Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

John Templeton Foundation awards $2.8 million to examine origins of biological complexity
EurekAlert (AAAS) ^ | 02 January 2006 | Staff

Posted on 01/02/2006 4:14:37 AM PST by PatrickHenry

The mechanisms driving the process of evolution have always been subject to rigorous scientific debate. Growing in intensity and scope, this debate currently spans a broad range of disciplines including archaeology, biochemistry, computer modeling, genetics & development and philosophy.

A recent $2.8 million grant from the John Templeton Foundation to the Cambridge Templeton Consortium [link] is providing the resources for further investigation into this complex and fascinating area. The funds will support 18 new grant awards to scientists, social scientists and philosophers examining how complexity has emerged in biological systems.

Attracting 150 applications, the grant process has generated much interest from a wide range of disciplines. Unique in the interdisciplinary nature of their applicants, the Cambridge Consortium grants will encourage and enable high quality research that approaches the issue from many angles, and will also sponsor collaborative work by people from different academic specialties. All of the work will study how biological systems (molecular, cellular, social etc) become more complex as they evolve.

"This is clearly an emerging area of science, and we are pleased that these grants are specifically aimed at encouraging work that would not easily fall under the parameters of any other grant-awarding body," says Consortium Chairman, Professor Derek Burke.

Questions to be addressed by the projects include:

* Why are biologists so afraid of asking 'why' questions, when physicists do it all the time?

* Can experiments using a digital evolutionary model answer why intelligence evolved, but artificial intelligence has been so hard to build?

* What lessons can rock art and material remains teach us about the development of human self-awareness?

* Can the geometric ordering of specific sheets of cells throw light on the questions currently being raised about design in nature?

* What principles allow individuals to develop social and colonial organizations?

Among the institutions receiving grants from the Cambridge Templeton Consortium are Duke University, Harvard University Medical School, University of California, San Francisco, University of Cambridge, UK, and Australian National University.


Formed by the John Templeton Foundation, The Cambridge Templeton Consortium was assembled for the purpose of selecting and evaluating proposals submitted under the "Emergence of Biological Complexity Initiative." Chairing the Consortium is Professor Derek Burke, Former Vice Chancellor of the University of East Anglia. Additional members include Dr. Jonathan Doye and Dr. Ard Louis, Department of Chemistry, University of Cambridge, Professor Simon Conway Morris, FRS, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Cambridge, Professor Graeme Barker, FBA and Dr. Chris Scarre, McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, University of Cambridge.

The mission of the John Templeton Foundation is to pursue new insights at the boundary between theology and science through a rigorous, open-minded and empirically focused methodology, drawing together talented representatives from a wide spectrum of fields of expertise. Founded in 1987, the Foundation annually provides more than $60 million in funding on behalf of work in human sciences and character development, science and theology research, as well as free enterprise programs and awards worldwide. For more information about the Templeton Foundation, go to www.templeton.org [link.].

[Omitted some contact info, available at the original article.]


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: biology; crevolist; grant; johntempleton; science; templeton
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 161-167 next last
To: Right Wing Professor
Does Jim Robinson do post-Christmas returns? This one's defective.

Boxing Day accident, perhaps?

81 posted on 01/02/2006 2:37:07 PM PST by longshadow (FReeper #405, entering his ninth year of ignoring nitwits, nutcases, and recycled newbies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
Boxing Day accident, perhaps?


Government approved!

82 posted on 01/02/2006 3:03:36 PM PST by balrog666 (A myth by any other name is still inane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; VadeRetro
They're [creationists] still thinking how to spin this. Give it time.

They haven't figured out a good angle yet.

They're still busy trying to recover from the Dover debacle by explaining how Judge Jones is no true Scotsman:
Dover in Review, pt. 4: Are the newsmedia reinventing Judge Jones as a conservative Republican?

... I do object to the media's transparent attempt to reinvent Judge Jones in order to supply a veneer of credibility to his incredibly biased decision. The media are cultivating the impression that Judge Jones must have been fair and impartial (his sloppy and biased opinion notwithstanding) because he is a deeply-religious conservative who should have been initially sympathetic to the school board and intelligent design.

In reality, there is very little evidence to suggest that Jones is either a conservative or particularly religious. ...


83 posted on 01/02/2006 3:53:57 PM PST by jennyp (PILTDOWN MAN IS REAL! Don't buy the evolutionist's Big Lie that Piltdown was a hoax!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: jennyp; VadeRetro; Alamo-Girl; longshadow; Junior

The reaction against Judge Jones ("He ruled against us, so he's evil!") has a certain resemblance to the reaction against Alamo-Girl after her principled mediation efforts during the Luddite War in mid-2003.


84 posted on 01/02/2006 4:10:00 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: shuckmaster
All humans alive today are directly descended from one very small tribe that lived on the beaches between South Africa and Ethiopia from 200,000 ya to about 80,000 ya

There've been many bottlenecks in our history. How do we know that humans weren't hairless prior to 200,000 years ago?

My personal expectation is that hairlessness is an adaptation for heat regulation for long-distance running that went hand-in-glove with the ability to walk upright. (Why? To chase down game. It is said that no land animal can outdistance a well-conditioned human.) Accordingly, I expect that the adaptation goes back millions of years.

All of these ideas are mere speculations, however. I'll be gobsmacked if there is ever any solid evidence for any of them.

85 posted on 01/02/2006 4:10:04 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
My personal expectation is that hairlessness is an adaptation for heat regulation for long-distance running that went hand-in-glove with the ability to walk upright. (Why? To chase down game. It is said that no land animal can outdistance a well-conditioned human.) Accordingly, I expect that the adaptation goes back millions of years.

Humans can hunt down far faster game by having greater endurance. When in good condition, a team of human hunters can chase virtually any game animal to exhaustion. But I don't know if hairlessness is really involved. Wolves hunt the same as we do (or as we did), and there aren't any hairless wolves. I've read that humans and canines are the only long-distance hunters.

86 posted on 01/02/2006 4:16:06 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; Physicist
But I don't know if hairlessness is really involved. Wolves hunt the same as we do

Wolves/canines have a different heat dissipation system than humans, one that doesn't involve evaporation of sweat secreted to the skin. Fur constitutes not only an additional layer of insulation, but also an impediment to evaporation of sweat for humans, but not wolves/canines, as the latter dissipate excess body heat by respiration, not perspiration.

87 posted on 01/02/2006 5:01:25 PM PST by longshadow (FReeper #405, entering his ninth year of ignoring nitwits, nutcases, and recycled newbies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
The reaction against Judge Jones ("He ruled against us, so he's evil!") has a certain resemblance to the reaction against Alamo-Girl after her principled mediation efforts during the Luddite War in mid-2003.

I was arguing with an ultra-lib buddy--I've known this guy since we were both in Little League--and mentioned FBI director Louis Freeh's deep suspicions of the very Clinton White House that appointed him to his job. My buddy just said something like "Oh, well! Flaky ol' Louie Freeh! Grumble, grumble! Harumph! Dismissed!"

In the Holy War, you're right and the other guys are wrong. There is no evidence against you. There are no inconvenient facts. Victory is inevitable.

88 posted on 01/02/2006 5:06:17 PM PST by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; Physicist
It may be true about humans being the long-distance champ, but from what I hear anybody who can run down a pronghorn over any amount of time is good.
89 posted on 01/02/2006 5:07:43 PM PST by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
I should have added that unlike wolves/canines, humans developeed the ability to make warm clothing for themselves, hence they no longer had a cold-weather requirement for being "hairy."

Shortly after developing this ability, mankind soon developed an even more advanced clothing capability: fashion. What cavewoman could resist a man sporting a club over one shoulder and a fresh saber-toothed tigerskin smock over the other, with a contrasting bear-skin loin cloth with Woolly Mammoth teeth trim around the nether regions?

