Niles Eldredge - The Darwin Blogs

The Darwin Blogs – November 16, 2006.

Some News; A Guest Blog; Mr. Darwin Checks Back in-and Plans are Made

First, some news:

Great to be back home after a very stimulating and successful two-week trip to Italy. While there, I attended two conferences (one on each coast of northern Italy!), and met with friends in Milano.

The 32nd Piu Manzù Conference was held in the Grand Hotel in Rimini. (Frederico Fellini was born there-and the Grand Hotel was the inspiration for his movie Amaricord). The Piu Manzù Conference is under the general direction of Gerardo Filiberto Dasi, Giandomenico Picco, and Mikhail Gorbachev. Each year the Conference focuses on a specific world problem; this year it was the biodiversity crisis-or the so-called "Sixth Extinction." Named "La Vita in Bilico" (not coincidentally the same name as the Italian edition of my book "Life in the Balance") the Conferencegathered together an impressive array of scientists, physicians, economists, sociologists and politicians who brought their considerable and diverse expertise to bear on the environmental and human global problems confronting all life on earth right now. It was an inspiring event!

The two-hour Sunday session was televised live nationally by Italian television RAI. I was doubly honored to be the recipient of the Medal of the Italian Senate as well as the Gold Medal of the Piu Manzù Conference. My profound thanks to the organizers of this important Conference!

Then it was off to Milano-where I visited my friends Ilaria Vinassa and Giorgio Teruzzi at the Natural History Museum in Milan. I was happy to do a newspaper interview, explaining both my admiration for the excellent dioramas at the Museum-and my plans for the forthcoming meeting of our new group on Evolutionary Hierarchy Theory about to convene at the Festival della Scienza in Genoa a few days later.

My wife Michelle and I then met with the amazing performance artist/musician/urban designer Massimo Giuntoli. We spent a delightful day at Como-ending up at our favorite restaurant in the world, Tullia Angelotti's wonderful "Tagiura" back in Milan. Massimo has a vision: he has designed a multi-story glass-with-steel-frame building in the shape of a giant tortoise! Dedicated to science in general, and to Charles Darwin in particular, the Giant Tortoise will have exhibition and theater space in which to celebrate and promulgate evolution and other scientific themes. I am hoping that Massimo will succeed in having these Tortoise Buildings constructed in many cities around the world.

Then it was off to Genoa. The Genoa Festival della Scienza, only in its fourth year, has already grown to be the largest such festival of its kind in Europe-which effectively means in the entire world! (Only the festival in Edinburgh rivals the Science Festival in Genoa in size). Several hundreds of thousands of people attended this event in a ten day period this year.

With Telmo Pievani-one of the principal organizers of the Festival-I organized a new Research Group on the subject of Hierarchy Theory in Evolution. Telmo is a rising star in Italy-one of Italy's youngest tenured professors. He is a philosopher of science-specifically of evolutionary biology. My thanks to Telmo and to the head of the festival, publisher Vittorio Bo (whose firm Codice has published several of my books-including the Italian translation of Darwin. Discovering the Tree of Life) for making our meeting in Genoa possible-and so successful!

Hierarchy theory recognizes the many levels of biological organization. In a nutshell, genes are parts of genomes; genomes the genetic wholes that are in turn parts of organisms; organisms are parts of breeding populations ("demes"); demes in turn are parts of species; and species are individual components of ancestral-descendant sequences that make up the array of genera, families, orders, classes and phyla of the Linnaean hierarchy.

This is the so-called "evolutionary" (or "genealogical") hierarchy. Each component replicates-or, more loosely, "makes more of itself:" genes replicate; organisms reproduce; species speciate.

On the other hand, organisms have a distinctly economic side to their existence: they process matter and energy to develop (as embryos, for example), grow-and simply to continue to exist. This side of life finds organisms of the same species forming local populations that are in turn parts of local ecosystems; local ecosystems are connected with neighboring systems, as matter and energy flow across the often very loose boundaries between local ecosystems. And so forth: the biota of the entire world ("biosphere") is hooked up into a vast network of matter-energy flow. This is the "ecological" (or "economic") hierarchy.

