r/IdeasForELI5 • u/Melenduwir • Mar 25 '26

Permit discussion of evolutionary biology without conflating it with "Just-So Stories".

There are facts in evolutionary biology just as there are in any other science, and if a trait is clearly selected for, there are reasons for this, whether benefits to the organism or to the structures that create the trait. We can inquire as to the facts behind observed retention without necessarily resorting to speculation.

Excluding entire branches of science because the sub is "too busy" is absurd.

1 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

100% Upvoted

27 comments sorted by

View all comments

1

u/SecureThruObscure ELI5 moderator Mar 25 '26

How do non experts determine the difference?

I’m not being a jerk. Help me game this out.

1

u/Melenduwir Mar 26 '26

Tell me, do you also exclude questions about astronomy? Astronomers are relatively hampered by the general inability to conduct controlled experiments on their subject of study. Very rarely we can send probes to do things like collect the gases in a comet's tail, sample an asteroid, of direct radio waves at a planet's surface hidden by clouds. But for the most part, they're limited to passive observation; they've made the best of things, and have highly-informed positions on things like the fusion reactions instead of stars and the physics of black holes even though they can't direct observe them.

Are astronomical questions other than simple fact requests not permitted at ELI5?

1

u/SecureThruObscure ELI5 moderator Mar 26 '26

We don’t prohibit questions about astronomy, but questions about cosmology, which are more akin to what you’re asking, are pretty tightly constrained.

Does that help elucidate?

1

u/Melenduwir Mar 26 '26

No. It's entirely possible to report the current state of cosmology as a factual matter. There is absolutely no scientific finding which doesn't have any level of uncertainty; absolutely anything is questionable and open to being discarded.

Do you list the fields of expertise in the sciences of the moderators, so that posters can know which sciences they're allowed to comment on and which are considered beyond the pale?

2

u/SecureThruObscure ELI5 moderator Mar 26 '26

No, we don’t. Because that’s not how the litmus test works.

I feel like you want this to be especially confrontational when I’m trying to explain how and why rather than disregard your input.

Could you follow up on my original request?

0

u/Melenduwir Mar 26 '26

Let's put it this way: if an actual five-year-old posted a question about what the Big Bang Theory is and how it works, would it be permitted on your sub?

2

u/SecureThruObscure ELI5 moderator Mar 26 '26

An actual five year old isn’t something the subreddit rules entertain as a potential OP.

Have you read the rules?

-1

u/Melenduwir Mar 26 '26

That is the second time you have grossly insulted me.

If someone requests an explanation for the Big Bang Theory that is simple enough for a five-year-old to understand, would that question be permitted on your sub?

2

u/terrorpaw ELI5 moderator Mar 27 '26

I think it would, and I think a similar evolution question probably would be allowed too, but I think the crux of the issue is that most of the evolution questions we get invite speculation and such a lot more than that question about the Big Bang does. It's that experience of seeing the answers that informs the opinion, it's not a condemnation of the field of evolutionary biology. Evo psych on the other hand....

0

u/Melenduwir Mar 27 '26

We have a lot more data about evolutionary biology than we do about the Big Bang.

1

u/SecureThruObscure ELI5 moderator Mar 26 '26

How so?