any work that posits an adaptive explanation for a feature, but calls it an “evolutionary” approach – much less “the” evolutionary approach – is likely to be of greater value to the study of rhetoric or narrative in human evolution than to the study of human evolution itself.
My comment: Evolutionary biology that is touted in the context of the “Modern Synthesis” is no better than evolutionary psychology. Any links from neo-Darwinian evolution to human behavior have no basis in experimental evidence of biologically-based cause and effect.
Pseudoscientists have ignored the experimental evidence that links quantum mechanics to quantum biology, which Schrodinger (1943) linked from the anti-entropic energy of the sun to all living genera via their physiology of nutrient-dependent reproduction.
Indeed, in the case of higher animals we know the kind of orderliness they feed upon well enough, viz. the extremely well-ordered state of matter in more or less complicated organic compounds, which serve them as foodstuffs. After utilizing it they return it in a very much degraded form -not entirely degraded, however, for plants can still make use of it. (These, of course, have their most power supply of ‘negative entropy’ the sunlight)
In this interview, Eibi Nevo ignores everything currently known to serious scientists about physics, chemistry, and biology but links the sun to speciation and biodiversity via inbreeding.
…the macroclimate and the geology are the same on both slopes of the canyon, and yet, if you look into the African slope, the south facing slope, which gets up to 800% more solar radiation than the European north facing slope — you see dramatic differences in the biodiversity between the savannoid African and forested European slopes. . . . This represents a cradle of sympatric speciation, i.e., the origination of new biological species within freely inbreeding populations of abutting slopes. . . .
My comment: He attributes the dramatic differences in the biodiversity to solar radiation but links sympatric speciation to the origin of new species in the context of inbreeding. With different words, he simply repeats the common claims of biological uninformed theorists like this one: “…genomic conservation and constraint-breaking mutation is the ultimate source of all biological innovations and the enormous amount of biodiversity in this world. (p. 199)”
Mutations do not link the sun’s anti-entropic biological energy to sympatric speciation and biodiversity. Mutations link perturbed protein folding to pathology. The anti-entropic energy of the sun is linked from photosynthesis to RNA-mediated DNA repair via gene duplications and fixation of amino acid substitutions in the organized genomes of species that have successfully adapted to changes in the epigenetic landscape. The changes in the epigenetic landscape link metabolic networks to genetic networks via RNA-mediated DNA repair and the physical landscape of DNA in all living genera.