Darwin's concept of natural selection boils down to the principle that how well an organism does in the economic side of its life is bound to have an effect on how well it will do in the reproducing side of its life. Hierarchy theory has the potential of integrating all aspects of evolutionary biology (perhaps all of biology in general) by explicitly recognizing the existence of each level in both hierarchies; understanding that there are distinct processes (or analogous processes operating at different scale of space and time) at each level (hence each level can be studied independently and in its own right-the way biology has historically been carved up into distinct, separate subdisciplines); and by analyzing the ways in which the different levels-within and between the "economic" and "genealogical" hierarchies-interact with one another.

In the 1980s, hierarchy theory showed promise as the way to develop a more complete evolutionary theory-and as a way to organize and better understand the complexity of biological systems. The approach has lain semi-dormant for over a decade, and our group has decided to see where things stand as of now-and how the entire field of hierarchy theory can be amplified and extended in evolutionary biology. We convened a research group consisting of T. Ryan Gregory (University of Guelph, Canada); Ryan studies genome size-and several years ago showed that the genome itself is hierarchically structured! Bruce Lieberman (University of Kansas) is a paleontologist who has made important contributions to our thinking about the importance of geography and the physical environment in understanding macroevolution. Ilya Temkin (NYU/American Museum) has brought molecular biology, anatomy and paleontology to bear on his understanding of the evolution of pearl oysters; Ilya has important new ideas about how networks relate to hierarchical structures. William Miller III is a paleontologist whose contributions to understanding large-scale ecological structures are unique-and very influential (absolutely essential to the development of my own thinking!). Telmo Pievani, as mentioned, is a philosopher of science (at University of Milano II); Telmo is an extremely sophisticated thinker who is able to interweave the group's disparate thoughts under the rubric of hierarchy theory. Dan Brooks (University of Toronto) is, along with me, the grizzled veteran of the group. A parisitologist, Dan has been at the forefront of all interesting theoretical discussions in systematics and large-scale evolutionary theory for his entire career; for example, with E.O. Wiley, Dan pioneered thinking about evolution in terms of thermodynamics-a subject which itself cries out for more attention. And me-whose work has been amply featured on these pages already.

We made plans and pushed the hierarchy envelope. But we also put on a 3 hour program for the public at the amazing Palazzo Ducale. With an audience of 500 people, we put on quite a show! Everything from molecules to ecosystems! Stay tuned for further announcements: this hierarchy group of ours is going places! My thanks again to Vittorio Bo, Telmo Pievani and the entire staff (and supporters!) of this extremely important annual event: The Festival of Science in Genoa!

One additional news note: I have finally obtained scans of my original paper (Eldredge, 1971) on the phenomenon named the very next year (Eldredge and Gould, 1972) "punctuated equilibria," as well as of our follow-up paper five years later (Gould & Eldredge, 1977). All three papers will be posted soon on the Library of Evolution page of this website-in downloadable, .pdf form.

Our Second Guest Blog!

And now it is my very great pleasure to introduce our second guest blogger. Mike Bertasso, Jr. started to write me when he was still in High School in upstate New York. Currently he is a freshman at Montana State University in Bozeman. Mike has a passion for evolution and paleontology (excellent choices!)-so, unsurprisingly, his email address (to which any interested readers can respond to Mike's blog) is paleoevolution@hotmail.com. I am very happy that Mike has taken the time and trouble to express his thoughts about evolution and creationism in American society; it is especially important that our nation's young people think about these issues-and express their thoughts for us all to be able to read! (And let this be a reminder to all prospective contributors: please feel free to contact me via email at this website if you have a blog to contribute! After all, Charles Darwin writes me here-so can you!).

Evolutionary Theory in an Insecure World
by Mike Bertasso, Jr.

Some things never change. Throughout the length of human history, new ideas have been advanced and often shunned for fear of change. With the passage of decades, centuries and millennia since our species' inception as a humble, hairless ape, society has often smothered change, perhaps whenever possible. Sure, change is possible when there is enough support for a new way of life, or a new theory, but even then the repercussions of a major change can drag out for decades, or even centuries.

