What do you think?
Rate this book
Explore Evolution: The Arguments For and Against Neo-Darwinism
The purpose of Explore Evolution is to examine the scientific controversy about Darwin's theory, and in particular, the contemporary version of the theory known as neo-Darwinism. Whether you are a teacher, a student, or a parent, this book will help you understand what Darwin's theory of evolution is, why many scientists find it persuasive, and why other scientists question the theory or some key aspects of it. Sometimes, scientists find that the same evidence can be explained in more than one way. When there are competing theories, reasonable people can (and do) disagree about which theory best explains the evidence. Furthermore, in the historical sciences, neither side can directly verify its claims about past events. Fortunately, even though we can't directly verify these claims, we can test them. How? First, we gather as much evidence as possible and look at it carefully. Then, we compare the competing theories in light of how well they explain the evidence. Looking at the evidence and comparing the competing explanations will provide the most reliable path to discovering which theory, if any, gives the best account of the evidence at hand. In science, it is ultimately the evidence-and all of the evidence-that should tell us which theory offers the best explanation. This book will help you explore that evidence, and we hope it will stimulate your interest in these questions as you weigh the competing arguments.
160 pages, Paperback
First published July 1, 2013
4 people are currently reading
390 people want to read
About the author
Stephen C. Meyer
32 books444 followersThere is more than one author with this name in the database.
Dr. Stephen C. Meyer received his Ph.D. from the University of Cambridge in the philosophy of science. A former geophysicist and college professor, he now directs the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute in Seattle. In 2004, Meyer ignited a firestorm of media and scientific controversy when a biology journal at the Smithsonian Institution published his peer-reviewed scientific article advancing intelligent design. Meyer has been featured on national television and radio programs, including The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, CBS’s Sunday Morning, NBC’s Nightly News, ABC’s World News, Good Morning America, Nightline, FOX News Live, and the Tavis Smiley Show on PBS. He has also been featured in two New York Times front-page stories and has garnered attention in other top-national media.
Dr. Stephen C. Meyer received his Ph.D. from the University of Cambridge in the philosophy of science. A former geophysicist and college professor, he now directs the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute in Seattle. In 2004, Meyer ignited a firestorm of media and scientific controversy when a biology journal at the Smithsonian Institution published his peer-reviewed scientific article advancing intelligent design. Meyer has been featured on national television and radio programs, including The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, CBS’s Sunday Morning, NBC’s Nightly News, ABC’s World News, Good Morning America, Nightline, FOX News Live, and the Tavis Smiley Show on PBS. He has also been featured in two New York Times front-page stories and has garnered attention in other top-national media.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews
May 2, 2016
Start Here: Explore Evolution is the place to start if you want to enter into the discussion between the Neo-Darwinists and the Intelligent Design people over the controversial topic of evolution.
The book is well written, organized, and easy to understand.
Evolution is first defined using three ways of using the word then the book is divided into its constituent parts: Universal Common Descent and the "Creative" Power of natural selection in conjunction with random mutations.
The outline of the book looks like this:
Universal Common Descent: Arguments for and Against
Fossil Succession
Anatomical Homology
Molecular Homology
Embryology
Biogeography
The Creative Power of Natural Selection: Arguments for and Against
Natural Selection
Natural Selection and Mutation
A New Challenge: Arguments for and Against
Molecular Machines
Special Studies
Natural Selection as Survival of the Fittest
What Fossils Can't tell You
Conclusion
The Nature of Dissent in Science
The book is well written, organized, and easy to understand.
Evolution is first defined using three ways of using the word then the book is divided into its constituent parts: Universal Common Descent and the "Creative" Power of natural selection in conjunction with random mutations.
