-
Очень хочешь возразить,
но возразить нечем.
Не теряйся, спроси,
-А, ты кто такой?! -
Разоблачим предметно наглую ложь эволюционистов что теория Дарвина и СТЭ отличается ( хотя это так же "забывают " и говорят от имении Дарвина ).
Ливио Марио
От Дарвина до Эйнштейна
Как мутация тонет в болоте нормы. От Дарвина до Эйнштейна [Величайшие ошибки гениальных ученых, которые изменили наше понимание жизни и вселенной]
Дженкин приводил глуповатые раситкие примеры что скрывают эволюционистыДженкин настаивал на том, что даже при самом жестком отборе нельзя ожидать полной трансформации установившихся признаков вроде цвета кожи, если новый признак появился в популяции всего один раз. Чтобы показать, как мутация тонет среди множества нормальных особей, Дженкин привел скандальный, неполиткорректный по нашим меркам пример: белый человек, наделенный множеством превосходящих признаков, в результате кораблекрушения оказывается на острове, населенном исключительно неграми. Расистский и империалистический тон этого пассажа в наши дни звучит попросту мерзко, зато по нему, пожалуй, можно изучать настроения, царившие в обществе конца викторианской эпохи: даже если этот человек «в борьбе за существование перебьет множество негров», у него будет «очень много жен и детей» и «в первом поколении появятся десятки смышленых юных мулатов», пишет Дженкин, «разве можно рассчитывать, что население всего острова в конечном итоге сделается белым или даже желтым?»
Так что успокойся болтун
И все же как-то не верится, чтобы Дарвин до прочтения статьи Дженкина совсем не задумывался о том, что любые «отклонения» должны раствориться в популяции. Конечно, задумывался. Еще в 1842 году, за четверть века до публикации рецензии Дженкина, Дарвин отмечал: «Если бы в какой-нибудь стране или округе все животные одного вида имели возможность беспрепятственно скрещиваться, любая мелкая тенденция к вариативности сталкивалась бы с постоянным противодействием»[61]. На самом деле Дарвин даже в некотором смысле опирался[62] на то, что эффект растворения мутации способствует сохранению однородности популяции, поскольку отдельные особи имеют тенденцию отступать от нормы из-за вариаций. Почему же он так и не понял, как трудно будет особи с «отклонениями» (отдельному мутанту) бороться с усредняющей силой смешивания наследственных признаков?Таким образом задолго до Дженкина Дарвин говорил об этомза четверть века до публикации рецензии Дженкина, Дарвин отмечал: «Если бы в какой-нибудь стране или округе все животные одного вида имели возможность беспрепятственно скрещиваться, любая мелкая тенденция к вариативности сталкивалась бы с постоянным противодействием»
Но так же он знал о НЕ смешении признака
.
В одном месте в «Происхождении видов» Дарвин отмечает:
«Когда признак, исчезнувший у данной породы, появляется вновь после длинного ряда поколений, нельзя предполагать, что будто одна особь внезапно уродилась в предка, отдаленного от нее несколькими сотнями поколений: наиболее вероятной будет гипотеза о том, что в каждом последующем поколении данный признак таился в скрытом состоянии и только в силу неизвестных благоприятных условий, наконец, развился[63].»
«
и он тоже горох скрещивал как Мендель
Особенно отчетливо Дарвин выразил свои атомистические и, в сущности, менделевские идеи наследственности в переписке с Уоллесом в 1866 году. В письме, написанном 22 января, он отмечает: «Я знаю довольно много вариаций их следует называть именно так потомство которых представляет собой не смесь, не нечто среднее, а похоже на кого-то одного из родителей»[70].Более того, это как раз Мендель это последователь ДарвинаПриведу пример. Я скрестил душистый горошек сортов «Нарядная дама» и «Пурпур» окраска у этих вариаций сильно различается и получил из одного стручка потомство обеих вариаций в чистом виде и ничего промежуточного. Мне думается, что-то в этом роде должно было произойти и с вашими бабочками и тремя разновидностями дербенника, и хотя эти случаи кажутся такими удивительными, я не думаю, что это более удивительно, что то, что каждая особь женского пола в мире производит потомство женского и мужского пола и ничего промежуточного[72].»
