<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
 <rdf:RDF xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:cc="http://web.resource.org/cc/" xmlns:syn="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/">
  <channel rdf:about="http://pinboard.in">
    <title>Pinboard (ernie.bornheimer)</title>
    <link>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/public/</link>
    <description>recent bookmarks from ernie.bornheimer</description>
    <items>
      <rdf:Seq>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.quora.com/Why-is-it-so-hard-for-some-Christians-to-understand-evolution/answer/Ernie-Bornheimer"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.quora.com/If-everyone-prefers-beauty-why-are-there-still-ugly-people-Isnt-it-against-the-rule-of-evolution/answer/Ernie-Bornheimer?__filter__=5&amp;__nsrc__=notif_page&amp;__sncid__=49412861239&amp;__snid3__=66157689560"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.quora.com/Why-do-Afrocentrists-still-advocate-all-humans-originated-from-Subsaharan-Africa-when-it-has-been-debunked-and-not-all-humans-came-from-Africa/answer/Barry-McGuinness-1"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.quora.com/Why-are-straight-men-so-afraid-of-being-seen-as-homosexual-but-women-arent/answer/Ernie-Bornheimer"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.quora.com/What-exactly-is-wrong-with-people-who-are-supposedly-creepy/answer/Ernie-Bornheimer?__filter__=5&amp;__nsrc__=notif_page&amp;__sncid__=28644967244&amp;__snid3__=38838743918"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/pLRogvJLPPg6Mrvg4/an-alien-god"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=110065"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://hbdchick.wordpress.com/2016/03/02/viscous-populations-and-the-selection-for-altruistic-behaviors/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-examples-of-human-evolution/answer/Zen-Faulkes"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://platofootnote.wordpress.com/2016/10/24/the-mismeasure-of-machine/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.iflscience.com/editors-blog/monogamy-humans-may-have-been-driven-stis/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://edge.org/conversation/steven_pinker-the-false-allure-of-group-selection"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://evolution-institute.org/this-view-of-life/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/biology-individual/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.quora.com/If-evolution-arises-from-random-mutations-where-does-the-new-information-come-from/answer/Phil-Darnowsky"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.quora.com/Does-the-theory-of-evolution-contradict-the-second-law-of-thermodynamics/answer/Eric-Pepke"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-ensure-that-all-the-dinosaurs-weve-classified-arent-just-mutations-variations-on-a-smaller-number-of-actual-species/answer/Daniel-Walker?__snids__=637355607&amp;__nsrc__=2&amp;__filter__=priority"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://alwestmeditates.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/hbd_11.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/26louo/why_do_chlorophyll_and_haemoglobin_molecules_look/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://i.imgur.com/gf1yj1j.jpg"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/1y9oti/who_dealt_the_argument_for_design_with_the_aim_of/cfj361v"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://evolvingthoughts.net/2014/01/why-do-believers-believe-those-silly-things/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.csicop.org/si/show/getting_the_monkey_off_darwins_back/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.quora.com/What-are-common-misconceptions-about-evolution-that-you-see/answer/Marcus-Geduld"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/science/a-cold-war-fought-by-women.html?_r=0"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ncse.com/taking-action/project-steve"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://creativeproductivity.quora.com/Complexity-Implies-an-Evolver"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://www.quora.com/Evolutionary-Psychology/Were-humans-ever-prey-for-animals-and-if-so-how-did-that-influence-the-evolution-of-the-human-mind/answer/Anderson-Moorer"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2013/05/14/1499332/social-networks-as-evolutionary-game-theory/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/experiments-in-philosophy/201202/why-are-men-so-violent"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/28/science/a-gripping-tale-each-flick-of-a-finger-takes-the-work-of-five.html?pagewanted=all"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://imgur.com/a/8NC4r"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/10/04/warning-genetically-modified-humans/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://chronicle.com/article/The-Evolutionary-Mystery-of/135762/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/01/restless-genes/dobbs-text"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/opinion/sunday/darwin-was-wrong-about-dating.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_r=0"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/feb/07/awaiting-new-darwin/?pagination=false#fnr-3"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/16eu22/oil_is_a_huge_potential_source_of_energy_so_why/c7vl5qb"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/168gcr/no_offense_intended_but_im_curious_why_vaginal/c7tu94k"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.timetree.org/book.php"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://edge.org/conversation/-brains-plus-brawn"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/10/there-may-be-no-gene-which-is-essential-for-our-humanity/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2012/09/17/120917crbo_books_gottlieb?currentPage=all"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://therumpus.net/2012/09/the-rumpus-interview-with-dr-neal-barnard/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://duckduckgo.com/?q=longest+cell+ever+blog+evolution+whale+bornheimer"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_evolution/2012/10/groups_and_gossip_drove_the_evolution_of_human_nature.single.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://scienceblogs.com/evolution/2009/11/05/truth-and-reconciliation-for-g-12/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://edge.org/conversation/a-21st-century-change-to-social-science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.trevorbedford.com/coaltracejs/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/richard-dawkins-edward-o.-wilson-and-the-consensus-of-the-many"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/edward-wilson-social-conquest-earth-evolutionary-errors-origin-species/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/06/a-perfect-and-beautiful-machine-what-darwins-theory-of-evolution-reveals-about-artificial-intelligence/258829/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://edge.org/conversation/the-false-allure-of-group-selection"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/id.15294,y.0,no.,content.true,page.1,css.print/issue.aspx"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2012/05/history_of_breasts_by_florence_williams_reviewed_.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/magazine/13Psychology-t.html?pagewanted=all"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-02-alan-turing-1950s-tiger-stripe.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-evolutionary-reason-for-mischief-trolling-and-the-pleasure-arising-from-it/answer/Paul-King-2"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.evogeneao.com/images/Evo_large.gif"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_(phylogenetics)"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://lesswrong.com/lw/l5/evolving_to_extinction/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~dpiau/cdem/130124b.pdf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100125123219.htm?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+(ScienceDaily%3A+Latest+Science+News)"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://lesswrong.com/lw/kv/beware_of_stephen_j_gould/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://scienceblogs.com/evolution/2009/11/truth_and_reconciliation_for_g_17.php"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://benfry.com/traces/"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/business/economy/12view.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2009/05/10-things-id-tell-darwin.html"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.netscrap.com/netscrap_detail.cfm?scrap_id=73"/>
      </rdf:Seq>
    </items>
  </channel><item rdf:about="https://www.quora.com/Why-is-it-so-hard-for-some-Christians-to-understand-evolution/answer/Ernie-Bornheimer">
    <title>Ernie Bornheimer's answer to Why is it so hard for some Christians to understand evolution? - Quora</title>
    <dc:date>2025-10-12T20:14:44+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.quora.com/Why-is-it-so-hard-for-some-Christians-to-understand-evolution/answer/Ernie-Bornheimer</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>my best Quora answers evolution</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:c3c52b6d2c14/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:my"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:best"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Quora"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:answers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.quora.com/If-everyone-prefers-beauty-why-are-there-still-ugly-people-Isnt-it-against-the-rule-of-evolution/answer/Ernie-Bornheimer?__filter__=5&amp;__nsrc__=notif_page&amp;__sncid__=49412861239&amp;__snid3__=66157689560">
    <title>Ernie Bornheimer's answer to If everyone prefers beauty, why are there still ugly people? Isn't it against the rule of evolution? - Quora</title>
    <dc:date>2024-02-23T12:50:45+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.quora.com/If-everyone-prefers-beauty-why-are-there-still-ugly-people-Isnt-it-against-the-rule-of-evolution/answer/Ernie-Bornheimer?__filter__=5&amp;__nsrc__=notif_page&amp;__sncid__=49412861239&amp;__snid3__=66157689560</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>my best Quora answers beauty evolution</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:709cdcbcc461/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:my"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:best"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Quora"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:answers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:beauty"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.quora.com/Why-do-Afrocentrists-still-advocate-all-humans-originated-from-Subsaharan-Africa-when-it-has-been-debunked-and-not-all-humans-came-from-Africa/answer/Barry-McGuinness-1">
    <title>Barry McGuinness's answer to Why do Afrocentrists still advocate all humans originated from Subsaharan Africa when it has been debunked and not all humans came from Africa? - Quora</title>
    <dc:date>2023-04-16T20:35:37+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.quora.com/Why-do-Afrocentrists-still-advocate-all-humans-originated-from-Subsaharan-Africa-when-it-has-been-debunked-and-not-all-humans-came-from-Africa/answer/Barry-McGuinness-1</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>early human origins evolution Quora Africa</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:2e9634348271/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:early"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:human"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:origins"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Quora"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Africa"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.quora.com/Why-are-straight-men-so-afraid-of-being-seen-as-homosexual-but-women-arent/answer/Ernie-Bornheimer">
    <title>Ernie Bornheimer's answer to Why are straight men so afraid of being seen as homosexual but women aren't? - Quora</title>
    <dc:date>2022-08-13T17:47:55+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.quora.com/Why-are-straight-men-so-afraid-of-being-seen-as-homosexual-but-women-arent/answer/Ernie-Bornheimer</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>my best Quora answers disgust society morality morals ethics normativity normative evolution evolutionary psychology</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:3daa59ea0b6e/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:my"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:best"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Quora"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:answers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:disgust"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:society"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:morality"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:morals"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:ethics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:normativity"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:normative"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolutionary"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:psychology"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.quora.com/What-exactly-is-wrong-with-people-who-are-supposedly-creepy/answer/Ernie-Bornheimer?__filter__=5&amp;__nsrc__=notif_page&amp;__sncid__=28644967244&amp;__snid3__=38838743918">
    <title>Ernie Bornheimer's answer to What, exactly, is wrong with people who are supposedly 'creepy'? - Quora</title>
    <dc:date>2022-07-04T19:09:45+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.quora.com/What-exactly-is-wrong-with-people-who-are-supposedly-creepy/answer/Ernie-Bornheimer?__filter__=5&amp;__nsrc__=notif_page&amp;__sncid__=28644967244&amp;__snid3__=38838743918</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Maybe nothing. Creepiness is in the eye of the beholder. You may seem creepy to one person and not another.