The outline of the book looks like this:
Universal Common Descent: Arguments for and Against
Fossil Succession
Anatomical Homology
Molecular Homology
Embryology
Biogeography
The Creative Power of Natural Selection: Arguments for and Against
Natural Selection
Natural Selection and Mutation
A New Challenge: Arguments for and Against
Molecular Machines
Special Studies
Natural Selection as Survival of the Fittest
What Fossils Can't tell You
Conclusion
The Nature of Dissent in Science
March 1, 2025
A WELL-ILLUSTRATED BOOK OF (MOSTLY) ARGUMENTS AGAINST EVOLUTION
The authors wrote in the Preface to this 2007 book, “The approach we are using in this is called ‘enquiry-based’ education. This approach allows you, the student, to follow the process of discovery, deliberation, and argument that scientists use to form their theories… Our goal in using this approach is to expose you to the discoveries, evidence, and arguments that are shaping the current debates over the modern version of Darwin’s theory, and to encourage you to think deeply and critically about them.” (Pg. v)
They continue, “This book is one of the first textbooks ever to use the enquiry-based approach to teach modern evolutionary theory. It does so by examining the current evidence and arguments for and against the key ideas of modern Darwinian theory. We hope examining the evidence and arguments in this book will … help you to evaluate its current status… you will discover that there are, indeed, important scientific controversies about the key claims of evolutionary theory and about the arguments that are used to support them. We have written this book, in part, so that you could learn about the controversial aspects of evolutionary theory that are discussed openly in scientific books and journals but which are not widely reported in textbooks.” (Pg. vi)
They explain, “you should know something about us, the authors. Two of us are biology professors doing research on evolution-related topics. Two of us are philosophers of science who have specialized in studying the logic of evolutionary arguments. One of us is a technical/curriculum writer. All of us happen to have reservations about various aspects of contemporary evolutionary theory, but we all think that students should learn MORE---not less---about this theory than they presently do. So, while we present criticisms of the theory that many biology books don’t present, we also explain and develop the arguments FOR contemporary Darwinian theory in more detail than other standard textbooks.” (Pg. vii)
They add in the Introduction, “The purpose of this book… is to examine the SCIENTIFIC controversy about Darwin’s theory, and in particular, the contemporary version … known as neo-Darwinism. We hope to help you understand what this theory is, why many scientists find it persuasive, and why other scientists question the theory or some key aspects of it.” (Pg. 3)
They assert, “Scientific critics of the Fossil Succession argument doubt that the alleged transitional sequences in the fossil record are really what they appear to be in the textbooks… Some critics are unpersuaded … by the few transitional sequences that have been found… critics argue that we would expect to find… at least a few fossil forms that could be arranged on plausible evolutionary sequences… Is it possible that the mammal-like reptile sequence is a statistical anomaly rather than a legitimate sequence of ancestors and descendants? Another problem is that fossils don’t always appear in the order they’re predicted to by evolution… Many ‘older’ groups of animals… appear above, not below, the supposedly ‘younger’ ones in the fossil record.” (Pg. 27)
They continue, “If one animal… is the forerunner of the next one in line, one might expect to find these fossils in the same geographical location. But we don’t. Instead, the animals in this ‘transitional’ sequence were found far from one another, often separated by thousands of miles of open ocean. Moreover, each individual tetrapod species is typically found in one location---and one location only. This has led some scientists … to wonder if tetrapods may have originated multiple times, independently, in different locations.” (Pg. 28)
They note, “Some exciting fossil finds have revived the hope that the fossil record does, in fact, reveal evidence of Precambrian transitional forms. Four types of fossils of multicellular organisms have been found in a Precambrian stratum called the Vendian layer… Some scientists have suggested that these strange creatures may well be the fossilized precursors that Neo-Darwinists have been looking for. Other scientists contend that the Vendian fossils aren’t much help in explaining the Cambrian explosion. At best, the Vendian creatures might represent ancestral forms of a small fraction of the many new phyla that arise in the Cambrian.” (Pg. 32)
They critique the so-called ‘molecular clock’ theory: “Molecular clock calculations tell how long ago a common ancestor for two or more organisms might have existed---IF one takes for granted that such an organism MUST have existed. But critics say this takes for granted the very point it is supposed to be proving… a logical fallacy called ‘begging the question.’” (Pg. 59)
They admit, “most modern critics of neo-Darwinism accept the idea that all the mockingbirds of the Galapagos have a common ancestor. In their view, the evidence DOES support the idea that the birds have changed in response to their environment… but it does NOT show that all creatures everywhere have a single common ancestor… These scientists accept that plants and animals of the Galapagos were transported or migrated to the islands and then adapted in some ways to their new environment… migration and adaptation does not equal macroevolutionary change.” (Pg. 76)
They point out, “Neo-Darwinists argue that the development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria is a powerful example of random mutations providing a source of new variation. Mutations produce new genetic information upon which natural selection can act. The result is a new, fitter strain of bacteria.” (Pg. 101)
They explain, “geneticist Richard Goldschmidt… coined the term ‘hopeful monster’ ‘to express the idea that mutants producing monstrosities may have played a considerable role in macroevolution.’ Goldschmidt’s ideas did not fare well during his lifetime… More recently, biologists … have suggested that hopeful monsters have a ‘proper place’ in evolutionary theory. But skepticism … persists. Even if the mutants survived… how would they reproduce? With whom would they mate?” (Pg. 107)
They explain Michael Behe’s idea that the bacterial flagellum is ‘irreducibly complex,’ and then add, “biologist Ken Miller… has noted that many of the protein parts we see in flagellar motor are also found in a simpler system---a machine that pumps proteins through the cell wall… Miller says this shows that protein parts from the flagellar motor can perform other functions… that natural selection could have preserved in simpler structures, Such structure might have been co-opted along with other simpler parts to form the motor assembly for the bacterial flagellum.” (Pg, 120)
They continue, “Critics of co-option … argue that even if all the genes for making the individual parts could be brought together in a single bacterium by natural selection, these parts would still have to be assembled in the correct sequence… In other words, even assuming the presence of all the necessary … parts… co-option [must assume]… the pre-existence of another irreducibly complex system…” Pg. 122)
They acknowledge, “The skeletons of mammals and reptiles do appear to have some similarities, and it’s fairly easy to envision a series of intermediates between them… But critics say that … Transforming a reptile into a mammal… would also involve major changes in organs and organ systems… Most reptiles lay eggs, while … mammals carry fertilized eggs … and bear live young… reptiles are cold-blooded… While mammals are warm-blooded…” (Pg. 129)
This book would hardly function as a ‘textbook’ in any ‘non-sectarian’ school, as the argumentation/discussion is only about criticisms of EVOLUTIONARY theory; the alternative to Darwinism---creation/intelligent design theories are never exposed to such critical discussion (e.g., why so many extinct species? How old is the earth? Do you believe in a worldwide Flood?)...
The authors wrote in the Preface to this 2007 book, “The approach we are using in this is called ‘enquiry-based’ education. This approach allows you, the student, to follow the process of discovery, deliberation, and argument that scientists use to form their theories… Our goal in using this approach is to expose you to the discoveries, evidence, and arguments that are shaping the current debates over the modern version of Darwin’s theory, and to encourage you to think deeply and critically about them.” (Pg. v)
They continue, “This book is one of the first textbooks ever to use the enquiry-based approach to teach modern evolutionary theory. It does so by examining the current evidence and arguments for and against the key ideas of modern Darwinian theory. We hope examining the evidence and arguments in this book will … help you to evaluate its current status… you will discover that there are, indeed, important scientific controversies about the key claims of evolutionary theory and about the arguments that are used to support them. We have written this book, in part, so that you could learn about the controversial aspects of evolutionary theory that are discussed openly in scientific books and journals but which are not widely reported in textbooks.” (Pg. vi)
They explain, “you should know something about us, the authors. Two of us are biology professors doing research on evolution-related topics. Two of us are philosophers of science who have specialized in studying the logic of evolutionary arguments. One of us is a technical/curriculum writer. All of us happen to have reservations about various aspects of contemporary evolutionary theory, but we all think that students should learn MORE---not less---about this theory than they presently do. So, while we present criticisms of the theory that many biology books don’t present, we also explain and develop the arguments FOR contemporary Darwinian theory in more detail than other standard textbooks.” (Pg. vii)
They add in the Introduction, “The purpose of this book… is to examine the SCIENTIFIC controversy about Darwin’s theory, and in particular, the contemporary version … known as neo-Darwinism. We hope to help you understand what this theory is, why many scientists find it persuasive, and why other scientists question the theory or some key aspects of it.” (Pg. 3)
