This link provides a nice concise summary of evolutionary thought from the Greeks to the victorian age. http://library.thinkquest.org/C004367/eh1.shtml Darwin's account of evolution is over emphasized, but that doesn't mean it is worthless. Although the link says Lamarckian evolution has been discredited, there is some truth in Lamarck's account as work on epigenetics is revealing. Anyway, I think evolution is driven by many causes and Darwinian natural selection is just one of the causes.
Harry On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Jojo Jaro <jth...@hotmail.com> wrote: > I find your attempt to equate Darwin with Newton rather amusing. > > If there ever was a field of pseudoscience, that is beholden to and > extremely malleable to political pressure; it is the field that Darwin > created with his swiss-cheese theory. > > While Newton created whole fields of legitimate science, Darwin and > his "science" of Darwinism, neo-Darwinism and Darwinian Evolution is a > quintessential example of how a legiitimate field of study has been turned > into a mockery of political conformance. > > My beef is not with Darwin, but with how people turned the science of Darwin > into a religion of humanism. > > Whenever someone proposes a theory, many times they come up with a > proposition on how to falsily their theory. > > Well, Darwin came up with how to falsify his theory of Darwinian Evolution. > Here is what he said about his theory and how to falsify it. > > "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not > possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my > theory would absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case." > > Well, centuries after Darwin, other people have indeed found an organ that > could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive slight > modifications. The bacterial flagellum is one. The "organ" composing every > other organ you have - the cell is another. And that organ you're using to > read this post is another. There must be dozens, even hundreds of organs, > processes, systems in your body that could not have been formed by numerous, > successive slight modifications. > > By this criteria, Darwinian Evolution is FALSIFIED, and yet, anyone who > questions Darwinian Evolution is automatically involved with > "pseudo-science" and is labelled a pseudoscientist. Just as Cold Fusion is > automatically labeled a pseudoscience. > > So my point is: If you are wondering why people like Huzienga, Parks, > Zimmerman oppose Cold Fusion out of hand, just remember that if you believe > in Darwinian Evolution, there is a Huzienga, Parks and Zimmerman in you. > > > (I'll be docking away from your shots now.) > > > > Jojo > > > > > > I hate to think what would have become of Newton or Darwin had they not been > among the relatively independent British middle (yeoman) class.
