Sunday, February 18, 2018

Did We Evolve From Monkeys?

There are many impressive and alluring aspects to the industrial capitalism of the United States of America. From technology to entertainment, energy production to finance, there are many industries my home country tends to excel in. Unfortunately, as far as I’m concerned, one of these innovative fields is that of religion. It is dynamic and adaptive, with the Evangelical wing of Christianity possessing a particular penchant for changing with the mood of the people in a way nearly unmatched in the Western world. As such, we have among the highest rates within developed countries of adults who do not accept the legitimacy of the scientific Theory of Evolution. This isn’t merely unfortunate, it’s dangerous.

When speaking with fundamentalist creationists, plenty of whom are in my very family, they truly, earnestly believe the Bible is the literal, infallible word of God. Therefore, the Earth and our entire universe cannot be older than ten-thousand years or so, in their minds. Not only is this wrong, it’s wrong by orders of magnitude, yet believe on they do. Their viewpoints often result in a bombardment of questions the likes of, “Where did everything come from if God didn’t speak it into existence?” “If Evolution is so scientific, why can’t we ever seem to witness it happening?” and my personal favorite, “If we evolved from monkeys, why do monkeys still exist?”

To say I find this frustrating would be an understatement, so I’ve decided to provide some sweeping answers and explanations to this apparently difficult-to-understand concept. First off, a theory in the scientific community does not carry the meaning many would imagine and commonly use. There is currently a Theory of Gravity which describes why we are pulled towards the Earth, Radio Wave Theory is used for cell phones and other such devices, Germ Theory of Disease is relied on in modern medicine, the Theory of Refraction is utilized by contact lenses and glasses, Theory of General Relativity is accepted by physicists and the aerospace industry; there’s even a Theory of Heliocentrism, related to the Sun being the center of our solar system. All of these are now obviously factual, and are taken advantage of by modern technology and public practices every single day, yet they are ‘just theories.’ This is because they all have an abundance of evidence to support them, and are readily accepted by the entirety or vast majority of the scientific community. The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is exactly this kind of ‘just a theory.’

In other words, it isn’t “just” anything, Evolution is a profoundly well-established framework for understanding a variety of fields within and related to the biological sciences. Over a century of research, discovery and debate has gone into establishing, developing, tweaking, and understanding the complex and amazing story of life on this planet. There is no longer a debate among the wider scientific community as to the legitimacy of Evolutionary Theory, just as there is no debate regarding the existence of gravity, atoms, bacteria or radio waves. While the latter items may be more obvious in our day-to-day lives, the preponderance of evidence supporting all of these concepts are of very similar quality. One simply conflicts with an established religious doctrine, and is thus contested.

To top it off, our school system does a generally poor job of educating kids in what natural selection is, why Evolutionary Theory matters or just how much evidence there is in support of the framework. There are a number of misconceptions and misunderstandings I hear on a regular basis, and many are fairly easy to explain. First off, Evolution is a process through which life slowly diversifies into a huge variety of niches, creating complex and co-dependent eco-systems, like forests, jungles, savannas or oceans. For example, phytoplankton creates its own energy through chemical reactions using the power of the sun, while fish feed on the plankton to survive. Fish become food for predatory species, such as sharks or dolphins, and when these predators die, their bodies give needed nutrition for plankton. This is extremely simplified, but think back to the Circle of Life analogy from The Lion King and you have a pretty good idea of how these ecosystems work.

Secondly, the phrase ’survival of the fittest’ is a misnomer; the diversification of life is better described as ‘survival of the good-enough.’ So, imagine we have a dense forest, and an arriving species of bird is the first of its kind to make its way to this place. Let’s say there are insects living within the bark of the tree, leaving only small openings from which to catch them. Meanwhile, there are nuts which have fallen to the ground bellow, but the shells are tough and require notable strength to crack. The smaller birds with thinner beaks will be better suited to catching the insects, while the larger, stronger birds with stocky beaks will be better at breaking open nuts.

Now, picture these birds fifty generations later, when the larger, stocky birds breed with those similar to them closer to the ground, while smaller, thinner-beaked birds breed with others similar to them higher up in the trees. Imagine this trend continuing for hundreds; thousands of generations, and what you eventually get is birds which have adapted to the environment which allowed them to best survive. These birds slowly become so physically and genetically different, they can’t even breed together any longer, and as such are no longer considered the same species. This, my dear viewer, is Evolution by Natural Selection at work.

