|
|
|
||||||||
 |
Comparison of the Model with problems
in current Evolutionary Theory © 1999 John Latter |
|
|---|
Please read the "Internal Evolutionary Mechanism" first.
Contents:
1) Introduction
2) Parallel Evolution
3) Changes in Behaviour precede structural changes
4) Devolution ("degeneration") of existing structures
5) "Failure" of some organisms to evolve further
1) Introduction
The "proof of the pudding is in the eating" and it will be the consistency of results from the Method of Testing that will determine the validity and accuracy of the brief notes that follow . Although the single-cell Common Ancestor is really too "large" a unit it will continue to suffice as a starting point.
Consciousness for organisms other than Man means awareness of the external world and nothing more. For example: when a bird lands on a surface it doesn`t stop flying 2 feet above it nor attempt to do so 2 feet below. The bird may not know what the surface is but it certainly knows it is there.
The example chosen to illustrate this is the similarity between the wing of a bat (a mammal) and that of a pterodactyl (a reptile). Bats didn`t evolve until millions of years after pterodactyls became extinct and this has lead to speculation over why such examples of Parallel Evolution occur.
Finding patterns in the History of Life in this way is, as an analogy, similar to becoming intrigued by some of the patterns found when looking into a kaleidescope. The Model, however, can be equated to the internal coloured pieces of glass that generate the patterns and the patterns themselves (and any found therein such as "Parallel Evolution") become of secondary interest as long as each one identified lies within the range capable of being produced.
It is a question of perspective. "Parallel Evolution" is an observation made looking back at the History of Life from today`s intellectual standpoint focussing on the similarities, in this example, between the wing of a bat and that of a pterodactyl. These exist because the mammalian AONE ("Area of Natural Equilibrium") evolved from the reptilian AONE and, given this relationship, it is not surprising to find that the proto-pterodactyl and the proto-bat evolved similar structures to maintain equilibrium while in transit through the common new medium of air.
The proposed Model, in recognising that all Life is individual, can be applied to the pterodactyl and bat in turn but not both at once and therefore it tends to highlight differences rather than similarities. Only one digit on the "hand" of the pterodactyl supports the structure of it`s wing indicating the remaining digits/claws were still being used during it`s evolution. This suggests that the proto-pterodactyl began the transition by jumping down onto it`s prey and then holding it on the ground while it used it`s teeth to kill/eat it. If so then perhaps gliding came first.
Only one of the claws on the bat`s "hand", however, has not been incorporated into the wing structure. If one had no other knowledge of bats than this then it would suggest that evolution of the wing began because of persistently jumping into the air to catch something for which claws weren`t needed. Insects for example.
It doesn`t really matter if the proto-pterodactyl jumped down or the proto-bat jumped up, the experience of being in mid-air would be similar at the level of the AONE in both organisms irrespective of the points in time at which they occurred.
3) Changes in Behaviour precede structural changes
It is the "oddities" of natural life that most obviously hint at the existence of the AONE. If evolution occurs because of changes in the physical constancy of the world at the level of the AONE then, if we step forward from the time of the single-cell Common Ancestor to that of the proto-mole, does this still hold true?.
The answer is "yes" because continuity of Being of the proto-mole now requires eating and the avoidance of being eaten. If it began to dig underground for these or similar reasons then, from the perspective of the AONE, the physical constancy of the world has changed and evolution/devolution would follow to restore equilibrium within the new environment. The point being made is that the naturally integrated organism of the proto-mole didn`t "decide" to live underground in the way that we may decide to "do this" or "do that" independently of what our natural needs of the moment might be.
Similarly the proto-flatfish, a fish of "standard" shape, began to want to be as close to the sea-bed as possible. Perhaps the main source of food could only be successfully approached from below or maybe there was an abundance of predators who could only be avoided in this way. Whatever the reason the persistence of the behaviour exceeded the thresholds of the AONE and the restoration of equilibrium entailed flattening the body and revolving one eye around the side of the head until both were on the "upper" surface.
The asymmetric result is interesting for two reasons. Even without a Method of Testing the existence of the AONE is strongly indicated because the form of the flatfish is the "best" that can be achieved given the starting point of a standard fish shape. Secondly the Model infers that external symmetry of form is merely a reflection of the inner equilibrium of the AONE and the asymmetrical shape of flatfish support this.
If the revolving of the eye around the side of the flatfish`s head was caused by the accumulation of chance mutations then, quite frankly, eyes and everything else would be migrating all over the place in every organism.
4) Devolution ("degeneration") of existing structures
Have you ever seen a glass knocked over and made an instinctive (and non-thinking) attempt to catch it?. The following presumes that when, for example, non-intelligent Life becomes hungry it re-acts in a similar manner along the lines of "HUNGER - SEE FOOD - EAT IT!".
The proto-chicken could fly but if there was a prolonged abundance of food on the ground and a suitable scarcity of predators then "HUNGER - SEE FOOD - EAT IT!" - an instinct that ensures continuity of Being - could be followed without flying anywhere except, perhaps, into the nearest tree. Once the degree of usage of the wings fell below the lower threshold of the AONE then they were partially devolved but only to a point that restored it`s equilibrium. Note that no intelligence is involved, there`s nothing to say "O.K., we`re not using wings at the moment but what if things change in the future?"
5) "Failure" of some organisms to evolve further
A classic example is the shark which hasn`t changed to any great extent over the last 150 million years or so. The Model accounts for this by saying the thresholds of it`s AONE haven`t been exceeded to the degree that further evolutionary changes have become necessary. It has neither "failed" or been "successful" because these are relative terms, the shark has maintained continuity of Being in a state of equilibrium at the level of it`s AONE.