И вот самая главная ложь эволюционистов Дарвин ссылается на Дженкина и видимИтак, Дарвин явно был недостаточно знаком с трудами Менделя[78] зато очевидно, что теории Дарвина сильно повлияли на идеи Менделя, правда, уже позднее 18541855 годов, когда Мендель начал свои эксперименты с горошком. У Менделя было второе немецкое издание «Происхождения видов», вышедшее в 1863 году.
Видите люди добрые как нас нагло обманывают эволюционисты !Глава IV ЕСТЕСТВЕННЫЙ ОТБОР, ИЛИ ВЫЖИВАНИЕ НАИБОЛЕЕ ПРИСПОСОБЛЕННОГО
Должно заметить, что в предшествующем примере я говорю о самых легкоподвижных особях волков, а не о сохранении какой-нибудь сильно выраженной вариации. В предшествующих изданиях этого сочинения я иногда выражался так, как будто бы такой выбор часто встречался. Я видел важное значение индивидуальных различий, и это привело меня v. обстоятельному обсуждению последствий бессознательного отбора, осуществляемого человеком и зависящего от сохранения все более или менее ценных особей и истребления худших. Для меня было также ясно, что сохранение в естественном состоянии какого-либо случайного уклонения в строении, такого, как уродство, происходит нечасто, и если даже первоначально оно сохраняется, то затем оно обычно утрачивается вследствие последующего скрещивания с обыкновенными особями. Тем не менее пока я не прочитал талантливой и ценной статьи в «North British Review» {1867), я не оценивал вполне, как редко могли сохраняться в потомстве единичные вариации, независимо от того, слабо или сильно они выражены. Автор берет случай, когда пара животных производит в течение своей жизни 200 детенышей, из числа которых, вследствие истребления различными причинами, только два в среднем выживают и оставляют по себе потомство. Это, пожалуй, крайняя оценка для большинства высших животных, но никак не для многих низших организмов. Он показывает далее, что если бы родилась одна особь, изменившаяся таким образом, что ее шанс на жизнь удвоился бы по сравнению с шансами других особей, то вероятность ее выживания была бы совершенно ничтожной. Но допустим, что она выживет и оставит потомство, половина которого унаследует благоприятную вариацию; тем не менее, продолжает автор, это молодое поколение будет иметь только немного большую возможность выживания и размножения, и эта возможность будет все более уменьшаться в последующих поколениях. Справедливость этих замечаний, мне кажется, нельзя оспаривать. Если бы, например, какая-нибудь птица могла легче добывать себе пищу, обладая искривленным клювом, и если бы родилась птица с сильно искривленным клювом, которая и благоденствовала бы поэтому, то все же была бы крайне малая вероятность того, что эта форма, представленная единственной особью, закрепится и полностью вытеснит основную форму; судя же по тому, что происходит, при доместикации едва ли можно сомневаться, что этот результат получится, если множество особей с более или менее сильно изогнутыми клювами будут сохраняться в течение мнотих поколений, а еще большее число особей с самыми прямыми клювами будет подвергаться истреблению.
He then shows that if a single individual were born, which varied in some manner,
giving it twice as good a chance of life as that of the other individuals, yet the chances would be strongly against its survival.
Supposing it to survive and to breed,
and that half its young inherited the favourable variation ; still, as the Reviewer goes on to show, the young would have only a slightly better chance of surviving and breeding
Дарвин ссылается на Дженкина но (!) видит проблему в самой мендлеевской наследственности !
Ибо половина наследует, а половина нет, а не смешение !Комментарий
-
"Давайте учиться иметь свое мнение, давайте не будем повторять чужое."
Виктор СуворовКомментарий
-
Открыл ли Дарвин борьбу за существование и естественный отбор ?
