Comments on: There ain’t no flies in us. http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/there-aint-no-flies-in-us/ Sun, 05 Feb 2012 06:46:45 -0700 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Anonymous http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/there-aint-no-flies-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-1084 Anonymous Tue, 28 Apr 2009 15:14:00 +0000 http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/there-aint-no-flies-in-us/#comment-1084 "Striving to be man, the worm Mounts through all the spires of form." -Emerson (Not Darwin!)<br /><br />I don't think Shubin means to suggest that we literally evolved through a fly phase. I'm sure he knows better even if his wording was unclear. I think he means to suggest that we have an "inner fly" to the extent that we share homologous features (and DNA sequence)with flies. In this sense, there is a part of you that is identical a fly. Or maybe Shubin is a closet transcendentalist who believes in the Aristotelian great chain of being. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt. “Striving to be man, the worm Mounts through all the spires of form.” -Emerson (Not Darwin!)

I don’t think Shubin means to suggest that we literally evolved through a fly phase. I’m sure he knows better even if his wording was unclear. I think he means to suggest that we have an “inner fly” to the extent that we share homologous features (and DNA sequence)with flies. In this sense, there is a part of you that is identical a fly. Or maybe Shubin is a closet transcendentalist who believes in the Aristotelian great chain of being. I’m giving him the benefit of the doubt.

]]> By: TR Gregory http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/there-aint-no-flies-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-683 TR Gregory Fri, 08 Feb 2008 21:51:00 +0000 http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/there-aint-no-flies-in-us/#comment-683 Well, "worm" is a vague term applied to several groups, but if someone said "inner worm" in regards to a modern species of worm (e.g., a nematode or annelid), then this would be incorrect.<br/><br/>The main point is that you cannot take a modern species from one group and talk about it as though it were the ancestor of another modern species.<br/>Especially when nothing even remotely like the species in question was an ancestor of the other species under discussion. Well, “worm” is a vague term applied to several groups, but if someone said “inner worm” in regards to a modern species of worm (e.g., a nematode or annelid), then this would be incorrect.

The main point is that you cannot take a modern species from one group and talk about it as though it were the ancestor of another modern species.
Especially when nothing even remotely like the species in question was an ancestor of the other species under discussion.

]]> By: RPM http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/there-aint-no-flies-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-682 RPM Fri, 08 Feb 2008 21:06:00 +0000 http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/there-aint-no-flies-in-us/#comment-682 How about "inner worm" for all triploblastic metazoans? The MRCA of the triploblasts was probably worm-like, right? How about “inner worm” for all triploblastic metazoans? The MRCA of the triploblasts was probably worm-like, right?

]]> By: Neil http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/there-aint-no-flies-in-us/comment-page-1/#comment-681 Neil Fri, 08 Feb 2008 02:45:00 +0000 http://www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/2008/02/there-aint-no-flies-in-us/#comment-681 Good point. "Inner fish" metaphor might be appropriate, since humans are technically "fish" (sensu: guppies + sharks > tunicates). But "inner fly" might as well be "inner redwood." Haven't read the book yet, but I'm always interested to hear what other Neils have to say. Good point. “Inner fish” metaphor might be appropriate, since humans are technically “fish” (sensu: guppies + sharks > tunicates). But “inner fly” might as well be “inner redwood.” Haven’t read the book yet, but I’m always interested to hear what other Neils have to say.

]]>