I very much enjoyed reading this collection of unique essays which explores, from a geologists’ point of view, few scientific theories that were popular about 40 years ago. All 33 essays are awesome. Essays number 6 (about 'ladder' vs 'bushes' ) and 9 (about Irish Elk) caught my attention with few things that I've never heard about.
In essay number 6, ‘ Bushes and Ladders in Human Evolution’, Gould rejects the “ladder” representation of the human evolution from 'Australopithecus africanus' to 'Homo sapiens' introducing the “bush metaphor” saying that species did not “morphed” into the next one but rather “overlapped in time”-“In this paradigm, speciation – the formation of new species – occurs by branching off from the ancestral stock, while the ancestors continue on. The details of the process are fuzzy, but proponents argue that it almost always occurs in small, isolated populations … in marginal environments …”
Essay number 9,’ The Misnamed, Mistreated, and Misunderstood Irish Elk’ evolves around the extinct Irish Elk known for its super-sized antlers –about 12 feet across a pair. Some scientists were supporting the idea that the antlers were increasing in size ‘ generation after generation’ and because very big antlers would have impeded eventually the Elk's overall function, the species disappeared. Trying to find out if it there is evidence for the ‘allometric’ correlation, Gould gathered specimens, did the measurements , and discovered that antlers were increasing “about two and a half times faster than the rest of the deer.”
“ In spite of this apparent success, Gould remained dissatisfied. Can we really know that
the giant antlers offer no selective advantage?, he asks rhetorically. Darwin …speculated that larger antlers might serve a role in sexual selection (“selected” as attractive by the female), rather than as better armament against predators or rivals. Another possibility, Gould suggests, is that they were used against rivals in “ritual combat” rather than literal combat; … In either case, we cannot dismiss the possibility that the antlers drove the size of the deer, rather than vice versa”