Home

EveningPrimrose2

The mechanism of speciation, or generation of a new species, is an essential but unsolved issue in evolutionary biology. Although many prominent evolutionists claimed to have unraveled the puzzle, the mechanism of speciation remains a hot debate.

Most flower were generated instantenously in one generation

What is Neo-Darwinism? 

The mainstream theory for the mechanism of evolution or speciation is modern synthesis, which was developed in the 1940s. Modern synthesis is interchangeable with Neo-Darwinism. The modern synthesis accepts multiple mechanisms accountable for evolution/speciation that include random mutation and natural selection (RMNS), geographical isolation (GI), genetic drift, polyploidy, and parthenogenesis. RMNS, GI and genetic drift are long-term processes, whereas polyploidy and parthenogenesis are one generation processes, in which new species is generated instantaneously.

Tenets of the modern synthesis

According to the modern synthesis as established in the 1930s and 1940s, genetic variations in populations arises by chance through mutation (this is now known to be sometimes caused by mistakes in DNA replication) and recombination (crossing over of homologous chromosomes during meiosis). Evolution consists primarily of changes in the frequencies of alleles between one generation and another as a result of genetic drift, gene flow, and natural selection. Speciation occurs gradually when populations are reproductively isolated, for example by geographical barriers. Neo-Darwinists consider only NS and GI as important, other instantaneous mechanisms only play minor roles (Mayr, Ernst, 1998).

The tenets are inconsistent with reality

Embarrassingly, no one can tell which organisms evolved by RMNS or GI. Thus far, only instantaneous speciation is without controversy among biologists. In this process, speciation does not require NS, GI or drifting prior to its startup. It is estimated that the majority of flowers and ferns were generated by polyploidy or instantaneous speciation, and it occurs in many other plants, land animals, and fish as well.

A female white spotted bamboo shark at the Belle Isle Aquarium in Michigan surprised zookeepers by giving birth to two babies. It was a virgin birth, or parthenogenesis, as the mother had not been in contact with a male shark for six years. The resulting sharks are a different species than their direct sexual ancestors because they are asexual. Parthenogenesis, which occurs in approximately 70 species, including snakes and lizards, is a process in which eggs become embryos without male fertilization. The majority of these species might have descended from sexually reproducing ancestors (Simon J. et al. 2002).

Although instantaneous speciation is not observable, biologists, including many famous Darwinists, accept it. The time length implicated in RMNS or GI would be several hundred thousand or many million years or longer, too long to be validated, if they ever occur.

Popperian criterion of pseudoscience

The issue of finding a criterion for distinguishing science from pseudoscience is always controversial. Karl Popper, an Austrian-born British philosopher of natural and social science, is a pivotal person in understanding the differences between science and pseudoscience. Popper believes that the criterion of the scientific status of a theory is its invalidity, i.e. person who establishes a theory should specify what events invalidate the theory. If a theory cannot specify a scenario where the theory will fail or it will justify any outcome, the theory is not a scientific one, but a pseudoscience. Sound scientific theories have many examples where it can occur theoretically if specific conditions are met, which would falsify theories. However, these scenarios do not happen in reality.

Testing the relationship among resistance, voltage, and current invalidate Ohm’s law. If the current is 10 and the resistant 10, then the voltage should 100. Although the voltage could be 105 or 110, it does not occur in reality.

Three major features make the case for falsification: 1) practical and doable, which mean that tests can be done with reasonable efforts. 2) Objective measurements could be obtained; thus, no matter who runs the machine same values are obtained. 3) Relevance:  one does not use current, resistance and voltage to invalidate Newton’s law, as they are not relevant.

To be continued…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s