The ID Report

By Robert Deyes

Evidence is certainly mounting across most fields of evolutionary biology that the slow turning of a gradualistic clock, in which natural selection produces bit-by-bit changes, does not translate into macroevolutionary change as Darwin might have wished. Indeed with their theory of Punctuated Equilibrium Stephen Jay Gould and Niles Eldredge have set the scene for an assault on, what they called, "this idol of traditional Darwinian conceptualizations" (Ref 1 p888). Smithsonian Paleontologist Alan Cheetham, perhaps one of the foremost converts of this new assault, recalls being surprised at seeing how individual species of Bryozoa- coral-like colonial creatures remained virtually unchanged for millions and millions of years (Ref 2). Biologist Timothy Collins from the University of Michigan has likewise identified long-lasting stasis in sea snails (Ref 2) while Santiago Elena, Vaughn Cooper and Richard Lenski also from the University of Michigan have observed stasis in certain strains of bacteria (Ref 3). Neil Shubin and colleagues documented stasis in the salamander which, as recent fossil findings indicate, has changed very little over the last 150 million years (Ref 4, 5). Rather than supporting a gradualistic evolutionary process, the salamander epitomises the relative stasis of form that dominates the fossil record (Ref 4).

Cheetham's collaborator Jeremy Jackson estimates that stasis could be up to 10 times more frequent than the gradual change so heavily promolgated by traditional Darwinists (Ref 2). As Cheetham and Jackson have written, "many fossil species appear in the record fully differentiated morphologically and persist for millions of years with no indication of transitional morphologies" (Ref 6). Science writer Richard Kerr has noted how there is now a growing acceptance that the history of life alternates between what he refers to as, "rapid change and long periods of stasis"- a stasis in which, "the dominant kinds of organism don't change much" (Ref 2).

With its claim of stasis, Punctuated Equilibrium has become a much talked-about theory. It represents a radical departure from the gradualistic foundations of Darwinism (Ref 7). For Darwin gradual change over time at the organism level formed the basis upon which speciation naturally followed (Ref 8, p153). It therefore seems paradoxical that zoologist Richard Dawkins should diminish this major difference in opinion as, "a minor dispute among experts", that has been, "blown up to give the impression that Darwinism's foundations are quivering" (Ref 9, p199). According to Dawkins, the most that could be said of Gould's and Eldredge's theory was that it represented a slight adjustment of ideas not unlike a hypothetical, slight redirection of the Copernican world view upon discovery that the earth was not perfectly spherical (Ref 9, p199).

It is worth noting that Dawkins himself took a radical departure from traditional Darwinian view of evolution. Through his selfish gene theory, he promulgated the idea that genes rather than organisms were the units upon which natural selection acted upon (Ref 10). Dawkins wrote of organisms as mere "survival machines" that served as "lumbering robots" through which genes could achieve their own ends of replicating and surviving (Ref 10, p.19). Genes were the replicators- the 'Darwinian individuals' that have opted for different ways of making a living, with natural selection selecting those genes that were good at making 'survival machines' (Ref 10 p.21-24). Those genes that were most successful at surviving, would go on through successive generations to inhabit new bodies and in the process develop new strategies for survival (Ref 10, p.25). What stood out as the principle feature of Dawkins' thesis and what clearly set him apart from his contemporaries was his rejection of organisms or species as Darwinian individuals (Ref 10 p. 33). Gould himself was highly critical of Dawkins position. As he later wrote:

"No matter how much power Dawkins wishes to assign to genes, there is one thing that he cannot give them-direct visibility to natural selection. Selection simply cannot see genes and pick among them directly. It must use bodies as an intermediary. A gene is a bit of DNA hidden within a cell" (Ref 11)

So why would Dawkins diminish the significance of these crucial differences between himself and his contemporaries? A quick review of his essays reveals one possible reason- his distaste for what he perceived as a creationist distortion of the truth (Ref 9, p.211). He categorically attacked creationists for misusing Fred Hoyle's famous Boeing 747 illustration (which Hoyle used to exemplify how complex biological systems might be assembled in nature- see Ref 9, p.211). He subsequently tried to correct the misunderstanding by concluding that a cumulative step by step construction through natural selection could do it all

"Creationists love Sir Fred Hoyle's vivid metaphor for his own misunderstanding of natural selection. It is as if a hurricane, blowing through a junkyard, had the good fortune to assemble a Boeing 747. Hoyle's point is about statistical improbability. Our answer, yours and mine and Stephen Gould's, is that natural selection is cumulative. There is a ratchet, such that small gains are saved. The hurricane doesn't spontaneously assemble the airliner in one go. Small improvements are added bit by bit" (Ref 9, p211).

