What Evolutionary Biologists Do

Posted 4 March 2012 by Nick Matzke

This meme has been going around. Recently someone did What Scientists Do, so...it's time for evolutionary biology. Obviously YMMV if you're not an evohacker, but even you field biologists end up coming to us in the end anyway when you have to turn your pet hypothesis into a statistically testable model. (Insert maniacal laughter.)

HT: What I do generator

16 Comments

Karen S. · 4 March 2012

Love the "what creationists think we do" one!

https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad · 4 March 2012

Where's expelling the ~~bold new scientists of tomorrow~~ manipulating anti-science hacks?

Glen Davidson

Nick Matzke · 4 March 2012

https://me.yahoo.com/a/JxVN0eQFqtmgoY7wC1cZM44ET_iAanxHQmLgYgX_Zhn8#57cad said: Where's expelling the ~~bold new scientists of tomorrow~~ manipulating anti-science hacks? Glen Davidson

That's what the R code does, of course.

Marilyn · 5 March 2012

What evolution biologists do is try and provide an explanation for what the creation is and where it could go.

Just Bob · 5 March 2012

Umm... OK.

BTW, it's "try to," not "try and."

Matt Young · 5 March 2012

BTW, it’s “try to,” not “try and.”

That's a bit pedantic -- what about "try and fail"?

Just Bob · 5 March 2012

Matt Young said:
BTW, it’s “try to,” not “try and.”
That's a bit pedantic -- what about "try and fail"?

REALLY way OT, but since you asked... The "try and fail" example shows the ambiguity problem with "try and...". It SHOULD logically mean "to try to succeed, but [still] fail nevertheless." But because people frequently misuse "try and", they COULD mean "try TO fail" (e.g. "Are you going to try and fail your eye test on purpose?"). In Marilyn's example, "try and provide", she surely means "try TO provide" (they attempt to provide, perhaps not always successfully). If she really does mean "try AND provide", then that's redundant: they provide it--the "try" is unnecessary, since if they successfully provide, then they obviously tried. /severe pedantry

Henry J · 5 March 2012

"There is no try. There is do, or do not." [- Yoda]

Robert Byers · 6 March 2012

This YEC creationist doesn't think there is sinister conspiracy.
Yet I do think evolutionary biologists are wrong if they think they are doing biology or rather biological research when gathering and thinking and concluding about evidence for evolutionary biology.
Evolutionary biological research has not shown they do biological research using the scientific method for the historic and still main points of evidence.
They shouldn,t get a pic frame for that!
Unless of coarse they can show they do have methodology credibility.!!
not saying they ain't biologists but am saying they ain't doing that in this evolutionary conclusions.

Dave Luckett · 6 March 2012

Evolutionary biologists, using labs, reporting fieldwork, with long records of professional publication of real data - they don't do science. Robert Byers says so. Creationists with no experience of actual biology, no fieldwork experience, no actual data and no publications - they are the ones doing science. Robert Byers says so. Robert Byers writes sentences like:

not saying they ain’t biologists but am saying they ain’t doing that in this evolutionary conclusions.

Robert Byers is an incoherent, illiterate loon.

DS · 6 March 2012

This YEC creationist thinks there is sinister conspiracy.
Yet the YEC thinks evolutionary biologists are wrong if they think they are doing biology or rather biological research when gathering and thinking and concluding about evidence for evolutionary biology.
Evolutionary biological research has shown they do biological research using the scientific method for the historic and still main points of evidence.
They should get a pic frame for that!
Since of coarse they can show they do have methodology credibility.!!
not saying they ain't biologists but am saying I don't like that they are doing that in this evolutionary conclusions.

Anything Robert doesn't like must certainly be wrong. It doesn't matter what the experts do, he knows better. Bow down and worship the all knowing all powerful wizard of crap. Truly a legend in his own mind. Able to judge large scientists with a single leap of faith. Able to ignore any and all evidence. ANd yet still hasn't discovered the beaning of "coarse" after being corrected fifty three times.

Marilyn · 6 March 2012

Just Bob said:
Matt Young said:
BTW, it’s “try to,” not “try and.”
That's a bit pedantic -- what about "try and fail"?
REALLY way OT, but since you asked... The "try and fail" example shows the ambiguity problem with "try and...". It SHOULD logically mean "to try to succeed, but [still] fail nevertheless." But because people frequently misuse "try and", they COULD mean "try TO fail" (e.g. "Are you going to try and fail your eye test on purpose?"). In Marilyn's example, "try and provide", she surely means "try TO provide" (they attempt to provide, perhaps not always successfully). If she really does mean "try AND provide", then that's redundant: they provide it--the "try" is unnecessary, since if they successfully provide, then they obviously tried. /severe pedantry

I perhaps should have put "to try and provide" but yes I see the grammar problem I perhaps should have used "to" and not "and" or even "endeavour to provide" then I would have put "to", I seem to write similar as to how I talk, possibly it's not quite right. But "try and provide" sounds more definite to me "try and at the same time provide". But so, by finding out how evolution has progressed I think a lot has been learnt as to how hopefully it should progress for the better, with consideration as to medicine or food, how we should live.

DS · 6 March 2012

Marilyn said: I perhaps should have put "to try and provide" but yes I see the grammar problem I perhaps should have used "to" and not "and" or even "endeavour to provide" then I would have put "to", I seem to write similar as to how I talk, possibly it's not quite right. But "try and provide" sounds more definite to me "try and at the same time provide". But so, by finding out how evolution has progressed I think a lot has been learnt as to how hopefully it should progress for the better, with consideration as to medicine or food, how we should live.

Sorry, wrong again. The study of what actually happened can tell us a lot about how it happened and it can tell us a lot about what could possibly happen in the future. However, what this shows us is that things do not always "progress for the better" and it definitely does not tell us "how we should live". We can learn the lessons of history. They reveal that sometimes species degenerate, sometimes they go extinct, sometimes even mass extinctions occur. There are no guarantees of getting better, or making progress, or even surviving. As for how we should live, we control our own destiny. Our actions have consequences which we can predict. We can either take responsibility for our actions and their consequences, or we can ignore the lessons of history at or own risk. And by the way, scientists do not try to provide an explanation for creation, they study nature, that is all.

Nick Matzke · 7 March 2012

The Discovery Institute has a try. C'mon guys, that meme is so three days ago. And they missed how the punchline should be ironic. They should look at gymnasts for example.

Henry J · 7 March 2012

If only the DI would fall through the cracks that way! (Or even in some other way.)

Henry

Atheistoclast · 16 March 2012

Evolutionary biology is the science of speculation. Unlike all of the natural sciences, that rely on reproducible, observable and falsifiable experiments, evolutionary biology relies mainly on imagination and conjecture. Indeed, I have been accused by many evolutionists of not having enough "imagination" when it comes to proposing possible exaptations that cannot be verified. Tut tut..naughty atheistoclast!

I personally don't think they are after global domination but are trying to bleed the NSF and other state-funded bodies into giving them lots of taxpayer dole to finance their fantasy projects. That has got to stop. It is time to withdraw their life support