Theories in evolution are treated like no other, their dogmas are held on to as a result of a belief in a particular philosophy that goes outside the realm of empirical science. Weismann’s experiments using his proposed germ plasm theory had falsified this theory long ago. But like many theories in evolution, it doesn’t get falsified enough to be replaced, it’s just a work (story) in progress. This is evident with recent publications. Nature published an article called; “Insight Perspectives” the author states…
“The nature-versus-nurture debate was one of the most important themes of biomedical science in the twentieth century. Researchers resolved it by conceding that both factors have a crucial role and that phenotypes result from the actions and interactions of both, which often change over time.”
“Most ‘normal’ phenotypes and disease phenotypes show some degree of heritability, a finding that formed the basis for a series of molecular studies of genes and their DNA sequences. In parallel to such genetic strategies, thousands of epidemiological studies have been carried out to identify environmental factors that contribute to phenotypes.”
“In this article, I consider complex, non-Mendelian, traits and diseases, and review the complexities of investigating their aetiology by using traditional – epidemiological and genetic ##e- approaches. I then offer an epigenetic interpretation that cuts through several of the Gordian knots that are impeding progress in these aetiological studies.”
It’s difficult to conclude that environmental factors caused a disease but evoking traits are acquired characteristics through environmental means isn’t as difficult. Live Science suggests that Tibetans were able to inherited a trait for hemoglobin that allows them to survive at high altitude. Too much hemoglobin causes mountain sickness. What this research lacks and the previous article lacks evidence how an environment can change the genetics of future generations. Where are those connections? And since these changes are slow, how could the ancient Tibetans survive till they got the inherited trait.
Thomas Kuhn once said when it came to a shift in an evolutionary theory, “handling the same bundle of data as before, but placing them in a new system of relations with one another by giving them a different framework.” Sounds like a story in progress ever shifting, stuffed, mixed, evoking but never being replaced by improved data.