Sir,
The majority of students and, it would seem, many of our biology teachers, are unaware of (or in the case of the latter ignore) the theory of evolution known as punctuated equilibria, which claims to better the idea of gradualism conceived by Darwin some 150 years ago. Although the modern view has been around since 1940 and the majority of the experts attending the Conference of the Chicago Field Museum of Natural History in 1980 accepted some form of the new concept, many hailing it as a turning point in the history of evoluntionary theory, the old view of gradualism is still taught exclusively and defended with almost 'religious zeal' against all comers.
I myself am not an advocate of the modern version, except in so far as it replaces gradualism with a concept of the abrupt appearance of each of the species. Punctuated equilibria is an attempt to deal with what Dr. S. J. Gould referred to as 'the extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record - the trade secret of palaeontology'.
Darwin himself saw this problem when he said in this connection, 'the case at present must remain inexplicable and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views', ie. his views on gradualism. (Dr. Gould does allow natural selection to operate at the micro level, but this has nothing to do with origin of the species).
Evolutionist, Professor J. N. Hawthorn is enthusiastic about the arrival of molecular genetics, but he admits that we are still a long way from the origin of the species. He says that mutations may be at the heart of it, but most of the differences between a frog and an elephant are not understood in terms of genetic code.
Then again, not everyone is aware of the full title of Darwin's Origin of the Species by Natural Selection or The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Stuggle for Life. Hitler espoused this philosophy. In a publication of the American Council of Public Affairs, he is reported as saying in one of his speeches by way of justifying his policies, that the whole of nature is an eternal victory of the strong over the weak. Militarists such as Neitzsche have held that it is normal to crush the weaker races and Bernhardi said that war gives a biologically just decision - it is a biological necessity of the first importance.
Writing in the height of the second world war, the highly respected Professor F. Wood Jones, of the Royal College of Surgeons, stated that, 'Darwin has gone far towards providing the sinister theories that have let lose the current demons of bloodshed.' One is tempted to sense of conspiracy to turn a 'blind eye' to the full title of Darwin's celebrated work and to ignore the full sociological implications of his theory.
On a lighter note, the humorous poem, 'The Song of the Apes', which is about ethics rather than biology, concludes with a telling line, 'Man has certainly descended, but he didn't descend from me!' And by the way, I do not agree with some exponents of punctuated equilibria who, to maintain their atheism, have attributed the abrupt appearance of the species to freaks of nature. I believe that they owe their existence to an intelligent mind - the Creator. Personally I would rather believe in the miraculous than in the ridiculous!
Rev. David Cardwell
Tenby.