относительно struggle for existence
в принципе это банальная экология
Ecology - Wikipedia
И вообще известна давно
Ecological concepts such as food chains, population regulation, and productivity were first developed in the 1700s, through the published works of microscopist Antoni van Leeuwenhoek (16321723) and botanist Richard Bradley (1688?1732).[6] Biogeographer Alexander von Humboldt (17691859) was an early pioneer in ecological thinking and was among the first to recognize ecological gradients, where species are replaced or altered in form along environmental gradients, such as a cline forming along a rise in elevation
Это так же известная концепция ГоббсаThe concept of a struggle for existence goes back to antiquity: Heraclitus of Ephesus wrote of struggle being the father of everything, and Aristotle in his History of Animals observed that "There is enmity between such animals as dwell in the same localities or subsist on the same food. If the means of subsistence run short, creatures of like kind will fight together."[9] From translations, the 9th century Arabic scholar Al-Jahiz apparently listed ways in which animals "can not exist without food, neither can the hunting animal escape being hunted in his turn"
In his Leviathan of 1651, Thomas Hobbes described vividly an unbridled human struggle over resources, a "war of every man against every man" if unrestrained by state power.[11] This was the doctrine of bellum omnium contra omnes.[12]
Это рассматривалось в Естественной теологии
И там была теория благого баланса the benign balance
struggle for existence
Natural theology continued an earlier theme of harmonious balance between plants and animals. In the late 18th century, naturalists saw the struggle for existence as part of an ordered balance of nature, but they increasingly recognised the fierceness of struggle and the fossil record shook ideas of permanent harmony. Carl Linnaeus saw an overall benign balance, but also showed calculations of the Earth quickly filling with one species if it reproduced unchecked,[17] and referred to "bellum omnium perpetuum in omnes, et horrenda laniena" (a perpetual war of all against all, and horrible massacre).
Но уже Линней не отрицая a benign balance говорит "войне всех и ужасной резне", но в целом видит в ней пользу для the balance.
Но именно fossil record палеонтологическая летопись пошатнула Веру в благой баланс природы the benign balance
the struggle for existence использовал либеральный Британский философ
"не борьба но конкуренция на выборах"
Дед Дарвина говорил о природе как "большой скотобойне мира войны "The term struggle for existence was already in use by this time.[17] For example, in 1790 Jeremy Bentham proposed reformed elections as "a contest for distinction, not a struggle for existence",[21]
In a House of Lords speech on 2 November 1797, Lord Gwydir said they were engaged "in a struggle for existence as a nation" in the French Revolutionary Wars.[23]
Конечно демограф МальтусErasmus Darwin in his Temple of Nature (published 1803) returned to Linnaean imagery, "From Hunger's arms the shafts of Death are hurl'd; And one great Slaughter‐house the warring world
И вот геолог Лайель ссылается на ДекандоляIn An Essay on the Principle of Population, Thomas Robert Malthus argues that a population will increase exponentially if unchecked, while resources will only increase arithmetically.[3]
The checks that exist on the human population growth result in a struggle for existence.
In 1832, Augustin Pyramus de Candolle concisely described the struggle between species of plants in a chapter about parasitism. His friend Charles Lyell quoted this passage in the second volume of Principles of Geology:[28]
"All the plants of a given country," says Decandolle in his usual spirited style, "are
at war one with another. The first which establish themselves by chance in a particular spot, tend, by the mere occupancy of space, to exclude other speciesthe greater choke the smaller, the longest livers replace those which last for a shorter period, the more prolific gradually make themselves masters of the ground, which species multiplying more slowly would otherwise fill."
Особенно впечатляет
the greater choke the smaller
choke
И
"the more prolific gradually make themselves masters of the ground, which species multiplying more slowly would otherwise fill."
