On Mon, 29 Jul 1996, Gary DosSantos wrote:
> Date: Mon, 29 JUL 1996 17:43:43 -0400
> From: Gary DosSantos <dossantos at paprican.ca>
> Newgroups: bionet.molbio.evolution
>> Chris Barry wrote:
> >
> > Funmental wrote:
> > >
> > > Can an organism's mental states (such as ourselves) communicate to our
> > > reproductive cells (egg,sperm) and somehow change the DNA to reflect a
> > > "higher state" that might be transmitted to the next generation?
> >
> > NO!
> >
> > Chris
>> MAYBE! According to Darwin (or, to be more precise, neodarwinist
Come on - get real. This is the most far fetched theory I've ever
heard.
> theory), this type of transmission can not occur. However, the fossil
> record shows species arising quicker than can be explained by descent
> with modification. Darwin knew this, and predicted that these gaps would
> disappear as more and more fossils were uncovered. In fact, there is not
> a single example of intermediate species to be found anywhere among the
> fossils uncovered to date. Does this mean that neodarwinism is wrong?
Precisely - so the evolutionary/speciation model doesn't work - or at
least is not solidly supported by the evidence (or much at all, IMHO).
> No, it just means that it does not explain everything. As far as I know,
> nobody has ever looked for this type of transmission (it's called
> Lamarckian evolution, and is generally frowned upon in evolutionary
> circles).
*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^
* David Beorn, david.beorn at pobox.com (internet) *
* Virginia FREENET *
*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^
~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'~*-,._.,-*~'`^`'
