Darwin's Consept Revisited

Consider evolution as a more abstract whole. The survival imperative of living organisms is to adapt or perish, but this imperative could be less species-oriented than science believes. All organisms on this planet could be living in a completely symbiotic relationship where the survival of one species depends on and is affected by another (possibly seemingly unrelated) species. This implies that a species doesn't necessarily evolve on its own; all species evolve simultaneously in order to benefit the planet as a mutual whole.

Now, consider evolution as simply a process rather than a forward-moving process. If evolution is possible, then an eventual retrograde of a species must be as well. Traditional discussion of evolution involves an organism developing new characteristics or mannerisms in order to live longer for the mere fact that it has to. When an organism is born, its default setting is to survive by reproducing in order continue the existence of its species. However, if all species evolve to increase the stability of all species, then a reverse-evolution of one species is possible if it benefits the global ecosystem... even if that leads to its extinction.

The human race has been fighting nature in a multitude of ways this past century. A variety of diseases, cancers, and natural phenomena have been antagonizing us and science is still struggling to keep up and understand. Maybe we aren't supposed to. This could be the next logical step in evolution; the end of the human race. Once again, think of the planet as a global whole. In the 20th century, man has created more setbacks to nature than anything else and a disgusting majority of our technological advancements are only for our own personal progress. Our extinction would definitely benefit the planet. We do not engage our planet in a symbiotic relationship; we are parasitic in nature, and our most significant evolution as a species has been our overwhelming apathy and greed.