(Warning, just-so story approaching.) Being able to detect creep vibes is a magic superpower that is the flip side of sexual attraction. Sexual attraction evolved because if you don't have it, you're less likely to reproduce. Creep radar is the same thing, but instead telling you who you should be with, it tells you who you should avoid.]]></description>
<dc:subject>my best Quora answers creep creeps creepiness evolution human nature</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:f0506a9d6c4c/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:my"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:best"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Quora"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:answers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:creep"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:creeps"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:creepiness"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:human"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:nature"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/pLRogvJLPPg6Mrvg4/an-alien-god">
    <title>An Alien God by Eliezer Yudkowsky</title>
    <dc:date>2021-12-06T22:17:04+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/pLRogvJLPPg6Mrvg4/an-alien-god</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[In a way, Darwin discovered God—a God that failed to match the preconceptions of theology, and so passed unheralded. If Darwin had discovered that life was created by an intelligent agent—a bodiless mind that loves us, and will smite us with lightning if we dare say otherwise—people would have said "My gosh! That's God!"

But instead Darwin discovered a strange alien God—not comfortably "ineffable", but really genuinely different from us. Evolution is not a God, but if it were, it wouldn't be Jehovah. It would be H. P. Lovecraft's Azathoth, the blind idiot God burbling chaotically at the center of everything, surrounded by the thin monotonous piping of flutes.

Which you might have predicted, if you had really looked at Nature.

So much for the claim some religionists make, that they believe in a vague deity with a correspondingly high probability. Anyone who really believed in a vague deity, would have recognized their strange inhuman creator when Darwin said "Aha!"

So much for the claim some religionists make, that they are waiting innocently curious for Science to discover God. Science has already discovered the sort-of-godlike maker of humans—but it wasn't what the religionists wanted to hear. They were waiting for the discovery of their God, the highly specific God they want to be there. They shall wait forever, for the great discovery has already taken place, and the winner is Azathoth.

Well, more power to us humans. I like having a Creator I can outwit. Beats being a pet. I'm glad it was Azathoth and not Odin.]]></description>
<dc:subject>evolution Eliezer God</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:e8738a8fcefe/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Eliezer"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:God"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=110065">
    <title>Interbreeding Between Invasive and Native Salamander Species Creates Hardy Hybrids Likely to Replace Parental Populations | NSF - National Science Foundation</title>
    <dc:date>2021-05-30T21:41:08+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=110065</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>animal animals evolution hybrid hybrids hybridization salamander salamanders California amphibian amphibians biology genetics</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:d0f14500c7b3/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:animal"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:animals"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:hybrid"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:hybrids"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:hybridization"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:salamander"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:salamanders"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:California"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:amphibian"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:amphibians"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:biology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:genetics"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://hbdchick.wordpress.com/2016/03/02/viscous-populations-and-the-selection-for-altruistic-behaviors/">
    <title>viscous populations and the selection for altruistic behaviors | hbd chick</title>
    <dc:date>2018-09-29T19:44:39+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://hbdchick.wordpress.com/2016/03/02/viscous-populations-and-the-selection-for-altruistic-behaviors/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>altruism evolution RHE</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:0fa5cd8527c4/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:altruism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:RHE"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-examples-of-human-evolution/answer/Zen-Faulkes">
    <title>Zen Faulkes's answer to Are there any examples of human evolution? - Quora</title>
    <dc:date>2018-07-20T14:51:30+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.quora.com/Are-there-any-examples-of-human-evolution/answer/Zen-Faulkes</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>recent human evolution</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:a2c2343ca1ab/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:recent"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:human"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://platofootnote.wordpress.com/2016/10/24/the-mismeasure-of-machine/">
    <title>The mismeasure of machine: why machine metaphors in biology are misleading | Plato's Footnote</title>
    <dc:date>2016-10-25T00:01:13+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://platofootnote.wordpress.com/2016/10/24/the-mismeasure-of-machine/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Dawkins disagrees, and writes in The Selfish Gene:

“When a man throws a ball high in the air and catches it again, he behaves as if he had solved a set of differential equations in predicting the trajectory of the ball. He may neither know nor care what a differential equation is, but this does not affect his skill with the ball. At some subconscious level, something functionally equivalent to the mathematical calculations is going on.”

No, it isn’t. In fact, experiments show that humans (and dogs) use a deceptively simple heuristic to catch a ball: keep your gaze fixed at the ball, and adjust your running speed such that the angle of the ball remains constant (for references to this and other claims in this post, see the original paper). When you follow this heuristic, you will be there when the ball hits the ground. As it happens, baseball players are very poor at predicting where a ball is going to hit the ground when they are asked not to run towards it. They just manage to get there when the ball does.]]></description>
<dc:subject>evolution biology philosophy mathematics baseball design Dawkins Pigliucci</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:437496686219/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:biology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:philosophy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:mathematics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:baseball"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:design"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Dawkins"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Pigliucci"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.iflscience.com/editors-blog/monogamy-humans-may-have-been-driven-stis/">
    <title>Monogamy In Humans May Have Been Driven By Sexually Transmitted Infections | IFLScience</title>
    <dc:date>2016-08-22T20:37:29+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.iflscience.com/editors-blog/monogamy-humans-may-have-been-driven-stis/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>monogamy evolution mating strategies human recent sex</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:b094aaad3e4f/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:monogamy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:mating"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:strategies"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:human"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:recent"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:sex"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://edge.org/conversation/steven_pinker-the-false-allure-of-group-selection">
    <title>THE FALSE ALLURE OF GROUP SELECTION | Edge.org</title>
    <dc:date>2016-02-23T19:03:36+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://edge.org/conversation/steven_pinker-the-false-allure-of-group-selection</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution group solution multi-level Pinker David Sloan Wilson</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:7ce8e396a059/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:group"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:solution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:multi-level"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Pinker"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:David"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Sloan"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Wilson"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://evolution-institute.org/this-view-of-life/">
    <title>This View Of Life | The Evolution Institute</title>
    <dc:date>2015-04-27T18:37:20+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://evolution-institute.org/this-view-of-life/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:9c432b30dfd3/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/biology-individual/">
    <title>The Biological Notion of Individual (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)</title>
    <dc:date>2015-01-05T20:24:15+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/biology-individual/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution life biology philosophy superorganism</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:9633c2972435/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:life"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:biology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:philosophy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:superorganism"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.quora.com/If-evolution-arises-from-random-mutations-where-does-the-new-information-come-from/answer/Phil-Darnowsky">
    <title>Phil Darnowsky's answer to If evolution arises from random mutations, where does the new information come from? - Quora</title>
    <dc:date>2014-11-25T03:20:18+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.quora.com/If-evolution-arises-from-random-mutations-where-does-the-new-information-come-from/answer/Phil-Darnowsky</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Earth's ecosystems are not closed: there's a bigass fusion reactor about eight light-minutes away promiscuously showering Earth with usable energy.]]></description>
<dc:subject>entropy evolution</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:a41bffe7d210/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:entropy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.quora.com/Does-the-theory-of-evolution-contradict-the-second-law-of-thermodynamics/answer/Eric-Pepke">
    <title>Eric Pepke's answer to Does the theory of evolution contradict the second law of thermodynamics? - Quora</title>
    <dc:date>2014-09-06T19:31:26+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.quora.com/Does-the-theory-of-evolution-contradict-the-second-law-of-thermodynamics/answer/Eric-Pepke</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution entropy thermodynamics</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:91310d8a7e19/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:entropy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:thermodynamics"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-ensure-that-all-the-dinosaurs-weve-classified-arent-just-mutations-variations-on-a-smaller-number-of-actual-species/answer/Daniel-Walker?__snids__=637355607&amp;__nsrc__=2&amp;__filter__=priority">
    <title>Daniel Walker's answer to How do we ensure that all the dinosaurs we've classified aren't just mutations/variations on a smaller number of actual species? - Quora</title>
    <dc:date>2014-09-04T20:01:53+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.quora.com/How-do-we-ensure-that-all-the-dinosaurs-weve-classified-arent-just-mutations-variations-on-a-smaller-number-of-actual-species/answer/Daniel-Walker?__snids__=637355607&amp;__nsrc__=2&amp;__filter__=priority</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution Neanderthal fossils</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:1dd162ce645e/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Neanderthal"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:fossils"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://alwestmeditates.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/hbd_11.html">
    <title>West's Meditations: 'HBD'</title>
    <dc:date>2014-07-10T16:09:32+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://alwestmeditates.blogspot.co.uk/2014/03/hbd_11.html</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>human biodiversity HBD biology nature nurture genetics environment evolution recent</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:8b6f0c427468/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:human"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:biodiversity"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:HBD"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:biology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:nature"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:nurture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:genetics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:environment"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:recent"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/26louo/why_do_chlorophyll_and_haemoglobin_molecules_look/">
    <title>Why do Chlorophyll and Haemoglobin molecules look so similar? : askscience</title>
    <dc:date>2014-05-27T19:19:45+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/26louo/why_do_chlorophyll_and_haemoglobin_molecules_look/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[I think /u/patchgrabber is on the right track, but starting out with "they're both porphyrins" is tantamount to saying they look similar because they have a similar structure... a porphyin looks like a porphyin because they're both porphyrins.

