Well, since it is life that the rat was protecting, then, it must be
biotic preservation mechanism. Nothing else, nothing more.
So, by biotic preservation mechanism, you mean instinct that has evolved to keep an organism alive long enough to produce offspring? Why didn't you just say so?
Yeah, there will be some similarity in TOE. But in Interrelation Theory, "life" is the
purpose of all living organisms that is why the main mechanism is biotic preservation
mechanisms BPM. But in TOE, it is the opposite. TOE believes that natural selection is the
main mechanism for rats to change, while in Interrelation Theory, it is the will to survive
or BPM cause those rats to change.
The mechanism of
change is mutation with selection. Rats don't change by will, they don't decide how to change or what to change into. If they could do that, they'd never starve or drown because they could change themselves into a bird to escape or a fish to swim.
But in TOE, life is still the main purpose of all organisms, so far that living is a prerequisite for passing on genes.
What you're proffering is something that does not predict anything different form evolution, does a worse job of explaining how populations change and why, and offers nothing that can be called evidence in favor of your idea because everything you've offered is also evidence for evolution.
So, I want you to make a very short, one or two sentence response to this message. Take your time, I've got years. I want you to answer this one question, and nothing else:
"What does your idea predict that is in conflict with evolution, and can you show that the prediction you make is actually the way things work?
If you can't answer this question, then your idea has no scientific worth and will be relegated to the trash heap of all failed ideas and hypotheses.
Edited by Perdition, : Changed the header already