A new evolution theory

Viewing 6 reply threads
  • Author
    • #18069

      Hi, I’d like to present you a new evolution theory, which explans the phenomenon of evolution rather be self-references that by the competition, as the standard Darvis’ theory does. The text is here: http://zbyszek.evot.org/ebs
      I’d be pleased by your comments.
      Zbigniew Lisiecki

    • #115727

      Hi, the main discussion is here: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic … mDDTSdnoXQ and
      here: http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/8945 … ion-theory

    • #115881

      The process of biological evolution begins with its creation from two types of 4 types of chemical combinations that have been subject to radiation in the form of 232 types of particles.

      The Last Universal Common Ancestor was not one type but 3 early eukaryotes and the first archaea. Eukaryotes and prokaryotes emerged independently from different types of 4 types of chemical combinations. The three early eukaryotes preceded the first archaea and it preceded bacteria.

      This information is derived from the Paradigm of Types in Cosmology and Biology which represents through an arrangement of the numbers of types everything that exists within the Universe across cosmology and biology.

      The paradigm also indicates that although the completely sequence genome of life of Earth has 191 types across the three domains, there are 211 types across the three domains in the Universe. The additional 20 exist on one other type of planet.

      The paradigm is introduced as the second section of an essay called “Waves at The Cave and the true nature of the Universe.” The essay is located at home.spin.net.au/paradigm/true.pdf

      The paradigm of types constitutes the ultimate paradigm shift revolution in science.

      Welcome to the revolution.

    • #115882

      What even is this?????

    • #116159

      These new theories and theories of evolution in general make me laugh a bit. People hold to them like cold hard facts when they are still just theory at heart. If we did evolve the way these theories suggest, we are devolving now. People are a whole are becoming dumber. They are becoming more barbaric again. Less civilized.

    • #116184

      Wow, but i I dont believe in this

    • #116219

      I have to agree with your reviewers from Nature that you have a very limited view of existing evolutionary theory.

      Evolutionary fitness (a measurement of how much an organism contributes to future generations), rather than competition, is the hallmark of Darwinian theory. In a population far from carrying capacity or in the absence of other organisms, fitness is measured purely as the speed of replication (e.g. bacterial colonies). However, when we want to talk about the fitness of an individual genetic variant, that can only be viewed as how does that variant influence the pace of reproduction compared to an individual with a different variant. Competition occurs as populations approach or exceed carrying capacity, meaning that self-replication is no longer enough because not all individuals will survive (hence competition). However, evolutionary fitness still applies.
      In light of this, your ideas add very little to existing literature and act more to bolster your limited understanding of existing research and theory.

Viewing 6 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.