Why Evolution made Souls!

Is there a thing as a Soul? In some extent there is, but is not what you think. When it comes to Abstractions, Evolution made many of them where Species was just the beginning.

As I already posted in From Flatness to Trinity a depart from the Materialistic view, the modern philosophy is dominated by Materialism, that denies the multi level reality despite all evidences. Is not just Species that are denied, the Representation nature of consciousness also is!

Consciousness is a miracle that materialism can't explain. The miracle is nevertheless simple to explain, you just need to use Layers, Multi layering is always the answer, because reality isn't flatness!

Before you ask how, you should ask why. Why Conscience works in a Representative Image and not on Reality? Why Indirect instead of Direct action on Reality?

The advantage of working on an Image instead of Reality itself is easy to explain, while Reality is rigid in Nature an Image isn't. Also, in terms of Cognitive costs Brains consume too much energy, having an Image on which conscience works makes all the sense, and doubtfully Evolution was blind to it!

With the evolution of this Image, this abstraction, Evolution gained a new Object of Selection, now was not exclusive to the physical body, this Cognitive Image was also a subject. This way Sexual Selection was the result of this new interaction, Body vs Image, physical vs logical.

The consequence of this new scheme is that Conscience doesn't act directly on Reality, it works on an Image that is perceived as a Reality. This doesn't mean that that Image isn't an accurate representation of that Reality, what it means is that doesn't need to be, at least completely, and that is its great accomplishment!

In the dichotomy Conscience vs Image, is important that Image is perceived as Reality, and so it should be out of reach to the "free will" of Conscience, and the best way to do it is make it out of Conscience, make it Subconscious.

However this layer is there, and some times you see its glimpse. One typical phenomenon that you likely already experienced, is the Broken escalator phenomenon. When you step in a escalator that is Stoped, you may have the conscience of it, but who acts on Reality is not your Conscience is instead "your" Image, and for it the Escalator is running, because Image represents that single and experienced reality, so, when you step on your legs obey to your Image not your Conscience!

Never wondered what really means know it as Second Nature? Or on the contrary when some one says, it didn't look Natural! This is the difference between your Image and you Conscience working on Reality, because your Conscience doesn't act directly on it and thus it will always look clumsy, unnatural!

The process of learning is a good example of that, basically you have the Cognitive phase and then the Associative phase, like learning to drive a car, things go like this:

• Cognitive phase:
1. Insert key;
2. Push the clutch down;
3. Put the gear in neutral;
4. Turn key;
5. Wait motor to Start;
6. Free key;
7. Free clutch.
• Associative phase:
1. Put motor running.

The transition from the Cognitive phase to the Associative phase is done with practice, and the small steps when repeated become part of the Image instead of the Conscience. Then Conscience recalls them in a form of purpose, put motor running, the task now in the Procedural memory is run without effort, as second nature! In some way, is like comparing the Development of the Prototype with the Factoring of the respective Product.

At this point you realize that Cognitive phase is much more expensive than the Associative one, this is the consequence of the cost to maintain a Conscience in terms of energy costs and in efficiency in dealing with the Reality, so naturally all your actions with practice and experience go from Conscience to Subconscious (Image), making you an extremely automated individual, efficient and fast. For instance, in the following example, children use buses more often than adults, and so, they have the bus drawn at their Image level, contrary to the adult that normally uses the car making him only able to use the Conscience, much more slow and inefficient to make conclusions.

 

Which way is this school bus headed?  

By experience, you immediately guess that heads to the left, because the entrance is in the other side (US Direction)! Children, with more recent experience on buses, are much better at answering this question than adults.

Contrary to the Image, the Conscience (Consciousness) is able to be On/Off whenever necessary as a mean to manage energy and as the result of its no physical reality (logical). In terms of conscience everything is possible to be On/Off, just like a dream, contrary to the physical world that is always On. In Reality nothing can be more volatile than Consciousness, or if you prefer, than the Soul!

Science in some domains has dropped the pure materialist view, and are starting to considerate other levels, also Logical and not only Physical.

A lot of what we think is real and obvious, in fact, is, well you could call it an illusion in a way. If I got pain in my hand the pain is not actually in the hand, the pain is my brain. My brain creates a three-dimensional model of the world and associates the nerve impulses coming from the pain receptors in my hand with pain in the hand and it create this illusion that the pain is actually in the hand itself, and it isn't. The more you look into neuroscience the more strange and confusing it becomes. - On how the brain creates pain, Neurosurgeon Henry Marsh.

Henry Marsh - BBC Documentary Storyville The English Surgeon english subtitles

The pain is a good proof of the Image, because you (AKA "soul") are living in a box of perception, and in this way pain is a Perception served to you by the Image. There are two Interfaces, the physical, between Reality and the Image, and the Logical one, between you and the Image. This means that in the end you are an Abstraction that Image manipulates the way it wants, your "existence" is only there to make ends meet, to make the syntheses of a Will that isn't really yours. Again, Souls are perceptions created to conform with the real Will, the Will of the Species encapsulated in the Image the only one that represents its physical reality. If there are so many wasted Organisms in the name of the Species, why it should be different with "Souls" (Consciences)? Independent layers is the main concept here!

This Image is in constant change, and it might be changed by trauma or stress. A post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is produced when due to trauma the Image is misfitted to a normal Reality, for instance when someone panics with fireworks perceived as a military attack.

The PTSD is however a overlooked issue. When it comes to social interactions not even the most perverse mind is able to conceive the Reality of the Image. Accordingly to the value of the Organism defined mainly by its biology, the Image is the cornerstone of the Sociobiological Hierarchy! By experience each Organisms' Image is shaped to its Real position in this Hierarchy, where Conscience isn't no more than an housewife trying to make ends meet. This is well seen in the Master/Slave relationship between role models and their fans! This relationship has Devotion as its main ingredient!

In the end, conscience is like someone in a control room, with manipulated pictures and emotions that are representations of Reality that isn't perceived directly. Like a big TV showing a processed reality (Image), not only by experience but also by instinct. The Image is the System outside which no Conscience is able to exist, because this System is what The Will of the Species really is.

This image is not only shaped by experience, it was also shaped by evolution, like the Cognitive Sexual Image. In reality is expected that the great part of this Image is instinctive instead of contextual, the fear of death isn't learned but inherited. Despite that, you may be afraid of death trough instinct or trough context (Conscience). You are instinctively afraid of highs but contextually afraid of a stripped electrical wire. The first one is produced directly by Reality acting on the Image, while the second one is produced by Conscience acting on that same image!

Instinctive vs Conscious fear of Death

Contrary to the Instinctive fear of Death, the Conscious one depends on Conscience, of learning. To be afraid of electrocution you need to know what electricity is and the respective Associative phase that instinct dispenses.

Is this contextual perception that makes Conscience very useful, because no mater how sophisticate a Reality might be, the puppet Conscience is there to work it out for its puppeteer Image, like a Slave serving its Master. Image wasn't shaped to foreseeing the Reality of the futuristic technology, or the new sophisticate tools that require learning and understanding that the crude and predefined Image can't conceive, so Conscience is there to allow Image to perceive and assimilate all the novelties, with the final purpose of having the real control where it belongs.

This Image was shaped by Evolution to make Conscience a believer of its materialism and control on Reality. This feeling of control and reality is so strong that Conscience sees it self as an immortal Soul despite its failure in giving a good explanation for it. So be it, as long as the work is well done and Species become rewarded by their so deluded Consciences.

Here is where the materialist is religious as religious people are! A materialist refuses the existence of a Soul because for him physical death means "Soul" death, while for a believer Soul is immortal. The Materialist, like the believer, is also corrupted by the Image, because he puts at the same level Physical and Logical phenomena, sustaining that Conscience "Soul" lives the same as body lives.