90 posted on 01/02/2006 5:08:02 PM PST by longshadow (FReeper #405, entering his ninth year of ignoring nitwits, nutcases, and recycled newbies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
That is so LAST Ice-Age!
91 posted on 01/02/2006 5:12:00 PM PST by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
That is so LAST Ice-Age!

That reminds me of the the scene in Mel Brook's "History of the World" with the first cave artist, and then the first cave art critic.....

92 posted on 01/02/2006 5:15:38 PM PST by longshadow (FReeper #405, entering his ninth year of ignoring nitwits, nutcases, and recycled newbies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
In the Holy War, you're right and the other guys are wrong. There is no evidence against you. There are no inconvenient facts. Victory is inevitable.

What's the term for that "modern" viewpoint so popular in certain radical circles -- there are no objective standards, it's all about power. So Shakespeare isn't really any good, it's just that a buncha white guys say he is; and when our side comes to power, it's gonna be different.

Anyway, whatever you call it, that's what's happening to Judge Jones in certain circles.

93 posted on 01/02/2006 5:20:12 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Post-modernism. Yeah. Anything is anything you need it to be.
94 posted on 01/02/2006 5:21:59 PM PST by VadeRetro (Liberalism is a cancer on society. Creationism is a cancer on conservatism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Once the Crystal Tortoise drops at the stroke of midnight

Rumor has it that the Cristal dropped tortoise at the stroke of midnight...

95 posted on 01/02/2006 5:25:12 PM PST by tortoise (All these moments lost in time, like tears in the rain.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
But I don't know if hairlessness is really involved.

Oh, it must be. I remember reading an article in which an experiment was described, wherein a world-class bicycle racer was put on a stationary bike and hooked up to all sorts of machines that go "ping", in order to quantify his endurance. The surprising result was that he didn't remotely have the endurance he regularly exhibited on the road. It turned out that the vital missing condition was the air rushing past him on the road, evaporating his sweat and cooling his blood. Heat dissipation is one of the keys to human endurance.

96 posted on 01/02/2006 5:25:57 PM PST by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Physicist

One of my professors thought that this form of hunting, which he called "persistence hunting," was critical in evolution. Along with that came large brains (to remember where you were, where you had been, and where the camp was, etc.). Also involved were the high-value foods obtained by hunting.


97 posted on 01/02/2006 5:30:03 PM PST by Coyoteman (I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

The usual Darwinist dreck crock-of-crap from PH. Can you just imagine the 24/7 this guys lives???? Evo-nut alert!


98 posted on 01/02/2006 5:31:14 PM PST by Doc Savage ("Guys, I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more COWBELL...Bruce Dickinson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doc Savage
"The usual Darwinist dreck crock-of-crap from PH. Can you just imagine the 24/7 this guys lives???? Evo-nut alert!"

Your usual brilliant and intellectual debating style.
99 posted on 01/02/2006 5:32:49 PM PST by CarolinaGuitarman ("There is grandeur in this view of life...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Post-modernism. Yeah. Anything is anything you need it to be.

Ah! There's a long, rambling, wishy-washy, present-both-sides-of-everything kind of article on that in Wikipedia (Postmodernism), as a Wiki article on such a topic must inevitably be, but it in the "political science" section it has this:

Charles Murray, a strong critic of postmodernism, defines the term:

"By contemporary intellectual fashion, I am referring to the constellation of views that come to mind when one hears the words multicultural, gender, deconstruct, politically correct, and Dead White Males. In a broader sense, contemporary intellectual fashion encompasses as well the widespread disdain in certain circles for technology and the scientific method. Embedded in this mind-set is hostility to the idea that discriminating judgments are appropriate in assessing art and literature, to the idea that hierarchies of value exist, hostility to the idea that an objective truth exists. Postmodernism is the overarching label that is attached to this perspective."

I think it's all starting to come together ...
100 posted on 01/02/2006 5:34:09 PM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 161-167 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson