Robert W. Felix is far from alone in his view that new species are not the result of a long accretion of changes. A review of Magnetic Reversals and Evolutionary Leaps: The True Origin of Species.
Magnetic Reversals and Evolutionary Leaps: The True Origin of Species
by Robert W. Felix
published by Sugarhouse Pub (October 24, 2008)
Ppbk., 192 pgs.
ISBN-10: 0964874679
ISBN-13: 978-0964874671
Charles Darwin got it wrong. This is not to disparage the man. Science is an ever evolving process and scientific theories are subject to being replaced by newer knowledge. Most certainly, Darwin (1809-1882) got everyone thinking about evolution, but the problem is that evolution is not a slow process. It happens very fast.
Indeed, Darwin's friend, the famed biologist Thomas Huxley, supported aspects of Darwin's theory, but didn't believe that evolution was gradual. Then, too, Darwin had to contend with those who believe that Noah built an ark and put two of all the creatures of the Earth on it. Religion is a great comfort, but it is no substitute for science.
I first became acquainted with Robert W. Felix through his book, Not by Fire, but by Ice, that pointed out that the Earth is on the cusp of a new ice age. Insofar as the Earth is now fully a decade into a new cycle of cooling, one that could last several decades or evolve into a new, full blown ice age, Felix not only got it right, but, in the course of writing his book, discovered an even more frightening scenario.
Magnetic Reversals and Evolutionary Leaps: The True Origin of the Species is Felix's new book (available from www.iceagenow.com) and, were it not for fans like myself and others, it is not likely to make it to the cover of leading news magazines or become a segment on Sixty Minutes. It will be largely ignored by the mainstream news media for the same reason they ignored his first book. Enthralled by the bogus "global warming" hoax, the mainstream media will find his new book equally appalling for its presentation of facts that run contrary to their ignorance.
Felix is far from alone in this view that new species are not the result of a long accretion of changes. The late paleontologist, Stephen Jay Gould (1941-2002), popularized that field of science with articles and books. Gould noted, "Gradualism is not a fact of nature. Most new species appear with a bang, not a protracted crescendo." Fossil records demonstrate that a species remains unchanged for millions of years before abruptly disappearing, "only to be replaced just as rapidly with a species that is, though clearly related, substantially different. Nature does take leaps."
Felix's great talent comes both in his ability to read and absorb the writings of scientists from different fields of study, and in his ability to explain complex issues to people like myself. I always remind readers that, while I am a science writer, I am not a scientist. Felix is a science writer and one who brings a great deal of passion to his quest to understand the history of the Earth and the life that appears to distinguish it from others in our galaxy.
While researching ice ages for his previous book, he became intrigued by a phenomenon that always coincides with them, magnetic reversals. In addition to mass extinctions of species that always accompanied magnetic reversals, Felix and others noticed that new species replaced them. For example, human beings are, in the long history of the Earth, 4.5 billion years, "blindingly new," having existed a mere 200,000 years.
"Mass extinctions," writes Felix, "have been the rule, rather than the exception, for the 3.5 billion years that life has existed on this planet. Almost identical, each extinction was abrupt, each was extensive, and each was caused by some temporary, unexplainable event."
Permit me to pause at this point and note the vanity and idiocy of those who demand that humans must conserve every species on Earth, no matter the cost involved. This nation has spent billions via the Endangered Species Act. In a similar fashion, the notion that humans are responsible for a non-existent "global warming" is the justification for measures that will wreck the economies of nations and cause untold losses of human life thanks to famines that should be avoided.
The next time you hear or read the word "environmentalist," you should also hear and read "fascist" for the core of the environmental movement is the belief that human beings are "a cancer" on the Earth and should be reduced to a minimum.
The real threat to life on Earth are magnetic reversals, as revealed by magnetostratigraphy, the study of the magnetic properties of ancient layers of sediment (strata) now hardened into rock. Major reversals "appear to occur in sync with ice ages" and other measurements of time. "And it happens fast!" says Felix.
The Earth is at the end of a cyclical interglacial period. Such periods are about 11,500 years in length and it has been 11,500 years since the last ice age. That portends that another magnetic reversal is due as well.
Though decried as "deniers," those of us who have been skeptical of the claims of Al Gore and the legion of global warming charlatans, the real deniers are those refuse to acknowledge the facts put forth and explained in Felix's new book.
Those who would have you dramatically alter your lifestyle, by ending the use of oil, natural gas, and coal for energy, by installing thousands of wind turbines and miles of solar panels, are willfully ignoring the signs that the Earth is poised to enter a new age in which life as we know it — including our own — will be dramatically changed and to a large extent even exterminated.
There is nothing humans can do about this.
Magnetic Reversals and Evolutionary Leaps: The True Origin of Species is available on Amazon.com.
Saying that Darwin was wrong is about as silly as saying Newton was wrong, or that Hip-Hop negates Mozart. Of course there are new discoveries that modify and revise earlier observations and theories, but science is a process of building on what has come before and whether you are a evolutionist or a IDer it damages your credibility to attack an idea that had not been proposed before some point in history. Certainly Darwin, if he were alive today, would be fascinated with magnetic pole theory and DNA analysis.
Unfortunately I am not apt to believe anything touted by Mr. Felix due to his sources of information. I would recommend that one read this column before purchasing his book or giving any sort of credibility to his assertions.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2005/may/10/environment.columnists
Too bad that this is not what the Bible says.
The Bible says that only from the land animal were to come, and from those only those who breath through their nostrils.
So much for the over population of the Ark, and the attacks on the Word of God
Ivan: Read the first paragraph of my commentary. Again. Very slowly. Then you will understand, perhaps, that I was not disparaging Darwin or the theory of evolution.
Alan: Well said. Any comment on the validity of Felix given his previous history of citing factual errors? I also shot you an email as I am curious.
I read it again very slowly and I’m not focused on you or this article in particular, but there is a lot of Darwin bashing now a days and I just wanted to make this point.
:>)
Ivan,
Like you, I do not fault Darwin as a scientist, per se. He was an intelligent enough guy who added something to the debate of his day. However, he may also have been something an anti-theist whose atheism ‘colored’ his theories (waters too muddied by detractors and defenders to sort out). Personally, I doubt his atheism (or agnosticism) went quite that far at the time of writing “The Origins of Species”; yet, as my sources indicate, he was already critical of religion before he sailed on the ‘Beagle’. He put off writing “Origins” 17-years, which he wouldn’t have done had his only problem been that of supporting the already extant ‘chance’ arguments (going back to Greek philosophers). Had he wanted to publish his results and speculate as to chance, he could have done that but didn’t. Evidently, then, he wanted to make a more definitive statement demolishing ‘design’, but didn’t have the stomach for a fight. Only when Wallace threaten to publish before him did he chance it himself.
“Darwin’s Hidden Agenda” (http://www.parentcompany.com/csrc/cdagenda.htm ) suggests he kept his hostility to religion hidden due to the indignation he and his ideas would suffer (Darwin was a ‘Great Awakening’ contemporary). Much of the ‘Darwin’s reticence’ defense of his delay hinges on his ideas being radical. However, as Meyer’s “A Scientific History” shows ( http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=3241 ), the evolution v. design debate was both ancient and contemporary, with Reid and Paine supporting and Kant partially supporting evolution over design. That reduces this reluctance to publish to more pragmatic considerations (career?). There is little doubt he opposed the ‘intelligent designer’ argument and wanted it silenced (if not in 1836, then later). If he, indeed, had as an objective to specifically discredit Paley’s ‘Designs of Living Creatures”, it would make his theory favoring evolutionary origins ‘agenda-based pseudo-science’. Agenda-based pseudo-science (e.g., present day climate-science) is that which un-objectively arrives at a particular conclusion despite contrary evidence. Darwin then is, at minimum, guilty of ignoring and disparaging contrary evidence wherever it leads to divine origins. If true, then, to the extent he was able, he wanted religion silenced, at least in the arena of science. Whether or not this was his intention, it was the principal result of his theories within his own lifetime; an outcome he surely understood and did nothing to discourage, and still the way it is exploited today (prejudicially blocking attempts at re-introducing G*d into discussions of science).
