Re: comment at Evolutionblog, and subsequent comments.
I am not surprised at the incomprehension of the eonic effect at a site such as Evolutionblog. First point, Darwinists, yes I insist on the term, have been lowballing so long around Darwin, Dawkins and natural selection, etc, that they have lost all perspective on what ‘evolution’ is, at least for the descent of humans.
The point is that we can closely observe man’s ‘evolution’ in a macro sense by looking at a very late phase of it, in its overlay with world history and the emergence of civilization. And it has nothing to do with natural selection climbing Mt. Improbable. There is an explicit evolutionary directionality at work, which suddenly stands out if we apply careful analysis using periodization.
Forget fitness landscapes and all of that. To grasp ‘evolution’ you must have closely tracked data, and a method that looks at the full spectrum of human culture, in all its aspects. Then you will see a dramatically coherent pattern stand out, one that can only be called ‘evolution’.
Darwinism makes people lazy and careless, because it offers an oversimplification that appeals to a mass public. Do the work on world history indicated, and the result will become clear.
You can cheer for Dawkins all you please, but you will never get ‘evolution’ straight using the current paradigm.
The reference was to:
The Eonic Effect: Climbing Mt. Improbable