Non-conclusionsWell, I decided to follow

by Prometheus 6
June 9, 2003 - 7:38am.
on Old Site Archive

Non-conclusions

Well, I decided to follow the link back to Gene Expressions. It was in the middle of one of the interblog disputes that seem pretty prevalent.

My interests lie in the direction of human development as opposed to human evolution but I don't see the two topics as being at odds necessarily. I have seen evolutionary concepts twisted by racists to their own ends though. So I approach the site with an open mind… but not so open as to let my brain fall out.

Without following up more than a few links on its blogroll or viewing any of its archives, I find nothing objectionable on the page today. In fact, if I read it correctly I find the last paragraph of this post to be quite useful:

The underlying problem with the Shifting Balance is that populations will not diverge by genetic drift if there is, on average, more than one migrant between them per generation, regardless of the size of the populations. (The last point may be counter-intuitive, but is well-established. The effectiveness of genetic drift is inversely proportional to the size of the population, so that with larger populations a proportionately lower migration rate is needed to prevent them drifting apart. Of course, none of this applies to asexual species, mitochondria, or Y chromosomes.) Fisher considered this degree of isolation unlikely in the absence of major geographical barriers. Oddly, neither Fisher nor Wright seems to have mentioned in this context that most species have behavioural and/or morphological adaptations for dispersal at some stage in their life-cycle. Among humans, exogamous marriage rules, or capture of females from other tribes, would have the same effect.

Given that every field has its specialized terminology, and that the terminology often spins everyday terms into a subtly different meaning, I may misunderstand what is meant by "migrant." I am seriously not as up on evolutionary theory as some. But if this well-established fact means what it says on its face, it blows a hole in the theory of significant evolutionary differentiation of the American "races" big enough to drive a semi through.

Bottom line: no endorsement, no attack due to unsufficient data. If it's a racism thing over there, I get the sense I'll be confronted with it sooner or later because I browse so much. And as the Good Book says, sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof. I got enough to deal with without looking for shit.

posted by Prometheus 6 at 6/9/2003 07:38:26 AM |