The teaching of evolution

[Frederick W. Schueler]

John Grehan wrote:
>
> Fred schueler wrote:
>

> >all the deep divisons among scientists that have been seamlessly
> >healed by data and discussion, rather than producing separate sects
> >as they would have in other religions.
>
> I'm not sure about all the deep divisions semlessly healed. What
> examples were in mind here? (perhaps for the purposes of this list an
> example from systematics or systematics related issues would be
> interesting).

* well for a start, how about the bitter contention between Mendelians
and selectionists early in this century, and all the biogeographic
questions resolved by plate tectonics, and the mid-century angst about
whether natural populations tended to be genetically diverse or
monomorphic? Within knowledge of particular lineages there are lots of
examples of things being settled by disoveries or analysis, like the
question of what, if anything other than Archeopteryx the Hoatzin might
be related to, or why Rana pipiens, as a transcontinental species was so
peculiarly diverse in it's physiological characteristics, or how many
species there might be in the Ambystoma jeffersonianum complex...

We're constantly arguing, but often about questions raised by the
previous answers, and even if the arguments tend to run in philosophical
cycles, the subject matter dealt with in each cycle tends to be new.

fred.
------------------------------------------------------------
         Eastern    Ontario    Biodiversity    Museum
                Grenville Co, Ontario, Canada
(RR#2 Oxford Station, K0G 1T0) (613)258-3107   bckcdb at istar.ca
------------------------------------------------------------