News:

The Common Review ceased as a print publication with the Fall/Winter 2011 issue. However, we will be posting a series of ten new articles on this site over the next couple of months, at approximately 1-week intervals. We trust that you will find these articles interesting, provocative, and equal in quality to the high standards set by The Common Review during its ten-year run.

 

 

In this Issue

More

    Connect

    • Share

    Review

    Culture Wars, Big Questions, and Geological Nanoseconds

    By  Apurva Narechania

    Switch to single-page view

    I remember sitting in my ninth grade biology class, staring at a pickled fetal pig, and learning that birds and mammals have what look like gill slits during early development. This bit of information blew me out of my chair. I once had gill slits! Of course, we now know that ontogeny doesn’t strictly recapitulate phylogeny. The developmental stages of a derivative life form do not play out as the end stages of its various ancestors. The gill slits could never truly become gills. In humans, they close and only one forms the basis for the ear canal. But none of that made any difference to me at fourteen. What a sketchpad development was! Etched into my body was the trial and error of evolution. At some point in my past, I was floating around in my mom like a fish. What do you do with a fact like that? You quit theology, and you study science.

     

    Apurva Narechania works at the Sackler Institute for Comparative Genomics at the American Museum of Natural History. He lives in Brooklyn.

    << First < Previous Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Next > Last >>
     
    Add comment

    * - required field

    *




    CAPTCHA image for SPAM prevention
    If you can't read the word, click here.
    *
    *
    Selly, 14-04-12 11:42:
    Okay, so you managed to give the aaccrute description of what the Darwin Awards are, yet didn't bother to realize that this video is clearly in no way associated with them since it doesn't follow those rules remotely? This is mainly made up of stupid people hurting themselves or others, disasters, and people getting hurt through no fault of their own. In no way does that qualify for any Darwin Awards. They need to end up dead of unable to reproduce, although they do have honorable mentions for the people who nearly achieved that goal through extreme stupidity, but those are rare, not the majority. Also this video includes the footage of the two burglars hitting themselves in the head with rocks bounced off the window which is a staged television commercial. The Darwin Awards requires careful citation and evidence before creating an award, and they would have disqualified this one within minutes of looking into it.It's a great compilation of videos, but your description is false advertising and continues to perpetuate a concept that fills the internet with false information. This is just the video version of those e-mail chain letters we've all gotten.
    Yuva, 14-04-12 15:30:
    First ask what specialties these sntictesis would be. One of the links listed in a previous answer gives such relevant specialties as Watershed Science , Agriculturist , Plant Physiologist and one 3 Doctorates and a NATO 3-star General Just how much involved in evolution are they?Certainly one have have a doctorate and believe in creationism. If the degree was in religion it wouldn't be a surprise. One could even call themselves a scientist to boot.The claim that evolution is wrong because we have never tested or observe a specie evolving in to a brand new specie either ignores or is unaware of the E coli long term experiment. It's been running since 1988 and has produced a new species. Likely this wasn't mentions as it's science and not something easily dismissed.There's also the slippery definition of what creationism was accepted. One person listed converted from theistic to something else. Problem is theistic is a creation belief. There's no one creation belief (we won't call any of then theories) Did all these people change to literal creationism? Gap? Young earth? Old earth? or did they weasel with worlds such as day and claim Genesis can't be taken at face value?
    Auth, 02-08-12 10:56:
    here but that doesn't mean darwinism and libearlism cannot go hand in hand. one can understand and accept Darwin's theories and also make altruistic decisions to help those in society who are not the fittest. In our struggle for survival we can also choose to help others survive who are less fortunate than us.