Reddit reviews The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene (Oxford Landmark Science)
We found 2 Reddit comments about The Extended Phenotype: The Long Reach of the Gene (Oxford Landmark Science). Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.
> Where is the SCIENCE that shows beneficial mutations outweigh negative ones?
https://www.amazon.com/Origin-Species-150th-Anniversary/dp/0451529065
And if you want more:
https://www.amazon.com/Selfish-Gene-Popular-Science/dp/0192860925
https://www.amazon.com/Extended-Phenotype-Oxford-Landmark-Science-ebook/dp/B01K2BLPN2/
> Who discovered it?
I already told you: Charles Darwin. And then Richard Dawkins filled in the most important details. (That's actually the reason Dawkins is famous, BTW, not because he's an atheist.)
Have you actually read "Origin of Species"? Or "The Selfish Gene"? Or "The Extended Phenotype"?
> He had virtually nothing original to offer
Then why do you think he gets all the credit?
It's possible that the credit should go to Blyth. I don't know, I'm not a historian. But either way, it doesn't matter. Someone discovered evolution, and if it wasn't Darwin then it was Blyth, and if it wasn't Blyth it was someone else. What difference does it make who it was? It's like arguing over whether Samuel Pierpont Langley was really the first to demonstrate powered flight and not the Wright brothers. Airplanes are going to fly either way.
> Darwin knew nothing of genetics
That's like saying that Einstein knew nothing of relativity.
The fact that parents pass traits on to their offspring has been known since ancient times. Not only did Darwin know of genetics, he actually uses the word "genetics" in Origin of Species!
---
Posted by: l****r
> Where is the SCIENCE that shows beneficial mutations outweigh negative ones?
https://www.amazon.com/Origin-Species-150th-Anniversary/dp/0451529065
And if you want more:
https://www.amazon.com/Selfish-Gene-Popular-Science/dp/0192860925
https://www.amazon.com/Extended-Phenotype-Oxford-Landmark-Science-ebook/dp/B01K2BLPN2/
> Who discovered it?
I already told you: Charles Darwin. And then Richard Dawkins filled in the most important details. (That's actually the reason Dawkins is famous, BTW, not because he's an atheist.)
Have you actually read "Origin of Species"? Or "The Selfish Gene"? Or "The Extended Phenotype"?
> He had virtually nothing original to offer
Then why do you think he gets all the credit?
It's possible that the credit should go to Blyth. I don't know, I'm not a historian. But either way, it doesn't matter. Someone discovered evolution, and if it wasn't Darwin then it was Blyth, and if it wasn't Blyth it was someone else. What difference does it make who it was? It's like arguing over whether Samuel Pierpont Langley was really the first to demonstrate powered flight and not the Wright brothers. Airplanes are going to fly either way.
> Darwin knew nothing of genetics
That's like saying that Einstein knew nothing of relativity.
The fact that parents pass traits on to their offspring has been known since ancient times. Not only did Darwin know of genetics, he actually uses the word "genetics" in Origin of Species!