And yet, in making such an assertion the burden of proof lay clearly with Dawkins. Demonstrating how an airplane could be assembled gradually from scratch, with intermediate functions conferred at various stages through the construction process, should have been his next move. Hoyle may have made a mistake in assuming spontaneous assembly of complex systems. Much more importantly, however, he also drew attention to the conceptual problem of trying to describe the cumulative assembly of such systems in biology through a series of functional intermediates. Dawkins was extremely critical of creationists accusing them of clutching at straws such as the Piltdown fraud simply because of their strong desire to believe in something as silly as a divine creator. Perhaps unknown to Dawkins are the fraudulent claims of missing links that continue to haunt evolutionary biology even in more recent times (Refs 12, 13).

Of course orthodox Darwinists still deny Gould's and Eldredge's conclusions of stasis and punctuation. According to biologist Steven Rose, "punctuated equilibrium made many traditional evolutionists unhappy" some of whom reduced it to nothing more than an outward manifestation of, "Gould's alleged Marxism" (Ref 14). To the critics, Punctuated Equilibrium became known as, "evolution by jerks" (Ref 14, Gould's retort- "evolution by creeps"- was equally amusing). Steven Jones from University College, London, likewise concluded that Gould's revisionism left much to be desired, referring to him as, "a mosquito on the backside of biology" (Ref 15). Yet these marked differences in opinion were always toned down for fear of how others might perceive such a rift in ideas between experts. Some such as Geerat Vermeij from UC Davis took on a traditional Darwinist view to explain the prevalence of stasis by inferring some sort of stabilizing selection in which stasis exists only because any departure from the status quo would somehow be detrimental to the survival of an organism (Ref 2). And yet amidst such suppositions and preconceptions, what has become clear is that the fossil record challenges one of the basic tenets of Darwinism- that of gradual change leading to the diversity of life that we see on earth today.

References

1. Stephen Jay Gould (2002), The Structure of Evolutionary Theory, Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts

2. Richard A. Kerr (1995) Did Darwin Get It All Right? Science Vol 267 pp.1421-1422

3.Santiago F. Elena, Vaughn S. Cooper, Richard E. Lenski (1996), Punctuated Evolution Caused by Selection of Rare Beneficial Mutations, Science Vol 272 pp. 1802-1804

4.The report of the silent salamander appeared in the BBC NEWS under the auspicious title "'Pompeii' salamanders fill fossil gap" on Friday the 30th of March, 2001 and can be found on the following website http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/1251318.stm

5. Ke-Qin Gao and Neil Shubin (2003), Earliest known crown-group salamanders Nature 422, 424 - 428

6. Jeremy B. Jackson and Alan H. Cheetham (1990) Evolutionary Significance of Morphospecies: A Test with Cheilstone Bryozoa, Science Vol 248 pp. 579-582

7. Niles Eldredge, Steven Jay Gould (1988), Punctuated Equilibrium Prevails, Nature Vol 332 pp. 211-212

8. Charles Darwin (1859), The Origin of Species By Means of Natural Selection Or The Preservation of Favored Races In the Struggle For Survival, Modern Library Paperbacks Edition (1998), New York

9. Richard Dawkins (2003), A Devil's Chaplain, Published by Weidenfeld and Nicolson, London, UK

10. Richard Dawkins (1989), The Selfish Gene, Oxford University Press, Oxford UK

11. Stephen Jay Gould (1992), The Panda's Thumb- More Reflections In Natural History, Published by W.W Norton and Company, New York

12. M. V. Erdmann, R. L. Caldwell (2000), How new technology put a coelacanth among the heirs of Piltdown Man, Nature Vol 406 p343

13. Rex Dalton (2000), Feathers fly over Chinese fossil bird's legality and authenticity, Nature Volume 403 p690-691

14. Steven Rose (2002), The Guardian Obituaries, Stephen Jay Gould, The Guardian, Wednesday May 22nd, 2002- see full article at http://www.guardian.co.uk/obituaries/story/0,3604,719828,00.html

15. James Randerson (2001), Stephen Jay Gould, biologist and writer, dies, New Scientist, 21st May, 2002, see article at http://www.newscientist.com/news/news.jsp?id=ns99992306