Flagellar tangle

Call it a row, a kerfluffle, a spat, or what have you. A linkurl:paper in __PNAS__;http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0700266104v1 has whipped up some convoluted discussion in science and non-science blogs. Here's the basic run down: 1. A group publishes an linkurl:explanation;http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0700266104v1 for the stepwise evolution of the flagellum, an interesting scientific question, which linkurl:intelligent designers (IDers);http://www.the-scientist.com/2007/4

Brendan Maher
Apr 24, 2007
Call it a row, a kerfluffle, a spat, or what have you. A linkurl:paper in __PNAS__;http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0700266104v1 has whipped up some convoluted discussion in science and non-science blogs. Here's the basic run down: 1. A group publishes an linkurl:explanation;http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0700266104v1 for the stepwise evolution of the flagellum, an interesting scientific question, which linkurl:intelligent designers (IDers);http://www.the-scientist.com/2007/4/1/57/2/ have long promoted as proof of irreducible complexity. 2. Scientists who have done a great deal of blogging to counter IDers' claims nevertheless linkurl:find a flaw;http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/04/flagellum_evolu_1.html in the paper. 3. linkurl:IDers rally;http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/04/darwinism_gone_wild_neither_se.html behind anti IDers. 4. Anti IDers sensing that's just the sort of thing an IDer would do attempted to linkurl:head them off;http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/04/uhohpoor_science_alert.php at the pass. 5. linkurl:Hilarity ensues.;http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/all-flagellar-genes-derive-from-a-single-gene/ 6. Anti IDers focus on the details of the paper linkurl:here;http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/04/update_on_pnas.html and linkurl:here.;http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/04/flagellum_evolu_3.html 7. IDers... seem to lose interest. Oddly I haven't seen any follow up posts. Questions remain: Will linkurl:web 2.0 take over;http://scienceblogs.com/loom/2007/04/17/when_scientists_go_all_bloggy.php science publishing? will...
p some convoluted discussion in science and non-science blogs. Here's the basic run down: 1. A group publishes an linkurl:explanation;http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/abstract/0700266104v1 for the stepwise evolution of the flagellum, an interesting scientific question, which linkurl:intelligent designers (IDers);http://www.the-scientist.com/2007/4/1/57/2/ have long promoted as proof of irreducible complexity. 2. Scientists who have done a great deal of blogging to counter IDers' claims nevertheless linkurl:find a flaw;http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/04/flagellum_evolu_1.html in the paper. 3. linkurl:IDers rally;http://www.evolutionnews.org/2007/04/darwinism_gone_wild_neither_se.html behind anti IDers. 4. Anti IDers sensing that's just the sort of thing an IDer would do attempted to linkurl:head them off;http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2007/04/uhohpoor_science_alert.php at the pass. 5. linkurl:Hilarity ensues.;http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/all-flagellar-genes-derive-from-a-single-gene/ 6. Anti IDers focus on the details of the paper linkurl:here;http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/04/update_on_pnas.html and linkurl:here.;http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/04/flagellum_evolu_3.html 7. IDers... seem to lose interest. Oddly I haven't seen any follow up posts. Questions remain: Will linkurl:web 2.0 take over;http://scienceblogs.com/loom/2007/04/17/when_scientists_go_all_bloggy.php science publishing? will Matzke publish a real, paper rebuttal? Will he ever contact Liu and Ochman? Will IDers continue to horn in on real scientific debates or eventually realize that the water's too deep once you get into the details?

Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member?