They assert, “Scientific critics of the Fossil Succession argument doubt that the alleged transitional sequences in the fossil record are really what they appear to be in the textbooks… Some critics are unpersuaded … by the few transitional sequences that have been found… critics argue that we would expect to find… at least a few fossil forms that could be arranged on plausible evolutionary sequences… Is it possible that the mammal-like reptile sequence is a statistical anomaly rather than a legitimate sequence of ancestors and descendants? Another problem is that fossils don’t always appear in the order they’re predicted to by evolution… Many ‘older’ groups of animals… appear above, not below, the supposedly ‘younger’ ones in the fossil record.” (Pg. 27)
They continue, “If one animal… is the forerunner of the next one in line, one might expect to find these fossils in the same geographical location. But we don’t. Instead, the animals in this ‘transitional’ sequence were found far from one another, often separated by thousands of miles of open ocean. Moreover, each individual tetrapod species is typically found in one location---and one location only. This has led some scientists … to wonder if tetrapods may have originated multiple times, independently, in different locations.” (Pg. 28)
They note, “Some exciting fossil finds have revived the hope that the fossil record does, in fact, reveal evidence of Precambrian transitional forms. Four types of fossils of multicellular organisms have been found in a Precambrian stratum called the Vendian layer… Some scientists have suggested that these strange creatures may well be the fossilized precursors that Neo-Darwinists have been looking for. Other scientists contend that the Vendian fossils aren’t much help in explaining the Cambrian explosion. At best, the Vendian creatures might represent ancestral forms of a small fraction of the many new phyla that arise in the Cambrian.” (Pg. 32)
They critique the so-called ‘molecular clock’ theory: “Molecular clock calculations tell how long ago a common ancestor for two or more organisms might have existed---IF one takes for granted that such an organism MUST have existed. But critics say this takes for granted the very point it is supposed to be proving… a logical fallacy called ‘begging the question.’” (Pg. 59)
They admit, “most modern critics of neo-Darwinism accept the idea that all the mockingbirds of the Galapagos have a common ancestor. In their view, the evidence DOES support the idea that the birds have changed in response to their environment… but it does NOT show that all creatures everywhere have a single common ancestor… These scientists accept that plants and animals of the Galapagos were transported or migrated to the islands and then adapted in some ways to their new environment… migration and adaptation does not equal macroevolutionary change.” (Pg. 76)
They point out, “Neo-Darwinists argue that the development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria is a powerful example of random mutations providing a source of new variation. Mutations produce new genetic information upon which natural selection can act. The result is a new, fitter strain of bacteria.” (Pg. 101)
They explain, “geneticist Richard Goldschmidt… coined the term ‘hopeful monster’ ‘to express the idea that mutants producing monstrosities may have played a considerable role in macroevolution.’ Goldschmidt’s ideas did not fare well during his lifetime… More recently, biologists … have suggested that hopeful monsters have a ‘proper place’ in evolutionary theory. But skepticism … persists. Even if the mutants survived… how would they reproduce? With whom would they mate?” (Pg. 107)
They explain Michael Behe’s idea that the bacterial flagellum is ‘irreducibly complex,’ and then add, “biologist Ken Miller… has noted that many of the protein parts we see in flagellar motor are also found in a simpler system---a machine that pumps proteins through the cell wall… Miller says this shows that protein parts from the flagellar motor can perform other functions… that natural selection could have preserved in simpler structures, Such structure might have been co-opted along with other simpler parts to form the motor assembly for the bacterial flagellum.” (Pg, 120)
They continue, “Critics of co-option … argue that even if all the genes for making the individual parts could be brought together in a single bacterium by natural selection, these parts would still have to be assembled in the correct sequence… In other words, even assuming the presence of all the necessary … parts… co-option [must assume]… the pre-existence of another irreducibly complex system…” Pg. 122)
They acknowledge, “The skeletons of mammals and reptiles do appear to have some similarities, and it’s fairly easy to envision a series of intermediates between them… But critics say that … Transforming a reptile into a mammal… would also involve major changes in organs and organ systems… Most reptiles lay eggs, while … mammals carry fertilized eggs … and bear live young… reptiles are cold-blooded… While mammals are warm-blooded…” (Pg. 129)
This book would hardly function as a ‘textbook’ in any ‘non-sectarian’ school, as the argumentation/discussion is only about criticisms of EVOLUTIONARY theory; the alternative to Darwinism---creation/intelligent design theories are never exposed to such critical discussion (e.g., why so many extinct species? How old is the earth? Do you believe in a worldwide Flood?)...
