Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Berry, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Berry, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Q J Med 2004; 97: 459-460
QJM vol. 97 no. 7 © Association of Physicians 2004; all rights reserved.

Biologic

Active evolution and current molecular learning

C. Berry

The first 10% of the full text of this article appears below.

It is sometimes said that one cannot have intermediary forms of organs or tissues in evolution that are useful, despite a great deal of data to show that this is simply not true (the eye, the subject of a previous Biologic, was formed in about 400 000 years1). Richard Dawkins has often written about the difficulties that creationists and others (he singles out lawyers as a group that believe in discontinuities rather than continuous variation) have with the absence of intermediate forms, perhaps because of a view of evolutionary action that is ‘progress driven’. But continuous variation is obvious, and . . . [Full Text of this Article]


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?