Nasal Selection

Sunday marked the one year anniversary of my broken nose, and I've been thinking: I may be able to single-handedly (or single-nosedly) prove or disprove the theory of evolution by natural selection.

The Peppered Moth resides in England. During the industrial revolution, there transpired an interesting phenomenon which has been cited as evidence for evolution over time on the basis of natural selection. This moth occurs in two varieties - light ("typica") and dark ("carbonaria"). Before the industrial revolution, the whiter specimens were more common and more prosperous because they blended more seamlessly with the light-colored trees in the area, and the birds that fed on them had a harder time finding them. The darker moths were easier targets. When the industrial revolution arrived, the heavy smoke that poured from nearby factories gradually began to turn the trees darker. After only a few short years, the carbonarias became the more prosperous variety because they now held the upper wing in terms of blending in with the soot-darkened trees. In years since, as industry has become cleaner, the lighter moths are again becoming more common. The idea is that the species evolved, generation by generation, according to what was the most profitable adaptation. Isn't it also possible, however, that the two types of moths had always lived side-by-side, and until recently, the white guys just had an easier time of it? (Kinda smacks of something else... history. The industrial revolution was just moth civil rights.) I'm not an expert, but the facts just don't seem to support the conclusion.

If and when I have children, I may be able to solve this dilemma once and for all. As the moths have naturally occurring camouflage that helps them to avoid predation, many animals have naturally occurring traits that are designed to help them find mates. Of course, it is profitable to be well-suited to find yourself a mate; your species will not survive without the ability to do so. When examined under the natural selection paradigm, creatures ought to adapt to produce whatever qualities will make them most attractive. It's no secret that, in the human world, physical beauty is a major factor. A symmetrical face tends to be a big part of that (it's a good thing that Adrian Brody can act). My nose once pointed significantly to one side - a trait I inherited from my father. If you look at pictures of us before my surgery, you will note that our noses were remarkably similar. The same characteristic nose is shared by several other men on my dad's side of the family. Now, due to my surgery, my nose is almost perfectly straight. This is not to say that I have become a beacon of hotness, but by one of the most traditional standards of physical beauty, I am now more attractive. I have adapted. If natural selection works as theory suggests, then my kids will share this adaptation, and the survival of our species will be furthered. Will natural selection ring true? Will Darwin be right? Or will I have to impose rhinoplasty upon my children? Will I be the missing link in the evolution of the Payne men? We'll have to wait for a while, but I doubt it. Sorry, Charlie.