So the reality is, we do see Evolution happening before us, we simply don’t often realize it or know what to look for. In today’s world, when a horse and a donkey breed, they produce a mule. While still able to produce offspring themselves, their mules are born infertile and are unable to breed. This is because horses and donkeys are growing closer to a final stage of genetic diversification, that of finally cutting ties with a closely related species and not being able to breed together at all. Given enough future generations, horses and donkeys will no longer be able to produce mules, and will then be considered entirely different species. This is Evolution happening before our very eyes.

Humans, for our part, have also descended from such a line of diversified species. We have not evolved from monkeys, nor even other modern great apes such as chimpanzees or gorillas, yet all of us have a common ancestral species if we go back far enough. The differences between us come down to the niches we fill. Gorillas are large, strong and forage on the ground, while lemurs are small tree-dwellers with eyes better suited to operating at night. We homo-sapiens are omnivorous pack hunters native to grasslands, yet our niche, and how well we fit into it, has allowed us to become much more successful and diversified than most species could imagine.

So, we exist alongside monkeys and other great apes because we are not competing in the same niches. The so-called “missing links” between humans and chimps or bonobos are largely if not entirely extinct because they directly competed within our niche, and our species is the current winner. Jellyfish, trees and bacteria have all existed since long before humans were around, and continue to exist because they have remained the most successful at surviving within their specific environment. Evolution does not require what may seem lower level lifeforms to die off so others higher on the food-chain may live, it is in fact the opposite.

Life is built out somewhat like a pyramid, from the bottom up. At the base are single-celled organisms, such as bacteria, fungi and protozoa. They are required for everything above them to survive, as they are very often symbiotic and assist in biological function such as digestion, immunity, and decomposition upon death. Next up are lifeforms which can produce energy themselves, such as plants and phytoplankton, which feed herbivorous, plant-eating species like blue whales and cows. Then we have the meat eaters, or carnivores, which consume creatures feeding on plants. Finally, we have the odd species which don’t fit neatly into one specific category, often being insectivores or omnivores, and this is where humanity finds itself.

We have greatly benefitted from being able to consume many different types of foods for energy, and being able to survive and thrive in so many different environments. Our social skills, use of tools, and relative environmental flexibility have all led to our species breaking many of the traditional rules of natural selection, but we are by no means exempt from them. We find ourselves at the top of our food chain, and as many predatory and even herbivorous species before us have discovered, if our environment changes too drastically or our food supply runs out, we too will join the list of extinct species.

The bottom line is, we’re not entirely sure where our universe and all the energy within it originally came from. It may have been divinely orchestrated, or it may be through naturalistic processes we simply don’t fully understand yet. What we are pretty damn sure of, however, is our universe, the earth and life on it are all far older than ten thousand years old, and life on this planet is constantly changing and adapting. One generation at a time, one species at a time, earth has played host to a brilliant and incomprehensibly complex dance of life which is still carrying on before us.

We humans are a powerful player in this current world, yet we are still but one part, one cog in a massive machine we have little control over. We would do well to remember just how fragile our position truly is, and do everything we can to understand our place; how our world around us truly works, without the willfully applied blinders of ancient books preaching supernatural origins. We only get one shot at life, as people and a species. Let’s make it count.

Thanks for reading! This blog works in tandem with my YouTube channel of the same name. Feel free to check it out if you enjoy my content here. Come back often for regular updates, and see you next time...


YouTube channel here.

Saturday, February 10, 2018

Was Star Wars Ever Truly Good?

Gungans, Ewoks, Asteroid-dwelling space worms, weak plot development, goddamn gungans, terrible dialogue, awful romantic subplots, loads of poor acting, idiotic stormtroopers, useless droids, EFFING GUNGANS; the list goes on. The long and short of it is this: even as a life-long Star Wars fan, I must admit, the saga as a whole, even the best films, have plenty of problems. Much of the franchise, including parts of the original trilogy, kind of sucks, in fact. With as much flak as The Last Jedi has been receiving, one might presume a rich, complex, masterful lore preceded it. But, that simply isn’t so.

