One more important reason to be skeptic about Darwins Theory
I don’t know if this has been apprechiated before, but in my view, following below is a MAJOR DIFFICULTY in the construct and concept of Darwins Theory, which justifies major skepticism and concern. What i post in sequence, puts the Theory of Evolution into speculation territory at best, fantasia-land at worst !!
One of the main tenets of the theory of evolution is:
Differential survival and reproduction. Individuals possessing traits well suited for the struggle for local resources will contribute more offspring to the next generation.
Understanding Evolution
It’s more accurate to think of natural selection as a process rather than as a guiding hand. Natural selection is the simple result of variation, differential reproduction, and heredity — it is mindless and mechanistic. It has no goals; it’s not striving to produce “progress” or a balanced ecosystem.
What is the definition of “differential reproduction”?
This means that individuals with a certain genotype for a given locus or gene have more reproductive success than individuals within the same population that have other genotypes for for that same gene. This difference in reproductive success can be the result of longer survival that results in more reproductive events over a lifetime, more offspring per reproductive event, or more frequent successful reproductive events.
Differential reproduction is the idea that those organisms best adapted to a given environment will be most likely to survive to reproductive age and have offspring of their own. Organisms that are successful in their environments will be more likely to be successful in reproduction, and therefore the better-adapted organisms will reproduce at a greater rate than the less well-adapted organisms. 2
Differential reproduction is needed because for natural selection to occur, one group with a specific trait has to have more reproductive success than another group within the same population.
The Extended synthesis, Pigliucci , pg.13
A second restriction overcome by the new approach is externalism. The nearly exclusive concentration of the Modern Synthesis on natural selection gave priority to all external factors that realize adaptation through differential reproduction, a fundamental feature of Darwinism not rooted solely in scientific considerations (Hull 2005).
If a short definition that catches the core of the process is desired, we can say that natural selection is “the differential reproduction of hereditary variations,” which is how textbooks often define it. That is saying simply that useful variants multiply more effectively over the generations than less useful (or harmful) variants. Thus a cheetah able to run faster will catch more prey, and therefore live longer and leave more offspring than a slower cheetah. So, a hereditary variant that boosts fleetness will increase in frequency over the generations and eventually replace the slower variant.
Its evident that harmful variants, where the mutation influences negatively health, fitness, and reproduction hability of an organisms diminshes. These are sorted out, or die through desease. That says nothing however in regard of an organism gaining MORE fitness through evolution of new advantageous traits, and spreading these in the population, resulting in evolutionary advancement.
DOMINANCE RANK, COPULATORY BEHAVIOR, AND DIFFERENTIAL REPRODUCTION
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu.sci-hub.cc/doi/abs/10.1086/412672
The view that high social rank is associated with high levels of both copulatory behavior and the production of offspring is widespread in the study of animal social behavior.
This fact alone would falsify the claim that positive mutations would result automatically in higher replication of the animals with the evolved variations. At least in species which have the social hiearchy where higher ranked animals have preference to mate with females.
In order to demonstrate the validity of this hypothesis it is necessary first to resolve ambiguities in the concept of dominance and to assign ranks by means of valid procedures. Second, copulatory behavior must be properly sampled, measured, and related to rank. Finally, it must be demonstrated that rank and increased copulatory behavior actually lead to increased reproduction.
And it must be demonstrated that advantageous evolutionary traits outcompete social behavior and rank in terms of reproduction success.
Each step in this process entails conceptual and methodological difficulties. There have been many studies of rank and copulatory behavior, fewer of rank and differential reproduction, and very few of rank, copulatory behavior, and differential reproduction. The consistency of results obtained varies with taxon; results of particular consistency appear in studies of carnivores and ungulates. Both the concept of dominance and the validity of the hypothesis relating it to copulatory behavior and to differential reproduction appear viable for at least some species, although the body of data relating rank to both copulation and differential reproduction remains minimal.
This is highly telling, and of crucial importance. Think about it. The body of data and evidence in regard of elucidating one of the most important ingredients of the theory of evolution are minimal !! The author admits conceptual and methodological difficulties to study this issue. There are no relevant studies that provide empirical data that differential reproduction can outcompete rank and copulatory behavior.
This fact alone puts Darwins ToE into speculative territory at best. Fantasia land at worst !!
Among the most prominent hypotheses in the study of animal social behavior is the view that dominant animals gain differential access to mating partners and consequently leave more offspring than do their subordinates. This view was promulgated by some of the earliest students of dominance (e.g., Zuckerman, 1932; Mas- low, 1936) and is often asserted in secondary references. For example, Barash (1977) has written that “There is abundant evidence that such dominant individuals engage in more matings and hence are more fit than are subordinates” (p. 237). This hypothesis linking dominance, copulatory behavior, and differential reproduction has elicited vigorous skepticism as well as advocacy (e.g., Bernstein, 1976; Gartlan, 1968; Kolata, 1976; Rowell, 1974).
The important place given the problem of rank, copulatory behavior, and reproduction in the study of animal social behavior is appropriate because an understanding of these relationships could greatly facilitate an understanding of the broader problem of the evolution of social behavior.
The real issue is if copulatory behavior outperforms differential reproduction.
The importance of the problem should not be overstated, however;
The contrary is the case. If copulatory behavior outperforms differential reproduction, Darwins theory is falsified, since its a essential mechanism to spread new traits in the population.