In agreement with the CICI paper on evolution (The Pope and Evolution by George Sim Johnston), the foundation upon which Darwinism is based is tragically flawed. Darwin's theory that specie's habitat favors subtle genetic changes, which, over time result in entirely different species is a pure hand waving argument. To substantiate such a claim first requires us to have a fundamental understanding of what an ecosystem is. Without first knowing what factors and forces are important to the absolute existence of a species we cannot claim to "know" that the specie's environment or ecosystem has anything at all to do with their genetic composition.

Certainly there is circumstantial evidence supporting Darwin's claim, but without a functional model of an ecosystem, or the absolutes of species-habitat interactions, we can only assume that what we observe is important. We have only recently begun to theorize on the principals of ecosystem function and these theories are grounded in the importance of functional biodiversity for adapting to a habitat, which effectively removes the importance of environment as a factor in the shaping of genetic information. This is true if species are entirely dependent upon each other for their survival and independent of their inorganic environment.

Intuitively we know that species are dependent upon their inorganic environment to a substantial extent. The grounding of either a functionalist model of an ecosystem or the principal of natural selection must find the importance of place and environment as a significant fraction of the shaping principal. According to existing theory, a species invents itself, dreaming up its specific functionality in response to some mythical previously unfulfilled void in an already sustainable biotic ecosystem. In competition with such a model, creationism is a formidable argument. At least creationism alludes to a centralization of purpose.

In contrast to both of these hypotheses, however, it is suggested that species adapt not to each other, but instead to the energetics of mineral concentration gradients in their microenvironments. In those instances where an imbalance occurs, the impacted species become exposed to higher than normal concentrations of undesirable elements such as cadmium, chromium, mercury and lead, which lead to an accelerated rate of mutation. In addition to mutation, the mineralogical imbalances lead to stresses and disease, which also instigate mutation in the case of viral infection.

Mineral imbalances can occur as a consequence of species introductions or loss, climate changes, the non-uniform weathering of substrate rock and the stage of succession the ecosystem is passing through. Overshoot and population cycles can also affect mineral availability and the specifics of the concentration distributions. In all of these situations the most susceptible individuals will become subjected to mutation pressures well above natural statistical levels. This is a consequence of the ubiquity of heavy metals among the panorama of substrate minerals. The necessity of minerals to the functioning and construction of living organisms dictates the assimilation of metals by plant and microbial species. When the combined cycles of an ecosystem fail to present a sufficient concentration of the required elements, substitution ensues and results in an increase in mutation pressure.

The critical argument that a dearth of transitional species refutes the thesis of evolution fails to recognize the earth itself as the shaping force of evolution. This is a historical sore spot for religions grounded in literacy, as they tend to eschew the materiality of life. Literacy has been found to cause a minimization of the importance of many right brained values, or those more grounded in evolution. Any evolutionary model must take nutrition into account and when they do they must find an abnormal assimilation of mutagenic compounds will occur in inadequately adapted species. This heightened level of mutagenicity will result in low population numbers, with poor reproductive success, as well as a wide range of variants, some of which will resemble the parent species, some the new species. The failure of archaeologists to locate many of these transitional species speaks only to their short-term inadequacy. As a species begins to achieve adequacy it will assimilate less of the mutagenic elements and graduate into its new ecological niche.

The true weakness in the theories of ecology, including evolution, is the failure to recognize that all essential elements present the individual species with a concentration gradient, not just the nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. In fact, the limiting element of life, from the perspective of earth crust availability and average life requirements is boron, an element that is rarely included in ecosystemic studies. This is strange in light of the fact that boron is an important element in the metabolism of nitrogen, the main element studied. Boron also plays a critical role in cell division and the synthesis of certain amino acids.

In order, the real most important elements in any living system are Boron, Sulfur and Phosphorus. At least we got the Phosphorus right, but even then, we don't do much with it other than wonder why ecosystems hold on to it so tenaciously. Perhaps the fact that phosphorus is necessary concentrated thirty fold above background levels in addition to the fact that it is extremely soluble in water may shed some light on this mystery. When phosphorus levels are inadequate cadmium is usually substituted for it.

Phosphorus is important in energy transport and is an essential component of DNA (the genetic strand). Cadmium is a potent mutagen. When cadmium substitutes for phosphorus, the rate of mutation increases many fold, in direct proportion to the amount of cadmium present, or the absence of phosphorus.

Phosphorus is lost from an ecosystem when there is severe loss of biota, or when there is massive inundation. Both of these factors are present following glacial activity. Absence of biota follows volcanic eruptions. Fire followed by heavy flooding can significantly contribute to the erosion of phosphorus and massive overshoot of a herbivorous population could also outpace the biotic accumulation rate of phosphorus, leading to severe die back. The simple case of low availability can also result in chronic displacement of phosphorus with mutagenic elements.

Whatever the cause, phosphorus depletion will result in mutagenic acceleration. Mutagenic acceleration will result in the production of changes in the presentation of the various species, influencing those already poorly adapted, and less well equipped to compete for the traces of available phosphorus, the most. Long term, the consequence of mineral demands disparate with availability, is mutation. This holds for all essential and trace elements combined, seeing as though the ecosystem, over time, will tend toward an equilibrium favoring the lowest Gibbs energy state. The least stressed species, during times of nutrient stress, will be the least affected by mutagenic forces. More stressed species will be affected at rates exponentially related to their stress levels.

Over the long term, it pays to listen to the timeless wisdom of religion, even if it results in the fictionalization of the religion's mythology. In fact, the more mythological a religion's beliefs, the broader the scope of their application, and the more functional the religion becomes. In the evolutionary question, the church's disdain for Darwinism holds a substantial quantity of wisdom. In addition to goading ecology on to higher states of realization, evolutionary theory doesn't hold for human societies. It has been proven that we adapt to our environment socially at a rate thousands of times faster that evolution can even proceed. Though we may unconsciously select for socially desirable aspects in our mates, Darwinism still does not hold. Those attempts to invoke Darwinism as justification of biological determinism, such as the Nazis did are not only wrong scientifically, but result in hideously tragic consequences. Though a mineralogical grounding of evolutionary theory does provide a significant synthesis of known data and information, it should not be used to refute the wisdom of any religion.

Communication is a polymorphous entity. Facts, laws, science, religion... are all subject to interpretation. None should ever be taken literally. We lack the intellectual facilities to know everything, consciously, all the time. Within the use of sentence structure and word choices there is a lot of permutability. The most successful interpretations take an informed synthesis of all known approaches and formulate an hypothesis. The hypothesis must then be substantiated with data. If the result is within the critical error range for the anticipated uses of the hypothesis, then it is valid. If the error range creates a risky situation then the hypothesis is inadequate, though not necessarily invalid. Religion and science are both grounded in hypothesis and substantiation, and each has its domain of utility. Religion keeps science honest and contributes to the ethics of hypothetical dimensions. Science does the same for religion.
RETURN