Charles darwin - April 13 3:34 PM - Sexual selection is the word!
It is finally here! My first edition of The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex has officially been published. If you thought natural selection was an evolutionary game-changer, then I cannot wait to set the bar even higher for future evolutionary theories.
Thomas huxley - april 13 6:00 PM
Congrats, Darwin! I’ll always be your Bulldog through and through.
Charles darwin - April 13 7:00 PM
Thank you, Huxley. Although we have our differences on the plausibility of natural selection, I do believe that this publication will provide sufficient background information to support my previous theory of natural selection.
alfred wallace - April 18 6:45 AM
Darwin, I admire your persistence with publishing these evolutionary theories, but that is all they are. As of now, they are not law and continue to remain open to speculation and considerable criticisms. I have read through your recent publication regarding sexual selection and it appears to have quite a bit of flaws in the evolutionary discussion among the species that are proposed.
charles darwin - APril 18 9:12 AM
Would you care to elaborate? It is of my understanding that we have a mutual agreement on the evolutionary process of natural selection. However, my theory of sexual selection is dedicated to strengthening the tendencies of natural selection’s depiction of increasing the fitness of a species.
alfred wallace - APril 18 2:00 PM
Darwin, my buddy ol’ pal, I would gladly defend my stance on this subject. Firstly, your notion of male-male competition or otherwise known as intra-sexual selection is very similar to your theory of natural selection. Secondly, your discussion of “female choice” also known as intersexual selection depicts a strong intellectually conscious process among species that are undoubtedly incapable of these feats.
charles darwin - April 20 7:12 am
I am following along with what you are telling me, but your conclusions do not make any strong objections to my theory. Nevertheless, I do agree that male-male competition may seem very similar to natural selection. However, I assure you my good friend, Wallace, it is not. natural selection relates to the changing of a species due to environmental factors. In contrast, sexual selection relates to increasing the fitness of a species due to behavioral patterns during selecting mates and reproducing.
alfred wallace - April 20 9:23 Am
After carefully reviewing your research in addition to my own, there are specific examples that reject your theory. Your theory promotes the idea of female choice due to their investment into raising their offspring. However, there are species that prove this inaccurate. For example, the Syngnathidae, which I am aware that you are also familiar with as the family representing seahorses and pipefishes, represents the exact opposite of your theory. The females lay their eggs, but the male will fertilize the egg and carry them. The males portray an investment with their offspring more than their female mates. Is this not in contrary to your theory?
charles darwin - April 25 9:00 pm
….yeah?.....no? What are you getting at?
alfred wallace - April 25 9:06 pm
I would appreciate it if you would explain to me why your theory does not address the differences in reproduction behaviors among different species.
charles darwin - April 26 8:00 am
It would take me a long time to explain what you are asking from me. I will save you the trouble and simply let you know that we have our agreements on the idea of natural selection, but to begin on our differences of sexual selection is quite difficult to pinpoint. At this point we will need to agree to disagree…
Click Here, If you would like to peruse through conversations between Charles Darwin (myself) and Alfred Wallace about sexual selection.