In reality, the believer, the religious, gives you a better clue of the real nature of the Soul than the Materialist. Because the believer expresses what he feels, he expresses his second nature, his Image, and unintentionally he gives the truth of what a Soul really is, the Conscience of an immortal Image in a volatile Reality, where its real duration is surely far less than the body where it "lives" in (multiple instantiations). However, the Materialist is corrupted by is naive and benevolent view of reality, failing to see the crude reality prevents him to see reality itself, because the best way to see reality is to conceive the worst one!

So, in conclusion, Evolution made Souls to better serve their Species accordingly to its Will.

EVOLUTION #4 - CONFUCIUS, ONE PICTURE IS WORTH TEN THOUSAND WORDS

And yet some still asking...!

EVOLUTION #3 - GALILEI, AND YET IT MOVES

Galileo Galilei now seen as a revolutionary figure from the scientific point of view, it was in its time, a blasphemous that dare to say the most ridiculous thing, that earth was not in the center, but the sun instead. Nowadays, the Red Queen paradigm is the same as that centuries ago, where clamming diversity as the reason of Sexual Selection, is the same as it was, that earth doesn't move, and yet it moves!

In a not so much recent study, Synchronous Aggregate Growth in an Abundant New Ediacaran Tubular Organism, Mary L. Droser and James G. Gehling, argues to have identified the Tubes of Funisia dorothea as the first evidence of sexual reproduction. As it's put it next:

"A recent discovery made international headlines when published in Science in March 2008, announcing the discovery of the origin of sex. The paper, by Mary Droser and Jim Gehling, described a new kind of organism from the Ediacara site, which they named Funisia. Funisia was a worm-like tubular organism, the fossils of which are found abundantly at the Ediacara sites, so much so that different stages of its growth can be studied and measured in detail.

Droser and Gehling identified that these organisms were budding off ‘sprats’, or juveniles from the adults, which were all at a similar growth stage. Hence instead of shedding or budding asexually (shedding identical clones of itself), as expected for primitive organisms of this period, it is likely that the ‘sprats’ developed all at the same time due to an act that began them all: sex.

Put simply, if they were budding asexually then a wider range of sizes would be expected in the juveniles. The fact that they were always at the same size suggested an act that was timed, a mutual shedding of sperm and eggs into the water, such as occurs for corals." - From Cosmos

 In the Abstract of the previously referred article, it's written:

"The most abundant taxon of the Neoproterozoic soft-bodied biota near Ediacara, South Australia, occurs as clusters of similarly sized individuals, which suggests synchronous aggregate growth by spatfall. Tubes of Funisia dorothea gen. et sp. nov. were anchored within the shallow, sandy sea bed and lived in dense, typically monospecific concentrations. Tubes were composed of modular, serially repeating elements. Individuals grew by adding serial elements to the tubular body and by branching of tubes. Their construction and close-packed association imply likely affinity within the Porifera or Cnidaria. These data suggest that several of the most successful marine invertebrate ecological strategies known today were in place in Earth's oldest known metazoan ecosystems before the advent of skeletonization and widespread predation." - From Synchronous Aggregate Growth in an Abundant New Ediacaran Tubular Organism

Well, it's obvious that all this synchronous is argued as the timing, and not as the form, of Sexual Reproduction. As it's said, you simple have groups of organisms that started their growth at the same time (same size individuals). However, all the Similarity, the Clustering, and the Synchronous nature of Sexual Reproduction should ring a simple idea, that this Clustering is the true Origin of Species. And yet it clusters!

BBC - David Attenborough's First Life - See 46:16.

EVOLUTION #2 - MENDEL, THE WHYS GUY

In this post I will materialize the importance of the Abstraction’s Environmental Process referred in the previous post. One of the ways this process become a reality is trough the chromosomal Crossing Over, as part of the Meiosis event.

In 1866, Mendel published his now famous paper entitled Experiments in Plant Hybridisation. In this time, evolutionists were attached to the blending kind of hereditary. This blending paradigm is one of the main reasons to the continuous view of evolution. Mendel, and his laws, brings a discrete and independent view of hereditary. However, in the same way only in 1900 his work was really appreciated (more than 30 years later), nowadays; the continuous view of evolution hasn’t yet been substituted by the discrete one. There are always people that simple don’t get it, and get stuck in details, in the following writing, details like not fully independent, or exotic disputes about other details, don’t change the point taken.

The Mendel laws are the base of the Hardy–Weinberg equilibrium, and because of that, this equilibrium, are only applicable to Eukaryotes and not to Prokaryotes. Now, what do you call, to the idea that all life is equally evolving, in a continuous and unstopping way like in Prokaryotes, and then, your examples are invariably involving Eukaryotes? You call it a delusion. Now, what it happens, when you ask to a deluded, if; are we still Evolving? If for the deluded, evolution is an unstoppable continuous process; he has the problem in conciliating the evolutionary force with his unstoppable and continuous concept. This difficulty makes the deluded a treasure hunter, where the treasure is the motive of the Natural Selection bias. If evolution has to be, the motive has to be found. As if it were not enough, you have the sticking species, and the respective speciation process undermining the continuous view of evolution. Now the delusion becomes denial, the denial of species’ existence, transformed in nothing more than a classification.

There is a question that until now hasn’t been well answered. What is the inbreeding effect on the genome quality? Charles Darwin was very concern with this issue, because he rightly suspected, that he and his family was victim of it. In a study entitled Was the Darwin/Wedgwood Dynasty Adversely Affected by Consanguinity?, by Tim M Berra, Gonzalo Alvarez, Francisco C Ceballos, it’s concluded that:

“(...) the high childhood mortality experienced by the Darwin progeny (...) might be a result of increased homozygosity of deleterious recessive alleles produced by the consanguineous marriages within the Darwin/Wedgwood dynasty.”

The experienced mortality wasn’t due exclusively to contagious diseases as many try to prove, but also to pure congenital ones, like the case of the last sun of Charles Darwin named Charles Waring. Many still see this as lack of diversity, as a mean to response to fast genetic change in infectious diseases. The name of this view was coined the Red Queen’s hypothesis.

Here I will give other explanation for the importance of Crossing Over, and show you that the so called arms races has nothing to do with it.

First of all, we will consider the two laws of Mendel. Those laws are:

1. Law of Segregation – every individual possesses a pair of alleles (assuming diploidy) for any particular trait and that each parent passes a randomly selected copy (allele) of only one of these to its offspring;
2. Law of Independent Assortment – separate genes for separate traits are passed independently of one another from parents to offspring.

Another thing to have in mind in the next simulations is that we will only consider the crossing over process in meiosis, and consequently; we will always consider haploid genomes for the sake of simplicity.

To help us to see what happens, we will construct an analogy with a picture made by pixels. In the next picture we have our Little Joe. We will consider the genes as the colors in each pixel of his picture. In this way, our analogy has the following meanings:

• Picture – Genome;
• Pixel – Locus;
• Colors – Allele;
• Color – Gene;
• Stacking – Sexual Reproduction;
• Noise – Deleterious genes.

Original Picture of Little Joe

From the previous full picture we may zoom in to visualize each pixel.

Zoom of the original picture

Next we have the generation tree for the simulation:

Stacking tree per generation

For the first simulation, we approach the merging view of the 19th century for heritably (continuous process), staring with the creation of 16 pictures resulted from the insertion of random noise, each one with the same parameters, in the original picture (Genome) for the 1/16 generation. The first obtained picture, similar in noise to the other 15, looks like this (first arrow):

Sample 1 of 16 from the generation 1/16

For the 1/8 generation, and following the generation tree, we will evenly stack each picture of the 1/16 generation by a methodology similar to focus stacking, resulting 8 pictures with reduced noise. The first obtained picture, similar in noise to the other 7, looks like this (first one of the 1/8 generation):

Sample 1 of 8 from the generation 1/8

Repeating the process for the generation 1/4, the obtained picture, similar in noise to the other 3, looks like this (first one of the 1/4 generation):

Sample 1 of 4 from the generation 1/4

Repeating the process for the generation 1/2, the obtained picture, similar in noise to the other one, looks like this (first one of the 1/2 generation):

Sample 1 of 2 from the generation 1/2

Finally, we get a single picture for the 1/1 generation, with extremely reduced noise comparably with the one on the 1/16 generation.

Final sample from the generation 1/1

In conclusion for this first simulation, the merging process clearly has the ability to reduce noise, however, this ability tend to lose strength for each new generation. This has to do with the merging nature itself. While merging we are making averages, and as many averages we make, we never get the real color of the original picture despite the approximation to with. The maximum that the merging process can provide is an Asymptote to the original color.


Animation from generation 1/16 throughout 1/1

Now we will take a different approach. We will take for granted the species. Species in the next simulation will be represented by the original picture of the Little Joe. Species, a product of Sexual Selection, is seen here as a target of systematic bombardment made by noise. In this way, our analogy has the following added meanings:

• Original picture – Species;
• Mask – Threshold between positive and negative allele’s feedback;
• Mask’s white pixel – Fixed allele;
• Mask’s black pixel – No fixed allele.

In this simulation we drop de continuous view of the noise, and adopt a Yes or No kind one. In this way, we create a Mask for the picture where is marked if there is or isn’t noise (no fixed allele). For this mask, we use the color white for the pixel without noise, and black for the pixel with noise.

Using the first 16 pictures of the previous simulation, we produce for each one of them, the white and black mask. This mask, and the resultant picture, similar to the other 15, looks like this (first arrow):

Mask sample 1 of 16 from the generation 1/16

As you can see, this mask doesn’t represent a uniform distribution of random noise; however, because it still represents a random situation it makes no difference for this simulation.

You immediately note an important difference, now, due to this discrete approach, the noise looks like sand in a surface, it almost seems like something you may literally clean instead of dimming it.

For the staking process, we consider the product of the Mask’s pixels, so, the white pixel represents 0 and the black one 1. For each pixel we have the following stacking results:

• White (0) x White (0) = White (0) - Homozygous;
• White (0) x Black (1) = White (0) - Heterozygous;
• Black (1) x White (0) = White (0) - Heterozygous;
• Black (1) x Black (1) = Black (1) - Homozygous.

Bellow we will review the mixed staking in more detail, for now we just accept things as they are.

Applying the stacking process, the first obtained Mask, and the resultant picture, similar in noise to the other 7, look like this (first one of the 1/8 generation):

Mask sample 1 of 8 from the generation 1/8

Repeating the process for the generation 1/4, the obtained Mask, and the resultant picture, similar in noise to the other 3, look like this (first one of the 1/4 generation):

Mask sample 1 of 4 from the generation 1/4

Repeating the process for the generation 1/2, the obtained Mask, and the resultant picture, similar in noise to the other one, look like this (first one of the 1/2 generation):

Mask sample 1 of 2 from the generation 1/2

Finally, we get a single Mask and the resultant picture for the 1/1 generation, with practically no noise comparably with the one on the 1/16 generation.

Final mask sample from the generation 1/1

Unlike the merging simulation, here there is no continuity restriction, and so, convergence can be total without any kind of Asymptote, and more importantly, there is no losing strength in reducing noise.

Animation from generation 1/16 throughout 1/1

As told before, we considered the result of a mixed stack, Heterozygous, as always White (0). You may think that it is an over simplification, however is not far from reality.

Firstly, while a no fixed allele will frequently encounter a mixed stacking (Heterozygous), a fixed allele, on the contrary, it will frequently encounter an equal allele (Homozygous), so, in terms of chances and accordingly with the first law of Mendel, a no fixed allele sees his probabilities of being carried on reduced by 1/2 per generation (Exponential decay), while the fixed one, only sporadically gets in that situation.

In top of the exponential decreasing probability, we have the Natural and Sexual Selection, each one with the following three kinds of feedback:

1. Positive Feedback – Increases offspring relatively to the average;
2. Neutral Feedback – Maintains offspring relatively to the average;
3. Negative Feedback – Decreases offspring relatively to the average.

Both Negative Feedbacks, for Natural or Sexual Selection, are the last hope killers for the “lucky” noise, which one, albeit the odds managed to remain in the genome, sees its diminished odds become even more reduced next to nothing.

In conclusion, the exponential decay of the probability of fixation for a no fixed allele, associated with the negative feedbacks of Natural and Sexual Selection, is a good base to consider that the result of the crossing over between a fixed and no fixed allele is the fixed one, mainly if the no fixed one has no evolutionary advantages (noise).

However, knowing that we are considering haploid genomes, we should not view these values as exact ones. For instance, for a new allele get fixed in a population without any inbreeding, the positive feedback of Natural Evolution had to be such, to the point of canceling the Exponential decay previously referred. In this way, that positive feedback would need to produce more than 2 times the average offspring per generation, so that 2*1/2 becomes 1 (same as the fixed allele), and to compensate the initial negative feedback from Sexual Selection.

Now you may ask, but it’s not possible the existence of Positive Feedback from Sexual Selection for the newcomer allele? For the right answer, we need to realize that the positive feedback of Sexual Selection is in the direction of the existing genome that defines the species. As you saw in the last simulation, the mask is the result of the difference between the original picture and the one with the noise, and in this way, Sexual Selection is attached to a referential, something that doesn't happen with Natural Selection. So, if positive feedback for Sexual Selection is relative to an existing referential, only Natural Selection has the ability of giving Positive Feedback for newcomers.

Some of you are in this moment thinking about the peacock's tail, and making the question if that is not an excellent example of Positive Feedback of Sexual Selection for newcomers. Thirst of all, you have to have in mind that tails per se are common in birds, so tails have a Positive Feedback from Natural Selection. What we are discussing is the ornament not the tail, and the ornament may well be explained with correlation. So, if a trait, any trait, positively correlates with some other trait or traits, which have Positive Feedbacks, either from Natural or Sexual Selection, with time, and only through Natural Selection, that trait becomes a fixed trait. When it becomes a fixed trait, and only then, it may receive Positive Feedback from Sexual Selection, simply because it becomes part of the new existing referential (species). In this way, you may think in beautiful bird singing, vibrant feathers colors, and stunning flowers as exclusive products of Natural Selection.

Giving a step forward, we will approach in detail the issue of Consanguineous or Inbreeding reproduction. Since Adam and Eve times, inbreeding reproduction becomes an inevitably, however, we will not explore the Adam and Eve reality; but instead, we will try to understand what we mean by the inexistence of inbreeding, and then, its degree.

Without inbreeding, our heritage (past generations) would follow an exponential Power of Two, and after few generations, would become greater than the existent population. To visualize this reality we will use the demography evolution of Portugal expressed in the next picture.

Numeric simulation with Portuguese population

Using a generation length of 30 years, by the year of 1410 any Portuguese born after 2010 would be relative to all the Portuguese population previous to 1410! This young Portuguese would be a direct descendent of figures like the Henry the Navigator, or even his great father, John of Gaunt. In the next graphics is possible to visualize the interception point, where the population needed for a perfect non consanguineous reproduction meets the real one.

Graphical simulation with Interception point (1410)

Now that it’s clear that inbreeding is an inevitable reality, it’s time to understand its impact in the Crossing over process. More, the real question is not, what is the impact of inbreeding, but instead, what is the impact of inbreeding’s degree. For this degree we use the distance in generations. For example, in case of brothers we have 1 generation distance, in case of first cousins 2 generations, and so on. Using our generation tree, we may construct a table with the impact of consanguineous reproduction, and see the impact in terms of genetic sampling.

Generation tree considered in the simulations

In the last simulation a consanguineous reproduction can be seen as a branch removal. From the way the simulation was carry on, based on the product of the Mask’s pixels, is applicable the concept of Absorbing element, where the White (0) pixel is the Absorbing element. One of the properties associated with the Absorbing element, is that the operation order doesn’t maters, the result is the same, the absorbing element White (0). This means that the reduction of branches is equivalent to the reduction of samples. In the simulation there were 16 samples of masks, as you can see in the next picture, depending on the generation where we have inbreeding; there is a reduced new set of samples. For instance, in the case of an inbreeding in the 1/2 generation, half of the samples are removed from the equation, meaning that only 8 samples become stacked, the same effect as stopping the reproduction series in the 1/2 generation instead the 1/1.

Unremoved noise due to consanguinity

It is possible to see in the image above; that inbreeding in the generation 1/2 has an impact in the picture, maintaining some noise that otherwise would have been removed.

Other conclusion is possible to make, as you can see in the next picture, inbreeding loses its influence in an Exponential decay way as far from the 1/1 generation it occurs. For instance, a single consanguineous has an influence of 2/16 in the 1/8 generation, and an influence of 4/16 in the 1/4 generation, or in other words, the inverse of the possible number of no consanguineous mating for a given generation.

Impact of inbreeding’s degree

Consanguinity is not worldwide equally distributed, some countries, like India and Pakistan, have high rates of consanguinity. The “rat-people” is a crude example of a mal functioning cross over, something promoting fixation of alleles that otherwise would never become fixed.

Worldwide distribution of consanguineous marriages

It’s now possible to conclude that there isn’t any kind of arms race, what we have is deleterious mutations that became easily fixed due to redundant crossing over in the respective locus. These deleterious mutations, like many other symptoms, weaken the immune system to the point of being exploited by infectious diseases. They work in somehow like AIDS, making people much more likely to get infections, including opportunistic infections and tumors that do not affect people with full working immune systems.

There is another problem with the arms race of the Red Queen’s paradigm, that problem is called blood type. Blood types varies in worldwide distribution, with A blood more frequent in Europe, Australia and North America, B blood, more frequent in Asia, and O blood bore frequent in Latin America. If this is considered an arms race, you have to consider races also the result of an arms race, because the distribution of blood type isn’t very different from other racial traits, neither in time or space. In that sense, the black skin of an African person would have to be seen as an arms race against the sun. The problem is that, like in races, there aren’t significant variances in time and space to attribute to other reasons than Natural Selection. However, this arms race is still argued as the reason for Sexual Selection, something essentially different from Natural Selection.

If blood type is no more than a polymorphism, like skin color, and if blood types play an important role in the protection from infectious diseases, there is little credit to be given to Arms Race or any other thing but the old and simple Natural Selection. What you really have in constantly change that crossing over works against it, is not any kind of virus, or bacteria, it’s instead, the old and simple noise. This noise, the product of Dissipation, root of all environmental processes, undermines the complexity in life and the possibility of greater genomes. Crossing over, and the consequent Speciation, is the working solution that no Eukaryote was ever able to be truly free of.

Dependence stacking of environmental processes

So, what crossing over really is? Crossing over is the instrument of the Environmental Abstraction process. This abstraction becomes the new entity subject to evolution. With abstraction, organisms were drained of protagonism, given to the new concept of Species and its Sexual Selection mechanism. This way, species become the real subject of Natural Selection and the consequent Evolution, or simple putted, Strains gave place to Species.

If materialization was needed, you just need to remember the heritage’s Power of Two exponential process. This form of heritage, only possible with crossing over, works like a stairs that connects species with individuals; turning them, not into children of parents, but into children of species. So, for the question, what makes us human? We may simple answer, the Species does.

Stairs connecting species with individuals

In conclusion, there are those who ask how, and those who ask why, Mendel, was one of the last kind. I will end this post with a simple sentence to bear in mind.

“The HOW represses, the WHY frees.”

Prokaryotes vs. Eukaryotes, NS - Natural Selection, SS - Sexual Selection