the second evolution

by danny vendramini
intro: teem theory
paper on teem theory
feedback
personal
about

my charles darwin site

email danny vendramini


'My reaction: your approach makes very good sense because the ability of Homo sapiens to adapt to widely different environments (obviously a key feature of the species) will be greatly enhanced through the ability to shape somewhat the triggers of emotional responses in the manner you describe.'
Professor Roger Masters. President, Foundation for Neuroscience & Society



'I think TEEM theory is all very scientifically addressable, and can rely on standard genetic techniques.'
Professor David Featherstone, Department of Biological Sciences. University of Illinois at Chicago



'I think you make splendid arguments regarding the necessity for a system of inheritance other than Darwinism.'
Dr. Mary MacGibbon, ACU, Australia


'If you are right, nearly everything I know about genetics and development is wrong.'
Robert Trivers, Professor of Anthropology and Biological Sciences, Rutgers University


'I will certainly look forward to seeing the publication of your book, not least because of some recently developed interests of my own on the evolution (and inevitability) of sensory mechanisms.'
Professor Simon Conway Morris. Cambridge University


'I taught Darwin and biology for more years than I care to remember. I am retired now but still like to keep up with what's new. I read your book extract with great interest, thanks for putting it online. It's a real achievement, up there with the best science I've come across.'
Wiliam Novak


'Your proposal that two evolutionary mechanisms administrate evolution is so very simple but equally very profound. It brought to mind Thomas Huxley’s remark when he was reading Charles Darwin’s book, The Origin of Species, “How incredibly stupid not to have thought of that myself.'
Dr. J. Dayal Purohit


'Some of your ideas parallel those of researchers who believe that there are very large portions of the genome dedicated to producing non-coding [regulatory] DNAs.  Unfortunately, the evidence for this is yet to arrive, although a small number of microRNA genes is known.'
Professor Ross H Crozier. James Cook University, Australia


'I believe that his propositions for the function of “junk DNA” are very plausible.  He 
has supported his propositions and conclusions by a wealth of scientific published evidence..  the publication of the theory itself would be a very worthwhile addition to our understanding of this area of human and animal biology.'

Professor Tord Kjellstrom. ANU, Australia


'Your theory is very novel and interesting.'
Professor Kirk Winemiller, Texas A&M University


'As I read your website, it provides an explanation for  thoughts that have puzzled me for decades.  The possibility of an "emotional genetic inheritance"  explains how information is passed down generations whereas natural selection would take too long a time to adapt.'
Alan Wolliner, New York




Kardoorair Press

THEM AND US
How Neanderthal predation created modern humans
 

Danny Vendramini


A neanderthal

"Sometimes it takes an outsider to cut through the routines of interpretation in the most intractable problems in science.  That is what Vendramini's approach offers the reader in his daring claims about the interactions between humans and their most famous evolutionary relatives, the Neanderthals."
Iain Davidson, Emeritus Professor of Archaeology, University of New England. Visiting Professor of Australian Studies, Harvard University, Massachusetts


  www.themandus.org



watch Danny Vendramini's Neanderthal doco on YouTube





This site describes a radical new scientific theory - that in addition to natural selection (the evolutionary process discovered by Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace) a second evolutionary process also exists that regulates the evolution of innate behaviours, instincts and emotions in multicellular animals. 

Although this second evolutionary process, which I call teemosis emerged about 543 million years ago to provide the first animals with inheritable behaviours (like instincts and innate behaviours) it also has an indirect influence on physical evolution.
Although arguably the most revolutionary new biological theory since Darwin, the second evolution hypothesis is based on the simple premise that everything in nature evolves, including evolution itself.

A number of skulls.

introduction

Read a non-technical introduction to teem theory.


Chromo red.
2005 paper on teem theory


Read the paper on teem theory published in the British journal, Medical Hypotheses.