Like most Americans, I grew up watching the original films and closed in on adulthood alongside the prequel trilogy. Like many pre-adolescent boys in 1999, watching the Phantom Menace was exhilarating for me, and I remain among a fairly small percentage of the population who hold a positive memory of my initial theatrical viewings of the prequels. They’re fun, fast-paced, action packed, and feature impressive world building paired with sublime musical scores. Not to mention, FULLY TRAINED JEDI LIGHTSABER AWESOMENESS. There’s no doubt the prequel trilogy sucks from a strict quality standpoint, but they’re so much fun to get lost in.

And that’s the point, really. The Star Wars films are overrated, not even Empire Strikes Back broke ground in storytelling or cinematography. What they are, and have always been, are supremely entertaining, summer-popcorn-blockbusters which have bled over into popular culture. Much as Shakespeare wrote for low-brow theatrical productions, while today his work is held up as exemplified mastery of flowing, heady, dramatic narrative, the original Star Wars trilogy is commonly regarded as something sacred, a holy portion of childhood not to be disturbed.

Frankly, I don’t have an inherent problem with this view. Star Wars films are among my favorite as well, and helped shaped my world as a child. Legitimate complaints against perceived flaws or creative decisions made in all of them, notably the prequels, are entirely justifiable and expected. The problem comes into play when this extends to automatically disliking new films which don’t fit into what specific fans want out of the franchise. It’s becoming incredibly common now for fans to project what they believe Star Wars should be, what they think the best version of the story is, onto the sequel trilogy and judge these new films accordingly.

Yes, Maz Kanata was shoe-horned into The Last Jedi, the Canto Bight casino sequence felt ripped out of the prequels, Snoke getting no background explanation at all left me feeling somewhat cheated, and why the hell the First Order didn’t just short-jump their Destroyers to surround and eliminate the remainder of the Resistance early on in the film is beyond me. The Last Jedi is not a perfect film, nor are any members of the Star Wars cannon. The Empire Strikes Back definitely comes the closest, but even this hallowed benchmark has plenty of campy and self-indulgent moments while leaning on hype from the original and giving a lazy cliff-hanger ending. It is not perfect story telling, and that’s okay.

The original Star Wars film was a simple, straight-forward hero’s journey tale. It was a coming-of-age, farmboy-saves-the-princess-and-slays-the-moon-sized-dragon-in-space sort of story. It was fun and well-paced, imaginative and captivating. Yet for the franchise to continue, it needs to break away from its roots as a children’s-sci-fi-fantasy and really build out the world around it. The Expanded Universe books, games and comics have been one way to enrich the franchise, but they became rather convoluted and internally inconsistent. So when Disney acquired LucasFilm, they needed to start over, to tell a cohesive tale from a unified source, and build out from there.

This is what we’re seeing now with the Sequel Trilogy and spin off anthology films. For the Star Wars franchise to survive and thrive long-term, it needs to adapt and mature. This is exactly what The Last Jedi does best: honor the past while blazing new potential for the future. Fans have had decades to imagine what the Original Trilogy heroes have done and are like all these years later, and it’s understandable many dislike the direction Disney took them, especially given their storylines in the Expanded Universe. Regardless, the backlash against the Sequel films, notably The Last Jedi, is unwarranted. Star Wars was never ours, it was never going to be decided by fan committees or a glut of individual authors. Not if it wanted to survive as more than a pleasant memory, anyway.

Disney is focused on world building, turning Star Wars into a cinematic powerhouse the likes of the MCU or the Call of Duty franchise is in gaming parlance. This isn’t going to be everyone’s style, not everyone will like this shift. Many will prefer the “good old days” which exist mostly in their heads. This is perfectly fine, yet fundamentally leaves us with two options regarding the saga. We can check out at any time, and choose to remember Star Wars for what it meant to us as children. Or we can adapt; appreciate the series for what it is: a franchise now more than forty years old, with a new generation of story-tellers crafting, for we the viewers, rich, flawed, fun summer-popcorn-blockbuster stories from a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away.


Thanks for reading! This blog works in tandem with my YouTube channel of the same name. Feel free to check it out if you enjoy my content here. Come back often for regular updates, and see you next time...

YouTube channel here.

The Art of Writing Well: Game of Thrones Rewrite: Part 2 - How To Fix Seaso...

The Art of Writing Well: Game of Thrones Rewrite: Part 2 - How To Fix Seaso... : Whew! Okay, now that we have the aforementioned laundry lis...