Zbigniew Lisiecki

1. Due to my theory evolutionary changes are not random, because 1. some circles of self-replication are stronger, some weaker, 2. some new circles appear naturally as a consequence of possible solutions. As a result certain spectrum (of species) establishes itself. 2. Species sometimes fit to the environment just as a consequence of damping (nat.selection), sometimes they don't if damping is weaker 3. The evidence for my thesis are existing systems which evolve with neglecting selection presure or systems evolving completely without environment 4. DNA changes surely affect the construction of individual species, but not an evolution generally. Without DNA changes the evolution takes place too. 5. Selection certainly affect only the way organism are build up, but not an evolution itself. You just use the term "evolution" in double meaning: 1. as a process, 2. as this process output. 2. is touched by selection and DNA changes and 1. is not. May I suggest you to consider a picture of a feedback. I noted it in footnote sup 10 in chapter 1.2.1 (power of self-reference). It allows to see easier why certain spectrum of species estabishes itself.

Exactly, three stages are necessary in the standard theory: I. Organic matter is replicating itself by passing DNS structure to its' children. II. Thereby unavoidable small changes in the DNA structure appear and III. the environment distinguishes between them by damping structures, which are less adjusted and allowing better adjusted to spread around. and this is nothing new. Now the new idea is that stages II and III are not necessary at all. I suffices for the evolution to take place.

I say nothing that differs from what is already known in this point. Without the sun the evolution needs another source of power like hot gases from the earth under the sea or similar sources, otherwise it dies. Nearly. I was speaking about the sun supplying self-replications. There are these self-replications which are crucial for the evolution to take place. Yes, the life could survive some weeks, but the evolution survives only as far as self-replications take place. What I say at this point is so simple and obvious that you doubt expecting something less simple ! The crucial point is later. Do you agree, that self-replications are the basis of any evolution ?

OK, please excuse me that I have overseen this rule. Here is my idea: The true power feeding the biological evolution is the circulation of matter defined by the self-replication (of DNA). This circulation is powered by the sun. The natural selection on the other hand has only a steering significance, without which the circulation will take place too. Do you agree ? I'll follow if yes.

> First, grass DOES grow from shearing. It grows differently than if you don't shear it. Only the second sentence is true. The gras grows from the sun with the help of water and minerals. You can see it with the following argument: the gras grows without shearing with the sun alone, but it won't with shearing alone, but without the sun. It's a pitty you won't look at the original text. Are you afraid of something like viruses, or spoofing ? How can I help you ? If you give me your e-mail addres I'll send you the whole article as pure html and you can verify this with any standard editor. My article is surely too long to post it here as one post. I'll copy an abstract below: The contemporary standard theory explaining the evolution of species with the natural selection between competiting forms is not sufficient as a general paradigma. This article proposes a change of view by which a feedback mechanism a main example of which is the loop closed with self-replication appears as the engine promoting evolution. The new view don't deny that the phenotype is in most cases shaped in the process of natural selection. Yet on a more general abstraction level it is the feedback mechanism that decides that some forms appear and other don't. With a new view explaining some phenomena appears more natural, is easier to understand and importand generalisations are possible.

Why do you ask about my backgroud ? I'd rather omit arguments by authority. If you'd like to know more about me just look at my homepage. I observed that some trivial mechanism, well known for each electronic ingenieur might be something new for a biologist, who does't have a technical education. Trivial solutions might be overseen by nearly all specialists. Still the nature shows us a suprising unity. ps. I added some critical voices under Introduction -> Discussions and critics

Hi swansont, I understand your claim. Yet the trouble is that subchapters open when clicking on them. This makes the rather long text easier to read. Therefore I cannot copy it here. I can only put excerbs.I can asure you that my whole domain evot.org (e.g. other servises too) has absolutely no payed commercial advert. Hi, Phi for All, I fully agree with you that natural selection is a fact seen every day. It also shapes the evolution of species. I only say that natural selection (NS) is not a correct force promoting evolution. Saying so means as if somebody says that the gras grows from shearing. The true force promoting evolution has another source ! I know that my theory is suprising, but read please more exact and judge about it later. Hi Endy0816, it may well be true that: "Many noncoding DNA sequences have important biological functions", as wikipedia says, but 80 % of non-coding sequnces is a little bit too much, don't you think ? Surely considerable efforts has been made to explain non-coding DNA, but my theory offers a very simple strightforward and obvious explanation ! Read it and compare, please.

Ok, thank you. I see. I'll correct and write. No, this is fine now. Possibly my server had some small trouble, but it should work properly now. Would you try again, please ?

Hi, I'd like to present you a new theory of evolution, which explans the phenomenon of evolution rather be self-references than by the competition, as the standard Darvins' theory does. The text is here: http://zbyszek.evot.org/ebs I'd be pleased by your comments. best, Zbigniew Lisiecki