Наиболее плодовитые наследуют землю
И вот что важно у Лайель struggle for existence МЕШАЕТ эволюции
А Ламарк фактически спасал natural theology идеей эволюции ибо виды тогда НЕ вымирают
Дарвин же верил тогда в гармонию природы (!)In this volume, Lyell strongly defended his view that species were fixed against ideas of transmutation of species. To explain adaptation, Lamarck proposed that species did not become extinct, but constantly transformed to suit a changing environment: Lyell believed in essentialism in which species were fixed so could not adapt to change, and became extinct.[29] Hybrids had been proposed as evidence of transmutation, Lyell argued that they would not survive to make new species[30]
If we consider the vegetable kingdom generally, it must be recollected, that even of the seeds which are well ripened, the greater part are either eaten by insects, birds, and other animals, or decay for want of room and opportunity to germinate. Unhealthy plants are the first which are cut off by causes prejudicial to the species, being usually stifled by more vigorous individuals of their own kind. If, therefore, the relative fecundity or hardiness of hybrids be in the least degree inferior, they cannot maintain their footing for many generations, even if they were ever produced beyond one generation in a wild state. In the universal struggle for existence, the right of the strongest eventually prevails; and the strength and durability of a race depends mainly on its prolificness, in which hybrids are acknowledged to be deficient.
Эту книгу я приводил ранееCharles Darwin initially shared the belief that nature was perfect and harmonious:[2] after graduating as a student at the University of Cambridge in 1831, he was convinced by William Paley's Natural Theology or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity which saw adaptation as purposeful design and presented population pressure optimistically; "it is a happy world after all".[31]
И принял что struggle for existence СОХРАНЯЕТ виды.
Правда они могли вымереть
Кроме того, они таки появлялись в летописи fossil recordBy mid January 1832, early in the Beagle voyage, Darwin saw geology from Charles Lyell's viewpoint. When the second volume of Lyell's Principles of Geology was delivered to the Beagle that November, Darwin accepted its argument that the "struggle for existence" disproved transmutation of species. He was reminded of Malthusianism when his sisters sent him out pamphlets by Harriet Martineau.[32]
да и на островах
Lyell had been unable to show the mechanism for introducing new species, and towards the end of the voyage Darwin noted that the distribution of mockingbirds found on the Galápagos Islands raised doubts that species were fixed."
Роль Мальтуса
"Кроме того, термин survival of the fittest взят из военной социологии СпенсераFrom Malthus, Darwin claims that the idea of a struggle for existence allowed him to see that favorable variations would be preserved while unfavorable variations would not resulting in the evolution new species
"
Survival of the fittest - Wikipedia
Herbert Spencer coined the phrase "survival of the fittest".
"Survival of the fittest" is a phrase that originated from Darwinian evolutionary theory as a way of describing the mechanism of natural selection. The biological concept of fitness is defined as reproductive success. In Darwinian terms the phrase is best understood as "Survival of the form that will leave the most copies of itself in successive generations."
Herbert Spencer first used the phrase, after reading Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species, in his Principles of Biology (1864), in which he drew parallels between his own economic theories and Darwin's biological ones: "This survival of the fittest, which I have here sought to express in mechanical terms, is that which Mr. Darwin has called 'natural selection', or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life."[1]
Darwin responded positively to Alfred Russel Wallace's suggestion of using Spencer's new phrase "survival of the fittest" as an alternative to "natural selection", and adopted the phrase in The Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication published in 1868.[1][2] In On the Origin of Species, he introduced the phrase in the fifth edition published in 1869,[3][4] intending it to mean "better designed for an immediate, local environment".[5][6]
In the first four editions of On the Origin of Species, Darwin had used the phrase "natural selection".[8] In Chapter 4 of the 5th edition of The Origin published in 1869,[3] Darwin implies again the synonym: "Natural Selection, or the Survival of the Fittest".[4]By "fittest" Darwin meant "better adapted for the immediate, local environment", not the common modern meaning of "in the best physical shape" (think of a puzzle piece, not an athlete).[5] In the introduction he gave full credit to Spencer, writing "I have called this principle, by which each slight variation, if useful, is preserved, by the term Natural Selection, in order to mark its relation to man's power of selection. But the expression often used by Mr. Herbert Spencer of the Survival of the Fittest is more accurate, and is sometimes equally convenient."[9]
In The Man Versus The State, Spencer used the phrase in a postscript to justify a plausible explanation of how his theories would not be adopted by "societies of militant type". He uses the term in the context of societies at war, and the form of his reference suggests that he is applying a general principle.[10]
"Thus by survival of the fittest, the militant type of society becomes characterized by profound confidence in the governing power, joined with a loyalty causing submission to it in all matters whatever".[11]Комментарий
-
"Давайте учиться иметь свое мнение, давайте не будем повторять чужое."