I think your comment about being involved in electron transport is the key. All porphyrins are modified tetrapyrroles (ie - have the same structure) and importantly share some chemical features, namely aromatic delocalization at the core, which is great for passing on electrons. So that answers one question -- why might we expect them to be the same, answer because they have a similar function.

I think the addendum that I would tack on is that biochemistry is highly modular. It's like legos where you get ten pieces and you build up crazy structures but you gotta have the same ten pieces... at a certain point, if you want to make a bridge, you follow the same motif because of your limited number of building blocks. In this view, if you have tetrapyrroles floating around, it makes sense to use them for electron transport. It's also understandtable from the perspective of evolution because variation on existing structure is far more likely than wholesale innovation because of the nature of mutation.

...........

mitochondria and chloroplasts were once the dominant archaebacteria on our planet, and are effectively siblings. The molecules that have helped fuel their respective respiratory/photosynthesis reactions since the process of endosymbiosis, i.e. their integration into a cell, are inherently related also. Don't know specifics about chemical structure, but its no surprise that they should look similar. After all, mitochondria and chloroplasts are themselves very similar also, practically non-identical twins (the mitochondria being the danny devito of the two).]]></description>
<dc:subject>evolution mutation re-use color hemoglobin chlorophyll mitochondria chloroplasts respiration oxygen photosynthesis</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:9933dd1b4ca7/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:mutation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:re-use"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:color"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:hemoglobin"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:chlorophyll"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:mitochondria"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:chloroplasts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:respiration"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:oxygen"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:photosynthesis"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://i.imgur.com/gf1yj1j.jpg">
    <title>gf1yj1j.jpg (PNG Image, 721 × 670 pixels)</title>
    <dc:date>2014-05-27T19:13:13+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://i.imgur.com/gf1yj1j.jpg</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>oxygen metabolism evolution metal heme hemoglobin chlorophyll</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:bb88a843e242/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:oxygen"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:metabolism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:metal"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:heme"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:hemoglobin"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:chlorophyll"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/1y9oti/who_dealt_the_argument_for_design_with_the_aim_of/cfj361v">
    <title>bombula comments on Who dealt the argument for design — with the aim of rationally establishing the existence of God — its fatal blow? Dawkins? Darwin? No. David Hume, the great philosopher of the Scottish Enlightenment</title>
    <dc:date>2014-03-20T20:20:28+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.reddit.com/r/philosophy/comments/1y9oti/who_dealt_the_argument_for_design_with_the_aim_of/cfj361v</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[

    we should expect to see natural theology dominant in intellectual culture until the generation after Darwin or so

I think this is a badly supported assumption. Darwin's concept of evolution by natural selection is astonishingly powerful due to its almost surreal combination of explanatory depth and parsimony. BUT, the evidence to support natural selection was quite scant in Darwin's day. This is where being familiar with the history of science is important. There was not overwhelming scientific consensus that the Earth was more than a few tens of millions of years old until the 1920s, because it took so long for geology and paleontology and astrophysics and cosmology to compile the necessary evidence pointing to the Earth's true age (the age of billions, not millions, of years was crucial in giving natural selection time to work). And speciation itself was still rather mysterious until scientific consensus solidified around the theory of plate techtonics and continental drift - in the 1960s! (Since without the continents moving around, explaining the location of fossils was very difficult).

I think you may also be severely underestimating the cultural and psychological investment that philosophers and scientists had (and, some of them, still have) in their religious beliefs. The compartmentalization of contradictory beliefs is quite a well documented cognitive phenomena.

From his private writings, Darwin was clearly an atheist, but you are right that he made no public attempt to refute any argument for theism. But if anyone's individual idea deserves credit for dealing the fatal blow to the design argument for theism, it is certainly Darwin's - not because it was structured as a refutation or counterargument, but simply because its elegance and explantory power so vastly exceed the alternatives that is it has, from its first announcement, been obviously correct (and therefore rendering the argument from design just as obviously false). Even among his contemporary peers, acceptance of evolution by natural selection was more an exercise of humility and the painful divestment of sunk costs in false beliefs than an exercise of intellect. Indeed, a bright child of 8 years old can readily grasp the essence Darwin's theory. So while it took a long time for evidence to reach overwhelming levels in support of Darwinism, only a minority of folks in the natural sciences ever truly doubted its veracity, even in Darwin's own day. The fact that his book was a spectacular bestseller and cultural phenomena in its own right is compelling evidence in this regard. Smart people knew, deep down, that he was right, however loathe they might have been to give up their other beliefs.
]]></description>
<dc:subject>Darwin evolution</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:f943b988b401/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Darwin"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://evolvingthoughts.net/2014/01/why-do-believers-believe-those-silly-things/">
    <title>Why do believers believe THOSE silly things? | Evolving Thoughts</title>
    <dc:date>2014-02-27T00:56:29+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://evolvingthoughts.net/2014/01/why-do-believers-believe-those-silly-things/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Once a signal has been proposed, cynically or otherwise, then it will spread to the extent that it acts as a useful marker. That is, just so far as it identifies honestly a member of the in-group. Rarely (in my opinion), the marker or signal will be something that bears directly upon the core beliefs of the belief-group. For example, modern western conservatism has as one of its stated values the freedom of the individual from government intervention, yet many of the signals, such as abortion or marriage, involve direct government intervention in people’s private lives. Justifications are given that are post hoc and ad hoc. Likewise, commitment to free market economics are set aside when special interests benefit, through subsidies and interventions or tax exemptions of failing industries. Likewise, social progressives often adopt economic policies that serve the interests of industry rather than their putative constituency, working people.]]></description>
<dc:subject>religion signalling culture cultural evolution hypocrisy</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:0bfd50a2c7a2/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:religion"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:signalling"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:cultural"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:hypocrisy"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.csicop.org/si/show/getting_the_monkey_off_darwins_back/">
    <title>Getting the Monkey off Darwin’s Back: Four Common Myths About Evolution - CSI</title>
    <dc:date>2014-02-12T20:03:40+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.csicop.org/si/show/getting_the_monkey_off_darwins_back/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution myths</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:fd3f5a1724bc/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:myths"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.quora.com/What-are-common-misconceptions-about-evolution-that-you-see/answer/Marcus-Geduld">
    <title>Marcus Geduld's answer to What are common misconceptions about evolution that you see? - Quora</title>
    <dc:date>2014-02-05T23:08:06+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.quora.com/What-are-common-misconceptions-about-evolution-that-you-see/answer/Marcus-Geduld</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution counter-intuitive time counter intuitive counterintuitive</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:b32cfcf4a607/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:counter-intuitive"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:time"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:counter"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:intuitive"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:counterintuitive"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/science/a-cold-war-fought-by-women.html?_r=0">
    <title>A Cold War Fought by Women - NYTimes.com</title>
    <dc:date>2014-01-15T04:33:37+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/19/science/a-cold-war-fought-by-women.html?_r=0</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[“Sex is coveted by men,” she said. “Accordingly, women limit access as a way of maintaining advantage in the negotiation of this resource. Women who make sex too readily available compromise the power-holding position of the group, which is why many women are particularly intolerant of women who are, or seem to be, promiscuous.” ]]></description>
<dc:subject>sex human behavior evolution women competition</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:00f92502f050/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:sex"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:human"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:behavior"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:women"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:competition"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://ncse.com/taking-action/project-steve">
    <title>Project Steve | NCSE</title>
    <dc:date>2013-12-16T16:53:43+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://ncse.com/taking-action/project-steve</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:8497b12286ba/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://creativeproductivity.quora.com/Complexity-Implies-an-Evolver">
    <title>(1) Complexity Implies an Evolver - Productive Creativity - Quora</title>
    <dc:date>2013-10-01T18:13:27+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://creativeproductivity.quora.com/Complexity-Implies-an-Evolver</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[William Paley argued that the complexity of biological life implies an intelligent designer. After all, when we look at a watch, and note its complexity, we infer an intelligent designer – a watchmaker who dreamed up this marvelous contraption and then built it.

If only Paley had understood how long it took Technology to EVOLVE a watch . . .

The first watch did not show up all at once in a designer’s head, and then get created. Instead, like pretty much every technology we've ever developed, it was the result of a great many generations of re-combination, tinkering, and selection.

