So there you have it. A lot of things get shouted in the middle of a public debate. Provocation is the name of the game.
Can we take a nuanced look at the charge, claim? But not my words, here stuff you can take to the bank:
Conclusions
Several recent findings indicate that CRISPR-Cas systems of adaptive immunity differ with respect to the level of self-nonself discrimination at the adaptation stage. Some of these systems seem to acquire spacers randomly, resulting in extensive cell death, with subsequent selection of surviving cells that are resistant to infection thanks to the incorporation of spacers from parasite DNA.
Other CRISPR-Cas variants possess mechanisms of efficient self-nonself discrimination during adaptation such that the incorporated spacers come almost entirely from foreign DNA.
These systems seem to qualify as machines for Lamarckian evolution. Subsequent experiments will determine how common is each of these scenarios among the diverse CRISPR-cas systems in bacteria and archaea.
However, even at this stage, it is becoming clear that the Darwinian and Lamarckian modes of evolution form a continuum of evolutionary regimes defined by mechanisms of evolvability that bias the mutational process to different degrees of specificity. In the course of evolution, Darwinian selection and genetic drift appeared first as intrinsic properties of replicators whereas the (quasi)Lamarckian mechanisms evolved jointly with mechanisms of DNA repair.
“Lamarckian” has become a buzz word,
then there are the underlying facts beyond the buzz words,
and how we humans choose to arrange them to complete a story we tell ourselves.
How we frame our questions, can limit what we learn, as much a stimulate it.