= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gwern comments on Open Thread, September 15-30, 2012 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (206)
So, Cochran and Harpending have been posting to their blog about genetic noise and parental age. Given modern data, this is actually a rather important result with a lot of wide-ranging implications. Turns out, people thought it was significant 50 years ago, and it's mostly lain dormant since then.
In genetics, it seems to be the rule that speculation far outpaces what can actually be known. Countless times I read these papers and they go 'as speculated by X 50 years ago...' (where X is usually Darwin or Fisher). I understand there's some question as to even whether Mendel's peas showed the laws he wanted them to show! Which would indeed exemplify the theory outpacing the practice.