How do we know this critique is, in some degree, just? One way is to look at things Darwin did and chosen associates more than denials and obfuscations. Darwin’s later associations and collaborations point almost exclusively to someone disdainful of religion at best and hostile at worst. It has been argued he married a pious woman, and that is taken as proof of neutrality. Yet very few contemporary women were less than pious, making it difficult for him to find and marry on that basis. Moreover, men are more often chosen than we choose, and I believe that was the case for young Darwin (victim of heart more than guided by head). The other case used to misrepresent Darwin as arriving objectively at his conclusions, is Robert Fitzroy, Captain of the Beagle; with whom he shared long discussions of and seemingly favoring divine intervention. As ‘Hidden Agenda’ shows, however, Darwin had ample reason to dissemble, did so on at more than one occasion (showing him capable of it), and on leaving the Beagle immediately dropped the pious pretense. Darwin came from a family of skeptics from whom he would have learned to keep his own council in a society that frowned on religious non-conformity. We have from his own autobiography he was an agnostic who was not particularly outspoken and who left it to others to fight his battles (which fits the ‘Hidden Agenda’ view of him).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_darwin#Religious_views
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=3241 – history of the Designer (teleological) v. Evolution debate
http://jeromekahn123.tripod.com/thinkersonreligion/id17.html – atheist site: disputes Darwin was anti-religious
http://darwiniana.org/religion.htm – Darwin’s apologia to family and friends on question of his religious views
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watchmaker_analogy – discussion of Paley
http://www.discovery.org/a/146 – additional criticisms of Darwinism (if not directly of Darwin)
There are some serious errors to Mister Felix’s tome.
For one, the Paleomagnetic record does NOT show a regular reversal every 11,500 years. Some reversals have occurred within 10k years of each other; others have occurred with a span of tens of millions of years intervening. The intervals are erratic and essentially unpredictable. Nor do they per se agree with species extinction, which also have other fairly solid explanations, such as the Chixlub Impactor of 65 million years ago. Finally, Geomagnetic reversals do not match up with ice ages by any means.
Mister Felix is a well-known pseudoscientific loon and has no professional background in Geography, Geology, Planetary Science, Astronomy, or any other relevant science you might name.
Felix notes that the cycle of ice ages includes an interglacial period of about 11,500 years. I do not believe he is referring to a “paleomagnetic record” as you suggest. I doubt you have read his book and I disagree that he is “a well-known pseudoscientific loon.” People like you probably said the same thing about Darwin. Felix’s previous book predicted that the Earth would be entering a cooling cycle and, guess what, we’re in one.
Alan” trust me on this, I am no fan of the “Global Warming Consensus.” It fails the test of good observational science, and uses cherry-picked datum and suspect methodologies and tools.
But the claims of Mister Felix equally do not meet the rigorous standards of good science either. He, like many with their own particular agendas, selects those aspects of the historical record that match their view and arbitrarily discard the rest.
Mister Felix sees patterns where patterns do not exist; he extrapolates based on no real, peer-reviewed scientific hypothesis’.
For example, he frequently refers to Cliff Harris and Randy Mann. Yes, Mister Mann is a legitimate Meteorologist, yet that speciality is not Astronomy nor Climatology nor Physical Geography nor Geology nor Planetary Science, all of which are far more relevant to the matter at hand; Mister Harris is mentioned as “one of the world’s top Climatologists,” yet he is entirely self-taught, with no academic background in any related field whatsoever.
From Mister Felix’s own website, he does indeed relate Geomagnetic reversals to ice ages to mass species extinctions (http://www.iceagenow.com/Magnetic_Reversal_Chart.htm). This is not correct. It is scientifically indefensible, as it links events with no real science to link them. His claims simply fail the test. Had he truly known what he was doing, he would be able to explain a mechanism as to WHY Geomagnetic reversals can affect the climate in the ways he claims, a thing he utterly fails to do (and I for one cannot see any such mechanism that would do so). He simply states they are directly and proportionally related, and expects us to accept it as fact.
I will be happy to continue to bore you with why Mister Felix is beyond wrong, but I will pause here for your (and others) comments.
(FYI, my academic background, albeit at the Undergraduate level, is in Planetary & Space Science and Physical Geography; I have some clue as to whereby I speak. I would not piss in the wind at this site – I respect it too much.)
LAM,
I am still looking into it, but like you I suspect this Felix guy may belong to the tin-hat crowd (Sorry Alan). It does no good refuting one set of hype and fantasy with yet another just because it supports something else we believe. Felix should have simply pointed out magnetic reversals may explain some (not all) such events, and left it at that (but, then, how do you write a whole book and make it sell without some sensationalism). By arguing all such events, plus a lot of other things, all stem from magnetic reversals he ignores a lot of other stuff that is going on and need not have been cataclysmic.