Living Fossils defy Neo-Darwinism

-


Here is a list of 10 animals that have not evolved:

  • Horseshoe crab: Horseshoe crabs have been around for over 450 million years and have changed very little during that time. They are often referred to as "living fossils" because they have remained so unchanged for so long.

  • Coelacanth: Coelacanths were thought to be extinct until one was caught in a fishing net in 1938. They are also considered living fossils, as they have changed very little in the past 400 million years.

  • Nautilus: Nautiluses are cephalopods, like squid and octopuses, but they have a spiral shell and tentacles. They have been around for over 500 million years and have changed very little during that time.

  • Shark: Sharks have been around for over 400 million years and have changed very little during that time. They are often referred to as "perfect predators" because of their efficient design.

  • Crocodile: Crocodiles have been around for over 200 million years and have changed very little during that time. They are also considered living fossils.

  • Tuatara: Tuataras are reptiles that are native to New Zealand. They are the last surviving members of an ancient order of reptiles that once lived on all continents. Tuataras have changed very little in the past 150 million years.

  • Opossum: Opossums are marsupials, like kangaroos and koalas. They have been around for over 70 million years and have changed very little during that time. Opossums are also the only marsupials found in North America.

  • Platypus: Platypuses are mammals that lay eggs. They are the only surviving members of an ancient order of mammals that once lived on all continents. Platypuses have changed very little in the past 165 million years.

  • Hagfish: Hagfish are primitive fish that have been around for over 500 million years. They have changed very little during that time. Hagfish are also known for being able to produce slime that can clog the gills of their predators.

  • Lungfish: Lungfish are fish that can breathe air. They have been around for over 300 million years and have changed very little during that time. Lungfish are able to survive in droughts by burrowing into the mud and breathing air through their skin.


Living fossils are any group of organisms thought to have changed very little since their appearance in the geological record. One of the most famous examples is the coelacanth, a fish that was thought to have gone extinct 65 million years ago until it was rediscovered in 1938.

IDPs, or intrinsically disordered proteins, are proteins that lack a well-defined structure. They are found in all organisms, from bacteria to humans. IDPs are involved in a wide variety of cellular processes, including signaling, regulation, and transport. They can absorb mutations over millions of years without change in function. 

Living fossils are often thought to have more IDPs than other organisms. This is because IDPs are more flexible and adaptable, which can be an advantage in changing environments. For example, the coelacanth's genome contains a high proportion of IDPs, which may help it to survive in the deep sea.

One study, published in the journal PLoS Genetics in 2013, found that living fossils have more disordered proteins than other organisms. The researchers analyzed the genomes of 17 living fossils and 17 other organisms, and found that the living fossils had an average of 32% disordered proteins, while the other organisms had an average of 25% disordered proteins.

Phenotypic bias is a NonDarwinian process used to describe the tendency of certain mutations to be more likely to occur than others. This can be due to a number of factors, such as epigenetics, noncoding RNA, and biased mutations. One way that phenotypic bias can explain living fossils is by preventing new mutations from arising. This is counter to neo darwinism which views evolution as forward moving and constant. Another way that phenotypic bias can explain living fossils is by causing them to revert to their ancestral form. This is counter to the forward action of NeoDarwinism.

There are a number of examples of living fossils that can be explained by phenotypic bias. For example, the coelacanth is a fish that has been around for over 400 million years. It is thought that the coelacanth's ability to survive for so long is due in part to its deep-sea habitat, which has remained relatively stable over time.

Another example is the platypus, a mammal that is native to Australia. The platypus has a number of features that are unique to mammals, such as laying eggs and having a venomous spur on its hind leg. However, the platypus also has some features that are more similar to reptiles, such as a lack of hair and the presence of a cloaca. It is thought that the platypus's unique features are long time enigma to neo darwinism.

Overall, phenotypic bias can provide a plausible explanation for the existence of living fossils. By preventing new mutations from arising or causing species to revert to their ancestral form, phenotypic bias can help species to remain unchanged for long periods of time.

These animals challenge Neo-Darwinism because they show that evolution is not a linear process and that some animals can remain unchanged for millions of years. This suggests that there may be other factors at play in evolution that Neo-Darwinism does not account for.

Additionally, some of these animals, such as the horseshoe crab and the coelacanth, have very complex body plans that would be difficult to explain through random mutations and natural selection. This suggests that there may be a guiding force in evolution that helps to create complex and well-designed organisms.

Overall, the existence of animals that have not evolved poses a serious challenge to Neo-Darwinism. It suggests that our understanding of evolution is incomplete and that there may be more to the story than we currently realize.

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