DARWIN DAYS--WHITEWATER
Carol Lee Smith
http://www.deja.com/threadmsg_ct.xp?AN=718209296
Race, Design, & Belief
http://www.deja.com/threadmsg_ct.xp?AN=718232089
-------------------------------------------
Subject: Darwin Day at UW-Whitewater
AUSTAD AT WHITEWATER
Prof. Steven Austad (University of Idaho) will be delivering the 2001
UW-Whitewater Darwin Day lecture at 7:30 pm, Monday, Feb. 12 in Upham Hall
126.
Darwin Day at UW-Whitewater is a celebration of Darwin's contributions to
biology and western thought generally. It takes place on or about
Darwin's birthday, Feb. 12. Each year we invite a speaker to give a
public lecture which illustrates the significance of evolutionary theory
throughout biology as well as the implications of evolutionary thinking
for broader societal issues. The 2000 speaker was Paul Ewald (Amherst
College).
There will be a pre-talk reception in the Biology Museum on the third
floor of Upham Hall from 6:30-7:30 pm (featuring the world's largest
edible tree of life). The talk is sponsored by the College of Letters and
Sciences, the Dept. of Biological Sciences and the Whitewater chapter of
BBB, the Biology Undergraduate Honors Society. All are welcome. Prof.
Austad will be on the Whitewater campus all day on Feb. 12. Anyone
wishing to meet with him (or needing directions to the talk) should
contact Assist. Prof. Jeff McKinnon (262-472-6200;
mcki...@mail.uww.edu).
The talk is entitled: "How Can Aging Evolve and What Can Be Done About
It?"
The following is a synopsis of the presentation:
This talk will resolve a paradox. Namely, living organisms can almost be
defined by their capacity to repair themselves. So how can aging, the
gradual disintegration of corporeal integrity and a process that is
uncontroversially harmful for the organism that ages, result in the face
of an optimizing natural selection? Having resolved this paradox using
evolutionary logic, I will focus on what the evolution of aging can tell
us about the prospects of current medical efforts to turn back the
biological clock in humans.
Prof. Austad is perhaps best known for his 1997 book WHY WE AGE (John
Wiley & Sons), now available in 8 languages. He has written numerous
scientific publications as well as popular articles for Scientific
American and Natural History. Prof. Austad's web page:
http://www.uidaho.edu/LS/BioSc/faculty/austad.html
and...@my-deja.com
100...@alpha1.csd.uwm.edu>,
"using evolutionary logic"????
Once again, the language gives it away. There is "logic", which
Pasteur and Kelvin and Maxwell and Behe and numerous other non-
Darwinian scientists have used. Then there is "evolutionary logic,"
which is something else.
Andy
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
wf...@ptd.net
>
>Once again, the language gives it away. There is "logic", which
>Pasteur and Kelvin and Maxwell and Behe and numerous other non-
>Darwinian scientists have used. Then there is "evolutionary logic,"
>which is something else.
>
really? if there is it seems to have escaped the scientific community.
none of these guys have ever told us anything about how their view of
the origin of species happened.
Ken Cox
> Carol Lee Smith <hu...@csd.uwm.edu> quoted:
> > This talk will resolve a paradox. Namely, living organisms can almost be
> > defined by their capacity to repair themselves. So how can aging, the
> > gradual disintegration of corporeal integrity and a process that is
> > uncontroversially harmful for the organism that ages, result in the face
> > of an optimizing natural selection? Having resolved this paradox using
> > evolutionary logic, I will focus on what the evolution of aging can tell
> > us about the prospects of current medical efforts to turn back the
> > biological clock in humans.
> Pasteur and Kelvin and Maxwell and Behe and numerous other non-
> Darwinian scientists have used. Then there is "evolutionary logic,"
> which is something else.
And you know this because ...?
Surely it *can't* be because you just saw the phrase for the first
time, and instantly invented an explanation for it that sounded good
to you but was actually based on nothing but your speculations. No,
you must have long familiarity with the term, and are able to point
to papers discussing evolutionary logic and delineating the ways in
which it differs from scientific logic. Right?
By the way, here's a quick test to see if you *did* jump the gun
here. Would you have similarly objected to the phrasing "Having
found a logical explanation for this (i.e., aging and senescence)
based on evolutionary theory"? Because that is what the author is
saying above, you know.
--
Ken Cox k...@research.bell-labs.com