Litnet

Dit is nie vir darwiniste goed genoeg om te bewys dat daar biologiese ooreenkomste in spesies is, nie. Die darwinistiese evolusieleer gaan oor véél meer as net dít. Om te slaag, moet daar ook bewys word dat die verwantskappe vanaf ’n gemeenskaplike voorouer (as mens dit só kan noem, verwysende na ’n protosoön of soortgelyke “repliseerder”) afstam. Dit, het Darwin gemeen, sou kon bewys word as die fossiele dié stamboom sou demonstreer. Darwin het gesit met die Woord, waarin hy ’n ent vêr gestudeer het, Wie sê dat God die Skepper is en dat God die soorte agtereenvolgens geskape het, maar nié die een uit die ander, uit een voorouer, laat evolueer het, nie. Darwin wou dit nie aanvaar nie. Wat mens dan volgens die Woord weergawe sou verwag, is dat die paleontologiese fossiel rekord juis nié daardie aaneenlopende skakeling sal aandui, nie, maar dat soorte kom en gaan. Maar as Darwin sou reg wees, dan sou mens noodwendig daardie aaneenlopende, daardie kontinue ontwikkel, in die fossielrekord, bevestig vind.

Die aftakeling van die evolusieleer van Darwin laat hom sekerlik verleë in sy graf. Sy sterkste aanspraak was dat sy hipotese deur paleontologiese opgrawings bevestig sou word. Dit het hom ontstel dat dit op die stadium toe hy nog geleef het, nie gebeur het, nie, maar hy het sy hoop op die nabye toekoms gevestig. Hy self het sterk benadruk dat die paleontologiese fossiel rekord sy hipotese móét ondersteun in die kontinuïteit van die evolusionêre proses, anders, het hy self gesuggereer, is hy verkeerd. Hy had darem daardie wetenskaplike integriteit, wat klaarblyklik nie by die nuwe generasie darwiniste te vinde is, nie.

Die stasis in die paleontologiese rekord, na bykans twee eeue later, vertel die storie.

“A localized population…suddenly appear(s) on the scene and then continue(s) essentially unchanged until [they] become(s) extinct.” –

Ernst Mayr, What Evolution Is, Basic Books, 2001 p. 63;

“The complete standstill or stasis of an evolutionary lineage for scores, if not hundreds, of millions of years is very puzzling.”-

Ernst Mayr, What Evolution Is, Basic Books, 2001 p. 195.

“Niles Eldredge and I …argued that two outstanding facts of the fossil record–geologically ‘sudden’ origin of new species and failure to change thereafter (stasis) – reflect the predictions of evolutionary theory, not the imperfections of the fossil record.” –

Stephen J., Gould, Evolution as Fact and Theory, in Montagu, Science and Creationism, 1984, p. 123.)

“Stasis has become interesting as a central prediction of our theory.” –

Stephen J. Gould, Opus 200, Natural History, 1991, p.16.

 “…the tale itself illustrates the central fact of the fossil record so well [the] geologically abrupt origin and subsequent extended stasis of most species… Anatomy may fluctuate through time, but the last remnants of a species look pretty much like the first representatives.” (p. 749.)

“…the greatest and most biologically astute paleontologist of the 20th century …acknowledged the literal appearance of stasis and geologically abrupt origin as the outstanding general fact of the fossil record and as a pattern which would ‘pose one of the most important theoretical problems in the whole history of life.’” (p. 755 quoting George Gaylord Simpson.)

“…the long term stasis following geologically abrupt origin of most fossil morphospecies, has always been recognized by professional paleontologists.” (p. 752.)

“The great majority of species do not show any appreciable evolutionary change at all. These species appear in the section (first occurrence) without obvious ancestors in the underlying beds, are stable once established and disappear higher up without leaving any descendants.” (p. 753.)

“…but stasis is data… Say it ten times before breakfast every day for a week, and the argument will surely seep in by osmosis: ‘stasis is data; stasis is data’…” (p. 759.)

 “Indeed proclamations for the supposed ‘truth’ of gradualism – asserted against every working paleontologist’s knowledge of its rarity – emerged largely from such a restriction of attention to exceedingly rare cases under the false belief that they alone provided a record of evolution at all! The falsification of most ‘textbook classics’ upon restudy only accentuates the fallacy of the ‘case study’ method and its root in prior expectation rather than objective reading of the fossil record.” (p.773 –

From Stephen Jay Gould, The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, 2002:

“Eldredge and Gould, by contrast, decided to take the record at face value. On this view, there is little evidence of modification within species, or of forms intermediate between species because neither generally occurred. A species forms and evolves almost instantaneously (on the geological timescale) and then remains virtually unchanged until it disappears, yielding its habitat to a new species.” –

Peter J. Smith, Evolution’s Most Worrisome Questions, Review of Life Pulse by Niles Eldredge, New Scientist, volume 116, November 1987, p. 59.

“The principal problem is morphological stasis. A theory is only as good as its predictions, and conventional neo-Darwinism, which claims to be a comprehensive explanation of evolutionary process, has failed to predict the widespread long-term morphological stasis now recognized as one of the most striking aspects of the fossil record.” –

Peter G. Williamson, Morphological Stasis and Developmental Constraint: Real Problems for Neo-Darwinism,” Nature, Vol. 294, 19 November 1981, p.214

Hierdie getuienis dui op ontstaan en vergaan van soorte sonder kontinuïteit – soos in die Woord gesuggereer maar terselfdertyd Darwin se nagmerrie. Darwin was en is, verkeerd. Die Woord, was en is stééds reg.

Groete,
Kobus de Klerk