August 31, 2025
FOSSIL SELECTION
Abrupt appearance
…paleontologists have discovered that new animal forms almost always appear abruptly—not gradually—in the fossil record, without any obvious connections to the animals that came before.
…about 530 million years ago, more than half of the major animal groups (called phyla) appear suddenly in the fossil record.
In biological classification, the term "phylum" (plural: phyla) designates a large group of animals that share a unique or distinctive body plan.
Because this sudden and dramatic appearance occurred in the Cambrian period, palaeontologists now refer to this event as "the Cambrian explosion." Many paleontologists now estimate the Cambrian explosion took place over a period of 10 million years or less.
…many scientists think this geologically sudden appearance of many new life forms contradicts Darwin's prediction that new forms would emerge gradually over vast spans of geological time.
What's true of the phyla (the highest animal classification) is also true of the middle and of many lower classifications. These also appear suddenly. For example, in the Palaeocene epoch (65-55 million years ago), 15 new mammalian orders suddenly enter the fossil record. Scientists call this series of events the "mammalian radiation." Not only do new mammalian orders appear suddenly, but when they appear, they are already separated into their distinctive forms.
Darwin himself said that the pattern of abrupt appearance (his own term), "may be truly urged as a valid argument" against his theory of Common Descent.
The stability of biological forms
…fossil studies reveal that most animal forms remain relatively stable throughout their time on earth. Paleontologists call this stability of form stasis when it occurs at the species level. Paleontologists call this stability of form stasis when it occurs at the species level.
But stability also characterises the body designs of the organisms representing the higher categories of life—the orders, classes and phyla. "Instead of finding the gradual unfolding of life," writes palaeontologist David Raup of the University of Chicago, "what geologists of Darwin's time, and geologists of the present day actually find is a highly uneven or jerky record; that is, species appear in the sequence very suddenly, show little or no change during their existence in the record, then abruptly go out of the record."
The fossil record provides many examples of living organisms that have remained stable in their form and structure over many millions of years—sometimes over hundreds of millions of years. These photos show several examples of such stability over time. The top two sets of pictures compare the internal and external structure of a chambered nautilus shells. The photos on the left show pictures of fossilised nautilus shells from the Devonian period. The photos on the right show modern nautilus shells, virtually unchanged after 400 million years of geologic time. The third set of pictures compares fossilised Ginkgo leaves with modern Ginkgo leaves, showing no change in structure in 135 million years. The final set of pictures is perhaps one of the most dramatic examples. The picture on the left shows a fossilised comb jelly from the Cambrian period, 530 million years ago. The picture on the right shows a modern, living comb jelly at home in the water. The form of the two organisms is identical.
…discontinuity (abrupt appearance, followed by stasis is the prevailing pattern of the fossil record. The transitional forms are the rare exceptions. Even advocates of the Darwinian account acknowledge that the fossil record displays far fewer transitionals than predicted by the theory of Common Descent. For example, in 1982, Oxford University palaeontologist Thomas Kemp noted that, "Indeed, the mammal-like reptile series is the only such major transition in the animal kingdom that is anything like well-documented by an actual fossil record."
NATURAL SELECTION
Artificial selection
No one has ever bred a dog lighter than a few pounds, or heavier than about 150 pounds, despite thousands of years of selective breeding. Critics say that the experimental evidence reveals definite, discoverable limits on what artificial selection can do.
They point out that animal breeders hit limits all the time. Breeders have tried for decades to produce a chicken that will lay more than one egg per day. They have failed. Horse breeders have not significantly increased the running speed of thoroughbreds, despite more than 70 years of trying. Darwin's theory requires that species have an immense capacity to change, but the evidence from breeding experiments shows that there are definite limits to how much a species can change, even when intelligent agents (the breeders) are doing the selection intentionally, trying to maximise certain traits.