Виктор СуворовКомментарий
-
О естественном отборе до Дарвине
Weltmurksbude: Natural selection before Darwin and Wallace
Дидро
Denis Diderot, in 1749, anonymously published the Lettre sur les aveugles. The pages 77-112 therein contain a passage of which I give the English translation by Margaret Jourdain (1916, pp. 111-112). The scene is a talk between a blind philosopher Saounderson and a clergyman, Mr. Holmes, summoned to the philosopher's deathbed:
For instance, I may ask you and Leibniz and Clarke and Newton, who told you that in the first instance of the formation some were not headless and others footless?
I might affirm that such an one had no stomach, another no intestines, that some which seemed to deserve a long duration from their possession of a stomach, palate, and teeth came to an end owing to some defect in the heart or lungs; that monsters mutually destroyed one another; that all the defective combinations of matter disappeared, and that those only survived whose mechanism was not defective in any important particular and who were able to support and perpetuate themselves.
Вымирание "безголовых, безгногих монстров " эта идея идёт от Эмпедокла, потом Лукреция.
Pierre Louis Moreau de Maupertuis (1751. Essay de Cosmologie) is, so far, the earliest source I know, in which the principle of natural selection or survival of the fittest was clearly stated. As typical for this time, however, natural selection was thought to keep the species fixed to their place in nature (we'd say niche). Natural selection was a mechanism of god's providence and thought to be mutually exclusive with species transmutation. This is why the sub-heading of this essay reads: "Which examinesthe evidence for God's existence from the Wonders of Nature."
Вымирание неприспособленных
Chance, one would say, produced an innumerable multitude of individuals; a small number found themselves constructed in such a manner that the parts of the animal were able to satisfy its needs; in another infinitely greater number, there was neither appropriateness nor order: all of these latter have perished. Animals lacking a mouth could not live; others lacking reproductive organs could not perpetuate themselves: the species we see today are but the smallest part of what blind destiny has produced.
Some translate "convenace" with "fitness" ( наиболее приспособленыый) instead of "appropriateness," in order to make the semblance clearer.
Joseph Tonwsend 1786. republished in 1817, "A Dissertation on the Poor Laws, by a well-wisher to mankind." (London: Ridgeways) seems to have inspired Thomas Mathus's (1798) Essay on the Principle of Population (see here for a separate blog post on this issue).
In it is a passage containing a short statement of natural selection (survival of the fittest). It is also highly reminiscent of later population ecological reasoning. But it is given in a context of discussing the poor laws and not organic evolution. That is, it is not proposed as a mechanism for the transformation of species. It could not possibly do so on its own without heritable variation and the other parts of the Darwinian explanatory system in place.
James Hutton 1794. "Investigation of the Principles of Knowledge and of the Progress of Reason, from Sense to Science and Philosophy." (Vol. 2, chap. 3, section 13, p. 501") reproduced in the Supplementary information to Paul N. Pearson's "In Retrospect." (2003. Nature 425, p. 665):
"
Now, this [adaptation through seminal variation and selection] will be evident, when we consider, that if an organised body is not in the situation and circumstances best adapted to its sustenance and propagation, then, in conceiving an indefinite variety among the individuals of that species, we must be assured, that, on the one hand, those which depart most from the best adapted constitution, will be the most liable to perish, while, on the other hand, those organised bodies, which most approach to the best constitution for the present circumstances, will be best adapted to continue, in preserving themselves and multiplying the individuals of their race."
Thomas R. Malthus 1798. An Essay on the Principle of Population ) was a major source of inspiration for Matthew, Wallace and Darwin for their insight into the importance of natural selection in evolution.
The race of plants and the race of animals shrink under this great restrictive law. And the race of man cannot, by any efforts of reason, escape from it. Among plants and animals its effects are waste of seed, sickness, and premature death. Among mankind, misery and vice.
