The Paradox of Evolution: The Strange Relationship Between Natural Selection and Reproduction

In dense and repetitive text, Rothman (Life Beyond Molecules and Genes), a retired physiologist from the University of California, San Francisco, attempts to point out a major flaw in evolutionary theory and offer an alternative perspective. Unfortunately, the flaw he refers to is of his own making and is not recognized by other biologists, while his "fix" provides no meaningful mechanism for action and flies in the face of much of modern population genetics. Rothman simplistically and idiosyncratically defines evolution, claiming that "natural selection is about survival," that it is distinct from change in a population's genetic composition, and that it "progresses toward some optimum incarnation of a particular trait." However, most biologists recognize that survival is important only because dead individuals can't reproduce, that changes in allele frequencies is exactly how evolution is measured, and that evolution has no end goal. Given his definition, Rothman separates reproduction from natural selection, stating that its purpose is "to help ensure the continuance of our reproducing group, our species, the population of organisms which we are but an impersonal part." But Rothman offers no mechanism for such action and ignores the point that his perspective is at odds with virtually every aspect of evolutionary theory that has been proposed for the past 40 years. (Dec.)