Evolution is a fact. But can all facets of life be exlained with the neodarwinistic theory of evolution alone?
I don't think so, and I have elaborated the reasons for this appraisal in a detailed book about enigmas of evolution (Nahm 2007).


1. The Origin of Life
The first and foremost enigma of evolution concerns the origin of life. Although one might get a different impression from following discussions in the public media, it needs to be stressed that until today, scientists have no clue about how first cells and molecules like the DNA came into existence.

On close examination, it becomes obvious that at present, all we have are highly speculative and problematic hypotheses that are built on questionable experiments with largely disappointing results. Even fashionable concepts of self-organisation and computer models like 'hypercycles' couldn't change this situation. Consequently, leading experts in the field of probiotic chemistry have conceded a lack of progress and success in their research discipline.

In my book, I have described 24 profound (bio-)chemical difficulties that need to be overcome in theory and in practice before it can be assumed that we know how life emerged on our planet.

Still, despite all obstacles, life appeared on earth. According to the standard theory of evolution, the first cells developed into increasingly complex organisms by random mutations in their genes, and by subsequent selection of the best adapted individuals. Although this theory seems appealing on a superficial level, numerous serious problems emerge as soon as we ask deeper questions about some of its most problematic implications.
Understanding these problems in adequate depth, however, requires diving into intricate biological details, and there is no space for this on the present website. I will only add a few general comments on mutation and selection in the following.


2. Mutation
Regarding the concept of random mutations as the substrate for developing higher complexity, it should be noted that past scientists have explored the creative potential of mutations in huge and detailled studies. Literally millions of random mutations were generated in numerous animal and plant species, e.g. by exposing them to X-rays. Yet, the very few mutations that could be interpreted positively under certain circumstances always concerned the loss of previously existing traits, or the modification of an already existing metabolism pathway. Stable mutations that would have resulted in the generation of a new and useful structure were completely lacking. Despite enormous initial expectations, this line of mutation research was entirely abandoned by disappointed scientists already decades ago.


3. Selection
Just like mutations, natural selection among living organisms does occur in nature. But does it explain evolution? Biologists disagree with regard to answers to this questions, and they advanced several different hypotheses revolving around selection processes. On close examination, however, all of them lack a concrete and continuously available point of action that would explain the development of inumerable organismic characteristics, especially of many macroscopic characteristics.

Just take the peacock. Already Charles Darwin tried to explain the development of its train and ocelli via sexual selection - i.e., for generations, the peahen would have always selected the most magnificent males for mating. This explanation was doubted ever since, and indeed, recent studies confirmed that it doesn't seem to apply in this case.

But, more importantly, the peacock is a prime example that illustrates how the result of supposed sexual selection can completely override an ideal body shape that would be useful in the purported continuous struggle for survival. If the peacock can survive with a severe handicap such as its train, then natural selection can only be regarded as a very tolerant judge upon life and death, what is as at odds with the traditional neodarwinistic view.
And the peackock is only one example out of many in which the macroscopic appearance of an organism cannot be explained solely by merciless selection processes that eliminate all suboptimally adapted individuals. 

For example, look at the amazing wealth of shapes and colours of the fruiting bodies of fungi. Clearly, the macroscopic appearance of a given mushroom species has no bearing for its commonness or 'fitness.' Without exception, specifications on the physiological level determine whether a fungus species is common or rare.
This appraisal is also valid for many (but not all) plant and animal species.

But, as mentioned, these are only a few general comments about mutation and selection. There are many more problematic aspects regarding these two pillars of neodarwinistic evolution theory, but they require more subtle considerations. In my book, I have elaborated them in detail.


A living being appearing in a hostile environment
(Schreckhorn; Photo: M. Nahm)


Abnormal blossom development in the late
spider-orchid (Photo: M. Nahm)


Indian peacock displaying (Photo: M. Nahm)


Yellow stagshorn (Calocera viscosa), a very
common mushroom species (Photo: M. Nahm)


The "March mushroom" (Hygrophorus marzuolus).
Typically, it grows in March and it is considered
very rare in Central Europe (Photo: O. Nahm).


Summing up: The development of many features of organisms in the course of evolution cannot be explained by chance interactions of molecules, random mutations, and inevitable selection processes alone. Rather, the development of life, and that of many macroscopic features of organisms, appear to include autonomous development dynamics. Numerous past biologists, but also palaeontologists, have advanced evolutionary concepts along these lines of thought.



Ψ  In addition, so-called Psi-phenomena like telepathy, clairvoyance, and psychokinesis, do not fit into current models of neodarwinistic biology, or into any other strictly materialistic world view. Yet, judging on personal experiences and on the scientific literature on these topics (parts of which I have reviewed in my book), I came to the conclusion that Psi-phenomena do occur.
Consequently, an appropriate comprehension of the foundations of nature and life must build on a model of reality that can account for these phenomena.



                                                                   This model of reality suggests that organisms including human beings are predominantly
   adapted to the mesocosm they live in, but that this environment is only part of a much
   larger structure of reality - many facets of which are usually hidden from direct experience.
   Yet, on rare occasions, exemplified by Psi-phenomena (which are neither 'supernatural' nor
   'paranormal'), aspects of this background reality are lifted into our realm of cognition.
   In my first book, I have depicted why the deeper layer of reality that mediates
   Psi-phenomena needs to feature or comprise psychic qualities itself, and how this might
   relate to living beings and their biological organisation.

   So far, there is no convincing mainstream theory that could explain Psi-phenomena and the
   manner they are rooted in reality, but this is not surprising. In fact, already our attemtps to
   fully understand the micro- and the macrocosm, represented be e.g. quantum physics and
   the theories of relativity, are limited at best. A 'Theory of Everything' is nowhere in sight.
   
   The fundamental structures of reality have so far resisted to be explained with simple
   bottom-up causality and logic.

   Hence, it is more than likely that current models of mainstream biology are likewise too
   simplistic, and cannot fully explain life and its evolution - including the properties of the
   human psyche. Rather, it seems that we have to assume other modes of causation that can
  Dresden Zwinger (Photo: M. Nahm)      influence at least some biological development processes in addition to the 'usual' mode
                                                     of causation, and that these modes of causation are rooted in the deeper layers of reality.



Publications on Enigmas of Evolution:

Book:

Nahm M (2007). Evolution und Parapsychologie. Norderstedt: Books on Demand; 400 pp.


Article:

Nahm M (2009). Charles Darwin. Leben und Werk des Begründers der Evolutionstheorie. Tattva Viveka, 39, 8-14.