It's Not Darwin's or Wallace's Theory
THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES WITHOUT DARWIN AND WALLACE
By
Milton Wainwright BSc, PhD
Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, University of Sheffield, England
Copyright, M. Wainwright (2008), all rights reserved
Email:m.wainwright@sheffield.ac.uk
INTRODUCTION
This essay is devoted to history of the development of the theory of evolution, via the process of natural selection. It is provided in response to what I believe is censorship by a small, but highly influential, part of the current academic community. This belief has been strengthened by my recent, unsuccessful attempts to get published my work on Darwin. Over the last six months or so a paper on the admission by Darwin and Wallace that they were beaten to natural selection role has been forwarded, in the normal way, to four academic journals and a shorter version has also been sent to a UK magazine devoted to the popularisation of biology. In all cases, the paper was summarily rejected without reviewer’s comments; no reasons were given for it having been denied any serious consideration. This experience has led me to conclude that any academic article proving that Darwin did not originate the theory of evolution, via natural selection, will be censored by the scientific community. This situation reminds me of the story (perhaps apocryphal) about the Russian scientist who stated that in the Soviet Union, he could criticise Darwin, but not the Government, while in the West, he was able to criticise the Government, but not Darwin.
In the light of this experience, I have decided not to waste further time submitting the first article, given here, to the normal peer review process; instead I have produced this pamphlet (given here on the Web) for general circulation. Ironically, censorship has forced me into the ways of scientists of the past, who often published their ideas in booklets like this one.
Dr Milton Wainwright, Sheffield, July 1st, 2008
About the Author
Dr Milton Wainwright has been a research scientist and academic for nearly forty years, specialising in studies on unusual aspects of the biology of microorganisms and the history and philosophy of science, notably in relation to the story of the development of antibiotics and the germ theory. He is the author of Miracle Cure-The Story of Penicillin and the Golden Age of Antibiotics; An Introduction to Fungal Biotechnology and An Introduction to Environmental Biotechnology. Dr Wainwright is also active in the area of the public communication of science and frequently writes letters concerning scientific controversies to newspapers, both in the UK and abroad. He sums up his philosophical position as being that of an agnostic, secularist and free thinker.
Thanks to my colleague, and long standing friend, Dr Jim Gilmour for his support over many years, and for acting as a critic to my views on Darwin.
It is often said that evolution was “in the air” during the years prior to the publication of On the Origin of Species. In reality-it wasn’t in the air-it was in books.
Two Quotes Published Before, and During, Darwin’s Voyage on the Beagle
As the field of existence is limited and preoccupied, it is only the hardier, more robust, better-suited-to-circumstance individuals who are able to struggle forward to maturity, these inhabiting only the situations to which they have superior adaptation and greater powers of occupancy than any other kind: the weaker and less circumstance-suited being prematurely destroyed. This principle is in constant action: it regulates the colour, the figure, the capacities, and instincts; those individuals in each species whose colour and covering are best suited to concealment or protection from enemies, or defence from inclemencies or vicissitudes of climate, whose figure is best accommodated to health, strength, defence, and support: in such immense waste of primary and youthful life those only come forward to maturity from the strict ordeal by which nature tests their adaptation to her standard of perfection and fitness to continue their kind of reproduction (Matthew,1831a).
When great changes are made on the surface of a country, as when forests are changed into open land, and marshes into corn fields, or any change that is considerable, the changes in climate must correspond; and as the wild productions are very much affected by that, they must also undergo changes; and these changes may in time amount to the entire extinction of a some of the old tribes, both of plants and animals, the modification of others to the hereditary specific characters admit and the introduction of not varieties, but species altogether new. That not only may, but must have been the case. The productions of soils and climate are as varied as these are, and when change takes place in either of these, if the living productions cannot alter their habits so as to accommodate themselves to the change, there is no alternative they must perish (Mudie,1832).
