Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Ellen Grace Jones

GET UPDATES FROM Ellen Grace Jones
 

Darwin Was Wrong: Why We Need to Update Our Model of Evolution

Posted: 05/05/2012 00:00

This week the University of Sheffield announced results of experiments which promulgate Darwin's 'survival of the fittest' theory. Scientists claim we humans continue to be subject to the forces and whims of natural selection like other species.

"We have shown advances have not challenged the fact that our species is still evolving just like all the other species 'in the wild,'" posited Dr Virpi Lummaa, from the University of Sheffield's department of animal and plant sciences. "It is a common misunderstanding that evolution took place a long time ago, and that to understand ourselves we must look back to the hunter-gatherer days of humans."

The study, however, was nebulous in terms of expressing precisely what 'evolutionary changes' they found from the church records of almost 6,000 Finns born between 1760 and 1849.

An interesting experiment and indeed correct in that we are still evolving, however to attribute it to the Victorian, matter-based, Darwinian model of evolution is backward-thinking and flawed given the recent leaps and bounds in metaphysical sciences and physical historical evidence disproving linear evolution. The ideology we randomly mutated from ocean slime to our knuckle-dragging neanderthal long-long lost cousins to our current incarnation is one that's been dogmatically accepted into mainstream evolutionary hegemony without challenge until recent years.

"If you take Darwinian theory, make a 'scientific' principal out of it, put it into political action, then you have something like Nazi Germany" states the pioneering Dr Bruce Lipton, author of Spontaneous Evolution. Lipton believes it's 'cooperation not competition' which are the hallmarks of most natural orders.

Speaking in context of the current human-related environmental destruction of the planet, "Much of this is related to the concept of us having arrived here as accident, when in fact it's the opposite, there was purpose and design in the process. The relevance is that when we bought into the Darwinian theory we bought into a way of life that's based on survival of the fittest, but the actual theory of evolution is survival of those that cooperate."

But if Darwin was wrong, that beardy fella on a cloud must have made us, right? Well, no.

The latest science suggests we are intelligently designed - not by some sentient humanistic being from on high - moreover a higher, energetic, source intelligence. Einstein's Unified Field theory equation was completed in 2007. The breakthrough proves everything: matter (which derives from energy, which is what we're made from) all natural laws and processes link to one underlying, unifying consciousness - aka, God, Source, Allah, Yaweh - pick your favourite.

According to John Hagelin, leading particle and quantum physicist, "Everything that's been discovered about the universe in modern science for the last 3 centuries can be systematically derived from the Unified Field's compact expression. The self interacting dynamics of unity at the basis of life's' diversity."

"The space between things isn't empty, it's full" claims maverick physicist Nassim Haramein whose groundbreaking expansion of the Unified Field theory is changing the face of physics as we know it. "We're bathing in energy which is the fundamental source of all creation. This was known by ancient civilisations but was lost due to the advancements of physics. My theories are starting to show the source of everything, all the material world, is mostly space. It's the medium that connects all things."

Quantum physicist Amit Goswami PhD supports the existence of a God consciousness, "The evidence for God is within us, but to see it we have to be subtle. To live it, we have to grow. Mystics, contrary to religionists, are always saying that reality is not two things - God and the world - but one thing, consciousness. The problem with science has always been that most scientists believe that science must be done within a different monastic framework, one based on the primacy of matter. Quantum physics showed us that we must change that myopic prejudice of scientists, otherwise we cannot comprehend quantum physics."

The problem with the Darwinian vs Creationist altercation is because it's so polarised. Atheists feel obliged to cling onto the Darwinian model because until now the only answer was a religious, faith-based one which they negate. Trouble is, in our logical, left-brain thinking society we view religious and ancient texts as literal rather than metaphorically encoded, hence their denunciation. For the sake of its remembrance, truth was often encrypted in fables, myths and legends. The highly-charged, energised space between things Haramein speaks of is what the ancients - and religious - call spirit.

One explicit way in which mankind is evolving for sure is in terms of our consciousness. From the Arab Spring, to #Occupy, to other measured dissent, there is a huge global shift and awakening to the corrupt, control system matrix we've been locked into for so long.

The Maya, who were acute astronomers, mathematicians and scientists knew this and their precise Long Count calendar not just tracked time, but evolution of consciousness. The much discussed end of it being December 21st 2012. Contrary to Hollywood fear-mongering, it doesn't connote the 'end of the world', moreover the transition into a more enlightened, evolved age.

Engineer and scientist Maurice Cotterell studied the Mayan cycles of human evolution and discovered they corresponded remarkably with his sunspot cycles of magnetic emissions. "Research was carried out confirming modulating magnetic fields caused genetic mutations in developing cells in test tubes." Begins Cotterell. "Here we have the mechanism whereby the sun's radiation affects the magnetic field of the earth then the magnetic field of the earth shuttles up the genes."

Everything is energy - including us. Life is the interaction of magnetic vibrational fields and our evolution is subject to the cosmos, not random selection. There have been peak sunspot emissions and coronal mass ejections in 2012 so it's little surprise humankind is awakening.

Unlike Darwin, the Maya, ancient Hindus and Hopi Indians recognised evolution/time as cyclical. There is overwhelming global, physical evidence that vast, advanced civilisations preceded us: the technology in which to create, many of today's engineers assert we do not possess.

Off the coast of Yonaguni Japan, India and Cuba there are giant sunken megalithic sites and pyramidal structures. In Bosnia Europe's first pyramid was discovered and dated to 10,000 years plus. Geologist Dr Robert Schoch has accurately dated the Sphinx to be 7-9,000BC - throwing our mainstream historical timeline into chaos and in need of serious re-writing.

Despite our spiritually-impotent, techno-worshipping race's arrogance that we're the height of all that's ever been, we are not actually the apex of human evolution, as Darwin's linear theory would have us believe. Primordial soup was never our ancestor. Dr Lummaa's archaic suggestion we should, "look back to the hunter-gatherer days of humans" to understand ourselves is dangerously reductionist. Yes the past can inform us, but by limiting our evolutionary learning using an old-world paradigm will only hinder progress. We can waste time searching for Darwin's 'missing link', but it will never be found.

 

Follow Ellen Grace Jones on Twitter: www.twitter.com/EllenGraceJones

FOLLOW UK TECH
 
 
  • Comments
  • 287
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (7 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:59 AM on 06/01/2012
Metaphysics have no real basis in actual science. That is why it has the prefix "meta."
11:23 PM on 06/11/2012
Metta World Peace has the same prefix, but that doesn't seem to stop him from chronically violent acts.

Once we get past semantics, the only important outcome is that which is shown to be factual through the scientific method, mathematics and observational data. Darwinism is a complete crock, along with the entire materialist ideology that holds that ongoing lucky mixes of chemicals are causing intelligent beings.

The darwinists have a had a free pass to spread a bizarre ideology at taxpayer expense without evidence for too long. Simply excluding all evidence that opposes your religious views (fundamentalist materialism) based on outdated definitions won't work much longer.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
rtgmath
There has got to be a better way!
12:26 AM on 05/29/2012
Wow. So many assertions, so little correct. Intelligent Design is nothing more than Creationism without mentioning God. The Unified Field Theory is far from complete, and quoting "maverick physicists" doesn't prove one single thing.

And Evolution has been updated constantly, as any competent person in the field would know. It moved on from Darwin ages ago. Darwin had some things right. He wasn't correct in everything, and no biologist makes such a claim. We have built the theory of inheritance on DNA, we see genetic links between close species, and can see genetically where species have diverged.

Ellen Grace Jones would do well to know her topic better. She needs a lot of study.
01:30 AM on 06/01/2012
rtgmath, if you have moved on past Darwin, then congratulations. You are doing much better than the folks who created my state's science standards.

Intelligent Design is nothing like creationism. Creationism is Biblically based and claims that God made all life, without macroevolution. Intelligent Design states that ther best explanation based on the evidence is that there is some type of intelligent cause involved in life's origins, and ID does not oppose evolution.

Jones also did not oppose evolution so your comments about genetic links, while correct, do not present a counterpoint to her article. She opposes the "Darwinian" model of evolution, not evolution itself, and I do too.
10:16 PM on 05/20/2012
Darwin WAS wrong and we DO need to revise our model of evolution, but lets examine the foolishness of Darwinism for a moment. The classic Darwinian Fallacy goes something like this:

Q: Why are there long necked giraffes?
A: Because all the short necked ones died.