Complexity should make us instinctively think “evolution”.]]></description>
<dc:subject>evolution Quora Paley watch watchmaker</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:16896fa1c7a4/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Quora"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Paley"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:watch"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:watchmaker"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="https://www.quora.com/Evolutionary-Psychology/Were-humans-ever-prey-for-animals-and-if-so-how-did-that-influence-the-evolution-of-the-human-mind/answer/Anderson-Moorer">
    <title>(6) Anderson Moorer's answer to Evolutionary Psychology: Were humans ever prey for animals, and if so how did that influence the evolution of the human mind? - Quora</title>
    <dc:date>2013-06-21T23:21:00+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>https://www.quora.com/Evolutionary-Psychology/Were-humans-ever-prey-for-animals-and-if-so-how-did-that-influence-the-evolution-of-the-human-mind/answer/Anderson-Moorer</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>violence evolution human humans</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:cc908e6c985b/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:violence"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:human"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:humans"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2013/05/14/1499332/social-networks-as-evolutionary-game-theory/">
    <title>Social networks as evolutionary game theory | FT Alphaville</title>
    <dc:date>2013-06-12T21:06:34+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2013/05/14/1499332/social-networks-as-evolutionary-game-theory/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution social networks Facebook FT collaboration</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:7000a7ad7d23/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:social"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:networks"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Facebook"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:FT"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:collaboration"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/experiments-in-philosophy/201202/why-are-men-so-violent">
    <title>Why Are Men So Violent? | Psychology Today</title>
    <dc:date>2013-05-29T19:40:02+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/experiments-in-philosophy/201202/why-are-men-so-violent</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[A historical explanation of male violence does not eschew biological factors, but it minimizes them and assumes that men and woman are psychologically similar. Consider the biological fact that men have more upper-body strength than women, and assume that both men and women want to obtain as many desirable resources as they can. In hunter-gatherer societies, this strength differential doesn't allow men to fully dominate women, because they depend on the food that women gather. But things change with the advent of intensive agriculture and herding. Strength gives men an advantage over women once heavy ploughs and large animals become central aspects of food production. With this, men become the sole providers, and women start to depend on men economically. The economic dependency allows men to mistreat women, to philander, and to take over labor markets and political institutions. Once men have absolute power, they are reluctant to give it up. It took two world wars and a post-industrial economy for women to obtain basic opportunities and rights.]]></description>
<dc:subject>violence history evolution culture men women</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:3aae1f75c4c1/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:violence"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:history"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:men"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:women"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/28/science/a-gripping-tale-each-flick-of-a-finger-takes-the-work-of-five.html?pagewanted=all">
    <title>A Gripping Tale - Each Flick of a Finger Takes the Work of Five - NYTimes.com</title>
    <dc:date>2013-05-28T19:17:42+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/28/science/a-gripping-tale-each-flick-of-a-finger-takes-the-work-of-five.html?pagewanted=all</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>hand hands evolution stone tools culture cultural</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:010a18b3d3d2/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:hand"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:hands"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:stone"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:tools"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:cultural"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://imgur.com/a/8NC4r">
    <title>Futurama - Imgur</title>
    <dc:date>2013-05-10T16:45:13+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://imgur.com/a/8NC4r</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution animation arms race</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:2e9051775ef3/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:animation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:arms"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:race"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/10/04/warning-genetically-modified-humans/">
    <title>Warning: Genetically Modified Humans | Guest Blog, Scientific American Blog Network</title>
    <dc:date>2013-05-07T22:52:15+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/10/04/warning-genetically-modified-humans/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Another candidate for remedy with reproductive technology is schizophrenia. The disorder affects cognition, and can lead to chronic problems with emotional responsiveness. The 1% prevalence of schizophrenia makes it an apt target for prevention. However, the globally consistent and high incidence of this disease may be an indicator of its association with advantageous genetic characteristics. The ‘social brain hypothesis’, the main theory to explain the evolution of schizophrenia, suggests that the human brain evolved to select for genes associated with schizophrenia in a trade for higher order cognitive traits. These include language and the ability to interpret the thoughts and emotions of others. Schizophrenia is the cost that humans pay for being able to communicate, and as such, the genes responsible may be an essential component of the human gene pool. As with ASD, the elimination of the disease may have unintended consequences, and permanently alter the social dynamics within our species.]]></description>
<dc:subject>DNA DTI genetics evolution eugenics screening genetic</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:2afe61ea31c4/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:DNA"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:DTI"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:genetics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:eugenics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:screening"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:genetic"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://chronicle.com/article/The-Evolutionary-Mystery-of/135762/">
    <title>The Evolutionary Mystery of Homosexuality - The Chronicle Review - The Chronicle of Higher Education</title>
    <dc:date>2013-04-26T16:18:31+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://chronicle.com/article/The-Evolutionary-Mystery-of/135762/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[The sine qua non for any trait to have evolved is for it to correlate positively with reproductive success, or, more precisely, with success in projecting genes relevant to that trait into the future. So, if homosexuality is in any sense a product of evolution—and it clearly is, for reasons to be explained—then genetic factors associated with same-sex preference must enjoy some sort of reproductive advantage. The problem should be obvious: If homosexuals reproduce less than heterosexuals—and they do—then why has natural selection not operated against it?

The paradox of homosexuality is especially pronounced for individuals whose homosexual preference is exclusive; that is, who have no inclination toward heterosexuality. But the mystery persists even for those who are bisexual, since it is mathematically provable that even a tiny difference in reproductive outcome can drive substantial evolutionary change.

J.B.S. Haldane, one of the giants of evolutionary theory, imagined two alternative genes, one initially found in 99.9 percent of a population and the other in just 0.1 percent. He then calculated that if the rare gene had merely a 1-percent advantage (it produced 101 descendants each generation to the abundant gene's 100), in just 4,000 generations—a mere instant in evolutionary terms—the situation would be reversed, with the formerly rare gene occurring in 99.9 percent of the population's genetic pool. Such is the power of compound interest, acting via natural selection.

For our purposes, the implication is significant: Anything that diminishes, even slightly, the reproductive performance of any gene should (in evolutionary terms) be vigorously selected against. And homosexuality certainly seems like one of those things. Gay men, for example, have children at about 20 percent of the rate of heterosexual men. I haven't seen reliable data for lesbians, but it seems likely that a similar pattern exists. And it seems more than likely that someone who is bisexual would have a lower reproductive output than someone whose romantic time and effort were devoted exclusively to the opposite sex.

Across cultures, the proportion of the population who are homosexual is roughly the same. What maintains the genetic propensity for the trait?

Nor can we solve the mystery by arguing that homosexuality is a "learned" behavior. That ship has sailed, and the consensus among scientists is that same-sex preference is rooted in our biology. Some of the evidence comes from the widespread distribution of homosexuality among animals in the wild. Moreover, witness its high and persistent cross-cultural existence in Homo sapiens.

In the early 1990s, a geneticist at the National Institutes of Health led a study that reported the existence of a specific allele, Xq28, located on the X chromosome, that predicted gay-­versus-straight sexual orientation in men. Subsequent research has been confusing, showing that the situation is at least considerably more complicated than had been hoped by some (notably, most gay-rights advocates) and feared by others (who insist that sexual orientation is entirely a "lifestyle choice").

Some studies have failed to confirm any role for Xq28 in gay behavior, while others have been supportive of the original research. It is also increasingly clear that whatever its impact on male homosexuality, this particular gene does not relate to lesbianism. Moreover, other research strongly suggests that there are regions on autosomal (nonsex) chromosomes, too, that influence sexual orientation in people.

So a reasonable summary is that, when it comes to male homosexuality, there is almost certainly a direct influence, although probably not strict control, by one or more alleles. Ditto for female homosexuality, although the genetic mechanism(s), and almost certainly the relevant genes themselves, differ between the sexes.

Beyond the suggestive but inconclusive search for DNA specific to sexual orientation, other genetic evidence has emerged. A welter of data on siblings and twins show that the role of genes in homosexual orientation is complicated and far from fully understood—but real. Among noteworthy findings: The concordance of homosexuality for adopted (hence genetically unrelated) siblings is lower than that for biological siblings, which in turn is lower than that for fraternal (nonidentical) twins, which is lower than that for identical twins.

Gay-lesbian differences in those outcomes further support the idea that the genetic influence upon homosexuality differs somewhat, somehow, between women and men. Other studies confirm that the tendency to be lesbian or gay has a substantial chance of being inherited.

Consider, too, that across cultures, the proportion of the population that is homosexual is roughly the same. We are left with an undeniable evolutionary puzzle: What maintains the underlying genetic propensity for homosexuality, whatever its specific manifestations? Unlike most mystery stories, in which the case is typically solved at the finish, this one has no ending: We simply do not know.]]></description>
<dc:subject>homosexuality evolution</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:7a2cc6ac8cc8/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:homosexuality"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/01/restless-genes/dobbs-text">
    <title>Restless Genes - Pictures, More From National Geographic Magazine</title>
    <dc:date>2013-04-16T19:38:23+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/01/restless-genes/dobbs-text</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[provocatively, several studies tie 7R to human migration. The first large genetic study to do so, led by Chuansheng Chen of the University of California, Irvine in 1999, found 7R more common in present-day migratory cultures than in settled ones. A larger, more statistically rigorous 2011 study supported this, finding that 7R, along with another variant named 2R, tends to be found more frequently than you would expect by chance in populations whose ancestors migrated longer distances after they moved out of Africa. Neither study necessarily means that the 7R form of the gene actually made those ancestors especially restless; you’d have to have been around back then to test that premise with certainty. But both studies support the idea that a nomadic lifestyle selects for the 7R variant.

Another recent study backs this up. Among Ariaal tribesmen in Africa, those who carry 7R tend to be stronger and better fed than their non-7R peers if they live in nomadic tribes, possibly reflecting better fitness for a nomadic life and perhaps higher status as well. However, 7R carriers tend to be less well nourished if they live as settled villagers. The variant’s value, then, like that of many genes and traits, may depend on the surroundings. A restless person may thrive in a changeable environment but wither in a stable one; likewise with any genes that help produce the restlessness.

................

In the 1830s in the deep forests of Quebec, Canada, a restless population of pioneers began a lengthy, risky experiment. Quebec City, built by the French by the St. Lawrence River, was growing fast. To the north, along the Saguenay River, stretched a vast, nearly untouched forest. This rich but brutal country soon attracted loggers and young farming families with a taste for work, risk, and opportunity. Up the valley they went, building one small village after another, creating a wave of settlement moving up the Saguenay. From a biologist’s point of view, such a migratory wave can concentrate not just particular types of people on its frothy front edge; it can also concentrate and aid the expansion of any genes that may encourage those people to migrate.

Sometimes a gene rides such a wave passively, more or less by accident—the gene just happens to be common in the leading migrators, so it becomes common in the communities they establish. For instance, if genes for curly hair had been especially common in the Europeans who first started spreading across North America, curly hair would have become more common in North America as those settlers spread across the continent. The gene doesn’t necessarily bestow an advantage; it just becomes more common because so many people in the front edge have it and then reproduce.

But a migratory wave can also allow genes friendly to migration to drive their own selection. A notable, if noxious, example is the South American cane toad. Introduced to northeastern Australia in the 1930s, it now numbers more than 200 million and is advancing across the continent at 30 miles a year. The leading toads hop on legs that are 10 percent longer than those of their 1930s ancestors—and measurably longer than the legs of toads even a mile behind them. How so? Toads that are both restless and long legged move to the front, bringing any restless, long-legged genes with them. There they meet and mate with other restless, long-legged toads to create restless, leggy offspring that move to the front and repeat the cycle.

Laurent Excoffier, a population geneticist at the University of Bern, thinks something similar occurred with the Quebec loggers. In a 2011 paper Excoffier and some colleagues analyzed centuries of Quebec parish birth, marriage, settlement, and death records and found that the pioneer families behaved and bred in a way that spread both their genes and the traits that drove them to the front. These wave-front couples married and mated sooner than did couples back home, perhaps because they were more impatient folks to begin with and because the frontier gave them access to land and a social atmosphere favorable to starting sooner. This alone produced more children than the “core” families who stayed behind did (9.1 per family versus 7.9, or 15 percent more). And because these children in turn proved likelier to marry early and have more children, each pioneer couple left behind 20 percent more offspring altogether. Twenty percent more offspring produces a huge evolutionary advantage. In this case it rapidly raised the share of these families’ genes and cultures within their own population—and thus within North America’s larger population.

Excoffier believes that if this “gene surfing,” as some call it, happened often as humans scattered around the globe, it would have selected for multiple genes that favor curiosity, restlessness, innovation, and risk taking. This could, he says, “help explain some of our exploratory behavior.” Exploration may thus create a self-reinforcing loop, amplifying and spreading the genes and traits that drive it.]]></description>
<dc:subject>DNA DTI genes genetics exploring restlessness genome gene ADHD exploration anthropology human evolution lactose tolerance</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:d1c81892e156/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:DNA"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:DTI"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:genes"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:genetics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:exploring"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:restlessness"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:genome"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:gene"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:ADHD"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:exploration"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:anthropology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:human"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:lactose"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:tolerance"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/opinion/sunday/darwin-was-wrong-about-dating.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_r=0">
    <title>Darwin Was Wrong About Dating - NYTimes.com</title>
    <dc:date>2013-04-08T22:30:02+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/opinion/sunday/darwin-was-wrong-about-dating.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_r=0</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[When asked about actual sexual partners, rather than just theoretical desires, the participants who were not attached to the fake lie detector displayed typical gender differences. Men reported having had more sexual partners than women. But when participants believed that lies about their sexual history would be revealed by the fake lie detector, gender differences in reported sexual partners vanished. In fact, women reported slightly more sexual partners (a mean of 4.4) than did men (a mean of 4.0). ]]></description>
<dc:subject>sex sexuality evolution psychology evolutionary men women</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:8ec896d125a2/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:sex"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:sexuality"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:psychology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolutionary"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:men"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:women"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm">
    <title>Is There Anything Good About Men</title>
    <dc:date>2013-03-14T18:08:47+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.psy.fsu.edu/~baumeistertice/goodaboutmen.htm</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>gender culture psychology evolution men women are wonderful</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:43c3a5021365/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:gender"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:psychology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:men"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:women"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:are"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:wonderful"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/feb/07/awaiting-new-darwin/?pagination=false#fnr-3">
    <title>Awaiting a New Darwin by H. Allen Orr | The New York Review of Books</title>
    <dc:date>2013-01-23T18:23:40+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/feb/07/awaiting-new-darwin/?pagination=false#fnr-3</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[a scientific education is, to a considerable extent, an exercise in taming the authority of one’s intuition.
...............

we have no reason to believe that we, as organisms whose brains are evolved and finite, can fathom the answer to every question that we can ask. All other species have cognitive limitations, why not us? So even if matter does give rise to mind, we might not be able to understand how.

.............

It’s true that organisms are on average more complex now than they were three billion years ago. But as biologists have long recognized, this doesn’t require any inexorable bias toward complexity. If life starts from a floor of zero complexity, it can on average only get more complicated.]]></description>
<dc:subject>evolution philosophy mind consciousness teleology</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:5ad557c247f0/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:philosophy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:mind"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:consciousness"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:teleology"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/16eu22/oil_is_a_huge_potential_source_of_energy_so_why/c7vl5qb">
    <title>mamaBiskothu comments on Oil is a huge potential source of energy, so why haven't bacteria been eating it all?</title>
    <dc:date>2013-01-12T16:55:00+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/16eu22/oil_is_a_huge_potential_source_of_energy_so_why/c7vl5qb</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>oil fungi evolution geology plants decomposition coal</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:1958e5c9f77b/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:oil"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:fungi"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:geology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:plants"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:decomposition"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:coal"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/168gcr/no_offense_intended_but_im_curious_why_vaginal/c7tu94k">
    <title>TheATrain218 comments on No offense intended, but I'm curious: why vaginal odors sometimes smell so decidedly fishy?</title>
    <dc:date>2013-01-09T15:59:43+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.reddit.com/r/askscience/comments/168gcr/no_offense_intended_but_im_curious_why_vaginal/c7tu94k</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>smell evolution</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:886f54376e82/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:smell"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.timetree.org/book.php">
    <title>TimeTree :: The TimeTree of Life Book</title>
    <dc:date>2012-11-25T19:34:28+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.timetree.org/book.php</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution book timetrees download</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:7bdb76f9cda2/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:book"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:timetrees"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:download"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://edge.org/conversation/-brains-plus-brawn">
    <title>Brains Plus Brawn | Conversation | Edge</title>
    <dc:date>2012-10-19T21:30:29+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://edge.org/conversation/-brains-plus-brawn</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Their brains are a little bit bigger than a chimpanzee’s, but not hugely so, and it wasn't until long after the genus Homo evolved that brains actually started getting really, really large. So increases in brain size were not really an early event in human evolution, and in fact, they didn't occur until after hunting and after the invention of hunting and gathering, and not even until cooking and various other technological inventions, which gave us the energy necessary to have really large brains.
....................
hunter-gatherers. They worked extremely hard every day to get a living. A typical hunter-gatherer has to walk between nine and 15 kilometers a day. A typical female might walk 9 kilometers a day, a typical male hunter-gatherer might walk 15 kilometers a day, and that's every single day. That's day-in, day-out, there's no weekend, there's no retirement, and you do that for your whole life. It's about the distance if you walk from Washington, DC to LA every year. That's how much walking hunter-gatherers did every single year.

In addition, they're constantly digging, they're climbing trees, and they're using their bodies intensely. I would argue that cognition was an extremely important factor in human evolution, along with language, theory of mind — all those cognitive developments that make us so sophisticated. But they weren't a triumph of cognition over brute force; it was a combination. It was not brains over brawn, it was brains plus brawn, and that made possible the hunter-gatherer way of life.
..................
My dog or a goat or a lion or a gazelle or some antelope in Africa can run 20 meters a second for about four minutes. So there's no way Usain Bolt could ever outrun any lion or for that matter run down any animal.

A typical chimpanzee is between about two and five times more powerful than a human being. A chimpanzee, who weighs less than a human, can just rip somebody's arm off or rip their face off (as recently happened in Connecticut). It's not that the chimpanzee is remarkably strong, it's that we are remarkably weak. We have this notion that humans are terrible natural athletes. But we've been looking at the wrong kind of athleticism. What we're really good at is not power, what we're really phenomenal at is endurance. We're the tortoises of the animal world, not the hares of the animal world. Humans can actually outrun most animals over very, very long distances.
.............
What's interesting is that there's a reversal of class today. Now, it's only the very wealthy who can afford to be physically active and to eat a good diet, and it's the lower classes, the people in the working classes that cannot afford to actually be physically active. People who are well-off, the one-percenters or maybe the five-percenters of our country, can afford to go to health clubs and take yoga classes and buy organic food. But most Americans today, particularly those who are in the working class, have to work all day long, they have to commute long hours. They don't have time to exercise; they can't afford to buy food that's very healthy. The result is that there's now an interesting reversal that never occurred before in human evolution, which is that the wealthier you are, the healthier you are. It used to be that it was only the very wealthy who could afford to get heart disease.
...................
We love comfort. We have this idea that things that are comfortable must be good for us. So people buy shoes that are comfortable. Well, since when was there a relationship between comfort and health? I would argue that a lot of shoes actually cause people to become injured because they're comfortable. An arch support in a shoe is comfortable because that arch support means that the muscles in your foot no longer have to work anymore to support your arch. It's like taking the elevator all day long. Those muscles then atrophy, or they never even develop properly if you give kids arch supports. Their arches don't even develop properly, or they collapse pretty quickly. Twenty-five percent of Americans have fallen arches, which is an amazing statistic.

In the Kenyan villages where I work, where people don't wear shoes, I have yet to find a single person with a fallen arch. They just don't exist. Maybe we'll find one eventually, like a black swan. But they're obviously extremely rare, those kinds of foot problems. They may have all kinds of crud in their feet and they have other shoe problems and foot problems, but collapsed arches don't seem to exist in barefoot populations.

We have been marketed and sold all kinds of products that we'll willingly buy because they're comfortable. Air conditioning makes us comfortable, but is it good for us? Probably not. The list goes on. Comfortable chairs, for example. Just think about how bad chairs are for us today. Paper after paper, study after study, have shown that chairs give us back problems because they shorten our hip flexors, give us weak backs, of course it make us sedentary. We take years off our lives probably by sitting in chairs, but we like them because they're comfortable. You go to an African village, you find me a chair with a back. That's a rare thing out there. We love comfort, and people make a lot of money selling us comfort, but I would challenge the notion that comfort is usually good for us.]]></description>
<dc:subject>evolution culture brain human brains sports running health comfort</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:c305019c1c40/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:brain"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:human"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:brains"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:sports"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:running"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:health"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:comfort"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/10/there-may-be-no-gene-which-is-essential-for-our-humanity/">
    <title>There may be no gene which is essential for our humanity | Gene Expression | Discover Magazine</title>
    <dc:date>2012-10-17T20:43:00+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/gnxp/2012/10/there-may-be-no-gene-which-is-essential-for-our-humanity/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>human evolution Neandertal</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:8e13930227cf/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:human"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Neandertal"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2012/09/17/120917crbo_books_gottlieb?currentPage=all">
    <title>Can Evolutionary Stories Explain the Human Mind? : The New Yorker</title>
    <dc:date>2012-10-09T22:12:09+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2012/09/17/120917crbo_books_gottlieb?currentPage=all</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[a snappy slogan: “Our modern skulls house a Stone Age mind.” This mind is regarded as a set of software modules that were written by natural selection and now constitute a universal human nature. We are, in short, all running apps from Fred Flintstone’s not-very-smartphone. Work out what those apps are—so the theory goes—and you will see what the mind was designed to do.]]></description>
<dc:subject>evolution evolutionary psychology just so stories Pinker mind behavior</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:3debbfa99562/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolutionary"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:psychology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:just"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:so"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:stories"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Pinker"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:mind"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:behavior"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://therumpus.net/2012/09/the-rumpus-interview-with-dr-neal-barnard/">
    <title>The Rumpus Interview With Dr. Neal Barnard - The Rumpus.net</title>
    <dc:date>2012-10-04T23:08:43+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://therumpus.net/2012/09/the-rumpus-interview-with-dr-neal-barnard/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[About the teeth: if you open the mouth of a cat, a carnivore, you see that they have long canines, way beyond the other teeth. If you open the mouth of a dog, you see the same. If you open your mouth, you don’t. You have canines that are the same length as your incisors. If you have long canine teeth, it allows you to do two things: one, it allows you to snatch your prey. The other thing it allows you to do is to pull away the hide. If a dog happens to catch a rabbit or another animal, it can very easily remove the hide. If a cat catches a squirrel, they have no trouble with that. But if a person does that, they will work all day and all night to get the skin off of an animal, because they don’t have long canine teeth anymore.

We also don’t have claws. Plus we’re not fast. Plus we don’t have very good vision, or good sense of smell. An owl is a predator and can detect a mouse at a tremendous distance. Dogs have a sense of smell much greater than ours and they’re much faster than we are. We have fairly dull senses, fairly slow locomotion. In our Olympic trials, we celebrate speeds that would be an embarrassment to a bird or a dog or another animal.

................

the dangers of eating animal products occur after the age of reproduction. If people developed cardiovascular disease that was fatal by the age of twelve or thirteen, eating animals would have died out long ago. You get it after you’ve already reproduced.

..................

I think it’s fair, if something really is disgusting, to make people aware of it. For example, I just sampled about 120 chicken samples in Buffalo, New York. And we sent them to the lab and tested for fecal contaminaton. We’ll find it in about half of the samples. If you take a chicken thigh and wring it out, there’s fecal soup that comes out of it because there’s chicken feces everywhere in these places, and as they go through the chill bath, that spreads it around and the meat soaks it up and that measurably increases the weight of the chicken product they’re selling. How many people know that? They see the little preparation label that tells you to make sure you cook it, as if somehow a little peppering of bacteria has come from the atmosphere. They don’t realize that it’s chicken dung that’s not just on the surface but soaked into the meat. So people are serving their kids cooked poop. I think it’s fair game for people to know that. They may decide they’re going to do it anyway. But if some people think, “Why am I eating a dead bird soaked in poop?” I think if some people get disgusted by that, it’s all to the good. Their coronary arteries will be healthier.]]></description>
<dc:subject>canine teeth canines evolution meat diet food eating chicken health veganism vegetarianism vegan</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:45bf973c2c80/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:canine"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:teeth"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:canines"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:meat"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:diet"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:food"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:eating"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:chicken"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:health"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:veganism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:vegetarianism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:vegan"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://duckduckgo.com/?q=longest+cell+ever+blog+evolution+whale+bornheimer">
    <title>longest cell ever blog evolution whale bornheimer at DuckDuckGo</title>
    <dc:date>2012-10-04T17:34:15+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://duckduckgo.com/?q=longest+cell+ever+blog+evolution+whale+bornheimer</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>cell cells long whale dinosaur evolution</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:422077d90647/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:cell"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:cells"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:long"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:whale"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:dinosaur"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_evolution/2012/10/groups_and_gossip_drove_the_evolution_of_human_nature.single.html">
    <title>Groups and Gossip Drove the Evolution of Human Nature - Slate Magazine</title>
    <dc:date>2012-10-03T16:41:40+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_evolution/2012/10/groups_and_gossip_drove_the_evolution_of_human_nature.single.html</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>human evolution behavior gossip morality altruism</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:a11bd4d56ca6/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:human"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:behavior"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:gossip"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:morality"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:altruism"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://scienceblogs.com/evolution/2009/11/05/truth-and-reconciliation-for-g-12/">
    <title>Truth and Reconciliation for Group Selection XIV: Group Selection in the Laboratory – Evolution for Everyone</title>
    <dc:date>2012-09-13T18:21:42+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://scienceblogs.com/evolution/2009/11/05/truth-and-reconciliation-for-g-12/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[consider my favorite group selection experiment, which I have written about in Evolution for Everyone. William Muir, an animal breeder at Purdue University, selected for egg productivity in hens in two different ways. Both involved housing hens in cages (groups), which is standard practice in the poultry industry. The first method involved selecting the most productive hen within each cage to breed the next generation of hens. The second method involved selecting the most productive cages and using all the hens from those cages to breed the next generation of hens. It might seem that this is a subtle difference, that the same trait (egg productivity) should be selected in both cases, and that the first method should be more efficacious. After all, eggs are produced by individual hens, so why not directly select the best? Why select at the group level, when even the best groups might have some individual duds?

The results told a completely different story. The first method caused egg productivity to perversely decline, even though the most productive hens were chosen each and every generation. The second method caused egg productivity to increase 160 percent in six generations, an astonishing response as artificial selection experiments go.

What happened? If you’ve been paying attention to my Truth and Reconciliation blogs, you’ll recognize a classic case of multilevel selection. Natural selection within groups is sensitive only to relative fitness, relentlessly favoring hens who lay more eggs than their neighbors. The first method favored the nastiest hens who achieved their productivity by suppressing the productivity of other hens. After six generations, Muir had produced a nation of psychopaths, who plucked and murdered each other in their incessant attacks. No wonder egg productivity plummeted! It would be hard to imagine a more graphic example of what I have called “the original problem” throughout this series of blogs; traits that are “for the good of the group” are not always locally advantageous within the group and require a process of group-level selection to evolve.

That’s why the second method worked. Selecting the most productive groups favored peaceful and cooperative hens, despite their selective disadvantage within groups. Moreover, group-level selection was sufficiently strong to successfully counteract selection within groups, which was taking place within cages for the second method, just as much as the first. Muir’s experiment proves the efficacy of group selection, at least under the conditions of the experiment.

By the way, the groups of chickens were siblings. When some of my colleagues learn this fact, they shout “Aha! It’s kin selection, not group selection!” Wrong. The groups were siblings in both methods, so their kinship cannot explain the difference between the methods. As I relate in T&R XIII, everything about kin selection theory can be understood in terms of the parameters of multilevel selection theory. Creating groups of siblings caused the psychopaths to cluster in some groups and the peaceniks to cluster in other groups, providing lots of variation to select upon at the group level. Psychopaths still beat peaceniks within each group; the fact that they were siblings is beside the point.

This experiment also raises important questions about what counts as an individual trait. Egg productivity seems like an individual trait because you can count the eggs coming out the hind end of a hen. The experiment reveals that egg productivity is in fact a highly social trait that depends upon the genetic composition of one’s group, not just the individual’s genetic composition. This example has profound consequences for how we think about human traits that seem individual but in fact are highly social.]]></description>
<dc:subject>chickens eggs evolution group selection multi-level</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:713361da4fef/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:chickens"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:eggs"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:group"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:selection"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:multi-level"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://edge.org/conversation/a-21st-century-change-to-social-science">
    <title>A New Kind Of Social Science For The  21st century | Conversation | Edge</title>
    <dc:date>2012-08-27T22:00:52+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://edge.org/conversation/a-21st-century-change-to-social-science</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[as we sequenced the human genome, we did it initially with an eye towards physiologic phenotypes (whether people express certain hormones, or what were the sources of certain variations in risk for diseases like diabetes, etc). Those discoveries are gradually going to be progressively applied to other realms having to do with human behavior.
...........
debate about whether or not human beings can evolve in historical time, under the pressure of historical forces. I used to think that this was not possible. But there's been a huge amount of work by many labs around the country in the last 10 years or so documenting that we humans are evolving in real time. The famous, best example of this is the evolution of lactase persistence into adulthood. The ability to digest lactose, which is a sugar in milk, isn't really of any value in adulthood until you have a stable source of milk. It turns out that human beings have independently evolved this capacity to digest milk as adults a half-dozen times, in different settings around the world, coincident with the cultural innovation of domesticating animals—domesticating sheep, goats, or cows, which provides a ready supply of milk. This milk is a good food source in times of scarcity. It's also a good source of unspoiled hydration. So this confers survival advantages.

