Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Duck and cover, kids..
2012
unknownj
Holy Crap!

What is this guy on?!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6057734.stm

I call shenanigans on his dubious qualification of "Evolutionary Theorist".. I will concede that theoretically speaking, he might have heard of evolution, but not of the mechanisms that actually drive it. It's not his fault - he hails from the LSE, not really a world leader in Biology.

For starters, this word 'sub-species' has been misused. There are specific criteria used among taxonomists that define sub-species as distinct groups within a single species that could interbreed, but would not choose to do so. Interestingly, humanity has been through periods in which one could consider there to be sub-species. For example, at the height of the slave trade, interbreeding between 'blacks' and 'whites' was likely sufficiently rare that one could consider them to each be sub-species. Maybe..

Our 'Evolutionary Theorist', however, thinks that in the future everybody will be the same colour. Never mind the fact that it hasn't happened in millions of years, or that there is a reason that certain colours are optimal for certain locations, apparently we'll all become 'coffee coloured'.

The man clearly has no grasp of the mechanism of natural selection.. Natural selection occurs on species with high levels of variation in times of selective pressure, and acts to reduce genetic variability through viability-based selection. The human race would, effectively, all lean in one direction.. Sub-species are created by (initial) isolation, not by choice.. But let us assume that, somehow, the human race is exposed to the relevant pressures and actually begins to diverge into two sub-species..

One qualification for a sub-species is that the two must be distinct, rather than points on a spectrum. It is in this way that this is the most flawed - there will always be significant interbreeding between the different groups in the early stages thus preventing a divergence....

Oh, wait.

"He carried out the report for men's satellite TV channel Bravo."

Silly me, I should've read to the end first. I think I can stop ranting (even though I could've gone on for several thousand words) - that's as good as an admission of lying as far as I'm concerned :o)

I give up, I really do.. I'm half tempted to try to get some sort of spurious qualification so the BBC will publish my misguided ramblings.. Then I realised that LJ already does it for me :o)

  • 1
There's your answer, then. What's that guy on? At least 10 times as much as you!

  • 1
?

Log in

No account? Create an account