GENE FROM NOWHERE: GOLDSCHMIDT’S MONSTER RESURRECTS

May 18, 2011 By Joseph P. Farrell

In the early 1960s the biologist Richard Goldschmidt spent years of his life trying to observe mutations in fruitflies that would, he believed, lead to speciation, i.e., to confirmation of the basic Darwinian model that microevolutionary changes over time could produce macroevolutionary results. After years of this fruitless quest, he gave up in despair and proposed what he called a "hopeful monster hypothesis," whereby a sudden macroevolutionary change could suddenly occur (sounding suspiciously like creationism), and be preserved over time and lead to a new species.

Well, consider this one:

Fruit fly gene from \'out of nowhere\' is discovered

Well...there it is, a gene that appeared suddenly in the lowly drosophilia from out of nowhere, and completely unconnected to any known gene in any other species.

I found this little article to be very intriguing, not so much from the modern point of view, but from the ancient one, so, brace yourself, for now I am going to let my imagination run wild, and "return wholesale dividends of speculation for a minimum investment of fact," to paraphrase Mark Twain (who, incidentally, made that remark about the theory of evolution).

What intrigues me here is the suggestion, genetically, that the male or masculine element somehow is connected with the idea of spontaneous differentiation in a kind of "come out of nowhere hopeful monster" scenario. What has this to do with the ancients, you may well wonder? Well, to put it as succinctly as possible, in The Grid of the Gods my co-author (Scott D. de Hart) and I devote a whole chapter to the weird (and very technical) musico-mathematical codes in the Vedic literature of India, and in the Sumerian-Pythagorean-Platonic legacy of Mesopotamia and Greece, and the change in those codes effected by the Hebrews.

One thing that stood out when comparing the Mesopotamian to the Vedic codes, was that the ancients consistently identified the masculine principle as the "musically differentiating" principle, i.e., as the principle that generated differentiated tones within a musical octave, whereas the feminine principle generated only sameness, i.e., an infinite series of the same note over and over again in octaves.

And along comes the Goldschmidt's lowly drosophilia once again, with its weirdly spontaneous spermatozoic gene generation "from out of nowhere," suggesting, in some small fashion perhaps, that the ancients knew - from somewhere and somehow - the same sort of thing long ago, and that, of course, implies perhaps yet another legacy that they inherited from High Antiquity. At the very least, the sudden appearance of this gene "from nowhere" should make the late Dr. Goldschmidt rest a little easier.