Things we thought were right but we now know are wrong with NeoDarwinism

-


Neo-Darwinism is the modern synthesis of Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection with Mendelian genetics and other scientific advances. It is still widely accepted…for now.

However, there are numerous  things that we used to think were right with Neo-Darwinism that we now know are wrong. Here are 15 examples:

1. Evolution is a gradual process. We now know that evolution can occur in rapid spurts, e.g., punctuated equilibrium. 

2. Natural selection is the only driving force of evolution. We now know that other factors, such as genetic drift, gene flow, and epigenetics play a dominant role. 

3. Mutations are always random.  We now know that  mutations are largely guided (biased) and can lead to new adaptations. 

4. Genes are the only units of heredity. We now know that epigenetic factors, such as DNA methylation and histone modification, play a major role in inheritance. 

5. Fossils provide a complete record of evolution. We now know that the fossil record is incomplete and that there are many gaps in our knowledge e.g. the Cambrian explosion.

6. Evolution is a purely biological process. We now know that evolution can also be influenced by cultural and social factors.

 7. Evolution is driven by competition. We now know that cooperation and altruism play a major role in evolution.

8. Lamarckian inheritance is not possible. We now know that epigenetic changes can be inherited, which is a form of Lamarckian inheritance. 

9. Homologous structures were considered as evidence for common ancestry. We now know that homoplasy (the evolution of similar features independently in different lineages) can also occur. 

10. Vestigial structures are always useless remnants of the past. We now know that some vestigial structures can actually have new functions. 

11. Natural selection cannot explain the evolution of complex traits. 

12. Humans are the product of a linear evolutionary sequence. We now know that human evolution is more complex and branching. 

13. Neanderthals were our evolutionary ancestors. We now know that Neanderthals were our cousins, and that very few modern humans interbred with Neanderthals. 

14. The human brain is a product of natural selection alone. We now know that other factors, such as Junk DNA, culture and social interactions, have also played a role in the evolution of the human brain. 

15. Evolution is a selfish process. We now know that altruism and cooperation are major drivers of change.

Neo-Darwinism is still widely accepted however, it is being replaced by the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis. 

The 15 things listed above are just a few examples of how our understanding of evolution has changed in recent years.

It is also important to note that some of the things listed above are still controversial, and there is some debate among scientists about their interpretation. However, there is a growing consensus that Neo-Darwinism needs revision if not replacement.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

No, the EES is not just a add on to Neo-Darwinism aka the Modern Synthesis

-
Image
" The summary of the state of affairs on the 150th anniversary of the Origin is somewhat shocking: in the post-genomic era, all major tenets of the Modern Synthesis fthe theory of evolution) are, if not outright overturned replaced by a new and incomparably more complex vision of the key aspects of evolution (EES). So, not to mince words , the Modern Synthesis is gone" -Eugene Koonin, an evolutionary biologist (Cited by over 270,000 evolutionary scientists.) The Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES) represents a significant departure from the traditional neo-Darwinian framework, also known as the Modern Synthesis . While both theories aim to explain evolutionary change, they differ fundamentally in their underlying mechanisms and the roles they assign to various biological processes. A crucial point of divergence lies in the interpretation and application of the term " evolutionary ," particularly concerning the incorporation of epigenetic mechanisms....
Read more

Is the random mutational model of evolution on its way out?

-
Image
While the random mutational model of evolution has long been a cornerstone of evolutionary biology, the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis (EES) and the study of epigenetics are challenging its core assumptions. The Random Mutational Model and Its Limitations The traditional view of evolution, often called the Modern Synthesis or neo-Darwinism , emphasizes random genetic mutations as the primary source of variation. Natural selection then acts upon this variation, favoring individuals with advantageous traits. This model has been successful in explaining some evolutionary phenomena, but it also has limitations: It struggles to explain complex adaptations: The idea that complex features like the eye or the immune system arose solely through random mutations seems statistically improbable. It overlooks the role of the environment: The traditional model treats the environment as a selective force, but it doesn't fully consider how organisms can actively respond to and s...
Read more

ERVs and Common Descent: A Reassessment in Light of Recent Findings

-
Image
Endogenous retroviruses (ERVs) have long been considered strong evidence for the common descent of humans and chimpanzees. These remnants of ancient viral infections, embedded in the genomes of both species, were once thought to be non-functional "junk DNA." The premise was that the shared presence of these seemingly random insertions in corresponding genomic locations could best be explained by a shared evolutionary history. However, recent research, such as the "Switching Sides" article published in May 2021, has challenged this assumption by demonstrating that ERVs play a functional role in the development of the human embryo and immune system. This discovery raises questions about the validity of using ERVs as primary evidence for common descent. The Traditional Argument for Common Descent The traditional argument for common descent based on ERVs rests on the following points: Random Insertion: Retroviral insertions are thought to occur randomly in...
Read more