The paper is the first unified theory of evolution, inheritance and behaviour published in a peer reviewed scientific journal since Darwin and  Wallace's historic
1858 papers on natural selection

Citation: Vendramini, Danny. (2005) 'Noncoding DNA and the teem theory of inheritance, emotions and innate behaviour'. Medical Hypotheses. v64, 3, pp512-519.
doi:10.1016/j.mehy.2004.08.022.








what scientists say about teem theory


The history of science tells us that radical new scientific theories are usually met with initial resistance from the scientific community. This is especially so when the proponent of that theory comes from outside the field or is an autodidact. It doesn't help if the theory challenges what academics have been espousing and teaching all their lives.

In the case of teem theory, the response from scientists has been what I'd call, "cautiously favourable." I think this is mainly because it's widely belie
ved in the biological community that gaps do remain in the NeoDarwinian paradigm, especially as it relates to the evolution of complex, environment-specifics behaviours.

In any case, y
ou can read the complete correspondence. Some of it's a bit technical.




Darwin, Australia.

My Darwin tribute site is intended as a resource for scholars and students. It  includes every photo, painting and drawing ever made of Darwin during his life.

does this mean darwin was wrong?

Evolution undoubtedly occurs by natural selection and Darwin's theory explains incremental gradual evolution (what we call microevolution) perfectly well. The problem is that it's less adept at explaining the big ticket items - what we call macroevolution (morphological complexity, biodiversity, speciation etc.) and unable to adequately explain behavioural evolution. 

Teem theory doesn't refute Darwinism, it simply adds a new complementary strand to Darwin's theory. By filling in a few blanks and resolving a number of long-standing biological, palaeontological and genetic problems, teem theory can only strengthen our existing NeoDarwinian paradigm.






Dramatic new proof for teem theory






"The best proof for a new scientific theory is to make predictions and for those predictions to be scientifically verified."












Scientists create a new teem in the laboratory



A reader recently sent me a link to a paper in
an American journal with the subject line, "Here's your proof."

The journal was
The American Naturalist (March 2010 issue) and it featured a remarkable paper by Professor Jon­a­than Storm of the Uni­vers­ity of South Car­o­li­na Up­state and Professor Ste­ven Li­ma of In­di­ana State Uni­vers­ity. They reported that crickets traumatized by predatory wolf spiders passed their newly acquired fears to their offspring.

The researchers blunted the fangs of wolf spiders with wax then put them in an enclosure with pregnant crickets. The spiders hunted and attacked the crickets but could not kill them. When the traumatized crickets laid eggs, their offspring were 113% more likely to try to evade wolf spiders than control crickets that had not been exposed. As a result they had higher
sur­viv­al rates.

The researchers said that 'fore­warned' crick­ets were al­so more likely to freeze when they en­coun­tered spi­der silk or fe­ces, which also helped them avoid de­tec­tion.

Professors Storm and Li­ma reported, “Trans­fer of in­forma­t­ion from moth­er to off­spring about preda­t­ion risk, in the ab­sence of any pa­ren­tal care, may be more com­mon than one might think.”

The researchers said they could not explain how the intergenerational transfer of environmental information occurred, but my from perspective, this is undoubtedly a simple anti-predator teem created by the teemosis evolutionary process.

To my knowledge, this is the first teem to be created in the laboratory. It provides the strongest evidence yet for the existence of the teemosis process. It additionally demonstrates how teems are adaptive. The offspring had learned to escape and evade a predator they had never actually seen. Very exciting.


them and us'

A scientific theory is like a key. If it's correct, it can unlock all sorts of other doors. Last year, I used teem theory to examine the mystery of human evolution - how, why, when and where we became human.

By analysing innate behaviours and instincts in modern humans (what we affectionately call 'human nature') and analysing the teems that encoded them, I came to the conclusion that our Palaeolithic ancestors had been hunted, cannibalized and raped by Eurasian Neanderthals in the Middle East for over 50,000 years.

My publisher asked me to write a popular science book about it, which I did. It's called 'Them and Us; how Neanderthal predation created modern humans' and it's available as a paperback and Ebook.

Check out the publisher's website

   
     about this site               personal page                  email DV


Copyright 2005-2014: Danny Vendramini