Anything for the money, that bunch.

What are some concrete examples of left-wing bias in science? A few named examples would be very helpful here.

Consider tho... To their opponents, they look like they're all business when setting up for tackles and like they're partying when they've broken away and are running free for the try.

If you study evolution, human variation, or anything that is natural historical, it is an important read. In the address, Douglass argues against the pronouncements of Black inferiority made by race scientists of his day, including Agassiz and Morton. It's still relevant today.2/2

The bill calls for state-/local-level planning (not funding) for eventual hourly trains from Chicago to:
🚆 Milwaukee
🚆 Madison and St Paul
🚆 Rockford
🚆 St Louis
🚆 Champaign
🚆 Louisville
🚆 Cincinnati
🚆 Columbus
🚆 Detroit
🚆 Moline (every 2 hours)
🚆 Peoria (every 2 hours)
🚆 Galesburg (every 4 hours)

I'd add that there has been a considerable synthesis of quantitative genetics and evodevo (Hall, Atchley, Riska, Cheverud, Rice, Wolf, etc.). It tends not to be recognized by EES proponents. It's a little frustrating.

I agree. A good chunk of my research program is about exactly this and @edhagen.net will agree that I'm no adaptationist. I'd point out that all of the theory that is used in the linked analysis is pretty conventional qgen and evodevo, which have a long history of synthesis. It just gets ignored.

Ben and I are talking about adaptive evolvability. An organism (a group of them, really) having the ability evolve adaptively because it was adapted to do so.

It’s a different matter from evolving in one set of contexts and then being able to deal with novelty as a correlated response.

I get very worried about talk of directed evolution toward distant beneficial ends in humans. Starts to get a bit eugenical. The lighter slightly less intentional version seems t be sewn together from the remains of Lamarck and Spencer. Not much of an improvement.

Bringing weight to the composition.

Thanks. I appreciate you saying that. Reviewer 3 wouldn't agree with you.

That's an interesting take on it. Ben and I didn't mean it that way, but now that you bring it up...

What we were trying to get across is that using evolutionary process-informed analyses and a comparative framework gives us informative results even if we aren't thinking about function.