A PRECISE comment by Darwin:
In 1831,Mr Patrick Matthew, published his work on Naval Timbers and Arboriculture, in which he gives PRECISELY the same view of the origin of species as that provided by Mr Wallace and myself in the Linnean Journal, and as that enlarged in the present volume (i.e. On the Origin of Species) (Origin of Species,4th edition, p.xv).
THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES WITHOUT DARWIN AND WALLACE
Milton Wainwright
Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, S10 2TN
Charles Darwin is usually portrayed as the greatest naturalist of all time, a genius who originated the theory of natural selection to explain the theory of evolution or, transmutation as it was often called in Victorian times. But did Darwin originate any of the ideas given in his famous book On the Origin of Species, first published in 1859? To answer this question I have produced a simulated paper using quotes taken from books and journals written before the end of 1857. In order to produce this simulated paper, I have arranged these quotes in a logical order and have provided reference to their origin. However, except for the occasional linking word (underlined) nothing has been added; the subheadings used were in use at the time the associated quote was written; the italicised words and punctuation were also used by the authors. In some cases the authors quote ideas to demonstrate their opposition to transmutation, nevertheless in so doing, they put such ideas into the public domain, from where they could be accessed by Darwin, or any other naturalist of the day. I have also capitalised “Man” throughout. The simulated paper shows that a) had the Origin of Species not been written, a theory of evolution by natural selection (approximating to that provided by Darwin and Wallace), could have been produced by any naturalist using the literature already published up to 1857, and b) that neither Darwin, nor Alfred Russel Wallace, originated the ideas published in the Origin.
It is important to note that Darwin, potentially, had access to all of the quotes given below. In contrast, none of the authors of these quotes had access to any of Darwin’s notebooks.
Simulated Paper
THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES BY A NATURAL PROCESS OF SELECTION*
By A Learned Victorian
No organism is, nor ever has been created, which is not microscopic. Whatever is larger has not been created, but developed. Man has not been created but developed (Oken,1847).
The transmutation theory defined
Mr Sedgwick, a critic of transmutation, sums up the theory as follows: It was contended that we know nothing but second causes, and that they are all in all-that the commencement of organic life was nothing more that one of a the material changes in the endless cycle of movements going on continually before our eyes-a natural combination produced by the elemental power of the natural world; and as purely natural as any new mechanical deposit or any new chemical combination. This view of the commencement of the organic world was called “spontaneous generation”, but other theorists were not content to rest at this point. They further assumed that the humblest of forms of organic life, having thus begun, had also a natural tendency to bread upwards, so as to ascend (by a law of progressive development)on a natural scale of organic forms:-that a monad thus passed by natural means (and by natural means alone)into the more complicated form of some zoophyte-the zoophyte into a mollusc-the mollusc, by a like succession of natural steps, into a fish, a reptile, a bird, and a mammal:-and lastly, but not leastly, that by a like natural progression(in which all idea of creative power is excluded)some inferior mammal passed into a monkey and monkey into Man. The successive changes, implied in this theory, were not sudden, but slow and gradual, and brought about, during the lapse of ages by the insensible sliding of one species into another. Thus by the simple operations of second causes we obtain, on the principal of this theory, two classes of phenomenon, one defined by the words “spontaneous generation,” the other by such terms as “progressive development” or transmutation of species.” (Sedgwick,1850). Mr King concludes: The world, throughout its epochs in past history, has been furnished with life in accordance with the times and seasons, each species being adapted to its age, the place, and its fellow species of life (King,1856). The transmutation theory is a stumbling block in the way only of those who will not see the truth. Nature left no gaps on her grand scheme; the gaps referred to simply demonstrate the narrow gap of human knowledge. Unity of design implies for instance unity of execution: if gaps appear, the time is not come for their being filled up. In the fullness of time all will be developed, and then, and not till then, if ever, can we comprehend full scheme of creation (Knox,1852). Lamarck, one of the most distinguished naturalists of the day, openly professes his belief, that both animals and vegetables are incessantly changing under the influence of climate, food, domestication, the crossing of breeds etc., and he remarks, that if the species now in existence appear to be fixed in their character it is because the circumstances that modify these species requires an enormous time for action and would consequently require numerous generations to establish the fact (Dunglison,1832).
