[Rockhounds] Survival of the firmest - Scientists say rocks
evolve too
Alan Silverstein
ajs at frii.com
Wed Nov 26 16:29:07 PST 2008
> http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/story.html?id=839b3ae1-264a-4e61-
> a6f5-d464d5f0f923
Which says:
"Mineral evolution is obviously different from Darwinian
evolution-minerals don't mutate, reproduce or compete like living
organisms,"...
Well it's an interesting observation: "Biochemical processes may thus
be responsible, either directly or indirectly, for most of the Earth's
4,300 known mineral species,"... But I take issue with (ab)using the
term "evolution" for the process. I'm a fan of Richard Dawkins's
elegant statement that:
"All life evolves by the differential survival of replicating entities."
If it doesn't reproduce, with mutations and differential survival of
individuals, it's not alive, so it doesn't evolve. Better to call it,
"biospheric mineral progression," or perhaps more briefly,
"biomineralization" I think, than "mineral evolution."
Just my $0.02... "I am not a biologist..." Yes, I know, we often talk
about "the evolution of this or that" in other contexts where we know
the system is not alive.
Cheers,
Alan Silverstein
More information about the Rockhounds
mailing list