Chapter 1 Foundations of Evolution: Darwin and the Synthetic Theory of Evolution Per. A. Nadiryan This and the next chapters give a brief description of the current state of evolutionary biology, as it was before 1995, when a new direction of science arose - comparative genomics.

Chapter 2 From a synthetic theory of evolution to evolutionary genomics: various mechanisms and paths of evolution Per. A. Nesterova In this chapter, we will continue our discussion of evolutionary biology in the pre-genomics period. Many of the discussed areas of development were not

Chapter 9 Lamarckian, Darwinian and Wright's modes of evolution, evolution of evolution, reliability of biological systems and the creative role of noise in evolution Per. D. Tulinova Drama of Lamarckism As already noted in the preface to this book, one of the key achievements

Chapter 1. Theories of progressive evolution Who knows that the spirit of man rises upward, And the spirit of cattle - that goes down into the earth? Ecclesiastes, III, 21 * Everyday anthropocentrism A person can remain indifferent to many things, just not to his own person. He is interested in himself

Basic principles of the traditional neo-Darwinian theory of evolution Heredity Genetic material (DNA) can be passed on unchanged from generation to generation. Mutations Occasionally, permanent changes occur in DNA - mutations. Charles Darwin called such changes

5.5. Alternative theories and synthesis of ideas of evolutionism Within the framework of scientific methodology, there is no alternative to evolutionism, since only creationism can serve as such an alternative. However, evolutionism itself is not a homogeneous stream. Although after reading popular

2.1. Formation and main provisions of the synthetic theory of evolution Evolutionism emerged as an alternative to the doctrine of the immutability of species. Questions related to the origin and development of life have gone through the entire intellectual history of mankind. Number of literature,

Send your good work in the knowledge base is simple. Use the form below

Students, graduate students, young scientists who use the knowledge base in their studies and work will be very grateful to you.

Posted on http://www.allbest.ru/

ESSAY

by discipline

"Concepts of modern natural science"

on the topic:

"Alternative evolutionary theories: Lamarckism, catastrophism,withaltationalism... Synthetic theory of evolution»

1. Alternative evolutionary theories

1.1 Lamarckism

The first integral doctrine of the evolutionary development of living nature, the main ideas of which were set forth by J. B. Lamarck in The Philosophy of Zoology (1809).

At the heart of Lamarckism is the idea of ​​gradation - an internal "striving for improvement" inherent in all living things; the action of this factor of evolution determines the development of living nature, a gradual but steady increase in the organization of living beings - from the simplest to the most perfect. The result of the graduation is the simultaneous existence in nature of organisms of varying degrees of complexity, as if forming a hierarchical ladder of beings. The gradation is easily traced when comparing representatives of large systematic categories of organisms (for example, classes) and on organs of paramount importance. Considering the gradation to be a reflection of the main trend in the development of nature, implanted by the "supreme creator of all things", Lamarck tried to give this process a materialistic interpretation: in some cases, he associated the complication of organization with the action of fluids (for example, caloric, electricity) entering the body from the external environment. Another factor of evolution, according to Lamarck, is the constant influence of the external environment, which leads to a violation of the correct gradation and determines the formation of the whole variety of adaptations of organisms to environmental conditions. Environmental change is the main cause of speciation; as long as the environment is unchanged, the species remain constant; if there is a shift in it, the views change. Lamarck deliberately distinguished between these factors of evolution, noting that the first of them in the body corresponds to "permanent abilities", the second - "abilities subject to change under the influence of circumstances."

The external environment for plants and lower animals, devoid of differentiated nervous system, act directly, induce adaptive changes in them. Animals with a nervous system are indirectly influenced by the environment, their evolutionary transformations are carried out in a more complex way. Any significant change in external conditions leads to a change in the needs of animals living in a given area. Changing needs entails changing habits to meet those needs. Changing habits leads to increased use of some organs and non-use of others. More often, the functioning organs are strengthened and developed, and the unused ones weaken and disappear. The resulting functional and morphological changes are transmitted by inheritance, offspring, amplifying from generation to generation. Thus, according to Lamarck, a function plays a leading role in the evolutionary transformations of organisms: a change in shape is a consequence of a change in function. The provisions on the exercise and non-exercise of organs and on the inheritance of acquired traits were elevated by Lamarck to the rank of universal laws of evolution. The inconsistency of both "laws" was proved experimentally already at the end of the 19th century and especially at the beginning of the 20th century thanks to the discoveries of genetics. In his later works (1815, 1820) Lamarck brings both factors of evolution closer together. He is inclined to view the environment not only as a force that violates the straightness of gradation, but also as the main factor in evolution. Accordingly, he connects the origin of the main branches of the genealogical tree of organisms with the influence of specific conditions of existence.

Justifying his teaching, Lamarck relied on the following facts:

Ё the presence of varieties that occupy an intermediate position between the two species;

Ё Difficulties in diagnosing closely related species and the presence in nature of many "dubious species";

Ё change in species forms during the transition to other ecological and geographical conditions;

There are cases of hybridization, especially interspecific.

Lamarck also considered the discovery of fossil forms, changes in animals during domestication and plants when introduced into culture to be important evidence of the transformation of species. Developing ideas about evolution, he came to the conclusion that there are no real boundaries between species and to deny the very existence of species. The observed breaks in the natural series of organic forms (which makes it possible to classify them) are only apparent violations of a single continuous chain of organisms, explained by the incompleteness of our knowledge. Nature, in his opinion, is a continuous series of changing individuals, and taxonomists only artificially, for the sake of classification convenience, divide this series into separate systematic groups. Such an idea of ​​the fluidity of species forms stood in logical connection with the interpretation of development as a process devoid of any interruptions and leaps (the so-called flat evolutionism). This understanding of evolution was consistent with the denial of the natural extinction of species: fossil forms, according to Lamarck, did not become extinct, but, having changed, continue to exist in the guise of modern species. The existence of the lowest organisms, as if contradicting the idea of ​​gradation, is explained by their constant spontaneous generation from inanimate matter. According to Lamarck, evolutionary changes usually cannot be directly observed in nature only because they occur very slowly and are incommensurate with the relative brevity of human life.

Lamarck extended the principle of evolution to the origin of man, although in the conditions of prevailing creationism he was forced to mask his beliefs. He believed that man descended from monkeys. Among the factors of the formation of a person, he attributed the transition to upright posture and the emergence of speech. Lamarck historically approached the highest manifestations of life - the consciousness and psyche of a person, linking their emergence with the evolution of the nervous system and its higher section - the brain.

Without giving an explanation of organic expediency and without revealing the true reason for evolutionary development, Lamarck for the first time proclaimed the principle of evolution as a universal law of living nature. Throwing a bold challenge to the prevailing concepts of the constancy of species, he was one of the first to make the problem of evolution a subject of special study, a special direction of biological research. That is why Lamarck was highly praised by the classics of Marxism.

Lamarckism did not receive recognition from contemporaries and after the death of its creator was consigned to oblivion. The revival of Lamarckism in the form of neo-Lamarckism occurred in the last third of the 19th century as a reaction to the spread of Darwinism.

1.2 Catastrophism

The idea of ​​development in the doctrine of catastrophism was concretized in a different way (J. Cuvier, L. Agassiz, A. Sedgwick, W. Bookland, A. Milne-Edwards, R.I. Churchison, R. Owen, etc.). Here the idea of ​​biological evolution was a derivative of a more general idea of ​​the development of global geological processes. If Lamarck tried with his deistic position to push aside the role of divine "creativity", to isolate the organic world from the intervention of the creator, on the catastrophists, on the contrary, they bring God closer to nature, directly introduce into their concept the idea of ​​direct divine intervention in the course of natural processes. Catastrophism is a kind of hypothesis of organic evolution, in which the progress of organic forms is explained through the recognition of the immutability of individual biological species. This is perhaps the main peculiarity of this concept.

In the system of empirical prerequisites for catastrophism, the following can be indicated:

Ё the absence of paleontological links between historical, successive floras and faunas;

Ё the existence of sharp gaps between adjacent geological layers;

Ё the absence of transitional forms between modern and fossil species;

Ё small variability of species throughout the cultural history of mankind;

Ё stability, stability of modern species;

Ё the rarity of cases of the formation of interspecific hybrids;

• detection of extensive lava outpourings;

Ё detection of replacement of terrestrial sediments by marine sediments and vice versa;

Ё the presence of whole series of inverted layers, the existence of cracks in the layers and deep faults in the crust.

The duration of the existence of the Earth in early XIX century was estimated at about 100 thousand years - in such a relatively short period it is difficult to explain the evolution of organic forms.

The question of the age of the earth is a special problem. For many centuries, the age of the Earth was considered equal to several thousand years, which followed from the biblical myth of the creation of the world. However, by the end of the 18th century, geology was already becoming a real science, and most geologists began to realize that processes such as the formation of sedimentary rocks or weathering are protracted and occur over huge periods of time. In the second half of the 18th century, the age of the Earth was estimated by geologists only at 75 thousand years. However, by the middle of the 19th century, this period of time "stretched" to hundreds of millions of years. At present, the age of the Earth by radioactive dating methods is estimated at 4.6 billion years.

The theoretical core of catastrophism was the principle of differentiation between the forces and laws of nature acting at the present time and those acting in the past. The forces that operated in the past are qualitatively different from those that are operating now. In remote times, powerful, explosive, catastrophic forces acted, interrupting the calm course of geological and biological processes. The power of these forces is so great that their nature cannot be established by means of scientific analysis. Science can judge not about the causes of these forces, but only about their consequences. Thus, catastrophism acts as a phenomenological concept.

The main sign of catastrophism was revealed in the ideas about the suddenness of catastrophes, about the extremely uneven rate of transformation of the Earth's surface, about the fact that the history of the Earth is a process of periodic replacement of one type of geological change by another, and between successive periods there is no natural, successive connection, just like there is it between the factors causing these processes. In relation to organic evolution, these provisions were concretized in two principles:

1) in principle, fundamental qualitative changes organic world as a result of disasters;

2) in principle, the progressive ascent of organic forms after the next catastrophe.

From the point of view of J. Cuvier, those insignificant changes that took place in the periods between catastrophes could not lead to a qualitative transformation of species. Only in periods of catastrophes, world perturbations, some species of animals and plants disappear and others, qualitatively new, appear, Cuvier wrote: “Life has shocked on our land more than once with terrible events. Countless living creatures fell victim to catastrophes: some, the inhabitants of the land, were swallowed up by floods, others who inhabited the bowels of the waters, found themselves on land together with the suddenly raised bottom of the sea, their races themselves disappeared forever, leaving only a few remnants in the world, barely discernible for naturalists " ... The creators of the theory of catastrophism proceeded from the world outlook on the unity of the geological and biological aspects of evolution; consistency of scientific and religious ideas, up to the subordination of the tasks of scientific research to the substantiation of religious mastiffs. At the heart of catastrophism is the assumption of the existence of leaps, breaks in gradual development.

Is it possible to distinguish invariant features in species replacing each other after the next catastrophe? According to Cuvier, such a similarity can be assumed. He identified four main types of animals (vertebrates, soft-bodied, articulated and radiant), in each of which he correlated a certain historically unchanging "plan of composition" (the basis of the variety of systems of correlated signs of an organism). The "plan of composition" for catastrophists is an immaterial force, an ideal organizing center of divine creation. In their opinion, the addition of "creative power" after each successive catastrophe determines the progressive ascent of organic forms.

For a long time, the concept of catastrophism was treated condescendingly in Russian literature, as something naive, outdated and completely erroneous. Nevertheless, the significance of this concept in the history of geology, paleontology, and biology is great. Catastrophism contributed to the development of stratigraphy, linking the history of the development of the geological and biological worlds, introducing the concept of uneven rates of transformation of the Earth's surface, highlighting the qualitative uniqueness of certain periods in the history of the Earth, studying the patterns of increasing the level of organization of species within the framework of general aromorphoses, etc. Historical geology and paleontology does not lost its meaning and the very concept of "catastrophe": modern science also does not deny geological disasters. They represent "a natural process that inevitably occurs at a certain stage in the life of a geological system, when quantitative changes go beyond the limits of its measure."

1.3 Saltationism

Saltationism- a group of evolutionary theories according to which speciation occurs very quickly - over several generations. The process is associated with the emergence of new individuals, sharply different and reproductively isolated from the representatives of the parental species. Saltationism is less developed than the synthetic theory of evolution (STE), but it allows one to explain the phenomena with which the latter has difficulties, in particular:

Ё incompleteness of the fossil record - the absence of continuous series of transitional fossil forms between species and superspecific taxa;

• the expected sharp decrease in the competitiveness and viability of the transitional forms in comparison with the original species.

Historically, the first scientific concepts similar to saltationism were formulated by Hugo de Vries in 1901. Studying the inheritance of traits in the primrose Oenothera Lamarckiana, Hugo de Vries observed the emergence of new forms, morphologically sharply different from the parental ones. Based on the results obtained, he formulated a mutational theory, the main position of which was the sudden appearance of new, previously non-existent species in the course of single mutational events. Further studies have shown that the selected model object is polymorphic in chromosomal rearrangements and the new forms correspond only to new combinations of these rearrangements and are not species.

In the middle of the 20th century, Goldschmidt formulated the concept of systemic mutation - this is special type mutations, leading to the emergence of individuals morphologically different from the original forms and which can give rise to new species.

Since the late 1980s, saltationism has been successfully developed by V.N. Quilting. According to V.N. Stignia, systemic mutations, as a necessary material for evolution, are stable changes in the orientation of chromosomes in the nuclei of generative and other tissues. Such changes in the orientation of chromosomes change the regulation of gene activity of the entire genome, leading to physiological changes and reproductive isolation of new forms from the original species.

According to a number of ideas of other supporters of saltationism, systemic mutations are associated with changes in specific conservative regions of the genome responsible for the regulation of morphogenesis.

One of the problem areas in saltation theories is the difficulty of finding sexual partners for single representatives of a new species, since reproductive isolation with the parental species is formed.

2. Synthetic theory of evolution

2.1 The emergence and development of STE

evolution lamarckism catastrophism mutation

The synthetic theory in its current form was formed as a result of rethinking a number of provisions of classical Darwinism from the standpoint of genetics at the beginning of the 20th century. After the rediscovery of Mendel's laws (in 1901), proof of the discrete nature of heredity, and especially after the creation of theoretical population genetics by the works of R. Fisher (1918-1930), J.B.S. Haldane Jr. (1924), S. Wright (1931; 1932), Darwin's teachings acquired a solid genetic foundation.

Article by S.S. Chetverikova "On some aspects of the evolutionary process from the point of view of modern genetics" (1926), in fact, became the core of the future synthetic theory of evolution and the basis for further synthesis of Darwinism and genetics. In this article, Chetverikov showed the compatibility of the principles of genetics with the theory of natural selection and laid the foundations of evolutionary genetics. The main evolutionary publication of S.S. Chetverikov was translated into English in J. Haldane's laboratory, but was never published abroad. In the works of J. Haldane, N.V. Timofeev-Resovsky and F.G. Dobrzhansky ideas expressed by S.S. Chetverikov, spread to the West, where almost simultaneously R. Fischer expressed very similar views on the evolution of dominance.

The impetus for the development of the synthetic theory was given by the hypothesis of the recessiveness of new genes. Speaking in the language of genetics of the second half of the twentieth century, this hypothesis assumed that in each reproducing group of organisms during the maturation of gametes, as a result of errors in DNA replication, mutations constantly arise - new variants of genes.

The influence of genes on the structure and functions of the body is pleiotropic: each gene is involved in the determination of several traits. On the other hand, each trait depends on many genes; geneticists call this phenomenon genetic polymerization of traits. Fisher says that pleiotropy and polymerization reflect the interaction of genes, due to which the external manifestation of each gene depends on its genetic environment. Therefore, recombination, giving rise to more and more new gene combinations, in the end creates for a given mutation such a gene environment that allows the mutation to manifest itself in the phenotype of the carrier individual. Thus, the mutation falls under the influence of natural selection, selection destroys the combinations of genes that make it difficult for organisms to live and reproduce in a given environment, and preserves neutral and beneficial combinations that undergo further reproduction, recombination and selection testing. Moreover, first of all, such gene combinations are selected that contribute to a favorable and at the same time stable phenotypic expression of initially little noticeable mutations, due to which these mutant genes gradually become dominant. This idea found expression in the work of R. Fisher "The genetical theory of natural selection" (1930). Thus, the essence of the synthetic theory is the predominant reproduction of certain genotypes and their transmission to descendants. In the question of the source of genetic diversity, synthetic theory recognizes the main role behind gene recombination.

It is believed that an evolutionary act took place when selection retained a gene combination that was atypical for the previous history of the species. As a result, for the implementation of evolution, three processes are required:

1) mutational generating new variants of genes with low phenotypic expression;

2) recombination creating new phenotypes of individuals;

3) breeding, which determines the correspondence of these phenotypes to the given habitat or growth conditions.

All supporters of the synthetic theory recognize the participation of the three listed factors in the evolution.

An important prerequisite for the emergence of a new theory of evolution was the book by the English geneticist, mathematician and biochemist J.B.S. Haldane, Jr., who published it in 1932 as The Causes of Evolution. Haldane creating genetics individual development, immediately included the new science in solving the problems of macroevolution.

Major evolutionary innovations very often arise on the basis of neoteny (preservation of juvenile characteristics in an adult organism). Haldane explained the origin of man ("naked monkey"), the evolution of such large taxa as graptolites and foraminifera by neoteny. In 1933, the teacher of Chetverikova N.K. Koltsov showed that neoteny is widespread in the animal kingdom and plays an important role in progressive evolution. It leads to morphological simplification, but at the same time the richness of the genotype is preserved.

1937 year was named the year of STE- this year a book by the Russian-American geneticist and entomologist-systematist F.G. Dobzhansky "Genetics and the Origin of Species". The success of Dobrzhansky's book was determined by the fact that he was both a naturalist and an experimental geneticist. "Dobrzhansky's double specialization allowed him to be the first to build a solid bridge from the camp of experimental biologists to the camp of naturalists" (E. Mayr). For the first time, the most important concept of "isolating mechanisms of evolution" was formulated - those reproductive barriers that separate the gene pool of one species from the gene pools of other species. Dobrzhansky introduced the half-forgotten Hardy-Weinberg equation into wide scientific circulation. He also introduced the "S. Wright effect" into naturalistic material, believing that microgeographic races arise in an adaptive-neutral way.

In American literature, among the creators of STE, the names of F. Dobrzhansky, J. Huxley, E. Myr, B. Rensch, J. Stebbins are most often mentioned. This, of course, is far from full list... Only of the Russian scientists, at least, one should name I.I. Schmalhausen, N.V. Timofeev-Resovsky, G.F. Gause, N.P. Dubinina, A.L. Takhtadzhyan. British scientists is great the role of J.B.S. Haldane Jr., D. Lack, C. Waddington, G. de Beer. German historians among the active creators of STE name the names of E. Baur, W. Zimmermann, V. Ludwig, G. Heberer and others.

