These include:
- The survival of the fittest
- That might makes right
-Evolution proceeds by “chance mutation.”
-Materialistic rationalism as the ultimate ideal of what is possible
-And the complete ridicule of the idea that there could be any organizing intelligence in Nature.
This is all happening because mainstream scientists around the world claim that Darwin's On The Origin Of Species, is the most significant book of the last two centuries. Published on November 24, 1859, its main thesis states: “individuals having any advantage, however slight, over others, would have the best chance of surviving and of procreating their kind. On the other hand, we may feel sure that any variation in the least degree injurious would be rigidly destroyed. This preservation of favorable variations and the rejection of injurious variations, I call Natural Selection.”
But lets look at the fallacies laid out in this book and ongoing Darwinian theory.
Charles Darwin, The Man
"A great man of science ... knows everything about everything, except why a hen's egg does not turn into a crocodile and two or three other little things." -Charles Kingsley, The Water Babies
In 1835 Charles Darwin, age 26, set out on the HSS Beagle for a species collecting expedition around South America. On board he read for amusement an essay by the clergyman, Thomas Malthus: "Principle of Population” It said: "Animals have a fearsome fecundity. No matter how fast the food supply went up, the supply of eaters went up faster. The result was a population, which was ultimately controlled by starvation." To the young Darwin this meant, that there would be a continuous struggle among the eaters for the available food. Only the strongest therefore would survive. Darwin said, "… it at once struck me that under these circumstances favorable variations would tend to be preserved and unfavorable ones to be destroyed. The result would be the formation of new species.”
Adaptation Not
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge” -Daniel J.Boorstin
Unfortunately for Darwin no real science has yet been developed to explain how one species becomes another. In fact what we call Darwinian evolution are theories of a science based on assumed facts. I hope to demonstrate that Darwin utterly failed to do what his famous treatise proposed: discover “the origin of species”.
Variations through adaptation certainly occur, but in the thousands of cases studied no new species has emerged despite the enormous variety of adapted mechanisms. Microbiologist James Shapiro writes: “In fact, there are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of any fundamental biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations. It is remarkable that Darwinism is accepted as a satisfactory explanation for such a vast subject –“Evolution”- with so little rigorous examination of how well its basic thesis works in illuminating specific instances of biological adaptation or diversity.” [Narby]
Biologists also fail to explain why the phenotype (the physical appearance) of some species can vary widely while the genotype (the core genetics) remains relatively constant. The most obvious example is the range of morphology that exists in the canine family. Dogs from Chihuahuas to Great Danes are all part of the same breed able population, called a species. In this case of these two canine types, breeding is possible but not advisable. William Bateson (father to Gregory) concluded in 1922: "In dim outline, evolution is evident enough, but that particular and essential bit of the theory of evolution which is concerned with [the] origin and nature of species remains utterly mysterious." [Taylor]
The Fittest
“Science is the art of creating suitable illusions, which the fool enjoys or argues against, but the wise man enjoys for their beauty or ingenuity, without being blind to the fact that they are human veils and curtains concealing the abysmal darkness of the unknowable.” ~ Carl Jung.
Another fallacious assumption of Darwin’s was that the members of the same species would be in competition for food sources. This would eliminate the less efficient individuals producing a stronger species. He stated this formally in Origins: "As many more individuals of each species are born than can possibly survive; and as consequently, there is a frequently recurring struggle for existence, it follows that any being, if it varies, however slightly, in a manner profitable to itself, under the complex and sometimes varying conditions of life will have a better chance of surviving and thus be naturally selected. “
He failed to realize that “competition for survival” is not always the case and that many species develop mechanisms to avoid it; such as specialization within an environment or the defining of territories. The example of wolves show that they hunt in packs and share the kill. [Taylor, p31] It is a group effort that brings down the prey. Darwinism rests upon a survivalist mentality, rather than the weight of true scientific evidence.
In addition natural selection does not explain how occasionally a breakthrough into a new niche or a new mode of adaptation takes place. Why would the ancestors of dolphins and whale would return back to the seas? In their absurd position modern biology finds itself in by adhering to Darwin’s false beliefs that "the diversity of life is inconceivable". [Taylor]
Chance- Neo-Darwinism and Its Flaws
There is no such thing as chance and what we regard as blind circumstance actually stems from the deepest source of all.”- Friedrich von Schiller, The Death of Wallenstein
Evolutionists who have that built theories upon Darwin’s are called Neo-Darwinists. One of their foundational ideas is that variations occur by chance. While it is not difficult to believe that small changes might have occur this way, it is difficult to believe that a structure as complex as the eye came about in that way. Darwin himself said, "When I think of the eye, I shudder.”
