Saturday, May 28, 2011

New species evolve in bursts - One more to the score

I'm starting to be like Darwin, like when people talk about Men from Apes.

When I say that there aren't Asexual Species, people normally forget that I'm taking from granted that only Eukaryotes have species.

Albeit the complains, again, and again, evidences fall in my hands telling me that I'm right, only Eukaryotes have species, because only them have Sexual Selection.

I found this more two for my increasing score:
  1. New species evolve in bursts;
  2. How many species of prokaryotes are there?.
The first one tells you that Sexual Selection promotes Punctuated Equilibrium, like my same conclusion in my post Inductive Nature, and the second one ends up making the following statement:
"Thus definition of species on this basis is not adequate for assessing the functional diversity of prokaryotic communities."

This last one, subscribes my post Why Sex, where I say:
"The placed pieces of the classic view do not solve the puzzle, because they are wrongly positioned in the next way:
  1. Speciation (all organisms);
  2. Sexual selection (some species)
Those pieces need to bee changed, like this:
  1. Speciation (some organisms);
  2. Sexual selection (all species)."
It's amazingly how Classical Evolutionist are starting to became like Evangelist, with Natural Selection exclusivity has his GOD.

Refusing the Status Quo is the fastest way to deprecation.

Monday, May 23, 2011

Important FAQs about Evolution - Fighting the Status Quo

Here are some FAQs for some important questions about Evolution:
Q: Why Sexual Reproduction?
A: Because it's the mechanism of speciation.

Q: Is there Asexual Species?
A: No, because sex is the mechanism of speciation.

Q: What undermines Complexity in Natural Selection?
A: Entropy.

Q: What liberates Natural Selection from Entropy?
A: Sexual Selection.

Q: What supports Evolution of Complexity with Sexual Selection?
A: Induction.

Q: Is the Evolution of Peafowl's tail a good example of Sexual Selection?
A: No, Evolution is Unachievable trough Sexual Selection.

What is the Cause of the Cambrian Explosion?
A: Cognition (Nervous Systems) plus Sexual Selection.

Q: Why evolutionists love to speak of Natural Selection but usually omit Sexual Selection?
A: Because in general they support Natural Selection exclusivity.

Q: Why in Google "Natural Selection" returns 10 times more results than "Sexual Selection"?
A: Because the Status Quo is committed in the Natural Selection exclusivity.

Q: Why in Google "Evolution" returns 40 times more results than "Natural Selection"?
A: Because it's just one word.

If you have more questions please ask...!

Relax Darwin, it's also Natural Selection!

Saturday, May 14, 2011

Eukaryotes from Prokaryotes and the Greatest Lie - For the Folks

In the People arena, there is the supposed knowledge about evolution that has been used as argument for a serie of events that intended to prove, or justify. People think that, for example, a systematic selection in an competitive environment is a good example of Natural Selection. This kind of survival of the fittest is in my opinion, the Greatest Lie that persists, because is one that supports as Natural something that isn't.

In a complex environment, or reality, Natural Selection isn't the systematic, or competitive actor, Sexual Selection is. So, in a complex world, systematic selection is Sexual Selection accordingly to a logic, or abstraction, that in reality, is the only product of the so argued Natural Selection. However, in the best interest of that logic, or abstraction, it's important that the competitors, or elements, fighting for its acceptance, believe in their competition as a sort of Natural Selection, were in fact, is Sexual Selection. This is the picture of the Greatest Lie.
"After the origin of eukaryotes the next transition suggested by Maynard Smith is the origin of sex. Sexual reproduction, the sharing of genes between two individuals to produce offspring, is normally viewed as a primary character trait of all eukaryotes. There are many eukaryote species that can reproduce asexually, but there are only a few that must reproduce asexually, and in those cases it is usually clear that they stem from sexual ancestors - They have given up sex, rather than never having had it in the first place." - Tim Lenton, Andrew Watson, 2001, Revolutions that Made the Earth
Next we will see the differences traditionally used to distinguish eukaryotes from prokaryotes listed by Mayrd.

