[Vision2020] Evolution's Sky

[Phil Nisbet]

Of Gaps and Darwin’s flawed vision

One of the principle problems with understanding evolution is that too many 
biologists and other short time fuse folks are still working from the failed 
understanding that was the result of Darwin’s ideas with regard to 
gradualism and survival of the fittest.  Charles was indeed a product of his 
time and his vision of evolution saw the idea of everything leading up to us 
as a certainty, indeed as leading to the eventual domination of the world by 
the British Empire in a slow but steady march from simple organisms.

Trouble is, the evolution of species does not work that way.

Gradualism is not the case.  Yes there is mutation in species at varying 
rates, but the bulk of mutations will not be adaptive.  Further, in the 
center of a species domain, mutations are what survival of the species will 
weed out.  Change in species occurs because of point events within a species 
range and then evolution is a process in which marginal groups at the edges 
of the habitat, in less than optimum conditions re-colonize once the 
previous fat dumb and happy types are all dead.  Preservation of the 
marginal species preliminary habitat is far less likely over geological 
time, which gives us the appearance of ‘gaps’.

Darwin’s ideas see the world as battling it out in the prime habitat for 
control of resources and have that battle resulting in evolution, with the 
‘best adapted’ winning to gain control of the habitat.  This was great 
politics in Charles’ day and fit nicely with the ideas that Socialism taught 
about the perfectibility of man and the dialectic.  It is still the idea put 
forth by Social Darwinists.  It’s also still the idea that is taught in the 
classroom and what too many biologists think of when you say evolution.

But the reality is that evolution and species survival is dictated by the 
diversity of marginal members at the poorest edges of habitat, the ragged 
nasty types that simply do not fit in and would be eliminated in the core of 
the species’ range.  The more varied and diverse this population in the 
margins is, the more possible survival conditions can be meet when sudden 
disaster in the central condition happens.  The more homogeneous the 
species, the less likely it will survive long term on the face of this 
globe.

This leads to completely different conclusions about politics and indeed, 
brings a very different conclusion about ecology and species survival for 
man.  For just one example, it makes the idea of diversity have very 
important meaning and tells us why perfected uniform man is a bad idea.

Phil Nisbet

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/