But this theory of chance has led such well-known Neos such as Stephen Jay Gould to decree that the creation of life has been “a glorious accident;” meaning that life on earth was a freakish happen stance. Accordingly it is unlikely to have occurred and unlikely that it could ever occur again. This leaves no room for understanding how the subtle complexity of organic molecular such as amino acid chains, that form the building block of life, could ever nave been created. By believing in this factor of chance mutation cosmologist, Fred Hoyle responded by saying, "this is as likely as a wind blowing through a junkyard assembling a Boeing 707." Noble prize laureate Albert Szent- Gyorgyi observed that biological reactions are chain reactions where organic molecules fit together more precisely than the cogwheels of a Swiss watch. In 1974 he said that if evolution could be improved by random mutations: “sounds to me like saying that you could improve a Swiss watch by dropping it …”[Ferguson] In The Great Evolution Mystery author Gordon Rattray Taylor concludes: "If the basic assumption that evolutionary variety depends on chance is proven false then the lynch pin of Darwin's theory is gone" [Taylor]
To think that change in generations of organisms occurs only due to internal random mutations constitute implies that individual life-forms exist in a vacuum not as a whole fabric of an overall ecology. This idea began to be challenged in the 1960s. Anthropologist Gregory Bateson realized that evolution was not a matter of the survival of the fittest but the survival of the organism-in-the-environment. Around the same time General Systems Theory was affirming “you cannot understand a cell, a rat, a brain structure, a family, or a culture if you isolate from its context. Relationship is everything.” [Ferguson] Emerging out of this thinking came the Gaia theory where evolution was seen as the total ecology of “world-as-organism.”
Consequently Darwin’s evolution provides no reliable vision of the future and any patterns that may appear are merely speculative. According to scientific philosopher Alfred N. Whitehead, “There can be no living science unless there is a widespread instinctive conviction in the existence of an order of nature.” General System theorists, such as Ludwig von Bertalanffy, understood that there must be principle of wholeness and self-organization at all level of existence. [Ferguson] This is a primary point missed by Darwinians. For evolution appears to be fueled by an innate intelligence of life moving towards greater wholeness in recognizing change in the world around it. As change occurs, greater awareness is achieved and this gives birth to more sophisticated forms to house the greater perception.
Increased awareness of the environment is the key to a more successful survival. Pierre Teilhard de Chardin said, “Evolution [is] ever more perfect eyes in a world in which there is always more to see." He called this the Law of Complexity-Consciousness and said, "Evolution proceeds in the direction of increasing complexity which is accompanied by a corresponding rise in consciousness."
Fractal Evolution
"We are all interdependent hordes of living-on- and being-lived-on-beings in a great partnership of evolution together to share information and perception to create a community of cells.” -Lewis Thomas, The Lives of the Cell,
By using the work of cellular biologist Bruce Lipton, former professor at Stanford University, I will show that the patterns of evolution are not created by chance. They are based upon a fractal configuration of nature. Lipton and others, say that evolution is a two-step process going from the One to the Many. This progresses in ongoing levels of development: from cell to multi-cellular organism and into social organizations.
First Lipton defines evolution as “ the gaining of greater awareness. At the most fundamental physical level of a single cell we can see that awareness is defined by a protein like protuberance coming off the membrane called a receptor site. Receptors like sense organs are interfaces between the outer and inner environments. They survey the environment and feed information back to the rest of the cell. It lets the organism know that if something is harmful- move away from it; or if something is beneficial -move towards it. There is only one site for each stimulus in the environment and they can only exist in a single layer. The more receptor sites the greater the awareness of the environment and the more survival is assured. But there is a limit to the amount of receptor sites a cell can have, because if the membrane were to get too big it would rip open, the cytoplasm would pore out and the cell would die.
There is however an overriding drive in the mechanism of life is to gain more awareness. But how could a cell membrane of limited size increase awareness? The inventive novelty of nature is seen in this first steps of evolution, which is a complete departure from Darwinian theory: Simple cells, having no internal structures, grouped themselves together to form colonies to increase their collective awareness. The naturalist Luther Burbank hinting towards the idea of synergy in the early part of the 20th century said: “When simple cells joined together, they exhibited organizing forces in new directions which were impossible for individual cells.”
The second step in this fractal evolution was even more revolutionary: the many cells of the colony merged in singularity; the membrane folded inwards to increase receptor capacity. In other words the cells incorporated. Different cells specialized in a certain types of awareness and formed organelles, little organs inside the cell wall. Organelles have their own DNA and small membranes with receptors that encase their operations within their own cell wall. This created a new oneness in the form of a complex single cell, known as eukaryotic cells. On the cellular level the survival of the group became more important than the survival of the individual.
The next development was to go from a single eukaryote to many grouped together to form another level of complexity; and eventually create the single a multi-cellular organism. And life proceeded from many to one to many, etc…
The Earth Membrane and Humanity
"Viewed from space, the astonishing thing about the earth is it aliveness. Aloft and floating, it lives beneath a moist gleaming membrane of bright blues swirling whites. It takes a membrane to be able to hold out against equilibrium, strive against entropy and filter and maintain perception." ~ Lewis Thomas
In 1830, Francis Galton, a biologist and a relative of Charles Darwin, wrote: "Our part in the universe may be analogous to the cells in an organized body and our personality may be essentially elements of an immortal and cosmic mind." In 1993, Lipton said, “Humans are the functional equivalent of the glycoproteins [receptors] on the surface of the membrane of this giant cell [the earth]. We are the receptors and effectors that are capable of responding to the universe's signal and effecting change for the planet.”
For the cable program New Realities, Lipton laid out the next phase of our evolution.
To see this clip of the interview go to:
Dim lights
Below is the transcript:
Alan Steinfeld: As organisms, we have developed from the organelles of cells to the organs of animals to the organizations of cultures. Human development has now covered the planet with a web of ideas. What is the next phase of evolution for the individual?
Bruce Lipton: Our evolution is not with the individual. We already have all the information capacity that we are capable of dealing with as individuals. Our evolution is the evolution of community. In reality, I am a bustling community of 50 billion single cells sharing organization in a community of cells to create a larger entity that will have a greater life.
The human body is a cell that exists as a community of cells functioning as a single unit. No matter how complex we are, there are no new functions in my human body that is not already present in a single cell. The human is a reiteration of a cell. A community of humans is like a multi-cellular organism that came together to share awareness to make a new whole.
We human beings are each individuals cells coming together to form a community to share awareness to create one living organism called humanity. We are not humans until we create Humanity. This is when we all recognize that we are all cells in the same living organism working in a coherent capacity. When we come together as a one, we have created the next level of evolution. When humanity is complete, the earth as an organism completes its evolution as a living, breathing, pulsing being — Gaia. This completion as a single unit is equivalent, on a fractal level, to the completion of the single cell.
AS: Julian Huxley said, "Humanity is nothing else than evolution becoming conscious of itself."
BL: The internet is an evolutionary leap. It is the equivalent of the communication system by which all the cells of my body are coherent. So now we have the ability for all the cells in our new human organization — humanity to communicate with each other and share information, which is why the cells came together in the first place.
AS: So what is next step?
BL: You tell me! According to this pattern, when the cohesive functional unit like the single cell was complete in its evolution, what was its next phase of evolution?
AS: To hook up with other complete cells to form a greater multi-cellular organism.
BL: Right. And when humans are complete in their evolution as individuals, what was their next step?
AS: To hook up with other humans and form communities.
BL: So when the earth completes its evolution with humans, coming together as humanity, functioning as coherent unique receptor sites, what is the next phase?
AS: To hook up with other ones?
BL: Yes! When we as humanity are at the level of a unity, with a single voice, that will allow us to speak as a one. And that will allow us to speak with other Ones.
AS: Ah ha! Thank you.
At that point in the interview I had an epiphany. I realized, that we absolutely need to know we are all equal parts in a greater living being. Then we can unite as conscious elements to share awareness for the common benefit of a planetary civilization.
We are this juncture in our collective evolution. We are the fingertips of consciousness reaching out in novel directions to bring greater awareness to our common perception. We can come together as another singularity of a whole planet, evolve out of our cosmic isolation and establish relationships with other Ones. The theoretical physicist Nassim Harremin says: “The level of consciousness of a civilization is always equal to their capacity to reach new fractal scales of relationship to their world.” It is only in our unity that we will formally meet the other planetary civilizations, become part of the greater galactic community and rise to the next level of our fractal evolution. Author Yatri, says, “Evolution is simply the way home…the ultimate aim of evolution is for Existence to re-awaken as Primal Consciousness, having tasted the novelty of creation.
References:
Darwin, Charles, On the Origin of Species by Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life, 1859
de Chardin, Pierre Teilhard, The Phenomenon of Man
Ferguson, M. (1980). The Aquarian Conspiracy. Los Angeles: J.P. Tarcher, Inc.
Gould, S. J. (1977). Ever Since Darwin. New York: W. W. Norton.
Harremin, Nassim (2007) Crossing the Event Horizon, Google video.
Hoyle, Fred, The Cosmic Life Force, Paragon House, New York, 1988
Lipton, Bruce H. The Biology of Belief, website: http://www.brucelipton.com
Lipton, Bruce H. (2001, October). The Human Genome Project, The Golden Thread magazine. vol. 1, no. 3
Knowles, A. (1994, July). Evolution issue. Natural History Magazine. New York: Museum of Natural History.
New Realities interview: Alan Steinfeld with Bruce LiptoN (2000): www.newrealities.com
Narby, Jeremy, The Cosmic Serpent, page142 quotes James Shapiro, National Review; vol.16, September, 1996, p62-65
Smith, John Maynard, The Problems of Biology, Hoyle's quote, page 49.
Taylor, Gordon Rattray, The Great Evolution Mystery, Harper & Rowe, New York, 1993.
Thomas, Lewis (1975). The Lives of a Cell. New York: Bantam Books.
New Realities Sponsors
