Happy Darwin Day!

On this day, 203 years ago, Charles Robert Darwin was born.  And his brilliant theory is more important today than it has ever been.  Evolution; descent with modification; whatever you call it, the idea that species change throughout time, and are all descended from a common ancestor, is one that connects us to the rest of the living world.  This is a connection that I've always appreciated, yet there are many out there that refuse to accept it.  I've often heard people say "evolution is only a theory", which means they believe it's nothing more than a guess.  And if they believe it to be a guess, it's just as likely as any other guess.  But in science, a theory is so much more than a guess.  It's a body of knowledge, obtained through repeatable observations, that can be used to describe some aspect of Universe to to the best of our ability.  Is a scientific theory subject to change?  If course it is.  As new information is gathered, it can be incorporated into a growing body of knowledge.  But the underlying principles stay the same.  In this case, species do change over time.  They are not fixed.  Through the processes of natural selection, mutation, genetic drift, and others, species do change throughout time.  If a trait is advantageous, it is passed on to the next generation.  If it is not, it gets removed from the population.  New species are born, others go extinct.  Evolution is more than just a guess.  It is a fact.  And I think Darwin Day is a great time to explore this fact in greater detail.  A good place to start is at the PBS Evolution website.  Learn about all facets of this theory, from how Darwin began to formulate it over 150 years ago, to the mechanisms that make it possible. This NOVA program is one of the best on the subject I've seen, and the website has a lot of other interactive features for teachers, students, and the general public.  Happy Darwin Day, and enjoy!

Interweb Science of the Week #4

Have you ever been out in nature, and marveled at the wonders of the living world around you? Stopped to look at a flower or critter, and wondered how much you actually have in common? Perhaps you care for a pet at home, and know deep down inside of yourself that there is a connection between you. One of the greatest things about being human is the fact that we can ponder these, and other questions, both from a metaphysical and scientific perspective. I'm not tackle the philosophical questions surrounding the nature of being, but I can tell you that the connections you may feel are grounded in sound scientific reasoning. You and every other living thing on this planet are connected to one another through common ancestry. That is, if you go far back enough through deep time on your family tree, you'll find that you are in fact (very distantly) related not only to other extinct hominids, but to the goldfish in your bowl, the grass you walk on, and the bacteria that make you ill as well. This edition of "Interweb Science of the Week" is brought to you by a website that aims to show you just how related you really are.

(New) soft bodied cephalopods from the Cambrian.

Is it Cephalopodmas already?!?! No, but it sure feels like it. Today the journal Nature published an article describing a previously known species, Nectocaris pteryx, in an entirely new light. In their new paper, Martin R. Smith and Jean-Bernard Caron reinterpret Nectocaris based on the holotype and 91 additional (brand spanking new) specimens that help show where this peculiar Middle Cambrian critter belongs on the "Tree of Life".

Restoration of Nectocaris based on old evidence, by Ghedoghedo, from Wikimedia Commons.

Universal Common Ancestry : I got it.

Yay science! Great news from the journal Nature this week. Douglas Theobald from Brandeis University (who writes for TalkOrigins from time to time) has published a paper that, for the first time, tests the theory of universal common ancestry. This a central part of the theory of descent with modification via natural selection (or evolution, for short), and while most scientists had accepted the notion that all known living organisms share a common ancestor at the base of the tree of life, no one had actually gone about formally testing the idea.

The "Tree of Life", courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.

Ardipithecus ramifications. (Science in the media part II)

Back in October, I wrote the first post in a series on science, education, and the media. Needless to say, I never got around to finishing that series, or answering the initial question of my friend regarding my thoughts on the (then) recent publication of papers and news articles on Ardipithecus ramidus, and the interpretation of the fossils by the scientist who claims that "apes descended from humans".

On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life

On this day 150 years ago, Charles Darwin, FRS published his groundbreaking work On the Origin of Species. It still stands as one of the most important texts in the history of science. In its pages, Darwin wrote of the observations he made in the natural world around him, and theorized that all living things on Earth were constantly changing generation after generation through the process of natural selection. Through a combination of fact and inference, Darwin was able to envision the interconnectedness of life’s diverse forms and come up with a comprehensive theory that would shape the way we view the living world.

Understanding the "Tree of Life"

A friend of mine (who can take credit for these posts in the form of a response, should he like to be recognized) recently asked me a question regarding the newly discovered hominid Ardipithecus ramidus, and the scientist who claims that "apes descended from humans". This immediately set off a number of alarms in my head, not in response to his asking the question, but in response to what I think are two issues facing science and scientists today: the lack of proper scientific literacy and education in the United States, and the role and influence that the media has when presenting scientific information to the public. These are both topics that have been brought up recently on the vertebrate paleontology mailing list, and while I didn't chime in there, I figure this is as good a place as any to speak up. This will be the first post in a series that I hope will shed some light on these issues, and help reach those who have questions similar to those of my friend. So let's get right down to business.