Page 17 - humanethology

Basic HTML Version

A study of the evolution of organic life - by Gerd Ney
It is doubtful that higher developed Eukaryotes are settled or originated in the Universe.
That means that in the depth of the Universe other simple biological cells could well have chosen a far reaching mutative
route and, who knows, perhaps they are happier with their creation as we, born in hidden hostility, in shape and form
limited and destructive by nature and what only remains is Pandora’s vague hope.
The reproduction of the different species is a precondition to secure continuity of life. All living biological cells - singly
living or multicellular - apply cell division as a means for reproducing. This has turned out to be the most successful way of
maintaining the species with the smallest risk possible: variations are seldom as cells in the stage of cell division genetically
are the same, a process we are calling ‘cloning’. It is also a measure of protection to maintain the own specie and protect
it against signs of breaking up.
However, this process indicates also the disadvantage of cell division as it is not possible to repair damaged DNA strands.
This makes it possible for intruding parasites to damage the cell, for instance, and they have no way to defend themselves.
The ‘Red Queen Theory’ proves this point convincingly.
Sexual Fertilization between two different cells which, by their nature, are hostile to each other invites to produce
ingenious variations; but the risk of incompatibility or undesired mutations is much enlarged as well.
Without thinking much about it, we ‘human multicellers’ assume biologically to be different of other cell life, because
we apply sexual fertilization instead of cell division. What we are forgetting with such generalizing remarks is that all
organic multicellular life is based on cell division and the one single sexual act (eggs, spores and sperm) is only one
sexually inspired cell division of two cells. Our 300 trillion of human body cells have been all created through cell division
and maintain their presence also through this process. We are not only related to cells – our physical and psychological
construction is a rough copy of the build of eukaryote cells.
‘Rough’ in so far as we as a whole multicellular organism don’t dispose of essential abilities like molecular processing
and other processes but especially the ability to divide the organism in order to reach a semi-immortality. Instead we are
concentrating on trying to form the outside world according to our moral shaped origins – and it is more comfortable as
We tried to spare us the hardship of the ethical imperative; biological cells in their development had to go through it and
enjoy this advantage of mortality and robustness in climate or geological upheavals. The biological-evolutionary destiny of
dinosaurs and human kind will be parallel: Both are individually mortal and cannot survive a change of environment.
In documentation and published information about this subject ‘conception’ by August Weissmann in 1889 we are informed
that the advantage of sexual fertilization is mainly an improved and larger genetic variety. This is true and sounds positive
and nice, but it is not the whole picture. Elementary patterns of biological cells show periods of hunger, threat of survival
through extreme climates and geological changes: this leads to sexual reproduction! Cloned cells are comparatively
deep rooted in their traditions, robust and placid as well, in our eyes of course, to an extent and are limited to apply
more sophisticated defence and offensive strategies for their own expansion and survival. On the other hand, their re-
productivity is reduced of sexually reproducing cells, as half of them are male and not capable of producing descendants;
the mortality rate has to follow this pro rata.
With the introduction of sexual fertilization, life became much more aggressive; it led to permanent struggles with others,
and any application of romance is wishful thinking. Sexually produced cells are better equipped to secure their sources of
food for themselves. They are able to chase competitors away from their own or other species. Already the sexual process
itself is an example of rape and cannibalism. Cells cannot avoid brutal fights for sexual priorities and their descendants
inherit the ability to apply an unconquerable will power, up to self sacrifice, in order to fight for borders, clan and family.
Sexual fertilization didn’t appear in one day. It is a process of approximately 500 million years, starting during the
Proterozoic Eon about 1.5 billion of years ago. Sexuality went also through all stages of mutant evolution with many
failures. One primitive development could have been when a cell organism with damaged DNA found a way through other
cell organisms to undertake repair jobs for its own DNA, because it couldn’t know what was possibly what wrong with its
own DNA strand. This, of course, invites the thought that this could have been a cannibalistic or similarly forced process.
It may be the ‘eaten’ DNA from another cell would not have been digested and instead would be implanted by the ‘eater’.
This theory appears to be convincing because the accompanying elements are still parts of the modern sexual life of
organisms. Modern sexual reproduction is based on Eukaryote cells, but older permutations of prokaryotic trials became
known as ‘fusion sex’ and may have started this process altogether.