Cell size
Small, ~1-10µm Large, usually 10-100µm
Endoplasmic membranes
AbsentEndoplasmic reticulum, golgi apparatus present
DNASingle circular chromosome, not complexed with proteins. No introns, few transposable elements
Multiple linear chromosomes contained in nucleus. Many introns, transposable elements
OrganellesAbsentPresent (mitochondria, hydrogenosomes, chloroplasts, etc...)
MetabolismDiverseMostly aerobic
Cell wall
Protein wall in (eu)bacteria
Cellulose or chitin, none in animals
Genetic recombination
Lateral gene transfer
Cell division
Binary fission
By mitosis
FlagellaRotatingUndulating cilia
RespirationOn membranes
Environmental tolerance
Wide range of temperatures, pressures, chemical tolerance, resistance to desiccation.
Narrower range of tolerance
Adapted from: Mayar, 2002, What Evolution Is

If you are one of those strongly committed to the Natural Selection dogma, you should read the following sentences:
"If sex did not reduce variation, then there would be as many species as there are individuals" - Charles Darwin (1838-1839)
"Sex usually results in extreme slowing of evolution" - Root Gorelick Henry H. Q. Heng, 2010.Sex Reduces Genetic Variation: A Multidisciplinary Review
"We reviewed arguments from a diverse assemblage of biologists—ecologists, cancer biologists, population geneticists, paleontologists, molecular biologists, genome theorists, epigeneticists—who implore that sex reduces genetic variation." - Root Gorelick Henry H. Q. Heng, 2010.Sex Reduces Genetic Variation: A Multidisciplinary Review
In the end, it will be obvious that Sexual Selection is like a wedge, maintaining the achieved evolution and encapsulating the entropy of Natural Selection inside the organism's layer. In this way, the achieved evolution is protected at the cost of wasted organisms, washing away any entropy from Natural Selection. However, this view stills very oppressed, because Natural Selection exclusivity is the spine of the contemporaneous philosophy, serving the status quo.

But this is supposed to be for the Folks' eyes, right? Yes, it is. And so, I draw my own table to make clear what is and what isn't Natural Selection in a complex environment, a table that works as an instrument to avoid folks being fools.

Natural Selection
Sexual Selection
TimingA posteriori
A Priori
Natural or Sexual Selection, the good question.

The first question you should make about yourself is, are you an organism? Now, even if you made part of a very strict military selection, for a special force, you may be made to think in that selection as Natural Selection. But think a little more, where is the Logic? Is the military soldier the Logical or the Physical element? The answer is simple, the soldier is the physical element. But where is the logical one? Well, the process of military selection itself is the logical element. Is the criteria for the "good soldier" that in the future will be Natural Selected, not the soldier itself, the last one was Sexual Selected in the past, in a systematic way!

Now the Greatest Truth. Your condition of organism, no matter the species you belong to (obviously one), puts you in a state of systematic testing. Because you belong to the physical world, evolution for you is an unachievable thing, the only thing that achieved something was the Species. This Greatest truth is a dramatic one when it comes to organisms, it's the drama of systematic provision of your good will for what the species it's concern, a provision that isn't meant to be definitely achievable, except for the logical element, the species itself.

But there is more, it's not only how the organism is made, it's also what that same organism wants. Think a little, what is connecting organisms that makes them wish essentially the same? Do you think that, because something is thought in an common way turns out to be a fact? Think in optical illusion, is not that common in humans? The conclusion is obvious, your will comes from the species, your feelings of reward or regret are constructions that are to much common to be really yours.

For those organisms that make questions about the meaning of life, and about the path to happiness, here is the answer:
"Life is waste, and happiness relief."
Is this pessimist? Well, all depends, if are the species commanding the organisms or vice versa. Until now, the species have been ruling with no exception.

A Good Soldier like a Good Specimen under the Species' Eyes