Critics point out another problem. Intense programmes of breeding (and inbreeding) frequently increase the organism's susceptibility to disease, and often concentrate defective traits. Breeders working with English bulldogs have strived to produce dogs with large heads. They have succeeded. These bulldogs now have such enormous heads that puppies sometimes have to be delivered by Caesarean section. Newfoundlands and Great Danes are both bred for large size. They now have bodies too large for their hearts and can suddenly drop dead from cardiac arrest. Many Great Danes develop bone cancer, as well. Breeders have tried to maximise the sloping appearance of a German Shepherd's hind legs. As a result, many German Shepherds develop hip dysplasia, a crippling condition that makes it hard for them to walk. When breeders try to force a species beyond its limits, they often create more defects than desirable traits. These defects impose limits on the amount of change that breeders can ultimately produce.
…whether you're talking about artificial selection or about microevolution that occurs naturally, changes in the sub-population take place as genetic information is lost to that population. Here's the rub: producing new organs or new body plans requires new lines of genetic code—more information, not less. Not surprisingly, many scientists argue that small-scale microevolutionary change cannot be extrapolated to explain large-scale macroevolutionary innovation.
Complexity and Molecular Machines
Abrupt appearance
…paleontologists have discovered that new animal forms almost always appear abruptly—not gradually—in the fossil record, without any obvious connections to the animals that came before.
…about 530 million years ago, more than half of the major animal groups (called phyla) appear suddenly in the fossil record.
In biological classification, the term "phylum" (plural: phyla) designates a large group of animals that share a unique or distinctive body plan.
Because this sudden and dramatic appearance occurred in the Cambrian period, palaeontologists now refer to this event as "the Cambrian explosion." Many paleontologists now estimate the Cambrian explosion took place over a period of 10 million years or less.
…many scientists think this geologically sudden appearance of many new life forms contradicts Darwin's prediction that new forms would emerge gradually over vast spans of geological time.
What's true of the phyla (the highest animal classification) is also true of the middle and of many lower classifications. These also appear suddenly. For example, in the Palaeocene epoch (65-55 million years ago), 15 new mammalian orders suddenly enter the fossil record. Scientists call this series of events the "mammalian radiation." Not only do new mammalian orders appear suddenly, but when they appear, they are already separated into their distinctive forms.
Darwin himself said that the pattern of abrupt appearance (his own term), "may be truly urged as a valid argument" against his theory of Common Descent.
The stability of biological forms
…fossil studies reveal that most animal forms remain relatively stable throughout their time on earth. Paleontologists call this stability of form stasis when it occurs at the species level. Paleontologists call this stability of form stasis when it occurs at the species level.
But stability also characterises the body designs of the organisms representing the higher categories of life—the orders, classes and phyla. "Instead of finding the gradual unfolding of life," writes palaeontologist David Raup of the University of Chicago, "what geologists of Darwin's time, and geologists of the present day actually find is a highly uneven or jerky record; that is, species appear in the sequence very suddenly, show little or no change during their existence in the record, then abruptly go out of the record."
The fossil record provides many examples of living organisms that have remained stable in their form and structure over many millions of years—sometimes over hundreds of millions of years. These photos show several examples of such stability over time. The top two sets of pictures compare the internal and external structure of a chambered nautilus shells. The photos on the left show pictures of fossilised nautilus shells from the Devonian period. The photos on the right show modern nautilus shells, virtually unchanged after 400 million years of geologic time. The third set of pictures compares fossilised Ginkgo leaves with modern Ginkgo leaves, showing no change in structure in 135 million years. The final set of pictures is perhaps one of the most dramatic examples. The picture on the left shows a fossilised comb jelly from the Cambrian period, 530 million years ago. The picture on the right shows a modern, living comb jelly at home in the water. The form of the two organisms is identical.
…discontinuity (abrupt appearance, followed by stasis is the prevailing pattern of the fossil record. The transitional forms are the rare exceptions. Even advocates of the Darwinian account acknowledge that the fossil record displays far fewer transitionals than predicted by the theory of Common Descent. For example, in 1982, Oxford University palaeontologist Thomas Kemp noted that, "Indeed, the mammal-like reptile series is the only such major transition in the animal kingdom that is anything like well-documented by an actual fossil record."
NATURAL SELECTION
Artificial selection
No one has ever bred a dog lighter than a few pounds, or heavier than about 150 pounds, despite thousands of years of selective breeding. Critics say that the experimental evidence reveals definite, discoverable limits on what artificial selection can do.
