Since I
finally finished the 6th edition of
The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection , I guess I’m ready for a discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector
There is no reason why our discussion can't include the current state of evolution theory.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by kennyc
You mean like punctuated equilibrium?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vector
Yes indeed, among other things.
|
In Chapter II: Variation Under Nature, Darwin writes,
It may be doubted whether sudden and considerable deviations of structure, such as we occasionally see in our domestic productions, more especially with plants, are ever permanently propagated in a state of nature. Almost every part of every organic being is so beautifully related to its complex conditions of life that it seems as improbable that any part should have been suddenly produced perfect, as that a complex machine should have been invented by man in a perfect state.
From that, it appears from this that Darwin would not think much of the Theory of Punctuated Equilibrium, although it doesn’t appear as if he rules it out
entirely:
If monstrous forms of this kind ever do appear in a state of nature and are capable of reproduction (which is not always the case), as they occur rarely and singly, their preservation would depend on unusually favourable circumstances.
— Chapter Chapter II: Variation Under Nature
Just
almost entirely:
They would, also, during the first and succeeding generations cross with the ordinary form, and thus their abnormal character would almost inevitably be lost.
— Chapter Chapter II: Variation Under Nature
That isn’t to say that Niles Eldredge and the late Stephen Jay Gould are wrong, of course. Gould in particular took great pains to demonstrate that his theory wasn’t in conflict with Natural Selection.