ScienceBloggers are up in arms about the cover article of New Scientist which boldly proclaims "Darwin was Wrong." The article, authored by Graham Lawton, explains that occurrences such as horizontal gene transfer and hybridization transform the shape of Darwin's famous tree into something more like a thicket with criss-crossing branches. But some argue that new information in genetics doesn't render Darwin's model obsolete, and, moreover, that the headline is misleading and could be used as a tool for Creationists. "Very few readers will read your article. But everyone will see the cover," ScienceBlogger Bora from A Blog Around the Clock wrote in a post addressing Lawton.
Related ScienceBlogs Posts:
More like this
New Scientist's recent cover that heralded the stunning news (not) that "Darwin was wrong" has generated an enormous amount of antipathy in these parts.
Using a classic paper by I. E. Lawton and N. B. Schwartz to consider the array of factors that control luteinizing hormone production:
We have entered the era of the imperial former presidency with lavish libraries, special staffs and benefits, around-the-clock Secret Service protection for life and other badges of privilege.
- Lawton Chiles
I know, I know, it's middle of February, but I was busy and neglected my duties. So, to catch up with the monthly feature, here is the best of January at A Blog Around The Clock: