replies.

Re: Findings Challenge Darwinian Theory
  I could be wrong, but I don't think it challenges Darwin at all.
Whether it's a right claw, or left claw, that enlarges due to use,
there's still probably a gene that acts like a switch. Lobsters with
that gene might have a better chance for survival that a lobster with
out the gene. That'd fall right into the "survival of the fittest idea,
no?
  Perhaps a series of genes might create different physical
attributes, depending on what activates them. It'd appear as thought the
environment was the principle cause, but it would still be an inherited
trait.
<snip>
"Further, studies on many other plant and animal species with both
right-sided and left-sided forms showed that if two of the same
'handedness' were mated, half their offspring would be left-sided and
half would be right-sided. "Genetics made no difference in the direction
of asymmetry. It's a trait strictly determined by environment. From an
evolutionary perspective, this means form arises first and the genes
follow.""
  On the contrary.... I think it shows just the opposite. If "form"
arose first, I'd see no reason why all the offspring wouldn't have the
same large claw, or, if there's no gene yet, why would any of the
offspring have any large claws at all?
  I think it shows that there's a "switch" gene, or series of genes.
The parents pass on the gene, and the environment chooses which claw the
gene(s) activates.
  (of course, that's only speculation on my part 🙂
  I can only suggest that perhaps they do their next study on mouse
tail amputations 🙂