Q. What other rational theory is there to account for the plant and animal
kingdoms we see today?
A. As I'm a journalist, not a scientist, it isn't my job to provide an
alternative theory. However, I can point to research in other areas that
is customarily ignored or ridiculed.
It is often said that the Lamarckian idea of the inheritance of acquired
characteristics has been long falsified. Although this is true in the gross
sense, there is in fact considerable evidence for such a mechanism at work in
some important matters of detail.
The experiments of Cairns at
Harvard and Hall at Rochester University suggest that microorganisms may
be able to mutate in a way that is beneficial to them, which in turn suggests
some form of direction of evolution.
Experiments with tobacco plants and flax demonstrate genetic
change through the effects of fertilisers alone. Experiments with
sea squirts and salamanders as long ago as the 1920s appeared to demonstrate the
direct inheritance of acquired characteristics.
Several scientists have suggested that evolution may have been
primarily influenced by the influx of microorganisms from space. As Sir
Fred Hoyle has pointed out, Fossil micro-organisms have been found in
meteorites, indicating that life is universal -- not a lucky break in the
primeval soup. This view is shared by Sir Francis Crick, co-discoverer of the
function of DNA.
Just follow link to linux cpanel vps for you
In the light of discoveries of this kind, the received wisdom
of neo-Darwinism is no longer received so uncritically. A new generation of
biologists is subjecting the theory to the cold light of empirical investigation
and finding it inadequate; scientists like Dr Rupert Sheldrake, Dr Brian
Goodwin, professor of biology at theUniversity and Dr Peter Saunders,
professor of mathematics at King's College London.