William Charles Wells 1813/1818. ("Two Essays: one upon single vision with two eyes; the other on dew...". Archibald Constable and Co., Edinburgh). Pages 423-437 contain An Account of a Female of the White Race of Mankind, part of whose skin resembles that of a negro; with some observations on the causes of the differences in colour and form between the white and negro races of men This has been read before the Royal Society of London in 1813, but not been published in its transactions. This is interesting because the next anticipator (Adams 1814
Joseph Adams 1814. (A Treatise on Hereditary Disease." London: J. Callow). Mind that the context is a treatise on hereditary disease meant for the general public. The public seems to have been frightened by the misconception that hereditary meant doom to the children of those who had a hereditary disease in the family. Adams anticipated many concepts of medical genetics, which would now be called recessiveness, penetrance etc. (see Weiss 2008).
In a state of nature the race of all gregarious animals is probably progressively improving, as far as is consistent with their capacity for improvement. The strongest male becomes the virgregis, and consequently, the father of most of the offspring.
Augustin Pyramus de Candolle 1820. Géographie Botanique contained the following passage:
"All the plants of a country, those of a given location, are in a state of war each. All are equipped with means of reproduction and nutrition more or less effective. The first that establish themselves by chance in a given location, tend, by the mere fact that they occupy the ground, to exclude other species: the biggest stifle the smaller; the more perennial replace those with a shorter duration; the most fertile gradually seize the space that could otherwise be filled by slower multiplying ones." (my translation)
John Claudius Loudon, 1822 ("An Encyclopaedia of Gardening." London: Longman, Hurst, Rees, Brown and Green), is particularly relevant to the claim, sometimes aired, that Darwin and Wallace plagiarised Matthew (see below) because Matthew, in turn, lifted his insights from Loudon (see here).
imagine that every year an enormous quantity of seeds, produced by the existing vegetables, are spread over the surface of the globe, by the winds and other causes already mentioned, all of these seeds which fall in places suitable for their vegetation, and are not destroyed by animals, germinate and produce plants; then among these plants, the strongest, and largest, and those to which the soil is best suited, developed themselves in number and magnitude so as to choke the others. Such is the general progress of nature, and among plants, as among animals, the strong flourish at the expense of the weak. These causes have operated for such a length of time, that the greater number of species are now fixed and considered as belonging to certain soils, situations, and climates, beyond which they seldom propagate themselves otherwise than by the hands of man."
James Cowles Prichard 1826. Researches into the physical history of mankind. Second edition, Vol. 2. John and Arthur Arch, Cornhill. Spoiler: racism. Page 573:
in such a way as to produce races fitted for each mode and condition of existence. A great part of this plan of local adaptation appears to have been accomplished by the original modification of a genus into a variety of species. It has been further continued, and the same end promoted, by the ramification of a species into several varieties.
Besides, it appears probable that those local circumstances, which are most congenial to particular races, do in fact promote the appearance of those varieties which are best suited to them, or tend to give rise to their production in the breed.
Francis Corbaux 1829. ("On the laws of mortality, and the intensity of human life." The Philosophical Magazine 5: 198-205.) Corbaux formulated an idea of natural selection in an odd combination with senescence. In one passage he even wrote about the "natural selection" due to individual competition between centenaries. This does not only show that he had not fully understood that natural selection can only have an effect when working on individuals that can still reproduce and inherit their anomalies, it also proves that the next anticipator, Patrick Matthew, did not coin the term "natural selection." This is important with respect to some people who claim that Darwin plagiarized Matthew based mainly on such logomachy.
"competing amongst themselves for protracted longevity, to the exclusion of all the rest. Indeed, this natural selection of particular lives, out of a very considerable mass, repeatedly occurs among centenaries, at later periods, and according to their respective degrees of constitutional vigour; so that very little difference may appear in the probabilities of living one more year, between two individuals of whom the ages differed even to the extent of twenty years." (Corbaux 1829, p. 201)
Patrick Matthew 1831. ("On Naval Timber and Arboriculture." Edinburgh: Adam Black, Edinburgh). On my closer reading of Matthew (1831), I noticed that various scattered passages in the main text have been informed by his idea of natural selection with heritable variation. Some of these occur in Part IVcalled Notice of Authors who treat of Arboriculture, in which Matthew reviewed works of other scholars on arboriculture. That is, Matthew (1831) would head a chapter reviewing a certain scholar by, for example, The Forester's Guide, by Mr. Monteath. The running head throughout that chapter would alternate between Notice of Authors and Monteath's Forster's Guide on every other page. From my perusal, I got away with the impression that selection was a household term in the trade of tree breeding, as much as it used to be among breeders of any other kind of organism. As is well known, Darwin consulted many breeders during his years of incubating The Origin
There is a universal law in nature, tending to render every reproductive being the best suited to its condition that its kind, or that organized matter, is susceptible of, which appears intended to model the physical and mental or instinctive powers, to their highest perfection, and to continue them so. This law sustains the lion in his strength, the hare in her swiftness, and the fox in his wiles. As nature in all her modifications of life, has a power to increase far beyond what is needed to supply the place of what falls by Time's decay, those individuals who possess not the requisite strength, swiftness, hardihood, or cunning, fall prematurely without reproducing--either a prey to their natural devourers, or sinking uner disease, generally induced by want of nourishment, their place being occupied by the more perfect of their own kind, who pressing on the means of subsistenece."
Charles Lyell 1832. Although Lyell's Principles of Geology are usually taken to be on geology only, volume 2 is a book on biology rather than geology. For example, chapter 2 summarizes and dismissed Lamarck's theory of species transmutation. However, Lyell also mentioned the "struggle for existence" verbatim at the pages 55-56:
"
Edward Blyth 1835. An Attempt to classify the "Varieties" of Animals, with Observations on the marked Seasonal and other Changes which naturally take place in various British Species, and which do not constitute Varieties. (The Magazine of Natural History 8: 40-46).
and the stronger must always prevail over the weaker
so that all the young which are produced must have had their origin from one which possessed the maximum of power and physical strength; and which, consequently, in the struggle for existence, was the best able to maintain his ground, and defend himself from every enemy. In like manner, among animals which procure their food by means of their agility, strength, or delicacy of sense, the one best organised must always obtain the greatest quantity; and must, therefore, become physically the strongest, and be thus enabled, by routing its opponents, to transmit its superior qualities to a greater number of offspring.
Fennel 1836. James H. Fennel replied to Blyth's above quoted article in the Short Communicationssection of the same journal. While he did not repeat the principle of natural selection, he contradicted Blyth on the fixity of species (Magazine of Natural History 9: 647-648). Remembering that Darwin owned these volumes and scrutinized them carefully, it is clear that he put the pieces of a huge puzzle into place rather than creating the pieces of the puzzle from scratch.
Charles Naudin 1852. Published a highly important article in the Revue Horticole, that is unjustly forgotten. He anticipated much more than merely the principle of natural selection, for example, the tree-of-life metaphor (see here and here for further
We do not think that Nature has made its species in a different fashion from that in which we proceed ourselves in order to make our varieties; or better, we carried it's [Nature's] process into our practice." (p. 104)
"Such is, in our ideas, the course followed by nature; like us, it wanted to form races
appropriate for their needs; and with a relatively small number of primordial kinds, she gave birth in succession and at various times, to all plant and animal species that inhabitthe globe." (p. 104)
"Nature has operated on an immense scale and with immense resources; we, on the contrary, we do so with extremely limited means; but between its processes and ours,between his results and those we get, the difference is in any amount; between itsspecies and those we create, there are only the more and less."
Herbert Spencer 1852. ("A theory of population, deduced from the general law of animal fertility." Westminster Review 57: 468-501):
Nature secures each step in advance by a succession of trials, which are perpetually repeated, and cannot fail to be repeated, until success is achievedКомментарий
-
Если кто то считает, что ТЭ не научна, ему надо показать каким критериям научности она не соответствует.Комментарий
Твитнуть
Комментарий