2.2 The main provisions of STE, their historical formation and development

In 1930-1940. a wide synthesis of genetics and Darwinism quickly took place. Genetic ideas penetrated into taxonomy, paleontology, embryology, biogeography. The term "modern" or "evolutionary synthesis" comes from the title of the book by J. Huxley "Evolution: The Modern synthesis" (1942). The expression "synthetic theory of evolution" in its exact application to this theory was first used by J. Simpson in 1949.

· The local population is considered an elementary unit of evolution;

· Material for evolution is mutational and recombination variability;

Natural selection is seen as main reason development of adaptations, speciation and origin of supraspecific taxa;

· Gene drift and the principle of the founder are the reasons for the formation of neutral signs;

· A species is a system of populations reproductively isolated from populations of other species, and each species is ecologically isolated;

· Speciation consists in the emergence of genetic isolating mechanisms and is carried out mainly in conditions of geographic isolation.

Thus, the synthetic theory of evolution can be characterized as a theory of organic evolution by natural selection of genetically determined traits.

The activity of the American creators of STE was so high that they quickly created an international society for the study of evolution, which in 1946 became the founder of the journal "Evolution". The American Naturalist revisited the publication of evolutionary papers, with an emphasis on the synthesis of genetics, experimental and field biology. As a result of numerous and varied studies, the main provisions of the STE were not only successfully tested, but also modified, supplemented with new ideas.

In 1942 the German-American ornithologist and zoogeographer E. Mayr published the book Systematics and the Origin of Species, in which the concept of a polytypic species and a genetic-geographical model of speciation were consistently developed. Mayr proposed the principle of the founder, which he formulated in its final form in 1954. If gene drift, as a rule, provides a causal explanation for the formation of neutral characters in the temporal dimension, then the principle of the founder in the spatial one.

After the publication of the works of Dobrzhansky and Mayra, taxonomists received a genetic explanation for what they had long believed in: subspecies and closely related species differ in adaptively neutral characters.

None of the works on STE can compare with the above-mentioned book by the English experimental biologist and naturalist J. Huxley "Evolution: The Modern synthesis" (1942). Huxley's work surpasses even the book of Darwin himself in terms of the volume of analyzed material and the breadth of problems. Huxley for many years kept in mind all directions in the development of evolutionary thought, closely followed the development of related sciences and had personal experience experimental geneticist. Prominent biology historian Provin assessed Huxley's work: “Evolution. Modern Synthesis ”was the most comprehensive on the topic and documents than other works on this topic. Haldane and Dobrzhansky's books were written mainly for geneticists, Myr for taxonomists, and Simpson for paleontologists. Huxley's book has become a dominant force in evolutionary synthesis. "

In terms of volume, Huxley's book was unmatched (645 pages). But the most interesting thing is that all the main ideas outlined in the book were very clearly written out by Huxley on 20 pages back in 1936, when he sent the address to the British Association for the Advancement of Science called "Natural selection and evolutionary progress". In this aspect, none of the publications on evolutionary theory published in the 1930s and 1940s can compare with Huxley's article. With a good sense of the spirit of the times, Huxley wrote: “At present, biology is in the phase of synthesis. Until that time, the new disciplines worked in isolation. Now there is a tendency towards unification, which is more fruitful than the old one-sided views of evolution ”(1936). Back in the 1920s, Huxley showed that the inheritance of acquired traits is impossible; natural selection acts as a factor in evolution and as a factor in the stabilization of populations and species (evolutionary stasis); natural selection acts on small and large mutations; geographical isolation is the most important condition for speciation. The apparent purpose in evolution is due to mutation and natural selection.

The main points of Huxley's 1936 paper can be very briefly summarized as follows:

1. Mutations and natural selection are complementary processes that, individually, are not capable of creating directional evolutionary changes.

2. Selection in natural populations most often acts not on individual genes, but on gene complexes. Mutations may not be beneficial or harmful, but their selective value varies in different environments. The mechanism of action of selection depends on the external and genotypic environment, and the vector of its action on the phenotypic manifestation of mutations.

3. Reproductive isolation is the main criterion for the completion of speciation. Speciation can be continuous and linear, continuous and divergent, abrupt and convergent.

4. Gradualism and panadaptation are not universal characteristics of the evolutionary process. Most land plants are characterized by discontinuity and the sharp formation of new species. Widespread species evolve gradually, while small isolates evolve intermittently and not always adaptively. Intermittent speciation is based on specific genetic mechanisms (hybridization, polyploidy, chromosomal aberrations). Species and supraspecific taxa, as a rule, differ in adaptively neutral characters. The main directions of the evolutionary process (progress, specialization) are a compromise between adaptability and neutrality.

5. Potentially preadaptive mutations are widespread in natural populations. This type of mutation plays a critical role in macroevolution, especially during periods of drastic environmental changes.

6. The concept of the rates of action of genes explains the evolutionary role of heterochronies and allometry. The synthesis of problems of genetics with the concept of recapitulation leads to an explanation of the rapid evolution of species that are in dead ends of specialization. Through neoteny, the taxon is “rejuvenated” and it acquires new rates of evolution. Analysis of the relationship between ontogeny and phylogenesis makes it possible to discover the epigenetic mechanisms of the direction of evolution.

7. In the process of progressive evolution, selection acts towards improving the organization. The main result of evolution was the emergence of man. With the emergence of man, great biological evolution develops into psychosocial. Evolutionary theory is one of the sciences that study the formation and development of human society. It creates the foundation for understanding the nature of man and his future.

A wide synthesis of data on comparative anatomy, embryology, biogeography, paleontology with the principles of genetics was carried out in the works of I.I. Schmalhausen (1939), A.L. Takhtadzhyan (1943), J. Simpson (1944), B. Rensch (1947). The theory of macroevolution grew out of these studies. Only Simpson's book was published in English and during the period of the wide expansion of American biology, she is most often mentioned alone among the fundamental works.

I.I. Schmalhausen was a student of A.N. Severtsov, however, already in the 1920s, his independent path was determined. He studied the quantitative patterns of growth, the genetics of the manifestation of traits, and genetics itself. Schmalhausen was one of the first to synthesize genetics and Darwinism. From the huge legacy of I.I. Schmalhausen, his monograph "Ways and patterns of the evolutionary process" (1939) stands out. For the first time in the history of science, he formulated the principle of the unity of the mechanisms of micro- and macroevolution. This thesis was not just postulated, but directly followed from his theory of stabilizing selection, which includes population genetic and macroevolutionary components (autonomization of ontogeny) in the course of progressive evolution.

A.L. Takhdadzhyan in the monographic article: "Relationship between ontogeny and phylogeny in higher plants”(1943) not only actively included botany in the orbit of evolutionary synthesis, but actually built an original ontogenetic model of macroevolution (“ soft saltationism ”). Takhtadzhyan's model based on botanical material developed many of the wonderful ideas of A.N. Severtsov, especially the theory of arhallaxis (a sharp, sudden change in an organ at the earliest stages of its morphogenesis, leading to changes in the entire course of ontogenesis). The most difficult problem of macroevolution, the gaps between large taxa, was explained by Takhtadzhyan by the role of neoteny in their origin. Neotenia played an important role in the origin of many higher taxonomic groups, including flowering ones. Herbaceous plants evolved from arboreal plants by longline neoteny.

Back in 1931, S. Wright proposed the concept of random gene drift, which speaks of an absolutely random formation of the gene pool of a deme as a small sample from the gene pool of the entire population. Initially, gene drift turned out to be the very argument that for a very long time was not enough to explain the origin of maladaptive differences between taxa. Therefore, the idea of ​​drift immediately became close to a wide circle of biologists. J. Huxley called the drift "the Wright effect" and considered it "the most important of recent taxonomic discoveries." George Simpson (1948) based his hypothesis of quantum evolution on drift, according to which the population cannot independently leave the zone of attraction of the adaptive peak. Therefore, to get into an unstable intermediate state, a random genetic event, independent of selection, is necessary - gene drift. However, enthusiasm for gene drift soon waned. The reason is intuitively clear: any completely random event unique and unverifiable. The wide citation of S. Wright's works in modern evolutionary textbooks, setting out an exclusively synthetic concept, cannot be explained otherwise than by the desire to illuminate the whole variety of views on evolution, ignoring the relationship and difference between these views.

The ecology of populations and communities entered the evolutionary theory thanks to the synthesis of Gause's law and the genetic-geographical model of speciation. Reproductive isolation has been complemented by an ecological niche as the most important criterion for a species. At the same time, the niche approach to species and speciation turned out to be more general than a purely genetic one, since it is also applicable to species that do not have a sexual process.

The entry of ecology into evolutionary synthesis was The final stage theory formation. From that moment, the period of using STE in the practice of taxonomy, genetics, and selection began, which lasted until the development of molecular biology and biochemical genetics.

With the development of the latest sciences, STE began to expand and modify again. Perhaps the most important contribution of molecular genetics to the theory of evolution was the division of genes into regulatory and structural (model of R. Britten and E. Davidson, 1971). It is the regulatory genes that control the emergence of reproductive isolating mechanisms that change independently of the enzyme genes and cause rapid changes (on a geological time scale) at the morphological and physiological levels.

The idea of ​​a random change in gene frequencies has found application in the theory of neutrality (Kimura, 1985), which goes far beyond the traditional synthetic theory, being created on the basis of molecular genetics rather than classical genetics. Neutralism is based on a completely natural position: not all mutations (changes in the nucleotide sequence of DNA) lead to a change in the sequence of amino acids in the corresponding protein molecule. Those amino acid substitutions that have taken place do not necessarily cause a change in the shape of the protein molecule, and when such a change does occur, it does not necessarily change the nature of the protein's activity. Consequently, many mutant genes perform the same functions as normal genes, which is why selection in relation to them behaves completely neutral. For this reason, the disappearance and consolidation of mutations in the gene pool depend purely on chance: most of them disappear soon after their appearance, the minority remains and can exist for a long time. As a result, selection evaluating phenotypes “is essentially indifferent to what genetic mechanisms determine the development of a given form and corresponding function; the character of molecular evolution is completely different from the character of phenotypic evolution” (Kimura, 1985).

The last statement, which reflects the essence of neutralism, is in no way consistent with the ideology of the synthetic theory of evolution, which goes back to A. Weismann's concept of the germ plasma, which began the development of the corpuscular theory of heredity. According to Weismann's views, all factors of development and growth are in the germ cells; accordingly, in order to change the organism, it is necessary and sufficient to change the germplasm, that is, the genes. As a result, the theory of neutrality inherits the concept of genetic drift, generated by neo-Darwinism, but later abandoned by it.

Some inconsistency within the theory itself indicates, most likely, that the development of STE will continue with the emergence of new discoveries in the field of evolution.

Posted on Allbest.ru

Similar documents

Evolutionary ideas in antiquity, the Middle Ages, the Renaissance and modern times. Charles Darwin's theory. Synthetic theory of evolution. Neutral theory of molecular evolution. Basic embryological evidence for biological evolution.

abstract, added 03/25/2013


The state of the Universe at the moment of the Big Bang. Synthetic theory of evolution. Natural process of development of living nature. Changes in the genetic composition of populations. Modern evolutionary theory. Charles Darwin as the founder of the theory of evolution.

abstract added 09/18/2013


Evolution theory. Synthetic theory of evolution. The reasons for the emergence of creationist theories. Evidence for evolution. Types and directions of creationism. Religious creationism. Modern creationism. Clash of worldviews. Development idea in biology.

abstract, added on 10/04/2008


Characterization of the stages (biochemical, morphophysiological, development of the psyche and consciousness), and theories (Darwin, synthetic) of the evolution of living nature. Consideration of embryological, biochemical and biogeographic evidence of speciation.

abstract, added 02/09/2010


The origin of life. The process of development of living things. General trends in the evolution of living and nonliving in nature. Darwin's theory of evolution, and the process of its approval. Theories of evolutionary teachings. Synthetic theory of evolution. Discontinuous equilibrium theory.

term paper, added 12/07/2008


The principles and concepts of the synthetic theory of evolution. Population as an elementary "cell" of biological evolution. General concept about natural selection. Micro and macroevolution concepts. Population genetic research in the development of evolutionary theory.

abstract, added 06/03/2012


Pre-Darwinian views of evolution. Dissemination of the ideas of evolutionism during the Renaissance and Enlightenment. Charles Darwin's theory of evolution. Artificial and natural selection. Synthetic theory of evolution: origin, main provisions.

abstract, added 03/01/2010


Basic principles of evolutionary theory. Antidarvinism and its manifestations. The facts refuting the theory. Synthetic theory of evolution. Worldview and methodological significance of evolutionary concepts and the formation of a modern scientific picture of the world.

abstract added on 11/18/2013


The main provisions of the theory of evolution J.-B. Lamarck and Charles Darwin. Neo-Lamarckism: Supporters of Autogenetic Concepts. Synthetic theory of evolution. Ecological and genetic foundations of evolution. Natural selection, forms and methods of speciation.

abstract, added 02/12/2011


Development of an integrated approach to evolutionary processes based on modern achievements population genetics, molecular biology, biosphere evolution. Natural selection. The struggle of species for existence. Preservation and accumulation of random small mutations.

Minister of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

GOU VPO "Kemerovo State University" (KemSU)

Department of Contemporary Natural Science

ESSAY

on the topic:

"Alternative evolutionary theories: Lamarckism, catastrophism,

saltationism.

Synthetic theory of evolution "

Completed: student gr. E-105

Dikazhev Ismail

Checked: K. B. N. Associate Professor

Prokhorova A.M.

Kemerovo 2010

1. Alternative evolutionary theories

Lamarckism

The first integral doctrine of the evolutionary development of living nature, the main ideas of which were set forth by J. B. Lamarck in the Philosophy of Zoology (1809).

At the heart of Lamarckism is the idea of ​​gradation - an internal "striving for improvement" inherent in all living things; the action of this factor of evolution determines the development of living nature, a gradual but steady increase in the organization of living beings - from the simplest to the most perfect. The result of the graduation is the simultaneous existence in nature of organisms of varying degrees of complexity, as if forming a hierarchical ladder of beings. The gradation is easily traced when comparing representatives of large systematic categories of organisms (for example, classes) and on organs of paramount importance. Considering the gradation to be a reflection of the main trend in the development of nature, implanted by the "supreme creator of all things", Lamarck tried to give this process a materialistic interpretation: in some cases, he associated the complication of organization with the action of fluids (for example, caloric, electricity) entering the body from the external environment. Another factor of evolution, according to Lamarck, is the constant influence of the external environment, which leads to a violation of the correct gradation and determines the formation of the whole variety of adaptations of organisms to environmental conditions. Environmental change is the main cause of speciation; as long as the environment is unchanged, the species remain constant; if there is a shift in it, the views change. Lamarck deliberately distinguished between these factors of evolution, noting that the first of them in the body corresponds to "permanent abilities", the second - "abilities subject to change under the influence of circumstances."

The external environment acts directly on plants and lower animals, deprived of a differentiated nervous system, causing adaptive changes in them. Animals with a nervous system are indirectly influenced by the environment, their evolutionary transformations are carried out in a more complex way. Any significant change in external conditions leads to a change in the needs of animals living in a given area. Changing needs entails changing habits to meet those needs. Changing habits leads to increased use of some organs and non-use of others. More often, the functioning organs are strengthened and developed, and the unused ones weaken and disappear. The resulting functional and morphological changes are transmitted by inheritance, offspring, amplifying from generation to generation. Thus, according to Lamarck, a function plays a leading role in the evolutionary transformations of organisms: a change in shape is a consequence of a change in function. The provisions on the exercise and non-exercise of organs and on the inheritance of acquired traits were elevated by Lamarck to the rank of universal laws of evolution. The inconsistency of both "laws" was proved experimentally already at the end of the 19th century and especially at the beginning of the 20th century thanks to the discoveries of genetics. In his later works (1815, 1820) Lamarck brings both factors of evolution closer together. He is inclined to view the environment not only as a force that violates the straightness of gradation, but also as the main factor in evolution. Accordingly, he connects the origin of the main branches of the genealogical tree of organisms with the influence of specific conditions of existence.

Justifying his teaching, Lamarck relied on the following facts:

the presence of varieties that occupy an intermediate position between the two species;

difficulties in diagnosing closely related species and the presence of many “dubious species” in nature;

change in species forms during the transition to other ecological and geographical conditions;

cases of hybridization, especially interspecies.

Lamarck also considered the discovery of fossil forms, changes in animals during domestication and plants when introduced into culture to be important evidence of the transformation of species. Developing ideas about evolution, he came to the conclusion that there are no real boundaries between species and to deny the very existence of species. The observed breaks in the natural series of organic forms (which makes it possible to classify them) are only apparent violations of a single continuous chain of organisms, explained by the incompleteness of our knowledge. Nature, in his opinion, is a continuous series of changing individuals, and taxonomists only artificially, for the sake of classification convenience, divide this series into separate systematic groups. Such an idea of ​​the fluidity of species forms stood in logical connection with the interpretation of development as a process devoid of any interruptions and leaps (the so-called flat evolutionism). This understanding of evolution was consistent with the denial of the natural extinction of species: fossil forms, according to Lamarck, did not become extinct, but, having changed, continue to exist in the guise of modern species. The existence of the lowest organisms, as if contradicting the idea of ​​gradation, is explained by their constant spontaneous generation from inanimate matter. According to Lamarck, evolutionary changes usually cannot be directly observed in nature only because they occur very slowly and are incommensurate with the relative brevity of human life.

Lamarck extended the principle of evolution to the origin of man, although in the conditions of prevailing creationism he was forced to mask his beliefs. He believed that man descended from monkeys. Among the factors of the formation of a person, he attributed the transition to upright posture and the emergence of speech. Lamarck historically approached the highest manifestations of life - the consciousness and psyche of a person, linking their emergence with the evolution of the nervous system and its higher section - the brain.

Without giving an explanation of organic expediency and without revealing the true reason for evolutionary development, Lamarck for the first time proclaimed the principle of evolution as a universal law of living nature. Throwing a bold challenge to the prevailing concepts of the constancy of species, he was one of the first to make the problem of evolution a subject of special study, a special direction of biological research. That is why Lamarck was highly praised by the classics of Marxism.

Lamarckism did not receive recognition from contemporaries and after the death of its creator was consigned to oblivion. The revival of Lamarckism in the form of neo-Lamarckism occurred in the last third of the 19th century as a reaction to the spread of Darwinism.

1.2. Catastrophism

The idea of ​​development in the doctrine of catastrophism was concretized in a different way (J. Cuvier, L. Agassiz, A. Sedgwick, W. Bookland, A. Milne-Edwards, R.I. Churchison, R. Owen, etc.). Here the idea of ​​biological evolution was a derivative of a more general idea of ​​the development of global geological processes. If Lamarck tried with his deistic position to push aside the role of divine "creativity", to isolate the organic world from the intervention of the creator, on the catastrophists, on the contrary, they bring God closer to nature, directly introduce into their concept the idea of ​​direct divine intervention in the course of natural processes. Catastrophism is a kind of hypothesis of organic evolution, in which the progress of organic forms is explained through the recognition of the immutability of individual biological species. This is perhaps the main peculiarity of this concept.

In the system of empirical prerequisites for catastrophism, the following can be indicated:

lack of paleontological links between historical, successive flora and faunas;

the existence of sharp gaps between adjacent geological layers;

lack of transitional forms between modern and fossil species;

low variability of species throughout the cultural history of mankind;

stability, stability of modern species;

the rarity of cases of the formation of interspecific hybrids;

detection of extensive lava outpourings;

detection of replacement of terrestrial sediments by marine sediments and vice versa;

the presence of whole series of inverted layers, the existence of cracks in the layers and deep crustal faults.

The duration of the existence of the Earth at the beginning of the 19th century was estimated at about 100 thousand years - with such a relatively short period it is difficult to explain the evolution of organic forms.

The question of the age of the earth is a special problem. For many centuries, the age of the Earth was considered equal to several thousand years, which followed from the biblical myth of the creation of the world. However, by the end of the 18th century, geology was already becoming a real science, and most geologists began to realize that processes such as the formation of sedimentary rocks or weathering are protracted and occur over huge periods of time. In the second half of the 18th century, the age of the Earth was estimated by geologists only at 75 thousand years. However, by the middle of the 19th century, this period of time "stretched" to hundreds of millions of years. At present, the age of the Earth by radioactive dating methods is estimated at 4.6 billion years.

The theoretical core of catastrophism was the principle of differentiation between the forces and laws of nature acting at the present time and those acting in the past. The forces that operated in the past are qualitatively different from those that are operating now. In remote times, powerful, explosive, catastrophic forces acted, interrupting the calm course of geological and biological processes. The power of these forces is so great that their nature cannot be established by means of scientific analysis. Science can judge not about the causes of these forces, but only about their consequences. Thus, catastrophism acts as a phenomenological concept.

The main sign of catastrophism was revealed in the ideas about the suddenness of catastrophes, about the extremely uneven rate of transformation of the Earth's surface, about the fact that the history of the Earth is a process of periodic replacement of one type of geological change by another, and between successive periods there is no natural, successive connection, just like there is it between the factors causing these processes. In relation to organic evolution, these provisions were concretized in two principles:

in principle, fundamental qualitative changes in the organic world as a result of disasters;

in principle, the progressive ascent of organic forms after the next catastrophe.

From the point of view of J. Cuvier, those insignificant changes that took place in the periods between catastrophes could not lead to a qualitative transformation of species. Only in periods of catastrophes, world perturbations, some species of animals and plants disappear and others, qualitatively new, appear, Cuvier wrote: “Life has shocked on our land more than once with terrible events. Countless living creatures fell victim to catastrophes: some, the inhabitants of the land, were swallowed up by floods, others who inhabited the bowels of the waters, found themselves on land together with the suddenly raised bottom of the sea, their races themselves disappeared forever, leaving only a few remnants in the world, barely discernible for naturalists " ... The creators of the theory of catastrophism proceeded from the world outlook on the unity of the geological and biological aspects of evolution; consistency of scientific and religious ideas, up to the subordination of the tasks of scientific research to the substantiation of religious mastiffs. At the heart of catastrophism is the assumption of the existence of leaps, breaks in gradual development.

Is it possible to distinguish invariant features in species replacing each other after the next catastrophe? According to Cuvier, such a similarity can be assumed. He identified four main types of animals (vertebrates, soft-bodied, articulated and radiant), in each of which he correlated a certain historically unchanging "plan of composition" (the basis of the variety of systems of correlated signs of an organism). The "plan of composition" for catastrophists is an immaterial force, an ideal organizing center of divine creation. In their opinion, the addition of "creative power" after each successive catastrophe determines the progressive ascent of organic forms.

For a long time, the concept of catastrophism was treated condescendingly in Russian literature, as something naive, outdated and completely erroneous. Nevertheless, the significance of this concept in the history of geology, paleontology, and biology is great. Catastrophism contributed to the development of stratigraphy, linking the history of the development of the geological and biological worlds, introducing the concept of uneven rates of transformation of the Earth's surface, highlighting the qualitative uniqueness of certain periods in the history of the Earth, studying the patterns of increasing the level of organization of species within the framework of general aromorphoses, etc. Historical geology and paleontology does not the concept of "catastrophe" itself has lost its meaning: modern science also does not deny geological catastrophes. They represent "a natural process that inevitably occurs at a certain stage in the life of a geological system, when quantitative changes go beyond the limits of its measure."

Various options for molecular Lamarckism " and "molecular Darwinism" ..., the conceptual apparatus, alternative cash conceptual solutions ... modern interpretations. M., 1998. Follmer G. Evolutionary theory knowledge. M., 1998. Freud 3. I ...

The perception of Darwinian ideas by scientists varied greatly both in different countries and within one country. Evidence for a long evolutionary history of descent from common ancestors and from the simplest forms of life has been universally accepted, but many scientists have denied that it was the natural selection chain that was the main cause of the change. In England, Thomas Huxley, and then George Romans, fiercely defended natural selection. Alfred Russell Wallace, who discovered the principle of natural selection independently of Darwin, believed that this could not explain the human ability to think. Lyell found that Darwin exaggerated the importance of selection, and such eminent scientists as Richard Owen, Adam Sedgwick and Lord Kelvin rejected the idea. Herbert Spencer, a prominent popularizer and advocate of the theory of evolution, was a Lamarckian.

In America, Harvard naturalist Asa Gray defended the idea of ​​selection, although he believed that providential design might be the cause of change. And the highly influential editor of the journal American Naturalist, ED Cope, was a leading exponent of neo-Lamarckism. Harvard scholar Louis Agassiz was an ardent anti-Darwinian and adherent of the form of philosophical idealism, which believed that there was reason behind creation. The author of a comparative study of scientists' responses to Darwinian theory concludes that "by the end of the century, there were apparently more neo-Lamarckians than Darwinists among American scientists." In France, at first, biologists took Darwin's views rather coolly, but then he received support from the anti-clerical movement. As in other countries where church authorities criticized Darwin, some scholars supported him in part because they wanted to defend the independence of their young professional group from church interference. In Germany, Ernst Haeckel combined Lamarckism with materialistic philosophy.

We define Darwinism as the belief that natural selection of variation is the primary (though not the only) source of evolutionary change. Why did so many scientists at the end of the century advocate views that are alternative to Darwinism?

First, at the scientific level, Darwinism had a number of insoluble problems. Some physiological structures do not seem to carry any payload, and the early stages of individual evolutionary changes seem to be unrelated to adaptive function. There were still no developed theories to explain the appearance and inheritance of variations, and many scientists tried to find alternative hypotheses. However, the Lamarckians failed to create a reliable theory of inheritance that could explain how physiological changes that occur throughout the life of an organism can be inherited by its descendants. Some developmental biologists believed that embryonic formation (ontogeny) follows the history of species (phylogeny). It was believed that a growing organism embodies some residual memory of those stages of development through which its ancestors went. But this was only a vague analogy, not a reliable theory.

Secondly, many representatives of developmental biology recognized that the growth of an organism is the deployment of an internally laid down plan. Such ideas were often combined with the idea that the evolution of different species occurs in parallel due to the forces arising in the organisms themselves (orthogenesis). In search of order in nature, biologists discovered a tendency towards linear development, the reason for which they defended the internal predisposition of the organism to change in a certain direction, even if this leads too far and leads to the emergence of maladaptive traits (or to extinction), which, in their opinion, is impossible explain by the principle of selection. Biologists who shared these views were usually influenced by the idealist philosophy, which held strong positions in England and even more so in Germany. Idealism believes that all structures of the material world are based on uniform organizing schemes or archetypes. Some idealists have argued that these fundamental forms are ideas that exist in the consciousness of God, but not all idealists were theists.

Third, the philosophical assumptions of Lamarckism seemed more acceptable than the Darwinian ones. Instead of the ruthless process of competition and external selection produced by the environment, Lamarckians believed that the internal creative forces of organisms played a role in their evolutionary history (either through mental activity or through positive physiological changes in response to environmental demands). Thus, Lamarckism affirmed the belief that evolution is directional and progressive, as opposed to the unpredictability of variation and the random nature of selection in Darwinian theory. Even those with theistic beliefs might retain a sense of purpose. The intrinsic tendencies of organisms could reflect various forms of divine design. In any case, Lamarckism was a less radical break with earlier philosophical and religious assumptions than Darwinism.

Fourth, the social aspects of Lamarckism were much more optimistic than Darwinian ones. If the choice of human behavior affects the inherited evolutionary future, then the possibility of rapid improvement of humanity opens up bright prospects for social change (it is for this reason Soviet authorities gave their blessing to Lysenko, when in the 1940s. he tried to revive Lamarckism). Of course, Lamarckism could not serve as a guide in the question of what kind of biological changes to strive for and what cultural changes can accompany them. Spencer was an ardent supporter of private enterprise, while Haeckel was socialist. The distinction between biological and cultural evolution has not been adequately scrutinized.

Attempts to confirm Lamarckism laboratory experiments led to questionable or ambiguous results, while Darwinism often offered an explanation for the findings. The distinction between genetic make-up (genotype) and physical appearance (phenotype) was only gradually recognized. Got recognition and understanding of the one-way flow of information from genes to a growing organism. At the scientific level, the Darwinian revolution in the 19th century was not yet completed, and only Mendel's genetics proposed a reliable theory of the inheritance of variation. Eventually, evolution came to be seen as a change in the relative frequency of genes in populations, but "population thinking" represented a huge shift in conceptual structure, which happened rather slowly. The synthesis of population genetics and the theory of evolution was carried out only in the 1930s. With the discovery of DNA in the 1950s. and the subsequent development of molecular biology, evolutionary theory perfected and went beyond Darwinian ideas (see Chapter 9).

No other scientific theory is as controversial as the theory of evolution. According to a recent poll, only 15% of people believe that homo sapiens evolved by accident. Therefore, even today there are new theories of how humanity has developed and will continue to develop. In our review of 10 of the most popular alternative theories of evolution.

1. Intelligent design

The founders of the theory of intelligent design are the American mathematician and philosopher Willian Dembski and biochemist Michael Behom... According to them, some things are too complicated to evolve by accident, so instead of assuming that humans are just a slightly more evolved ape, they should "start looking for the celestial equivalent of Steve Jobs." In other words, life on Earth arose as a result of the intervention of a certain higher intelligence.

2. Morphic resonance

While most countries in the world argue about evolution in biology, Rupert Sheldrake decided to look at the origin of species from the point of view of the universe. According to his theory, over time, invisible morphic fields are formed, which contain the collective memory of organisms and substances, including stars with galaxies. it information field affects the subsequent development of similar species.

3.Christian Science

Christian Science is a theory that says that God is everywhere and everything around is a part of him. This theory, as claimed Mary Baker Eddie based on contained in Bible eternal truths. Also, this theory states that nothing exists but the spirit, therefore everything around is an illusion.

4. Space ancestors

People are used to always thinking that Universe had a specific date of birth. Whether it was created by God or created as a result of the Big Bang - it happened at some particular moment. The theory of cosmic ancestors says that the universe has always existed, and life has always existed in it. On Earth, life arose from being carried by microbes from space. Later life developed, imitating life in the universe.

5. Ancient Astronauts

According to the theory of intelligent design or space heritage, aliens arrived on Earth millions of years ago and deliberately gave birth to life here. Ancient texts, flying saucers, pyramids, the Mayan calendar, etc. are cited as evidence.

6. Progressive creationism

There is a well-known story from the book of Genesis that God created the Earth in six days, and rested on the seventh day. Progressive creationists claim that each of these "days" lasted millions of years.

7. Intermittent balance

Of all the theories on this list discontinuous equilibrium theory is by far the most mainstream. As you know, all archaeological finds indicate not a gradual evolution, but about sudden appearance of species... Discontinuous equilibrium theory states that all species are in stable equilibrium, interrupted by short periods of strong change.

8. Theistic evolutionism

Theistic evolutionism is the science that most of all united Darwin's theory and the creation of man by God. The idea is that God created the universe and everything in it, only he created everything according to scientific theory. Hence, evolution is one of the divine tools in his experiments with creation.

9. Scientology

Religion that was created on the basis of the created American science fiction Ron Hubbard belief system, claims that human consciousness has gone from birds to sloths, and then - monkeys and finally people. People are the product of an alien race that perished in a nuclear disaster millions of years ago, and their consciousness was transferred from one animal to another until it entered the human brain. Feelings such as indecision, envy and toothache remained as a load of animal memories.

10. Creationism

Creationism claims that everything in Genesis is written absolutely right. In a literal sense: God created the Earth and everything that is on it for six days, that we all descended from Noah and once there were giants. In addition, the Earth is only six thousand years old, so any geological and archaeological data is complete nonsense.

Whatever theory of the appearance of life on Earth people adhere to, exists today.