@arvidagren Also, our published historical work below makes similar points to Gayon but is more focused on debunking familiar Synthesis stories (and on rehabilitating the mutationists and their positive contributions to evo discourse) https://t.co/mvlVDs
Morgan & colleagues working on laboratory populations of fruit flies underestimated the importance of standing genetic variation in natural populations. I note that some biologists want to rewrite history and argue for revival of mutationism: https:/
@bat020 Interesting. Although Shapiro has some specific axes to grind. The best answer to the headline q of how synthesis-era biogists got it wrong are found in these two great papers on the agressive reification of natural selection https://t.co/HjZKhBMYW
Mendelian-Mutationism: The Forgotten Evolutionary Synthesis https://t.co/M5dvttIS4J
@WTF_R_species I spent years reading primary & secondary sources on this so feeding me the Mutationism Myth we debunked isn't going to work Read the abstract. It is NOT claiming the Mendelians established the genuine neo-D Mod Synth decades earlier th
@ArlinStoltzfus Rather well researched paper, I may say, if you mean: https://t.co/genehYFvxk (your link defaulted to a login to the U Maryland library). But I still think that the overall conclusion is incorrect.
@OdedRechavi @DanGraur @DrSidMukherjee @matthewcobb The books by Provine and Smocovitis are essential reading. I learned a lot from Grodwohl's (2017) "The Theory was Beautiful Indeed". I've studied and written on early genetic thinking about evo (link). Do
@TJNear For a scholarly account of the first integration of genetics and evo— far more sensible than Synthesis Historiography will tell you—, see my paper with Kele Cable (https://t.co/NpgVzI12PP). A blog with a bit of context is here: https://t.co/tY0gdc4
'When scientists relate how the discovery of genetics affected evolutionary thinking, they nearly always invoke a caricature of the classical view in which bumbling geneticists fail to find the missing piece' https://t.co/eTGKoYhcpz
RT @SpringerPhil: #OA the Journal of the History of Biology! Mendelian-Mutationism https://t.co/IYjpAfohk7 https://t.co/CykbCih6By
RT @SpringerPhil: #OA the Journal of the History of Biology! Mendelian-Mutationism https://t.co/IYjpAfohk7 https://t.co/CykbCih6By
#OA the Journal of the History of Biology! Mendelian-Mutationism https://t.co/IYjpAfohk7 https://t.co/CykbCih6By
If you only know the orthodox story of the modern evolutionary synthesis, put this on your reading list: http://t.co/Ein1CeyJZE
If you only know the orthodox story of the modern evolutionary synthesis, put this on your reading list: http://t.co/Ein1CeyJZE
The Forgotten Evolutionary Synthesis? http://t.co/uTxxq07Ydh Did geneticists 'crack' the secret of evolution much earlier than believed?
Oo. More pls. @Neuro_Skeptic:The Forgotten Evolutionary Synthesis? http://t.co/NKNf2Lh4N5 Did geneticists 'crack' evo. earlier thn believed?
The Forgotten Evolutionary Synthesis? http://t.co/uTxxq07Ydh Did geneticists 'crack' the secret of evolution much earlier than believed?
The Forgotten Evolutionary Synthesis? http://t.co/uTxxq07Ydh Did geneticists 'crack' the secret of evolution much earlier than believed?
The Forgotten Evolutionary Synthesis? http://t.co/uTxxq07Ydh Did geneticists 'crack' the secret of evolution much earlier than believed?
The Forgotten Evolutionary Synthesis? http://t.co/uTxxq07Ydh Did geneticists 'crack' the secret of evolution much earlier than believed?