April 13, 2017

Darwinism and genetics

In biology, there are more than 30 versions of the Earth’s biosphere, the authors have tried to understand and formulate the laws of the progressive development of life. According to the scientific community has been the most successful model Darwinian evolution. “However, after the victory of accumulation of facts, the time has come to the fore began to emerge inexplicable from the point of view of classical Darwinian phenomena”. Especially concretized revision of the fundamental provisions of Darwinism with the advent of genetics.

Here is the next surprise. Genetics – an experimental science, its scope of study are the molecular basis of heredity of organisms, and Darwinism – a theory of evolution of species. Logically, there is no hint of the likelihood of conflict. Nevertheless, a serious conflict arose between them.


In Darwin, accidentally encountered favorable changes supposedly saved and harmful destroyed, while the body itself is not involved in this process and remains passive object selection.

In genetics, according to de Vries, random changes, this mutation, chromosomal damage to the machine. Independent from any medium or from the body.

As you can see in the two versions, one reason for changes – absolute fluke, but adverse changes in Darwin destroyed selection and genetics stored in generations all the changes, except for fatal (mutation load).

This seemingly minor difference and become a source of conflict, as the genetic load of mutations logically eliminates the need for selection (no need to kill anything).

Moreover, Genetics set out to free the theory of evolution by selection. The first attempt was made by Johansen, who experimentally established that natural selection does not apply to pure plant lines, although it was clear, and to experiment. He concluded: “Genetics has eliminated the basis of Darwin’s theory of selection” and “thus the problem of evolution is actually a completely open question.” However, the tradition of easy to difficult to overcome, and the biology of leave without the development of the theory of the more, therefore, the conclusions Johannsen “were” wrong. However, genetics do not intend to retreat and took evasive action in the style of outright sophistry. They decided a little tweak Darwin: “The basis of Darwinism is a doctrine of indefinite variability. Solving the problem of the historical appearance of expediency, the abolition of all mystics and teleology in this matter was due to the fact that Darwin showed how the expediency arises through selection of indefinite, that is inappropriate hereditary deviations … appearing in the offspring of organisms even in the presence of the same external conditions”. Thus, the seemingly innocent substitution of concepts (undefined volatility inexpedient) has transformed the natural selection in fiction.

For selection came the turn of the struggle: “… the deepening of knowledge about the processes of the struggle for existence has led many Darwinists? According to the need to eliminate the concept of the evolution of the number of factors such as the metaphysical, too vague and total.

Having finished this raider way with Darwinian “theory of evolution”, genetics, to protect against possible criticism traditionally-minded scientists, and most importantly, to Darwinists or God forbid do not have guessed that they were thrown, not just meekly played the role of the successor of Darwinism, not only agreed to the operation (in her opinion) fictitious natural selection in the Darwinian sense, but also the announced reconciliation with Darwinism supposedly consensual.

This deception of its representatives issued for a new genetic theory (STE), but let us be realistic. Experimental science, not rising in their research above study the molecular level of living and its claim to the theoretical basis of the laws of life – is incompatible concepts.

Therefore, biology, the only one of the natural sciences, has no theory.

This is a statement of fact. Neither Darwinism nor genetics cannot respond specifically to the question: what is life?

I found the most concise definition in Wikipedia: Life – the active form of existence of matter, in a sense, the highest compared to its physical and chemical forms of existence. Life – is actively proceeding with an energy expenditure of maintenance and reproduction of the specific structure.

Against this backdrop, the absolute failure of Darwinism is obvious. The body is the only real carrier of life and as such must first be active, because life is the active form of existence. In Darwin, it is passive, inert object selection; In addition, the body itself does not study the theory of evolution, and the reason for his change, that is the active body is completely excluded from the scope of knowledge.

This fully applies to the genetics, where the minimum unit of evolution is considered to be the population and where the real life of the carrier – the body is considered only from the standpoint of “the physical and chemical forms of existence.”


Theoretical Biology stagnation is the result of a priori and false assumptions about the absolute randomness of organisms change.

The basis, the foundation of biology should be a theory of the organism, the nature of its activity, rather than a random selection of the inert cause of the change of the object.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *