Evolutionary theory posits that through natural selection, a simple organism could, over milions of years, develop into a complex life form. Natural selection ( the process of developing advantageous characteristics, and eliminating disadvantageous ones purely from the perspective of survival) occurs because of environmental impositions that leads the oraganism to develop structural changes that allows it to survive and thrive under changing paradigms.
Reseachers now have shown that complexity develops from simplicity, not merely on the basis of natural selection (i.e. Darwinian evolutionary theory) but basically, and perhaps more extensively on elementary chromosomal mutational processes.
So now where does that leave Darwinists?.... In that dust?
Could you be a little clearer about what you think the problem is? Random variation can occur for many reasons, natural selection is a constant.
Organisms tend to become better adapted. This may mean being more complex, or more simple or staying at the same level, or even being completely unchanged for long periods of time if the environment is stable.
The operative words being "if the environment is stable". We know of course that in the natural world the environment do not remain stable for any lenght of time, change being one of the major components of nature. Environmental change do occur in ways i.e. gradually, that allow any living entity in that environment time to adapt, thrive and ultimately survive. But if change occurs drastically, as what happened when that meteor hit earth million of years ago, then mass extinction is the consequence (goodbye T.Rex).
What researchers are doing in their labs is allowing a living entity ( in some labs, the fruit fly has become the favorite object to study) to be enwrapped and ensconsed in a very stable, unchanging environment
devoid of any stimulatory impositions and what they found out is that these fruit still manage to change their bodily structure, (in ways that may not necesarily be related to the needs to perpetuate the specie) solely because chromosomal mutational changes have occured.
I don't think that the idea of development of organisms from simplicity to complexity is particularly new nor is it an indicator of the failure of natural selection or of the inaccuracy of Darwin's thinking and theorizing.
Evolution is a complex problem; a complex process that includes multiple dependent and independent variables. As such, the discovery of additional mechanisms for evolution do not negate mechanisms previously discovered and understood.
Researchers are not entirely eliminating natural selection from the evolutionary equation; but its importance now seems to be lessened by the new discoveries. The question is how much of a set-back would natural selection take, and would it lead to a total re-structuring of our knowledge of the origins of life's complexity.
by thetruthhurts20098 years ago
Rules of this forum, no swearing, no straw men arguments and no FSM nonsense. Most importantly remember, Ridicule is not an argument. Enjoy. If want to continue to believe you come from a rocky soup. You...
by marinealways246 years ago
I think natural selection is conscious selection. I think any life must have consciousness/awareness of it's environment for Natural Selection to be selection. Without a consciousness or awareness of the environment,...
by Richard Parr5 years ago
“Evolutionary theory is not a slam-dunk. It is an exercise in storytelling that masquerades as a scientific theory” [William A. Dembski]In his article 'Questions Evolutionists Would Rather Dodge', Dr Dembski asks...
by Alexander A. Villarasa3 years ago
The human brain in all its complexities is now just being unraveled, however slowly, via various research modalities at various/multiple research centers across the country. The team of Ed Lein (a...
by Mark Knowles7 years ago
Gardner Osagie vs Mark Knowles (consultations allowed)Osagie proposes:"Biblical theory better describes how human life came to be as opposed to Evolutionary theory." Knowles is prepared to refute this and...
by paarsurrey5 years ago
"Natural Selection" is a coined term; I don't think it is much related to the natural; and it is not opposite of un-natural, in any way.Natural might have been used to differentiate from the artificial i.e....
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.