Transmutation merely an “orderly miracle”, not and explanation for creation
If with the Progressionists we conceive the species of living things undergo transmutation at the present day; that this transmutation is from a lower to a higher type; and that all the kinds of living beings which have ever existed upon the Earth’s surface have originated in this way; the idea is a perfectly legitimate one and must be admitted or rejected according to the evidence available; but if fully proved, it would not be, in any sense and explanation of creation; “such creation in the manner of natural law” would in fact simply be an orderly miracle. (Hooker,1856).
How did life originate?
Some suppose that everything was originally fluid, that this universal fluid gave existence to animals which were at first of the simplest kind, such as monads, and other infusorial microscopic animalcules; that in process of time, and by acquiring different habits, the races of these animals became complicated and assumed that diversity of nature and character in which they now exist (Anon,1818).
The nucleated vesicle, the fundamental form of all organization, we must regard as the meeting point between the inorganic and the organic –the end of the mineral and beginning of the vegetable ad animal kingdoms, which then start in different directions, but in perfect parallelism and analogy…We are drawn on to the supposition the first step in the creation of life upon the planet was a chemico-electric operation, by which simple germinal vesicles were produced. This is so much, but what were the next steps? The answer, an advance, under favour of peculiar conditions, from the simplest being to the next more complicated, and this through the medium of the ordinary process of generation (i.e. without the help of the Creator) ( Chambers,1844).
The author (of the Vestiges) would have us believe, that, as soon as the Earth was at a temperature suitable for life, germs of rudimentary species were introduced in the moist ground, or in the ocean, by a natural process. (Anon,1846). From the simplest primitive germs or rudiments may be evolved, by what has been termed spontaneous generation, all the various forms of vegetable and animals organic life, the particular form being determined by the conditions to which the germs are incidentally subjected, and the development, multiplication, and variations of species depending on the same contingencies acting throughout unbounded time, and aided by certain principles of action and change within the beings thus developed (Anon,1850).
From organic molecula to Man
The formation of Man and animals long puzzled those world makers, who would attribute everything to material causes. At length a discovery was supposed to be made of primitive animalcula, or organic molecula, from which every kind of animal was formed; a shapeless, clumsy, microscopical object. This, by the natural tendency of original propagation to vary to protect the species, produced other better organized. These again produced other more perfect than themselves, till at last appeared the most complete of species, mankind, beyond whose perfection it is impossible for the work of generation to proceed (Sullivan, 1794).
A theory of life obeying only natural laws
The genera and species of animals that inhabit this globe are evidently subject to change; some are entirely extinguished –As old species perish, do new species rise up! Is there some secret law of animal reproduction by which there is a succession of species in the course of ages? (Polehampton,1815).
There is general gradation through the animal race and through the whole vegetable system. By gradation, I mean the various degrees of powers, faculties and organisation (White,1799). The inevitable relation of all the successive forms to one primitive type constitutes the legitimate and undeniable evidence of some regular order of causes presiding over their production, operating through periods of time of enormous length, during which old species have slowly disappeared by the action of natural causes, and new allied species have gradually appeared beyond all doubt as much in accordance with other equally natural, even if at present unknown, laws (Baden Powell,1856a). No animal can produce itself, but depends on its parent as the pre-existent efficient cause. The doctrine of equivocal generation or spontaneous generation of things, i.e. fortuitously and without cause of its kind, is utterly false, an idle conceit of ignorant philosophers and the bold assertion of an impious atheist (Marten,1737).
The creation of the Earth as it at present exists, has been going on for millions of years, an assumption based upon the observed rate of sedimentary deposit, as taking place now, i.e. a few inches a century (Anon,1857a). Geology reveals to us a gradual extinction of species, accompanied by a successive appearance of new species, it reveals to us also that the surface of the Earth has undergone great mutations; that land and sea have frequently changed places; and that the climate of the several regions of the world, owing to many causes, has greatly varied. Natural history is replete with striking accounts of the modification produced in a race of animals by climate, diet and the enforcement of new habits (Anon,1845).
