About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristat #4 Overall Rank

E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


Disclaimer

  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.
Juristat_165
Juristat #8 Overall Rank

Pharma-50-transparent_216px_red

« Game Over for Myriad -- Update | Main | USPTO Holds Forum on Interim Guidance -- Part II »

February 17, 2015

Comments

To think that many of the representatives voting on patent laws do not recognize evolution.

Well, Simon, while I wasn't thinking about that you have a good point. It's particularly ironic that we have the most evidence for evolution ever today, when according to statistics the most people seem skeptical of it (and science in general).

Thanks for pointing that out.

Well, speaking as a scientist, I've seen evidence of evolution within a species (e.g. the development of antibiotic resistance), but I have yet to see any evidence showing evolution from a single-celled organism to, say, one or more vertebrates. For that matter, I haven't seen anyone produce life from inanimate matter in a lab. Reproducibility is part of the scientific method (e.g. failure to reproduce cold fusion as claimed in 1989 was what got those claims debunked), and I expect the same level of proof for evolutionary biology claims that I expect from any other scientific claim. The failure (to date) to make even an amoeba in the lab, let alone take such a creature and transform it to, say, a moose, a flying squirrel, or an inept spy, leaves me skeptical about claims that life as we know it started by happenstance and then evolved from the same unicellular organism. On the other hand, since I haven't seen the idea disproven, I remain open-minded about it, particularly when faced with the lack of an alternative, provable suggestion for how life on earth came to be as we know it. (Intelligent design is possible, but by definition not repeatable in the lab, which means it violates the tenets of my religion, viz. science.)

The comments to this entry are closed.

January 2023

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30 31