At first pass this almost seems to make sense but after a few moments and a cup of coffee, you realize the Darwinists never really explained how long necked giraffes exist. If there ever really were short necked ones, they could explain their death, but death doesn't extend a neck.

Darwin falsely believed he had found a perpetual creation machine, but mathematicians do not agree in the least. Darwin credits random happenstance as his sole creator of new traits and species (a Luck Theory), but random changes cause nothing but an ambiguous, useless mess There is nothing more destructive than random chaos. It NEVER creates.

Ah, no, say the Darwinists, we have SELECTION! Doesn't that change everything? In a word, no. The only thing selection can do is either kill or get out of the way, but it can NOT create anything new. Nothing at all, good OR bad, can be created "by" selection because selection can only select that which already exists. To credit selection for evolution is illogical nonsense. Its like saying "We live because we didn't die."

So the Darwinists claim that random chaos causes complex functional order and that death causes life. Darwinism is the most destructive force imaginable.
photo
DrTachyon
Baby, please! I am not from Havana.
03:35 AM on 05/21/2012
Wow, I don't think I've ever seen such a long post with so few valid assertions. By the pure luck you incorrectly apply to Natural Selection, you should have gotten one thing correct! Provide some supporting evidence and try again.
12:01 PM on 05/23/2012
DrTachyon, you've made three replies to me without making a single point other than "you're wrong" without specifying what your problem is. You are either incapable of debate or lack confidence in your failed theory.

You mentioned selection, so I see you are a Darwinist. So tell me, do you believe selection can cause new traits or new species? If so, how can it select something that doesnt already exust? Or if you agree it can only select a trait after it exists, then it can't cause the trait in the first place.

Like most Darwinists, I expect you to dodge the questions....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:42 AM on 06/01/2012
I'll give you a simple example. Microbe divides into two. One mutates. That mutation gives the mutant a slight advantage over the other. Now, this doesn't necessarily mean the non-mutant dies, but more of the mutant's offspring will be successful in surviving to reproduction than the non-mutant's offspring if they both manage to reproduce. Eventually the mutant strain becomes dominant just by way of reproducing more often and more successfully competing with the mutant strain over resources needed for survival.

So chance introduces variety, and possibly some mechanical influence on genes in more complex organisms. Then natural selection slowly removes things. This slowly, over time, creates gradual change in a creature.

Your argument ignores half of what makes evolution happen - the introduction of new genes.
01:46 AM on 06/01/2012
onewhothinks, thank you for your comments. The objections to Darwinism pertain only to your one statement: "That mutation gives the mutant a slight advantage over the other" Everything that happens after that has nothing to do with creating a beneficial trait or new species and is not difficult to understand nor is it controversial. In fact, the whole selection concept is trivially vapid. it is simply stating that if something emerges that is more fit to survive in its environment, then it is more likely to survive in its environment. Like most circular logic, this is both correct and useless.

If new traits or species can emerge that are superior to the previous trait or species, then that really is the crux of the matter, not what comes later anyway. The megamillion dollar question is how do genetic upgrades keep happening? If mutations were random, they would literally never happen and destruction of order would ensue, as that is the only outcome of randomness. What Darwin got wrong is that he thought the phenotypical modifications were random but he didnt do the math

Nor the science nor the common sense.
08:32 PM on 05/20/2012
When I saw the title: "Darwin Was Wrong: Why We Need to Update Our Model of Evolution" I was excited because I thought HuffPo was finally dropping its 150 year old pseudoscience and joining the 21st century. Alas, no, they presented an article that has nothing explaining why Darwin was wrong.

I can't disagree with Jones, but she included so much here I don't know how to break it down. I like Lipton's comments that evolution has more to do with cooperation than competition. First off, competition for limited resources, when it does happen, is a cause of death, not life. Death of the unfit does not cause the life of the fit, anyway. Darwin's theory doesn't even make sense.

Jones did discuss a study showing that evolution is not a linear progression, but we have known this since Gould's Punctuated Equilibrium. We know what a Genomic Range is. She finished saying there is no missing link, but didn't explain how she knows this. Magnetics? I don't doubt that magnetism could affect genetics as we already know radiation and toxins can cause deformations, but how does this translate to Darwin being wrong? (And I agree Darwin was wrong.)

I just wish Jones had shown why Darwinism fails and why it should not be taught in schools as if it had any reality to it. If she had done so, HuffPo wouldn't have presented it.
photo
DrTachyon
Baby, please! I am not from Havana.
04:28 AM on 05/21/2012
Never, on the topic of natural history has someone written so much that made so little sense to so many. --Winsom "mad dogs a loony" Churchill
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:48 AM on 06/01/2012
Evolution is not linear - that is correct. It's branching. But "fit" in evolutionary terms refers to success at reproduction, not physical prowess. The cuttlefish is a good example - smaller males that disguise themselves as females (using the species moderate camouflage abilities) are more fit than large males that win fights with other males over the females, because the females will choose to actually use the smaller males' sperm packets. The camouflage is also a significant contribution to their general survival, rather than brute force, so this system favors males who can best take advantage of that ability.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
John Kwok
04:37 PM on 05/20/2012
This is a misinformed, highly inaccurate, assessment of modern evolutionary theory and one that bases its conclusions on the absurd pseudoscience of Eric Von Daniken, Intelligent Design creationists and others.
08:04 AM on 05/17/2012
What a load of old tush. von Daniken impregnates Deepak Chopra and this is the love-child. Anyone who thinks Darwin used 'fit' in the sense of 'how many bench presses can you do?' hasn't the first clue about evolutionary theory and can be immediately disregarded, never mind the woo woo physics.
03:39 PM on 05/16/2012
Bye HuffPo.
05:09 AM on 05/12/2012
Like my cat, cute and fluffy. :D
02:55 PM on 05/10/2012
The author should stick to the arts and her daily makeup routines. She clearly has no clue about science. This article is pathetic.
photo
mmartini54
Roll on 2015!
02:20 PM on 05/10/2012
Hands up if you like "The Big Bang Theory". This thread is populated by a host of Sheldon Coopers - myself included...

I say that in a loving way - I agree entirely with the thrust of the comments.
03:11 PM on 05/09/2012
Yet again people looking at laws as the origin. LAWS ARE WRITTEN BY DECISION MAKERS. Energy is NOT intelligent it is governed by LAWS. As the laws governing the Universe are now shown to be of intelligent ORIGIN the law designer HAS to be OUTSIDE our universe. Wake up people science is showing a GOD of some sort exists.
photo
mmartini54
Roll on 2015!
02:23 PM on 05/10/2012
I do believe you're on the wrong thread. Move on John...nothing to see here, mate.
08:23 PM on 05/10/2012
You are using the word law in the wrong sense. Remember, words sometimes have more then one meaning and forgeting that can lead to confusion. Law in the scientific sense is just a description of a repeating pattern that is always observed. There is nothing about the fact that the universe has patterns that indicate it was designed by someone.
And remember, if the universe didn't have patterns it would be impossible for anything that resembles what you are to exist and ask why it has patterns.
04:50 PM on 05/15/2012
The Anthropic principle drawn up by physicists says the Universe's laws HAD to be designed as they are too perfect for them to have developed by chance. Most physicists stop short of saying a God created the Universe's laws though. The way round it which was invented is multi- universes with enough of them for all values of e.g. gravity to be present somewhere. We just happen to be in the Right universe for life as we know it. Multi-universes are shown to exist only by certain maths and have not been seen or detected.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
wakyracir
My spaniel is watching you
09:27 AM on 05/09/2012
Dangerous rubbish. If Huffpost expects to ever be taken seriously, they should avoid articles by Ellen Grace Jones. Just because someone has PhD after their name it doesn't follow that they're not a few sandwiches short of a picnic.
06:53 AM on 05/09/2012
Wait... this is a joke, right?

Is it possible to be more wrong?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Arturo Ramrez
06:39 PM on 05/14/2012
There could be typos, I guess.
11:47 PM on 05/08/2012
Un. Believable. The editor of "The REAL Runway" deigns to educate the rubes about how stoopit evolution is?

We are so f**ked.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Arturo Ramrez
06:20 PM on 05/08/2012
What a bunch of mumbo jumbo based on misinterpretations of both biology and quantum physics.