Joined: Nov. 2006
What scientific paper has political language like this? In the abstract no less?
|Second, the argument is presented that the selfish DNA "hypothesis" is actually a narrative scheme, that it serves to protect neo-Darwinian assumptions from criticism, and that this story is untestable and therefore not a hypothesis. |
Taken from this pack of lies from scrotalova:
More political language:
|It is argued throughout that a new conceptual framework is needed for understanding the roles of repetitive DNA in genomic/epigenetic systems, and that neo-Darwinian "narratives" have been the primary obstacle to elucidating the effects of these enigmatic components of chromosomes.|
How weird. Unless this is just an article that comes before actual research papers, like they have in Science and Nature.
I don't have access to the highly prestigious "Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences" so I can't read this essay. The abstract sure makes it sound like a review or even some kind of position paper. As in: no original research presented.
With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg
To do just the opposite is also a form of imitation. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg