"Representative Trantis"  wrote in message
news:...
> Richard Dawkins is well known for his non acceptance of the theory of
> punctuated equilibrium. However, having recently read Steve Jones' updated
> version of Origin Of Species I have found that I have gained a new respect
> for just ho delicatly balanced the natural world is, and that one thing
> could drastically destabilise it.
> 
> I had always assumed that Punctuated equilibrium didn't seem to make any
> sense (Although I have to admit I had not read the theory in great detail,
> the fact that a man such as Richard Dawkins has discounted it tended to
> force it to lose a little wright in my eyes. Also, it seemed obvious that it
> was a literal interpretation of a very bitty fossil record.
> 
> However, recently, having gained an appreciation for the delecate balance of
> the natural world it has made me realise that one major change in an animal
> could have a major effect on the world around it, altering the relative
> fitness of all other animals. It has made me realise that it is indeed
> possible that a change in an animal could lead to massive spirals of
> evolution, perhaps triggering the massive changes that the theory states.
> 
> Thoughts?

Dawkins, IIRC, did/does not disagree with the conventional
interpretation of punctuated equilibrium.  That evolution sometimes
proceeds quickly, sometimes slowly has long been appreciated, for
example Charles Darwin talks about the "intermittent action of natural
selection" in the first editition of Origin.

Gould & Eldredge framed PE as an attack on the notion of gradualism,
however as Dawkins points out in The Extended Phenotype, it is
entirely consistent with gradualism and instead provides an
alternative to what we might call 'constant speed-ism' (i.e. the
notion that all evolution proceeds at a constant rate).  Since there
don't ever appear to have existed constant speed-ists, what Gould &
Eldredge were infact doing was erecting a straw-man in the hope that
they could convince others that their 'breakthrough' was a paradigm
shift.

Some readings of PE suggest that G & E were advocating saltationism,
which truly would be an alternative to gradualism.  If this is a
correct interpretation of their theory, then it is indeed
revolutionary, but unsubstantiated and almost certainly wrong.
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 8/26/03 12:17:46 PM