Biological Big Bang Model

[werple]

Has anyone read much on this model for the major transitions in evolution? Last year this peer reviewed paper was published, and in it Eugene Koonin attempts to answer why the fossil records seem to show that pivitol changes within RNA, proteins, animals, etc. "...seem to appeal rapidly and fully equipped with the signature features of the respective new level of biological organization." After reading the paper, I don't see any real difference between the BBB model and Gould's punctuated equilibrium. I also did not see any explanation for jumps in the records.

 

Is the BBB Model taken seriously in biology? What consequences, if any, does this model have on classic Darwinism?

[CharonY]

Could you specify which publication, precisely you are referring to?

 

In any case it would not have an impact on Darwinism as in Darwinism neither DNA/RNA nor proteins were involved ;=)

[PhDP]

CharonY; it's probably this article;

 

http://www.biology-direct.com/content/2/1/21

 

About his theories; it combines many controversial ideas, I would have to read more about this to form an educated opinion.

 

And anyway, I think classical Darwinism is already dead

 

If you're interested, Larry Moran posted a review of Koonin's biological big bang on his blog; http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2007/10/eugene-koonin-and-biological-big-bang.html

[CharonY]

Thanks. For some reason this paper did not pop up in an author search. Gonna read it after a few hours of sleep (been awake since over 20 hours).

[pioneer]

Last year this peer reviewed paper was published, and in it Eugene Koonin attempts to answer why the fossil records seem to show that pivitol changes within RNA, proteins, animals, etc. "...seem to appeal rapidly and fully equipped with the signature features of the respective new level of biological organization."

 

I always assume it has to do with discontinuous data. For example. if one had pictures of themselves at year 1 and then year 18, it would look like one day your grew from 15 pounds to 165 pounds. It would look like this human had a quantum growth spurt due to some genetic mutation. Baldness is another example. One can see them with hair as young and then have a picture of being bald. The conclusion is selective advantage and some mutation that changes the species. But in reality it was innate genes that took some time to become expressed. It is a magician's trick due the gap in data being a type of pretty girl distraction. Or quantum data leads to quantum conclusions.