Know Any Evolution Books?

Periannan Senapathy sena at genome.com
Tue Mar 19 17:44:23 EST 1996


Susan Jane Hogarth <sjhogart at unity.ncsu.edu> wrote:
>
> Periannan Senapathy wrote:
> > 
> > I think that you will be interested in a book that I have recently
> > published by the title "Independent Birth of Organisms," in
> > which I propose a new theory as an alternative to the conventional
> > theory of evolution.
> 
> This is very interesting, but I have a few questions.
> 
> > Organisms have not descended from a common ancestor, but
> > rather from millions of independently born organisms, whose
> > genomes were all assembled from a common gene-pool from
> > a single small primordial pond by using the common biochemicals,
> > genes and molecular biological mechanisms. 
> 
> "biological mechanisms"? So these primordial genes were in organisms?

Please note that I said "molecular biological mechanisms."  I meant 
prebiotic molecular mechanisms of DNA coding, DNA-protein 
interactions, and protein/enzyme functionalities.  


> > Computer studies
> > of the genes of animals and plants that are split into exons (coding
> > regions) and introns (junk DNA) show that such genes would
> 
> I object to the term "junk DNA" for introns. I thought there was lots of
> evidence for their function in regulation.

You are not correct in this.  Only very rarely do introns have 
function.

 
> > Modern molecular biology provides ample evidence for the new
> > theory.  Recent discoveries of many unique genes in distinct
> > organisms that are totally absent in other organisms provide the
> > best evidence.
> 
> Example, please? How do we know they aren't present elsewhere?

One example is the blood plasma proteins of the vertebrates 
(more than 600 of them), which are totally absent in all the 
invertebrates.  The proteins of the generically called "blood" 
of different invertebrates have, on the other hand, nothing 
to do with the blood of the vertebrates.  Also, the "blood" 
of the different groups of invertebrates (the creatures 
belonging to the different phyla, for example) are unrelatable.  
Please note that these proteins in the blood (or the circulating 
fluid) of a creature are synthesized by many organs and tissues 
within a creature.  Moreover, the cells and proteins of the immune 
system, blood clotting system, respiratory system, and digestion, 
and preception etc.  are also unrelatable among these distinct 
creatures.  The only way one can explain this scenario of the 
presence of both essentially the same genes and utterly unrelated 
unique genes in widely distinct organisms is by the mechanism of 
the multiple genome assembly from a common pool of genes from a 
primordial pond.  For more details of molecular evidence of my 
theory, please see my book Independent Birth of Organisms, 
page 376-451 (http://www.fullfeed.com/genome/), and my replies 
to the previous Internet discussion (http://www.mattox.com/genome/).

 
> >  The sudden appearance of almost all the distinct organisms
> > belonging to all the different phyla in a geological instant at the
> > base of the Cambrian period, termed the Cambrian Explosion,
> > has not been explainable by the theory of evolution.  The new
> > mechanism in fact predicts this scenario. 
> 
> I'm confused - if "higher taxa" have been around since very early, why
> is there no early fossil record for them? 


Precisely!  Your question is perfectly valid.  Fossil record 
actually shows evidence of the presence of all the higher taxa 
from the very beginning of the multicellular life on earth.  

When signs of multicellular life appear in the fossil record, 
the conventional evolution theory demands that there be only 
one original primitive creature that is supposed to be the 
original ancestor of all life on earth, or, at the most few 
creatures that are similar and related.  But, to the absolute 
contradiction of this thesis, numerous creatures that are 
structurally so unique and unrelated appear almost 
simultaneously at the base of the Cambrian period.  
That is why this phenomenon is termed the Cambrian Explosion.  

As you can see, the fossil record is totally upside down to what 
one would expect based on the conventional theory of evolution.  
For your information, this actually bothered Darwin so much that 
he said in his Origin of Species:

"The case at present must remain inexplicable;  and may be 
truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained." 

Paleontological authorities such as Stephen J Gould have elaborated 
on this extensively.  However, it is amazing that generally 
evolutionists try to ignore this problem and sidestep this whole 
issue.  It makes me wonder if many people who so vigorously defend 
the theory of evolution are "superficial evolutionists" who are 
using incorrect assumptions of facts and truths and are comfortably 
unaware of such details.  Chapter 11 of my book "A New Look at the 
Fossil Record" gives elaborate answers to your question.

I wonder why you have not asked if the organisms belonging to the 
different phyla are really unrelatable.  It will be interesting 
to you to know that this phenomenon of the utter unrelatedness 
of creatures in terms of their organismal structures has been 
known to zoologists and evolutionary biologists for all the time 
since Darwin (see for instance, Mitchell, L. G., Mutchmore, J. A., 
and Dolphin, W. D., 1988,  Zoology, The Benjamin/Cummings, Menlo 
Park; and Futuyma, J. D., 1986, Evolutionary Biology, Sinauer 
Associates, Sunderland, MA).  As you asked, all the phyla 
appeared suddenly in a nearly simultaneous manner during the 
Cambrian explosion which took place in a geological instant.  
But, why all the creatures at the beginning of the appearance 
of multicellular life on earth were so numerous, and so utterly 
unrelated in terms of their organismal structures, so as to be 
classified into the broadest category of all the phyla that are 
ever known?  Evolutionary biologists truly do not have an answer, 
and authorities such as Douglas Futuyma do accept this, although 
they may think that an answer may be found in the future based on 
the theory of evolution.  But, please realize that evolutionary 
biology will never be able to answer these questions.  The only 
way these questions can be answered is by the multiple assembly 
of genomes from a common pool of genes available in a primordial
pond during the time whenever the Cambrian explosion occurred.  
And, this mechanism is able to explain all the major scenario of 
life on earth clearly, without any of the problems that the 
conventional theory of evolution faces.

Regards,

Periannan Senapathy





More information about the Mol-evol mailing list