Charles Darwin's tree of life is 'wrong and misleading', claim scientists
Charles Darwin's tree of life, which shows how species are related, is " wrong" and "misleading", claim scientists.
Charles Darwin's idea of a tree of life is now 'obsolete' according to some scientists
Photo: ENGLISH HERITAGE PHOTO LIBRARY
They believe the concept misleads us because his theory limits and even obscures the study of organisms and their ancestries.
Evolution is far too complex to be explained by a few roots and branches, they claim.
In Darwin's The Origin of Species, published in 1859, the British naturalist drew a diagram of an oak to depict how one species can evolve into many.
But not much was known about primitive life forms or genetics back then when he was only dealing with plants and animals – long before there was any real comprehension of DNA or bacteria.
Researchers say although for much of the past 150 years biology has largely concerned itself with filling in the details of the tree it is now obsolete and needs to be discarded.
Dr Eric Bapteste, an evolutionary biologist at the Pierre and Marie Curie University in Paris, said: "For a long time the holy grail was to build a tree of life. We have no evidence at all that the tree of life is a reality."
The discovery of the structure of DNA in 1953 – whose pioneers believed it would provide proof of Darwin's tree – opened up new vistas for evolutionary biology.
But current research is finding a far more complex scenario than Darwin could have imagined – particularly in relation to bacteria and single-celled organisms.
These simple life forms represent most of Earth's biomass and diversity – not to mention the first two-thirds of the planet's history.
Many of their species swap genes back and forth, or engage in gene duplication, recombination, gene loss or gene transfers from multiple sources.
Dr John Dupré, a philosopher of biology at Exeter University, said: "If there is a tree of life it's a small irregular structure growing out of the web of life."
More fundamentally recent research suggests the evolution of animals and plants isn't exactly tree-like either.
Dr Dupré said: "There are problems even in that little corner." Having uprooted the tree of unicellular life biologists are now taking their axes to the remaining branches.
...
Read more here/Leia mais aqui: The Telegraph
+++++
NOTA IMPERTINENTE DESTE BLOGGER:
Eu fui evolucionista de carteirinha, e disse adeus a Darwin, sem medo de ser feliz, após a leitura do livro A Caixa Preta de Darwin, de Michael Behe (1997, Rio de Janeiro, Zahar): a bioquímica detona as especulações transformistas de Darwin.
Posições esdrúxulas da Nomenklatura científica (autoritária e medieval nas práticas contra os oponentes), da Grande Mídia Tupiniquim (acapachante amante silenciosa) e a Galera dos meninos e meninas de Darwin (histérica por se ver órfã epistêmica): silêncio pétreo sobre estas dificuldades teóricas fundamentais para a corroboração de uma teoria científica no contexto de justificação teórica.
Posição mais esdrúxula ainda é a do MEC/SEMTEC/PNLEM que, despudoramente, apesar de ter recebido análise crítica dessas questões em 2003 e 2005 (tenho comprovante de recepção) aprova livros didáticos de Biologia do ensino médio com duas fraudes e várias evidências científicas distorcidas a favor do fato, Fato, FATO da evolução.
Posição mais esdrúxula ainda é a do MEC/SEMTEC/PNLEM que, despudoramente, apesar de ter recebido análise crítica dessas questões em 2003 e 2005 (tenho comprovante de recepção) aprova livros didáticos de Biologia do ensino médio com duas fraudes e várias evidências científicas distorcidas a favor do fato, Fato, FATO da evolução.
Gente, alguém me belisque, mas o que deve ser feito para ver o direito de cidadania em se ter acesso às informações científicas atuais e desmotivadas da ideologia do materialismo filosófico sendo discutidas pública e abertamente nas salas de aulas de ciência, nas universidades e em outros espaços acadêmicos?
Fui, nem sei por que, pensando: Quando a questão é Darwin, o ídolo secular, é tutti cosi nostra, capice? Capice???