Consider the "theory" of evolution, put forth so hesitantly by Charles Darwin in the mid-1800's and soon supported by many of the most prominent scientists of the time. Nearly a century and a half after Darwin published The Origin of Species, evolution is still accepted by scientists as the correct explanation for how species came to exist. Even the last head of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope John Paul II, came to consider the theory possible and stated that it did not have to be viewed as contradictory to Christian doctrines (see his October 22nd, 1996 address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences, entitled "Truth Cannot Contradict Truth"). Indeed, although references to the processes governing evolution may still be relegated to the realm of theory, evolution is a fact. However, in what is often considered to be the most scientifically advanced nation in the world, evolutionary biology is still facing attacks by ultraconservative religious sects. Why is this?

In many other nations, any attempt to falsify evolutionary biology by way of Creation Science (or its newer version, Intelligent Design), would be laughed off as total stupidity. However, that is not the case in the United States. In a nation that was the first to land on the Moon, a nation that prides itself upon both religious freedom and the separation of church and state, we also see religious concepts being pushed into science classrooms. This is not a new movement; the immensely publicized "Scopes Monkey Trial," where John Scopes was tried and convicted of teaching evolution to a high school class, occurred in 1925 and set the stage for subsequent "trials of evolution" that are occurring even today. Though the scientific "evidence" put forth in support of Creation Science or Intelligent Design has little or no strength to withstand scrutiny, it has been seriously considered by at least some courts in this nation. True, the Federal District Court in Little Rock, Arkansas did condemn the Creation Science movement as unscientific (in Mclean vs. Arkansas-a decision left standing by the higher courts). Yet much of the same "evidence" used to support Creation Science has been applied to Intelligent Design, and still fails under scrutiny. The "theory" is basically unchanged in everything but name, yet once again has been considered for inclusion in science classrooms in this nation. Evolutionary theory, on the other hand, has been strengthened through myriad discoveries and observations since Darwin's day, and yet is still being challenged by the Intelligent Design movement. Again, we must ask ourselves why.

What would possess a person to condemn a scientific theory as false even when the theory in question has been demonstrated to work many times over, while the alternative has only been proven to be flawed? Perhaps, in a world wracked by war, economic uncertainty and terrorism, people are drawn away from scientific truths and toward a comfortable state of religious immersion. Religious faith is not the problem here, and I do not wish to state otherwise. What is problematic is when religion is removed from its proper role. Science and religion are not mutually exclusive (Truth cannot contradict Truth), as they deal with two wholly different realms: religion dealing with how to live our lives in a moral sense, and how to interact with other people to a certain extent; and science dealing with how to live in and interact with a constantly changing world. Religion is a powerful force that can bring out the best in people when exercised in its proper element, and science can be a dangerous tool when taken out of context. The mirror statements also apply, such that religion is also dangerous when taken out of context, and science is a powerful positive force when applied in its proper element. When religious doctrines are forced into a science classroom, no good can come of it. Let us keep religion in the realm of religion, and leave the science classrooms to what they are meant for, the teaching of science.

In order to overcome the difficulties facing our society, we must depend on future generations as well as ourselves, and without a strong educational background, where will our descendants lead us? A science as important and far-reaching as evolution must not be compromised in our educational system. Indeed, rather than attack evolution as a science only because it goes against the religious convictions of some, we should embrace the science with open arms for what it truly is, namely, one of the most far-reaching and important scientific theories ever developed.

Mike Bertasso, Jr.

Mr. Darwin Reappears

Readers of these blogs may recall that in his most recently posted email to me, Charles Darwin announced he was off to visit-in cyberspace-someplace other than the United States. Here is his-rather disquieting-account of that journey:

Nov. 7th, 2006

My Dear Eldredge

I trust this note finds you well after your recent excursion in Italy. I look forward to hearing the details of your adventures there. Though I myself never managed to visit that most celebrated country, I did enjoy the opportunity to exchange considerable correspondence with Italian scientists in my day-most notably, perhaps, with the founding director of the Naples aquarium.

As to my own travels, I view my recent experiences with an equal measure of joy and dismay. I decided to see what news I could learn of the Galapagos Islands-those equatorial islands 600 miles west of the coast of Ecuador. History seems to view the Galapagos as the very sine qua non of my early intellectual journey that took me, after much doubt and uncertainty, to the conviction that the transmutation postulate is in fact correct. My experiences there, upon reflection, may well have been decisive-but in fact my cogitations had led me to entertain the notion of transmutation quite some time before the Beagle arrived there in the Fall of 1835.

