'Alien Empire' - a letter to the author
(Written to the author of the book 'Alien Empire')
Dear Mr. O'Toole,
I
recently purchased ‘Alien Empire’ and was very impressed by the interesting
information and beautiful photographs in the book. As a keen collector of
research material, your book will have its place on the shelf.
However, I had a
problem with something I read on page 34, 35 and 38, about the peppered moth. I
have come across this example of natural selection before, in school text books
and at least two encyclopedias, but the conclusions which all these articles,
and your article, reach have never satisfied me.
As you correctly
pointed out, the blackening of the trees should have given the darker moth an
advantage over the lighter moth. I have read about H.B.Kettlewell,
who performed most of the original studies on the moth. He said, if
But surely, all Kettlewell proved was that gene frequencies have shifted
back and forth? The same moth, which can express a gene which gives it a light colour or a dark colour, is still
the same moth, with the same genes? If a new gene had been produced, due to the
arrival of industrial soot on the trees, we would have a clear example of
evolution, but as far as we know, the moth has no new genes, so no evolution
has occurred.
I have also read
something written by L.Harrison Matthews, a biologist
who wrote the foreword for the 1971 edition of
Also, British
scientist Cyril Clarke has investigated the peppered moth for 25 years. He said
he saw only 2 moths in their natural habitat by day. He says that Kettlewell and others attracted the moths into traps in the
forest by night, using a light, or released female pheromones. In each case the
moths were seen only at night. (C.A.Clarke ‘Evolution
in reverse : clean air and the peppered moth’ Biological
Journal of the Linnaean Society 26:189-199. 1985)
The moths being
filmed eaten by the birds were laboratory-bred ones placed onto the tree trunks
by Kettlewell. They were so languid they had to be
warmed up – on the car bonnet – before they were stuck to the trees. Dead moths stuck to tree trunks hardly proves that moths
settle by day on tree trunks.
Theodore Sargent –
But
there is another aspect to what you wrote in ‘Alien Empire’ which I have a
problem with – about Gregor Mendel. You seem
to think that the peppered moth “demonstrates the inheritance of discrete
factors or genes” in the sense that genes may become mixed, producing new
combinations which will then be passed on to future generations. This is not
what Mendel discovered.
What Mendel proved,
years before
Mendel’s studies
clearly established the stability of plants and animals. He also showed that
traits which were not present in the parents but which appeared in the
offspring were not ‘new’ at all, but had been present in the parent’s
ancestors. The information to produce the trait was present in the genetic
material all along, but it was hidden because of the dominance of another
trait. Mendel’s work showed that natural selection alone cannot bring about a
new trait, let alone a new species.
You say that “The
process of natural selection has now been amply demonstrated by observation and
experiment . . .” To a certain extent this is true. Natural selection is a
powerful mechanism, which sorts out the strongest from the weakest, and the
best-adapted from the less adapted. Natural selection helps organisms to
survive in a changing environment. But if you think natural selection is a
mechanism whereby evolution occurs, the evidence is lacking. All natural
selection does is ‘shuffle’ pre-existing genes. It never produces new
information, or new genetic material.
A second theory has
been proposed, that mutations provide the new material, but in every observed
case, mutations have been either lethal, or they have worked against the best
interests of the organism – unless it has been placed in an abnormal
environment to protect it. Mutations usually amount to removal of or confusion
of information, so they have never been shown to be a viable mechanism behind
evolution.
I think it is a
terrible shame that millions of people believe in natural selection as a cause
for evolution when this has never been demonstrated. So many people have been
indoctrinated with so-called ‘proofs’, which are in fact fraudulent (as in the
case of Kettlewell and others), or a mixture of
half-truths and philosophy. The lack of real, solid evidence is a shameful
aspect of the noble pursuit which we call Science.
I am open-minded
enough to recognize genuine proof of evolution when I see it, yet, over the
last 30 years, I have never seen any proof. Every
so-called proof is lacking. Natural selection (or survival of the fittest)
produces no new genetic information. All it does is modify already existing
information. No new DNA appears. Animals may seem to show evolution, but all
they are doing is expressing genes which were not, until that moment, dominant.
Suppressed genes are not evidence of evolution because they are already there.
Thanks to the
variety of genes already available within an organism, there is room to adapt,
to change, to modify, but never beyond the strict limit imposed on the organism
by the genes. It is a case of “This far but no further.”
One illustration of
this might be the spectrum of visible light. There are seven colours in a
rainbow, and all the colours we see are different combinations of these seven.
No new colours are ever produced, because the primary limit is always seven.
It is a truly
remarkable thing how Science constantly affirms the truth, yet scientists
constantly deny it.
Yours sincerely,