The Extended Synthesis is passing the Modern Synthesis (the theory of evolution)


The modern synthesis (THE theory of evolution) is a theory of evolution that combines the principles of natural selection with the laws of Mendelian genetics. It is still narrowly accepted by biologists. There are more and more scientists who argue that it has failed to explain evolution. 

Here are 10 ways that the modern synthesis has been criticized:

  1. It cannot explain the origin of new information. Natural selection can only act on existing genetic variation, but it cannot create new information. This is a problem because complex organisms, such as humans, have genomes that contain a vast amount of information.

  2. It cannot explain the rapid evolution of new species. The modern synthesis predicts that new species should evolve slowly, over millions of years. However, there are many examples of new species that have evolved much more rapidly.

  3. It cannot explain the evolution of complex traits. Many complex traits, such as the eye, are made up of many different genes. The modern synthesis has difficulty explaining how such traits could have evolved by natural selection.

  4. It cannot explain the evolution of altruism. Altruism is behavior that benefits others at a cost to oneself. Natural selection should favor individuals who are selfish, but there are many examples of altruism in nature.

  5. It cannot explain the evolution of vestigial structures. Vestigial structures are organs or features that have lost their original function. The modern synthesis has difficulty explaining why these structures have not been eliminated by natural selection.

  6. It cannot explain the evolution of irreducible complexity. Irreducible complexity is a term used to describe systems that are so complex that they could not have arisen by gradual evolution. The modern synthesis has difficulty explaining how such systems could have evolved.

  7. It cannot explain the evolution of punctuated equilibrium. Punctuated equilibrium is a theory that proposes that evolution occurs in fits and starts, with long periods of stability punctuated by brief periods of rapid change. The modern synthesis has difficulty explaining punctuated equilibrium.

  8. It cannot explain the evolution of regulatory genes. Regulatory genes are genes that control the expression of other genes. The modern synthesis has difficulty explaining how regulatory genes could have evolved.

  9. It cannot explain the evolution of epigenetics. Epigenetics is the study of changes in gene expression that are not caused by changes in the DNA sequence. The modern synthesis has difficulty explaining epigenetics.

  10. It cannot explain the evolution of consciousness. Consciousness is a complex phenomenon that is not fully understood. The modern synthesis has difficulty explaining how consciousness could have evolved.

These are just some of the ways that the modern synthesis has been criticized. 

The EES (Extended Evolutionary Synthesis) is a modern synthesis of evolutionary biology that integrates new findings from molecular biology, ecology, and developmental biology. The MS (Modern Synthesis) is the older synthesis of evolutionary biology that was developed in the early 20th century.

Here are 10 ways that the EES explains biology better than the MS:

  1. The EES takes into account the role of development in evolution. The MS focused on genes and natural selection, but the EES recognizes that development is also a major force in evolution.

  2. The EES recognizes the importance of epigenetics. Epigenetics is the study of how environmental factors can change gene expression without changing the DNA sequence. The MS did not consider epigenetics, but the EES recognizes that it is a major factor in evolution.

  3. The EES takes into account the role of cooperation in evolution. The MS focused on competition, but the EES recognizes that cooperation is also a major force in evolution.

  4. The EES recognizes the importance of niche construction. Niche construction is the process by which organisms modify their environment, which in turn can affect their evolution. The MS did not consider niche construction, but the EES recognizes that it is a major factor in evolution.

  5. The EES takes into account the role of contingency in evolution. Contingency is the idea that historical accidents can have a major impact on evolution. The MS did not consider contingency, but the EES recognizes that it is a major factor in evolution.

  6. The EES takes into account the role of multiple levels of selection. The MS focused on selection at the level of the individual, but the EES recognizes that selection can also occur at the level of the group, the species, and the ecosystem.

  7. The EES takes into account the role of non-genetic inheritance. Non-genetic inheritance is the transmission of traits from one generation to the next that is not mediated by genes. The MS did not consider non-genetic inheritance, but the EES recognizes that it is a major factor in evolution.

  8. The EES takes into account the role of culture in evolution. Culture is the transmission of knowledge, beliefs, and practices from one generation to the next. The MS did not consider culture, but the EES recognizes that it is a major factor in evolution.

  9. The EES is more inclusive. The MS focused on the evolution of animals and plants, but the EES is more inclusive and considers the evolution of all life forms.

  10. The EES is more predictive. The MS was limited in its ability to predict future evolutionary changes, but the EES is more predictive because it takes into account a wider range of factors.

These are just a few of the ways that the EES explains biology better than the MS. The EES is a more comprehensive and inclusive theory of evolution that is better able to explain the complexity and diversity of life.

Assisted by Bard

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Beyond the Sequence: The Epigenetic "Fingers" That Play the DNA Keyboard

Image
Imagine the keyboard itself is not a standard piano keyboard, but a modular synthesizer, capable of producing an almost infinite array of sounds. The DNA sequence, then, represents the fundamental building blocks of this synthesizer, the raw materials from which all sounds are generated. Epigenetics, our "fingers," manipulates these building blocks, adjusting parameters like volume, timbre, and rhythm, transforming the raw potential of the DNA sequence into a symphony of cellular functions. We can further refine the "fingers" analogy. Consider that each finger represents a distinct epigenetic mechanism: DNA methylation, histone modifications, and non-coding RNA.  DNA methylation, for instance, might be the "index finger," capable of precisely silencing specific genes, like muting individual keys on the synthesizer. Histone modifications, the "middle finger," could represent the ability to adjust the accessibility of the DN...
Read more

Why are Christian philosophers running towards Darwin while biologists are "running" away?

Image
As nature reveals the strength of epigenetics and the weakness of Neo-Darwinism, biologists are “running” away from the long-standing accepted theory. In The Federalist , April 2019, Benjamin Dierker reviews “Why one-third of biologists now question Darwinism”: "Current estimates are that approximately one-third of professional academic biologists who do not believe in intelligent design find Darwin’s Theory inadequate to describe all of the complexity in biology.” Dierker continues, “The important note is that these are not ideologues or religious zealots, nor do they propose a god or biblical solution.  Rather, they find problems in the lack of explanatory power of Darwin’s theory in light of modern understanding of mutation, variation, DNA sequencing and more. These expressions of doubt do not reject naturalism or evolution per se, but the rigor of the Neo-Darwinian model for explaining the development of life.” For 40 years, scientists calculated natural se...
Read more

Rewriting the Rules: Epigenomic Mutation Bias Challenges Randomness in Evolution

Image
This research challenges the long-held dogma that mutations occur randomly, irrespective of their consequences, by demonstrating a clear, epigenome-mediated mutation bias in Arabidopsis thaliana . The study meticulously unveils how mutation rates are not uniform across the genome but are significantly reduced in functionally constrained regions, particularly within gene bodies and essential genes. This discovery fundamentally alters our understanding of evolutionary processes, suggesting that mutation is not a purely directionless force. "Mutation bias reflects natural selection in Arabidopsis thaliana" This opening statement encapsulates the core finding: mutation rates are not random but reflect epigenetic pressures. The authors demonstrate that mutations are less frequent in crucial genomic regions, directly contradicting the prevailing theory of random mutation. This observation suggests an active mechanism that minimizes deleterious mutations in essentia...
Read more