They point out that animal breeders hit limits all the time. Breeders have tried for decades to produce a chicken that will lay more than one egg per day. They have failed. Horse breeders have not significantly increased the running speed of thoroughbreds, despite more than 70 years of trying. Darwin's theory requires that species have an immense capacity to change, but the evidence from breeding experiments shows that there are definite limits to how much a species can change, even when intelligent agents (the breeders) are doing the selection intentionally, trying to maximise certain traits.
Critics point out another problem. Intense programmes of breeding (and inbreeding) frequently increase the organism's susceptibility to disease, and often concentrate defective traits. Breeders working with English bulldogs have strived to produce dogs with large heads. They have succeeded. These bulldogs now have such enormous heads that puppies sometimes have to be delivered by Caesarean section. Newfoundlands and Great Danes are both bred for large size. They now have bodies too large for their hearts and can suddenly drop dead from cardiac arrest. Many Great Danes develop bone cancer, as well. Breeders have tried to maximise the sloping appearance of a German Shepherd's hind legs. As a result, many German Shepherds develop hip dysplasia, a crippling condition that makes it hard for them to walk. When breeders try to force a species beyond its limits, they often create more defects than desirable traits. These defects impose limits on the amount of change that breeders can ultimately produce.
…whether you're talking about artificial selection or about microevolution that occurs naturally, changes in the sub-population take place as genetic information is lost to that population. Here's the rub: producing new organs or new body plans requires new lines of genetic code—more information, not less. Not surprisingly, many scientists argue that small-scale microevolutionary change cannot be extrapolated to explain large-scale macroevolutionary innovation.
Complexity and Molecular Machines
October 18, 2010
Buku ini menjelaskan teori evolusi Darwin secara lengkap, dari ide-ide awal menuju neo-Darwin. Setiap ide evolusi dihadapkan dengan bantahan dari penolak ide evolusi. Saya katakan ide-ide, karena pada dasarnya teori evolusi terdiri dari beberapa ide besar.
Sebagai orang awam, buku ini membantu menjelaskan ide teori evolusi yang sepertinya banyak dipahami sepotong2 dan tidak utuh. Saya jadi paham bahwa ide teori evolusi yang sebelumnya saya tahu itu tidak benar.
Pada bagian akhir juga dijelaskan bahwa posisi banyak ilmuwan biologi yang tidak tunggal terhadap ide-ide teori evolusi. Mendukung ide yang satu tapi menolak ide yang lain, berdasarkan bukti-bukti yang mereka temukan dan pahami.
Karena dijelaskan dengan bahasa yang relatif populer, sangat dianjurkan buat kalangan awam seperti saya.
Sebagai orang awam, buku ini membantu menjelaskan ide teori evolusi yang sepertinya banyak dipahami sepotong2 dan tidak utuh. Saya jadi paham bahwa ide teori evolusi yang sebelumnya saya tahu itu tidak benar.
Pada bagian akhir juga dijelaskan bahwa posisi banyak ilmuwan biologi yang tidak tunggal terhadap ide-ide teori evolusi. Mendukung ide yang satu tapi menolak ide yang lain, berdasarkan bukti-bukti yang mereka temukan dan pahami.
Karena dijelaskan dengan bahasa yang relatif populer, sangat dianjurkan buat kalangan awam seperti saya.
August 5, 2016
A helpful overview of the sub components of the neo-Darwinian theory and difference amongst evolutionists themselves as well as design evidence.
June 25, 2019
OK if you want to understand how Intelligent Design proponents view things. Typical of ID, it cherry picks info.
November 13, 2023
I enjoyed reading both arguments for and against neo-darwinism. To me, some of the authors' bias is evident, but it was still very informational instead of trying to convince you one way or the other.
June 28, 2014
"Explore Evolution" aims to present the current arguments for and against universal common descent. It looks at several topics (such as fossil succession, anatomical homology, embryology, and complex cells) and offers a case for and a case against for each. The information presented within the book isn't enough to come to allow any final conclusions but is useful for introducing the debate.
March 26, 2016
Excellent book. I felt it dealt fairly with both sides.
Displaying 1 - 9 of 9 reviews