Intelligent Design

mini
Mon, 08 Aug 2005 19:08:11 +0000

In the early days of neo-Darwinian theory, the chief rival theory (after the available data from Darwin itself had been sifted for forty years) was that of Lamarck/Lysenko. The falsifiable hypothesis was that if non-inherited traits acquired through environmental requirements could then be inherited by offspring, then the Darwinian theory of natural selection would no longer explain the available data. Scientists worked with this one for 20-30 years, without being able to explain the data obtained. Other falsifiable elements included the inability to explain from the paleontological evidence the straight-line development of species. The work of Eldredge-Gould and a host of others, over a 40-year period and on multiple species, found that the theory of natural selection itself was essentially sound, but that theories around a steady-state rate of change needed to be revised, and they were, based on the notion that ecologies exhibit stasis as well as species, and that natural selection can still (over time) reward genomes that are “economically fit” for changing environments.

I could go on, but the point to be made is that Darwinian evolutionary theory has itself evolved in the natural process of science. Parts of the theory were not only falsifiable, but have been falsified, over time.

FS - thank you for the proof that I am God. Since I am already all-knowing, and am capable of producing chaos, I didn’t require it. ;)