Here we have a cultural product—namely, the discovery or the invention of domestication of animals—which feeds back to, and creates, a kind of selection pressure on us as a species, so that here, thousands of years later, most of us are able to digest milk in adulthood as a result of this cultural product.
................
 In one world, for example, people were dropped into a network that had random wiring between the individuals, and we observed them across time. In the beginning, we saw that 65 percent of them cooperated with their neighbors. But, they couldn't control who their neighbors were, and they found out that some of their neighbors were defectors and weren't cooperating back, and so after each round of the game, after the passage of some number of rounds, pretty much everyone had given up and cooperation was extinguished in the system. This result had been widely described by others, and has been studied a lot. At least empirically, cooperation declines in these types of fixed lattices, or fixed networks.

In other variants of the experiment, however, we allowed people to re-wire their networks. At every time step, they could cut the ties to people who were abusing them, and preferentially form ties to other people who were cooperators. And so, they could rewire their social world. In this variant of the experiment, after the passage of some time, cooperation persisted. In a world in which we allow people to form and re-form their social ties, cooperation can be sustained.

What this means is that there's a very deep relationship between social network structure and function and the maintenance of this very key human behavior, namely cooperation. This is an experiment in which we were able to isolate one of the deep sources of human cooperation, which is the ability to preferentially form ties with certain others in our social orbit.
...............
you can readily get through institutional review boards research proposals which propose to take 100 people with cancer and randomize half of them to get a drug and half not, in which the risk of a mistake leads to the death of the subject. And yet, if you propose to do something in which you ask people about their sexual behavior, everyone gets up in arms. Even though there's really a trivial risk in that situation. Maybe someone will feel bad about having talked about their sexual behavior, or perhaps the data will in some way not have been properly anonymized, and there'll be a leak of information about someone's sexual behavior. I'm not trivializing that risk, but I am benchmarking that risk against the alternative kind of research, in which the stakes are life or death, or the loss of a limb or something.

You hear a lot of conversation in the public sphere about the ethical conduct of this research, and we should. But I can't help but notice that there is a little less conversation about the ethical conduct of all kinds of other research, for which the stakes are actually much higher.

Incidentally, another thing that's fascinating to me is that, there's a very funny saying when it comes to the ethical review of science, or an anecdote, which is that if a doctor wakes up in the morning and decides that, for the next 100 patients with cancer that he or she sees that have this condition, he's going to treat them all with this new drug because he thinks that drug works, he can do that. He doesn't need to get anyone's permission. He can use any drug “off-label” he wants when, in his judgment, it is helpful to the patient. He'll talk to the patient. He needs to get the patient's consent. He can't administer the drug without the patient knowing. But, he can say to the patient, "I recommend that you do this," and he can make this recommendation to every one of the next 100 patients he sees.

If, on the other hand, the doctor is more humble, and more judicious, and says "you know, I'm not sure that this drug works, I'm going to only give it to half of the next 100 patients I see," then he needs to get IRB approval, because that's research. So even though he's giving it to fewer patients, now there's more review.
]]></description>
<dc:subject>Edge question genomics evolution cooperation DNA behavior lactose intolerance tolerance human mutation milk culture social society privacy</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:03348f299416/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Edge"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:question"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:genomics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:cooperation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:DNA"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:behavior"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:lactose"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:intolerance"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:tolerance"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:human"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:mutation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:milk"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:culture"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:social"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:society"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:privacy"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.trevorbedford.com/coaltracejs/">
    <title>trevorbedford : coaltrace.js</title>
    <dc:date>2012-08-27T20:55:07+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.trevorbedford.com/coaltracejs/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>javascript evolution cool animation genetics genealogy</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:deaa105a6419/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:javascript"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:cool"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:animation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:genetics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:genealogy"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/richard-dawkins-edward-o.-wilson-and-the-consensus-of-the-many">
    <title>This View of Life: Richard Dawkins, Edward O. Wilson, and the Consensus of the Many</title>
    <dc:date>2012-06-25T19:20:30+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.thisviewoflife.com/index.php/magazine/articles/richard-dawkins-edward-o.-wilson-and-the-consensus-of-the-many</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution group selection Wilson Dawkins</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:0237bac664b3/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:group"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:selection"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Wilson"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Dawkins"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/edward-wilson-social-conquest-earth-evolutionary-errors-origin-species/">
    <title>The descent of Edward Wilson</title>
    <dc:date>2012-06-25T18:01:13+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/edward-wilson-social-conquest-earth-evolutionary-errors-origin-species/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[So, “replicators” and “vehicles” constitute two meanings of “unit of natural selection.” Replicators are the units that survive (or fail to survive) through the generations. Vehicles are the agents that replicators programme as devices to help them survive. Genes are the primary replicators, organisms the obvious vehicles]]></description>
<dc:subject>evolution science book books Wilson group selection controversy</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:4e7c41558e6b/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:book"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:books"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Wilson"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:group"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:selection"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:controversy"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/06/a-perfect-and-beautiful-machine-what-darwins-theory-of-evolution-reveals-about-artificial-intelligence/258829/">
    <title>Technology - Daniel C. Dennett - 'A Perfect and Beautiful Machine': What Darwin's Theory of Evolution Reveals About Artificial Intelligence - The Atlantic</title>
    <dc:date>2012-06-25T00:34:34+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/06/a-perfect-and-beautiful-machine-what-darwins-theory-of-evolution-reveals-about-artificial-intelligence/258829/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>computers evolution Darwin Turing counterintuitive</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:df8dccf7df21/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:computers"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Darwin"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Turing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:counterintuitive"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://edge.org/conversation/the-false-allure-of-group-selection">
    <title>The False Allure Of Group Selection | Conversation | Edge</title>
    <dc:date>2012-06-20T18:33:14+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://edge.org/conversation/the-false-allure-of-group-selection</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Natural selection is a special explanatory concept in the sciences, worthy, in my view, of Daniel Dennett's designation as "the best idea that anyone ever had." That's because it explains one of the greatest mysteries in science, the illusion of design in the natural world. The core of natural selection is that when replicators arise and make copies of themselves, (1) their numbers will tend, under ideal conditions, to increase exponentially; (2) they will necessarily compete for finite resources; (3) some will undergo random copying errors ("random" in the sense that they do not anticipate their effects in the current environment); and (4) whichever copying errors happen to increase the rate of replication will accumulate in a lineage and predominate in the population. After many generations of replication, the replicators will show the appearance of design for effective replication, while in reality they have just accumulated the copying errors that had successful replication as their effect.

What's satisfying about the theory is that it is so mechanistic. The copying errors (mutations) are random (more accurately, blind to their effects). The outcome of interest is the number of copies in a finite population.  The surprising outcome is a product of the cumulative effects of many generations of replication. If the copying errors were not random (that is, if Lamarck had been correct that changes in an organism arise in response to a felt need, or if creationists were right that a superior intelligence directed mutations to be beneficial to the organism), then natural selection would be otiose—the design could come from the mutation stage. If the outcome of interest were not the number of copies in a finite population, but some human-centered criterion of success (power, preeminence, influence, beauty), then natural selection would not be mechanistic: the dynamics of change in the population could not be mathematically computed from its prior state. And if it took place in a single generation, then natural selection would be banal, since it would add nothing to ordinary physical cause and effect. When a river erodes the soft rock layers on its bed and leaves behind the harder layers, or when the more volatile compounds in petroleum evaporate faster than the less volatile ones, one hardly needs to invoke the theory of natural selection. One can just say that some things are stronger, or longer-lasting, or more stable than others. Only when selection operates over multiple generations of replication, yielding a cumulative result that was not obvious from cause and effect applying to a single event, does the concept of natural selection add anything. 

...............

The recent surge of interest in group selection has been motivated by two empirical phenomena. One is eusociality in insect taxa such as bees, ants, and termites, whose worker or soldier castes forgo their own reproduction and may sacrifice their lives to benefit their fellows, as when a bee dies when stinging an invader. E. O. Wilson notes that a self-sacrificing insect benefits the colony, and concludes that eusociality must be explained by selection among colonies. But most other biologists point out that the sacrificer benefits the queen (her sister or mother), who founds a new colony when she reproduces, so the simplest explanation of eusociality is that the genes promoting self-sacrifice were selected because they benefited copies of themselves inside the queen.[4] The same is true for other collectives of genetic relatives in which only a select few reproduce, such as the individuals making up a colonial organism and the cells making up a body.

.................

The huge literature on the evolution of cooperation in humans has done quite well by applying the two gene-level explanations for altruism from evolutionary biology, nepotism and reciprocity, each with a few twists entailed by the complexity of human cognition.