If these observations are correct, no organ or system of organs, nor any new type in the animal world, can be said to have suddenly appeared on the stage of existence. There are certain laws to which nature herself is compelled to submit, and by which all her operations must be regulated…I cannot help believing that amongst them is to be found the laws of progressive development (Nash,1833).
Finally Mr Morgan concludes: Each animal derives from the sum of its organization a sensibility to external nature, and a power of reacting upon it, such as is sufficient for the continuance of its existence (Morgan,1822).
*Wilson, J. uses the expression, “origin of species” in 1829-31, Quarterly J. Agriculture 2, 1829-31, p.335; the expression “natural process of selection” was used by Patrick Matthew in 1831, see references below.
Change in nature occurs from one species to another over immense periods of time
The author of the “Vestiges” concludes that the whole system of creation, with all its diversified forms inanimate and animate, from its first to its last stage unfolding was brought forth under the operation of one great law of progressive development by which the “simplest and most primitive type gave birth to the next type above it,” by which “this gain”, produced the next higher, and so on to the very highest, the stages of advance being in all cases very small-namely, from one species only to another, so that the phenomenon has always been of a simple modest character (Fishbough,1852). As we ascend in the (geological) series we meet new tribes, new genera, and new species. Generation succeeds generation. Old forms disappear and are replaced by new ones, which in turn become obsolete. The duration of a single species comprehends an immense period of years…..The geologist represents periods of duration of millions of years, as the astronomer represents the distance of fixed stars from Earth, by millions of miles. (Foster and Whitney,1851).
Comparative anatomy, when aided by geology, becomes retrospective, and exhibits a vast series of living things adapted to the condition of the Earth’s surface at the several periods of their existence, and gradually ascending from simple to more complex forms of organisations: hence some physiologists have surmised that all varieties of organic structures may be mere adaptations of a simple and primary form. ..The rate according to which conditions of change are produced is a very slow one (Clark, 1836).
Fossils and the succession of life
Fossils inform us that from time to time great convulsions of nature have occurred-that numerous species, and not only species, but entire genera have been swept from the Earth, and that when the paroxysm had subsided and the fit of physical passion was over, life did not recommence from the exact point where it was arrested, but started up in a variety of new organisms in company with a portion only of the old (Anon,1857b). The fossil species do not differ less from the living to which they make their nearest approach, than various animals that are familiar to us do from others that belong to the same tribes, and which are found, under one species or other, over the whole world (Good,1837).
There has in fact been a succession of races of animals and plants living on the globe, their creation having been regulated by certain laws, the species having been created in a regular order, and no species once extinct having ever been re-created. The species of animals and plants that now inhabit the Earth have come into existence, slowly one after the other. There have been no sudden and general catastrophes by which entire populations have been at once destroyed over the whole Earth. Whenever we have the appearance of sudden breaks we can always trace it to the fact of vast intervals of time having elapsed, during which no deposition of rock took place in the district under examination, or during which beds of rock once formed have been washed away (Anon,1856a).
Finally, the noted American geologist, Mr Rogers notes that: We see exemplified a general and important law concerning the distribution of fossils, which is, that those species whose geographical distribution is the widest possess likewise the greatest vertical range, or, by being adapted to a greater variety of localities and physical conditions, they have been suited to withstand a greater series of vicissitude, and to endure therefore a longer time. Mr Lea called the attention of the meeting to the importance of Prof. Hall’s observations on the fossil Brachipoda, where he demonstrated that many species had been made from one, the difference of forms having arisen from difference of age, locality, etc.
It follows that Man must also be included amongst fossil species, or rather that a sudden transition from one condition of being to another must be disallowed, and that the same gradual alteration of species, already fully developed by M. Deshayes in his comparison of fossil shells of the different periods of the tertiary formations, must be extended to animals and perchance to Man (Smith,1833).
...
Read more here: Wainrightscience
