"Of Moths and Men" by Judith Hooper

"Of Moths and Men" by Judith Hooper

Fourth Estate, London, 2002

Minor comments by A. S. Lodge

1. p.51, para. 2, "competion" should be "competition".

2. p.284, para.2, "...Discovery Institute, a 'scientific creationism' think tank...". It is not. Judith Hooper is here adopting one of the Darwinists' standard ploys - that of dubbing all critics with the emotive label "creationist", thereby confusing them with "Creationists" who believe that the Earth was created a few thousand years ago.

3. p.360: "1848: R. D. Edleston observes a black mutant form of the peppered moth...". According to E. B. Ford (Ecological Genetics, Chapman & Hall, London 4th Edition 1975, p. 329) there was an earlier example prior to 1811. The point is important because the melanic form may have preceded industrial pollution.

4. The author does not give a definition of the Neo-Darwinian Theory.

Jerry Coyne reviewed this book in Nature 418, p.20

He stated that Judith Hooper "conveniently glosses over the simple and unassailable fact that the light and dark alleles of Biston segregate as Mendelian variants when tested under uniform experimental conditions." But Hooper stated (on p.287) that "countless breeding experiments with peppered moths have produced the expected Mendelian ratios in the offspring." She then discusses this for 3 pages.

Some gloss!

	Arthur S. Lodge \| home First statements \| First replies: Thomas \| First replies: Wells \| Second replies: Wells \| Dr Musgrave's reply \| Wells' third reply \| Dr Musgrave's 2nd Reply \| Dr Wells' reply to Dr Musgrave's 2nd Reply \| From "Melanism: Evolution in Action" \| Melanism via NDT? \| Needed: statistical analysis \| Summary \| "Of Moths and Men" by Judith Hooper \| Natural selection: the only mechanism? Industrial Melanism Evolution
	"Of Moths and Men" by Judith Hooper Fourth Estate, London, 2002 Minor comments by A. S. Lodge 1. p.51, para. 2, "competion" should be "competition". 2. p.284, para.2, "...Discovery Institute, a 'scientific creationism' think tank...". It is not. Judith Hooper is here adopting one of the Darwinists' standard ploys - that of dubbing all critics with the emotive label "creationist", thereby confusing them with "Creationists" who believe that the Earth was created a few thousand years ago. 3. p.360: "1848: R. D. Edleston observes a black mutant form of the peppered moth...". According to E. B. Ford (Ecological Genetics, Chapman & Hall, London 4th Edition 1975, p. 329) there was an earlier example prior to 1811. The point is important because the melanic form may have preceded industrial pollution. 4. The author does not give a definition of the Neo-Darwinian Theory. Jerry Coyne reviewed this book in Nature 418, p.20 He stated that Judith Hooper "conveniently glosses over the simple and unassailable fact that the light and dark alleles of Biston segregate as Mendelian variants when tested under uniform experimental conditions." But Hooper stated (on p.287) that "countless breeding experiments with peppered moths have produced the expected Mendelian ratios in the offspring." She then discusses this for 3 pages. Some gloss!