Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: shubi; AntiGuv; js1138
BTW, just cause I'm turning in early.

Common descent is a primary pillar of the modern synthesis theory of the theory of evolution (as I think js knows)

845 posted on 02/08/2005 8:30:11 PM PST by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 835 | View Replies ]


To: Tribune7; shubi; js1138; Ichneumon; narby
To quote the source that you cited, Wikipedia: "A group of organisms is said to have common descent if they have a common ancestor. In biology, the theory of universal common descent proposes that all organisms on Earth are descended from a common ancestor or ancestral gene pool.¹" (bold emphasis added). To wit:

"¹ The earliest life-like forms probably exchanged genetic material laterally in a manner that is analogous to lateral gene transfer amongst bacteria. For this and other reasons, the most recent common ancestor may have been a genetic pool rather than an organism."

In fact, I personally think that if abiogenesis is the ultimate origin of life on earth, then it is far more probable that the universal common ancestor is a gene pool rather than one individual organism that preempted all others (though the latter would hardly contravene the precept of abiogenesis either, much less the underpinnings of evolution). If instead some kind of deity were the first cause of terrestrial evolutionary development then it would be more efficient to just design the first, solitary replicating organism - since it would already contain all the necessary ingredients for everything that followed.

Leaving that aside, this was your initial question and my response:

Are you saying that it is possible all life may not have a common ancestor?

That is certainly possible and would not contravene the scientific underpinnings of evolution in the slightest.

Although we have no evidence of this and it appears fairly unlikely at this juncture, it is also possible that we have not yet discovered the extant remnant, if it exists, of any organisms that have descended from a different common ancestry than that of all known forms of terrestrial life. So, whereas we don't have any evidence of this, it is also possible that it's out there but we just haven't uncovered it, and if we did uncover it then it would definitely not contravene the scientific underpinnings of evolution in the slightest (but it would be a most fascinating subject for research!) any more so than discovering life on Europa or Titan would.

Speaking of which, another reason your statement is certainly possible is because you didn't specify all life on earth, but I knew that's what you meant and answered accordingly. If you had asked about "common ancestry" rather than a "common ancestor" then I would've said: There is no evidence or any reason to believe that any known life on earth originated apart from and outside of the common lineage.

909 posted on 02/08/2005 11:54:25 PM PST by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 845 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson