Darwin is often praised by his supporters as the greatest scientists, and his theory as the greatest and the most “beautiful” theory. Over-majority of people only hear Darwin in school and media, and do not know what his theory is about.
A number of years ago, it might be reasonable to hold that Darwin’s idea is a scientific theory, because the biological knowledge was very primitive, a lot of basic knowledge we know now was unknown to persons at that time, what they thought correct are actually wrong by late discovery. Today we are in the 21st century. Based on biological knowledge known, Darwin’s theory can be described as full of holes, absurd, and nothing close to a scientific theory, it could be considered as a scientific fiction, or a scientific joke, and later might be considered as a scientific scandal. The protagonist of the scandal is not Darwin, because Darwin did not live nowadays; and did not know what kind of scientific discoveries found behind him. The protagonists are the world-renowned academic “elites”.
To understand why I said the theory a joke, one must understand what Darwin’s theory is about. I have discussed in another post that Darwin’s theory Darwin’s theory is about the mechanism how new species generated. At its core is the natural selection by which organism fight for relative shortage of natural resource. Within this in mind, I will discuss a few cases.
1. Not an evolution tree, but an evolution pole
If organisms evolved in the described by Darwin, advantaged ones in the initial organism would become a new species, the weaker ones died out. Advantaged ones in the new organism would become the second new species, the weaker ones died out. The process continues.
“This tells us that every species goes back to a single common ancestor, an ancestor who had those common traits and passed them on to its descendants. But if evolution meant only gradual genetic change within a species, we’d have only one species today—a single highly evolved descendant of the first species. “(Coyne 2009a)
“A better title for The Origin of Species, then, would have been The Origin of Adaptations: while Darwin did figure out how a single species changes over time (largely by natural s election), he never explained how one species splits in two. “(Coyne 2009b)
Here we can see that even leading contemporary Neo-Darwinian admitted that the theory is only to say that a species went through competition to become a new species in different environments, but never tell how one species become into two or more species. If the theory correct, we only had a species in the world and we would have evolution pole, not tree, Darwin even had his book with the wrong title.
Coyne, J. A. (2009a). Why evolution is true. p. 5. Oxford ; New York, Oxford University Press
Coyne, J. A. (2009b). Why evolution is true. p. 170. Oxford ; New York, Oxford University Press