Comments on: Natural Selection vs. Opportunity in Macroevolutionary Patterning of the Fossil Record

By: carle groome

carle groome — Fri, 27 Aug 2010 19:26:09 +0000

I understand you were somewhat inebriated when you composed this. While I agree with the conclusions, I must point out the following: “…and different people with different views will differentially see the role of one or the other as more important as they look at the same data…” That’s awful. Were you trying to say “it takes all kinds” or “you can’t please everybody” or such? Please don’t over-arch the end of your sentence when the beginning has two parenthetical asides as well. And this: “The realty of the situation is probably simpler…” Realty? I know you were talking about land-use, but you said nothing about property law previous to this.

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 17:33:52 +0000

Ian, I entitle you “Sir Ian of the Grammar” which entitles you to inspect for grammar any blog post regardless of what it may be titled.

By: Nandy

Nandy — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:50:33 +0000

Lol, IanW! I was afraid I was the only one who noticed.
I won’t feel so alone anymore… 🙂

By: IanW

IanW — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 13:35:49 +0000

“In an article titled …”

Finally a science blogger who knows the difference between “titled” and “entitled”. Spread the good word to your fellow sci-bloggers, Greg!

By: Greg Laden

Greg Laden — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 01:58:43 +0000

Regarding birds flying: Flight is probably not a niche, but rather, a dimension cutting across many niches. For instance, the smallest flying thingies before birds were quite large (as were the first flight-capable birds, probably). But the vast majority of birds are tiny compared to those creatures. Perhaps the condor, vultures, and eagles fill some of the niches of the extinct pterodactyls and other flying non-birds.

An even better example, of course, would be bats, because that is the flying in the dark niche.

By: Mike Hanson-Haubrich

Mike Hanson-Haubrich — Thu, 26 Aug 2010 00:02:29 +0000

I concur with ateeq ahmad.

By: ateeq ahmad

ateeq ahmad — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 21:22:15 +0000

A fabulous riposte and in high dudgeon too. Very many people are too worried about Darwin being write or wrong. The poor man is dug up every time and made to walk over hot coals every time evolution is discussed. We should focus on the research at hand rather indulge in sensationalism. BBC should know better.

By: Susan Ferguson

Susan Ferguson — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 21:11:01 +0000

Sorry, “when birds evolved the ability to fly”, I should be careful about what I put in quotation marks.

By: Susan Ferguson

Susan Ferguson — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 21:07:26 +0000

I liked the example of, “birds learning to fly”, as animals entering a new, unoccupied niche. Weren’t there already pterosaurs zipping around in the sky at that time?

By: Johnny

Johnny — Wed, 25 Aug 2010 20:30:57 +0000

“I will now give two or three instances of diversified and of changed habits in the individuals of the same species. When either case occurs, it would be easy for natural selection to fit the animal, by some modification of its structure, for its changed habits, or exclusively for one of its several different habits. But it is difficult to tell, and immaterial for us, whether habits generally change first and structure afterwards; or whether slight modifications of structure lead to changed habits; both probably often change almost simultaneouslyâ?¦â?

–Darwin, Origin of Species Chapter 6