Gauger has a PhD in zoology and is a signatory of Discovery Institute’s 2005 petition “Scientific Dissent from Darwinism”. She’s currently associated with the Discovery affiliated creationist think-tank the Biologic Institute whose goal is to perform real research on ID and which has yet to produce a single publication supporting ID creationism despite big budgets and numerous employed “scientists”.
A rather infamous incident occurred when Gauger reported on her work at the Wistar Retrospective Symposium, 2007, in Boston, Massachusetts. She discussed “leaky growth” in microbial colonies at high densities, leading to horizontal transfer of genetic information, and announced that under such conditions she had actually found a novel variant that seemed to lead to enhanced colony growth. Gunther Wagner, a real scientist, asked the obvious question: “So, a beneficial mutation happened right in your lab?” at which point the moderator halted questioning - Gauger has earlier argued that any evolutionary change is non-adaptive.
Diagnosis: Surely intelligent, but caught up in a system of self-reassuring but misguided views on how reality hangs together. The Biologic Institute is supposed to provided creationism with a sheen of scientific legitimacy, and although its existence may carry some influence on general perception of creationism (then again, probably not), it has failed to fool scientists or scholars in general (apart from Robin Collins).
(ed. note - I haven't been able to find a pic that I can reliably identify as the Ann Gauger of this entry. If anyone can point me to one, please let me know)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
She may not be very notable. This blog is the fifth or sixth google hit, at least on my computer (I dunno if google stores pages I visit often and let them influence the search), depending on whether you use quotation marks around the name or not.
ReplyDeleteThe slander here is absurd.
DeleteAnn Gauger and Douglas Axe recently got a paper out concerning the evolution of proteins, published in Michael Behe's journal (since its lack of understanding of the material/dishonesty would definitely prevent publication anywhere reputable). Their understanding of the papers they audaciously refer to is discussed here.
ReplyDeleteThere's an image and an interesting story here http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/12/inteliigent-design-think-tanks-institute-is-a-shutterstock-image/
ReplyDeleteHere's the pic. And a funny article to boot. http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/12/inteliigent-design-think-tanks-institute-is-a-shutterstock-image/
ReplyDeleteI was searching for her on the Googles because of this photo of her in front of a stock photo lab:
ReplyDeletehttp://arstechnica.com/science/2012/12/inteliigent-design-think-tanks-institute-is-a-shutterstock-image/
Youtube video of "Biologist Ann Gauger, Ph.D in her laboratory: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7tuZIxDxkxI
ReplyDeleteHer laboratory can be seen here: http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-862039/stock-photo-biological-science-laboratory-at-night.html
Gauger fails population genetics, as presented in a documentary shot, apparently, in the Biologic Institute’s new laboratory.
ReplyDeleteIntelligent? Selectivelly, maybe.
ReplyDeleteI was once in a Facebook message exchange with her on the subject of endogenous retroviruses, slam-dunk evidence for evolution. Eventually, she asked me to cite the relevant scientific literature. As soon as I provided it, she promptly blocked me!
ReplyDeletehttps://barryhisblog.blogspot.com/p/endogenous-retroviruses-frequently.html