Nepotistic altruism in humans consists of feelings of warmth, solidarity, and tolerance toward those who are likely to be one's kin. It evolved because any genes that encouraged such feelings toward genetic relatives would be benefiting copies of themselves inside those relatives. (This does not, contrary to a common understanding, mean that people love their relatives because of an unconscious desire to perpetuate their genes.) A vast amount of human altruism can be explained in this way. Compared to the way people treat nonrelatives, they are far more likely to feed their relatives, nurture them, do them favors, live near them, take risks to protect them, avoid hurting them, back away from fights with them, donate organs to them, and leave them inheritances.

......................

The idea of Group Selection has a superficial appeal because humans are indisputably adapted to group living and because some groups are indisputably larger, longer-lived, and more influential than others. This makes it easy to conclude that properties of human groups, or properties of the human mind, have been shaped by a process that is akin to natural selection acting on genes. Despite this allure, I have argued that the concept of Group Selection has no useful role to play in psychology or social science. It refers to too many things, most of which are not alternatives to the theory of gene-level selection but loose allusions to the importance of groups in human evolution. And when the concept is made more precise, it is torn by a dilemma. If it is meant to explain the cultural traits of successful groups, it adds nothing to conventional history and makes no precise use of the actual mechanism of natural selection. But if it is meant to explain the psychology of individuals, particularly an inclination for unconditional self-sacrifice to benefit a group of nonrelatives, it is dubious both in theory (since it is hard to see how it could evolve given the built-in advantage of protecting the self and one's kin) and in practice (since there is no evidence that humans have such a trait).]]></description>
<dc:subject>biology evolution group selection natural social eusociality Wilson insects ants bees behavior altruism</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:d074c6dcb6ac/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:biology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:group"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:selection"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:natural"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:social"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:eusociality"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Wilson"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:insects"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:ants"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:bees"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:behavior"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:altruism"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/id.15294,y.0,no.,content.true,page.1,css.print/issue.aspx">
    <title>Do the Eyes Have It? » American Scientist</title>
    <dc:date>2012-05-16T19:28:47+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.americanscientist.org/issues/id.15294,y.0,no.,content.true,page.1,css.print/issue.aspx</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>dogs evolution anthropology science hunting Neandertal gaze eyes</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:b9a9e2394a55/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:dogs"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:anthropology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:hunting"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Neandertal"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:gaze"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:eyes"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2012/05/history_of_breasts_by_florence_williams_reviewed_.html">
    <title>History of breasts by Florence Williams, reviewed. - Slate Magazine</title>
    <dc:date>2012-05-07T18:00:50+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2012/05/history_of_breasts_by_florence_williams_reviewed_.html</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>breasts evolution health sex</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:1dafc1c32302/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:breasts"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:health"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:sex"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/magazine/13Psychology-t.html?pagewanted=all">
    <title>The Moral Instinct - New York Times</title>
    <dc:date>2012-03-31T15:40:29+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/13/magazine/13Psychology-t.html?pagewanted=all</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[Singer]]></description>
<dc:subject>morality evolution ethics philosophy psychology Pinker NYT New York Times roots Muslim Islam</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:2c6b0094131e/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:morality"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:ethics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:philosophy"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:psychology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Pinker"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:NYT"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:New"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:York"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Times"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:roots"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Muslim"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Islam"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-02-alan-turing-1950s-tiger-stripe.html">
    <title>Alan Turing's 1950s tiger stripe theory proved</title>
    <dc:date>2012-02-21T18:22:42+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-02-alan-turing-1950s-tiger-stripe.html</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA['Regularly spaced structures, from vertebrae and hair follicles to the stripes on a tiger or zebrafish, are a fundamental motif in biology. There are several theories about how patterns in nature are formed, but until now there was only circumstantial evidence for Turing's mechanism. Our study provides the first experimental identification of an activator-inhibitor system at work]]></description>
<dc:subject>biology embryology development Turing stripes repitition evolution science</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:6bdbb2b7daaa/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:biology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:embryology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:development"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Turing"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:stripes"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:repitition"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:science"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-evolutionary-reason-for-mischief-trolling-and-the-pleasure-arising-from-it/answer/Paul-King-2">
    <title>Paul King's answer to What is the evolutionary reason for mischief/trolling? (and the pleasure arising from it) - Quora</title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-26T21:59:44+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.quora.com/What-is-the-evolutionary-reason-for-mischief-trolling-and-the-pleasure-arising-from-it/answer/Paul-King-2</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>brain brains evolution behavior sexual selection neural basis evolutionary psychology</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:8aa93e1717cc/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:brain"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:brains"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:behavior"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:sexual"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:selection"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:neural"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:basis"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolutionary"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:psychology"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.evogeneao.com/images/Evo_large.gif">
    <title>Evo_large.gif (GIF Image, 2420x915 pixels)</title>
    <dc:date>2011-10-22T06:01:02+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.evogeneao.com/images/Evo_large.gif</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution history science visualization graphic infographic tree life biology</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:338c23eb21ae/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:history"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:science"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:visualization"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:graphic"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:infographic"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:tree"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:life"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:biology"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_(phylogenetics)">
    <title>Basal (phylogenetics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia</title>
    <dc:date>2011-04-09T22:46:59+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basal_(phylogenetics)</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>primitive derived clade clades cladisics trees life biology relationships evolution</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:3a1181d35ac5/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:primitive"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:derived"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:clade"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:clades"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:cladisics"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:trees"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:life"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:biology"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:relationships"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://lesswrong.com/lw/l5/evolving_to_extinction/">
    <title>Evolving to Extinction - Less Wrong</title>
    <dc:date>2011-02-16T01:59:42+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://lesswrong.com/lw/l5/evolving_to_extinction/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><description><![CDATA[The real struggle in natural selection is not the competition of organisms for resources; this is an ephemeral thing when all the participants will vanish in another generation.  The real struggle is the competition of alleles for frequency in the gene pool.  This is the lasting consequence that creates lasting information.  The two rams bellowing and locking horns are only passing shadows.]]></description>
<dc:subject>evolution quote Eliezer Yudkowsy</dc:subject>
<dc:source>https://pinboard.in/</dc:source>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:e4353bddd88d/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:quote"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Eliezer"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Yudkowsy"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~dpiau/cdem/130124b.pdf">
    <title>THE NEW VIEW OF ANIMAL PHYLOGENY</title>
    <dc:date>2010-10-20T22:48:35+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~dpiau/cdem/130124b.pdf</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>animal evolution pdf paper academic clades classification genetics</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:19e6cda9c8c1/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:animal"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:pdf"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:paper"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:academic"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:clades"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:classification"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:genetics"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100125123219.htm?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+(ScienceDaily%3A+Latest+Science+News)">
    <title>In bats and whales, convergence in echolocation ability runs deep</title>
    <dc:date>2010-02-08T22:40:25+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100125123219.htm?utm_source=feedburner&amp;utm_medium=feed&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily+(ScienceDaily%3A+Latest+Science+News)</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>bats whales echolocation sonar radar evolution convergent</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:2376710c5580/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:bats"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:whales"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:echolocation"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:sonar"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:radar"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:convergent"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://lesswrong.com/lw/kv/beware_of_stephen_j_gould/">
    <title>Less Wrong: Beware of Stephen J. Gould</title>
    <dc:date>2010-01-13T23:34:01+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://lesswrong.com/lw/kv/beware_of_stephen_j_gould/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>Gould Stephen evolution</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:6e62dcb34d34/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Gould"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Stephen"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://scienceblogs.com/evolution/2009/11/truth_and_reconciliation_for_g_17.php">
    <title>Truth and Reconciliation for Group Selection XVII: The (Crude) Human Superorganism : Evolution for Everyone</title>
    <dc:date>2009-11-21T00:11:19+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://scienceblogs.com/evolution/2009/11/truth_and_reconciliation_for_g_17.php</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>superorganism human evolution group selection</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:0a2cb91636d4/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:superorganism"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:human"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:group"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:selection"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://benfry.com/traces/">
    <title>the preservation of favoured traces | ben fry</title>
    <dc:date>2009-09-05T05:33:55+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://benfry.com/traces/</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>visualization Darwin evolution text</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:5965a798e8c3/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:visualization"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Darwin"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:text"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/business/economy/12view.html">
    <title>Economic View - The Invisible Hand, Trumped by Darwin? - NYTimes.com</title>
    <dc:date>2009-07-13T13:08:57+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/12/business/economy/12view.html</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>Adam Smith Darwin competition New York Times evolution economics</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:76039b92ea44/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Adam"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Smith"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Darwin"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:competition"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:New"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:York"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Times"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:economics"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2009/05/10-things-id-tell-darwin.html">
    <title>Times Online - Science Central - WBLG: 10 things I'd tell Darwin</title>
    <dc:date>2009-06-22T18:47:42+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://timesonline.typepad.com/science/2009/05/10-things-id-tell-darwin.html</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution Darwin list</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:bde409d5f495/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:Darwin"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:list"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://www.netscrap.com/netscrap_detail.cfm?scrap_id=73">
    <title>NetScrap(TM): CREATURES FROM PRIMORDIAL SILICON</title>
    <dc:date>2008-12-24T16:53:35+00:00</dc:date>
    <link>http://www.netscrap.com/netscrap_detail.cfm?scrap_id=73</link>
    <dc:creator>ernie.bornheimer</dc:creator><dc:subject>evolution circuits electronic</dc:subject>
<dc:identifier>https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/b:00c589add9c9/</dc:identifier>
<taxo:topics><rdf:Bag>	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:evolution"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:circuits"/>
	<rdf:li rdf:resource="https://pinboard.in/u:ernie.bornheimer/t:electronic"/>
</rdf:Bag></taxo:topics>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>