Yet I must confess that the Galapagos do indeed hold a special place in my heart. They are so isolated, and though famous for their fauna and flora, so desolate-seeming. Life thrives there-but the struggle is palpable.

Or, I should say, was. Or perhaps I should say that the struggle has deepened in new dimensions not reflecting an aboriginal state of Nature. What is palpable now is the absence of some familiar creatures; and though there are indeed many places there that continue to impart the flavour of living exuberance in the face of conditions most harsh, to my extreme regret it seems that the human population of these islands, and most especially the commercial exploitation of the fisheries (not to mention the mostly well-meaning, but Oh so destructive tourists!) threaten even these remote islands with a destruction so horribly complete in my contemplation, that I found my visit there to be most unsettling.

Good as it was to "see" the Galapagos Islands again, I cannot remove from my mind's eye their current state of degradation and prospective further decline.

On the brighter side, I did learn something of the rather thorough research work undertaken by Drs. Peter and Rosemary Grant, their students and colleagues, carried out over the past 25 years or so on what I am bemused to learn are called "Darwin's finches" native to the Galapagos. (I gather I am the butt of many jokes as to my having neglected to systematically collect, let alone see the signficance of, these small nondescript birds; to which I can only reply that no one is perfect-and from what I can see on the Internet, these birds are devilishly difficult to tell apart!). I hope to learn more of the Grants' analyses of evolution-which appear to encompass all subjects from the origin of variation; inheritance; natural selection; up through the appearance of new species and indeed, the production of the entire "adaptive radiation" (as I gather the production of disparate forms in a single lineage has come to be called). Perhaps you can, in due course, enlighten me further on the Grants' work-and any other research undertaken subsequent to my visit and the analyses of my collections, especially by Gould (on the birds-the mockingbirds being, as you are aware, the most important) and (at long last, after it became abundantly clear that dear old Henslow was simply not going to come forth) by Hooker on the Galapagean plants.

My dear Sir, I look forward to further correspondence with you.

Yours Most Sincerely,

Charles R. Darwin

To which I replied:

Nov. 9, 2006

Dear Charles Darwin:

Many thanks for your latest communiqué-it is always a pleasure to hear from you. Though I am sorry that you have had to witness first hand the destruction of your beloved "Islas Encantadas," alas this is the by-now familiar story of virtually all the world's terrestrial ecosystems-no matter how remote, and no matter how special, they may be.

As it happens, I will be traveling this coming January to the Galapagos, leading an "eco-tour" on behalf of the American Museum of Natural History along with Professor David Kohn, already mentioned in our correspondence as a foremost Darwin scholar and expert botanist as well. I should say that eco-tourism can be vital to conservation efforts-as well as, no doubt, contributing to the decline of a region's habitats. And I assure you that even as I type this reply, efforts are being redoubled to strengthen the measures already in place to preserve the fragile ecosystems of the Galapagos.

As to your well-publicized failure to grasp the signficance of these drab little birds known as "Darwin's finches," I think it gives people some measure of relief to see that you, too, were only human-even to the point of ignoring your mentor's (I refer to John Stevens Henslow) training on how to collect and keep proper records when in the field-lessons which you seldom otherwise lost sight of in your momentous five-year journey.

May I suggest a sort of experiment which would vastly improve the quality of my own visit-but could prove enlightening to yourself as well? May I ask you, at your leisure, to write me at this website your particular recollections of each individual locale you visited while in the Galapagos in 1835-in effect telling me what YOU would be looking for at each stop along the way. I will double check, of course, against your diary, zoological notes and the two editions of the "Voyage of the Beagle"-but it would be an honour and personal thrill to explore these islands with your memories as a guide.

In turn, I (and I am sure, Professor Kohn and our traveling companions) can be your eyes and ears-measuring the current state of the islands against your experiences so long ago. Does that sound like a good idea to you? Will you do this for me-and for your own rself? I truly hope so.

As to my recent experiences in Italy, they were more joyous for me than your digital journey to the Galapagos seems to have been for you. You'll see my report on these adventures earlier on in this current "Darwin Blog."

I look forward to furthering our correspondence-and especially to your guide to my forthcoming Galapagos visit-should, of course, you agree to provide one.

Yours,

Niles (Eldredge)

Previous Blog ::: Blog Index (main) ::: Next Blog