Old Weblog - June 2003
A signal sent by the space craft to ground control confirmed what scientists had hoped - the launch had been successful and the probe was on the correct path for Mars. The Mars Express orbiter, carrying the British-built lander, Beagle 2, left Earth on a Russian Soyuz-Fregat launcher.
Beagle 2 is, of course, named in honour of HMS Beagle—the ship on which the young Charles Darwin voyaged around the world.
Fifty years ago, we were told that by the turn of the century we would live in domed cities with robot maids, and travel to work by jetpack. Now we are told that a world of genetically enhanced humans is just around the corner. Steven Pinker is highly dubious.
Early humans shed their coats of fur as a result of being plagued by disease-carrying parasites, a new theory of evolution claims. The new hypothesis challenges the long-held view that our early ancestors become almost hairless in order to control their body temperatures in the heat of the African savannah.
I'm not convinced. If the theory is correct, why aren't there more hairless mammals?
I've just come up with an alternative hypothesis (which, of course, I can't back it up with any actual evidence)… perhaps human hairlessness is nothing more than a by-product of human neoteny: the prolonged retention of foetal/juvenile features in the adult form (which is one very plausible explanation of how we managed to evolve such large brains). Other people have suggested that hair-loss was a necessary parallel adaptation with the evolution of extra sweat glands—sweating isn't much use if you're covered in hair—but perhaps it was the other way round and enhanced sweating capabilty was a by-product of hair-loss.
Interesting. Don't you just love playing evolutionary Just-So Stories?
I've just come up with an alternative hypothesis (which, of course, I can't back it up with any actual evidence)… perhaps human hairlessness is nothing more than a by-product of human neoteny: the prolonged retention of foetal/juvenile features in the adult form (which is one very plausible explanation of how we managed to evolve such large brains). Other people have suggested that hair-loss was a necessary parallel adaptation with the evolution of extra sweat glands—sweating isn't much use if you're covered in hair—but perhaps it was the other way round and enhanced sweating capabilty was a by-product of hair-loss.
Interesting. Don't you just love playing evolutionary Just-So Stories?
Three fossilised skulls unearthed in Ethiopia are said by scientists to be among the most important discoveries ever made in the search for the origin of humans.
Which is stronger—nature or nurture? The latest science says genes and your experience interact for your whole life, says Matt Ridley.
I'm with Matt Ridley: Will this new vision of genes enable us to leave the nature-nurture argument behind, or are we doomed to reinvent it in every generation?
Researchers’ efforts to clone the vanished Tasmanian tiger highlight the quandary of reviving long-gone creatures.
Cod fishing in northern Europe must be totally abandoned, because fish populations are on the brink of collapse, say the scientists who advise the European Commission.
A recent study in Norway suggests that wild salmon lose out to sexually precocious fish-farm invaders when breeding in rivers.
A comet collision with Earth around 55 million years ago may have kick-started a crucial early phase of mammal evolution.
Chance can play a big part in evolution.
Scientists in the US have published the results of their detailed scrutiny of the genetic sequence of the human Y chromosome. This DNA bundle - one of 24 distinct chromosomes found in human cells - holds the crucial information to make the male of our species.
The unregulated supply of Aids drugs in the non-industrialised world threatens to accelerate the development of drug-resistant HIV strains.
Natural selection could lead to drug-resistant strains.
Scientists have found an organelle - an enclosed free-floating specialised structure - inside a primitive cell for the first time… Finding a self-contained organelle inside a prokaryote is a puzzle as it suggests that the evolution of cells - the basic building blocks of higher organisms - may have to be reconsidered.
A New Zealand scientist and historian is set to explode a theory of renowned British naturalist Charles Darwin that some New Zealand native plants, insects and animals were less evolved and inferior to their English counterparts.
This particular theory was exploded many years ago. Yes, even Darwin got it wrong—occasionally.
Experts are studying the "torrid and tangled" sex life of one of the UK's most popular pet fish as they try to learn how the battle of the sexes influences evolution. Researchers at St Andrews University hope that the guppy's mating behaviour can help them unravel the mystery of how new species are formed.
I'm fascinated by studies like these. For many years now, I have had a hunch that Darwin's other great idea—Sexual Selection—might be more influential in speciation than it is generally given credit for.
New species of underwater life, including a giant sea spider and armoured shrimps, have been discovered by a expedition trawling in deep water northwest of New Zealand.
At least seven species new to science have been found in the mountains of Bolivia by a university expedition. The students found two frog species, two snakes, two toads and a lizard.
Sexual suicide, cannibalism and necrophilia are all involved in a macabre study that adds a new twist to the mating behaviour of spiders. Researchers found that for male orb-weaving spiders of the species Argiope aurantia completing copulation leads to certain death. The deceased suitor's corpse is then trapped in the female genitalia. This may be a strategy to prevent other males from subsequently mating with the female, say the scientists.
All things bright and beautiful… Explain away that one, creationists.
Males continually evolve novel adaptations to entice females to mate with them rather than with other males, and females continually evolve novel strategies to resist these manipulations. It is suggested that this sexual conflict could be the strongest driver of speciation, but the supporting evidence has been limited.
As I have previously commented, I believe that sexual selection could be a major player in speciation.
The idea that women are hunting for rich husbands while men choose wives for their beauty is a long way from the truth, suggests a new study… The new study suggests most men and women in Western society look for partners with qualities on a par with their own. Attractive females, for example, are much more likely to seek a similarly healthy and good-looking mate than a rich one. And wealthy males are more likely to seek a rich wife than a pretty one.
Never been a big fan of all these ad hoc sociobiological "explanations". Unfortunately, the people behind the new study have gone on to propose an evolutionary explanation of their own for why people from similar backgrounds get together. Couldn't it just be that people from similar backgrounds are more likely to meet each other in the first place? Not everything has to have an evolutionary explanation.