Re: Something you may not know.

Mitchell Coffey wrote:
On Jun 2, 2:26 pm, "[M]adman" <ad...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
unrestrained_h...@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jun 2, 8:38 am, Mitchell Coffey <m.cof...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Jun 2, 8:50 am, "[M]adman" <ad...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Evolution had a Birthday recenetly! [clap clap clap, blows out
candle]

One year closer to being exposed for the lie that it is. [sets
coffee down and takes a seat]

Now, we already know a bit about old Charlie. How spoiled and rich
he was as a child, how his over active his imagination startled
everyone, how his sisters overcompensated for charlie after the
early death of their mother, how he married his cousin, how he was
never home due to being off trotting the globe on his daddy's
nickel while his cousin sat home raising the kids, how he went
through job after job aimlessly looking for his niche in life, (he
even tried taxidermy which involved blood and the gutting of
animals despite the fact that he failed medical school because he
could not stand the sight of blood) AND, let's not forget how he
liked to shoot dogs of course.

But here is something you may /not/ know about ole'charlie..

Charlie may not be the father of Evolution. That's right. Charlie
may have stole his place in history. Let's see.

<quote>
Wallace actually came up with the idea twenty years earlier, says
David Quammen, author of the book The Reluctant Mr. Darwin.
Wallace delayed publishing anything about his theory because in
addition to wanting to amass all the evidence he could in defense
of it, Quammen says, "he was a little bit wary of how this
drastic radical idea would be received."

Wallace was also an outsider, with none of Darwin's wealth or
social standing, says Quammen, who is currently writing an
article about Wallace for National Geographic. Wallace left
school at age 14, and had to support himself by selling insect
specimens to museums and collectors. Wallace knew Darwin from a
distance, says Quammen, as an eminent and conventional
naturalist, who wrote what was, in essence, a best selling travel
book, The Voyage of the Beagle.

When the young Wallace sent Darwin a copy of a paper outlining the
theory, Darwin at first went into despair, thinking that Wallace
would be the first to claim credit for the idea.

Instead, friends of Darwin's organized a presentation of papers by
both men at London's Linnean Society. "It was about 30 people in a
hot room," says Quammen. "The people who attended the meeting
don't seem to have realized what had just been read to them. It
just slipped by how important these papers were."

Darwin then rushed to publish On the Origin of the Species, which,
unlike the Linnean Society evening, did make an impression, one
that has been reverberating ever since.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92059646

</quote>

But that's not all:

<quote>

Science never takes places in a void and evolutionary thought is
no exception. Although Charles Darwin is considered to be by many
the "father" of evolutionary thought, he was in fact aided and
guided by the works of many scientists before him. The theories
and ideas proposed by his predecessors were limited to the
information available at the time. Darwin himself had no
knowledge of genetics and therefore, his theory of natural
selection as an explanation of evolution was based solely on what
he observed and knew at the time.

http://www.sciencenetlinks.com/lessons.cfm?BenchmarkID=10&DocID=391

</quote>

Well. I seems Charlie is /not/ the father of evolution. Further
more, "Darwin himself had no knowledge of genetics and therefore
his theory of natural selection as an explanation of evolution was
based solely on what he observed.."

A single interpretation of the evidence based on one man's
observations with /no/ "knowledge of genetics". And evolution
holds to it's very roots today by being just another
interpretation of the evidence.

How about THAT.

Interesting stuff this evolution is.

Class dismissed.

[turns off over head projector and leaves the room]

adman.

The following is a copy of an email I just sent to the NPR
Ombudsman:

"Regarding this
piece:http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92059646#comment...

"In the above piece NPR states 'And even though we generally think
the
idea of natural selection was devised by Charles Darwin, it turns
out that he wasn't the concept's sole originator. Another Victorian
naturalist, Alfred Russel Wallace, came up with the idea after
years of living in the Far East, studying and collecting animal
and plant specimens.

"'Wallace actually came up with the idea twenty years earlier, says
David Quammen, author of the book The Reluctant Mr. Darwin. Wallace
delayed publishing anything about his theory because in addition to
wanting to amass all the evidence he could in defense of it,
Quammen says, 'he was a little bit wary of how this drastic
radical idea would
be received.'

"In fact, "twenty years earlier" Wallace would have been 15 years
old. (See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Russel_Wallace.) In
fact it
was Darwin who developed the idea twenty years before and delayed
publication in part due to the radical nature of the idea.
(See:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin.)

"There are an astounding number of important historical errors in
NPR's piece, particularly given its brevity. For instance, summing
up Darwin's career and contributions as of 1858 as one "who wrote
what was, in essence, a best selling travel book, The Voyage of the
Beagle"
is preposterous.

"NPR embarrassed itself by publishing such easily disprovable
falsehoods."

I know one of the NPR science correspondents and shall be bringing
the
matter up to his attention. Evidently NPR seriously misrepresented
what David Quammen wrote.

Mitchell Coffey

Thank you!

Kermit

You are a sucker for anything

So you think Wallace invented natural selection when he was 15?

He had the idea when he was 15.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Definition of Randomness
    ... accomplished by natural selection? ... evolution" mean variation within species? ... apparently random non-predictable mutations in DNA. ... Darwin went on to say that if true, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Something you may not know.
    ... Charlie may not be the father of Evolution. ... Wallace actually came up with the idea twenty years earlier, ... author of the book The Reluctant Mr. Darwin. ... A single interpretation of the evidence based on one man's ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Harshman Still Fears to follow in Elsberrys footsteps; The
    ... If the evidence of molecules-to-man is overwhelming where is the ... established, evolution has occurred. ... Case in point: Darwin ... natural selection and treelike common ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Harshman Still Fears to follow in Elsberrys footsteps; The
    ... If the evidence of molecules-to-man is overwhelming where is the ... established, evolution has occurred. ... Case in point: Darwin ... natural selection and treelike common ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Peter Nyikos: "Natural selection is not falsifiable."
    ... natural selection" or the "thing known as evolution" (logically ... them by Darwin face to face. ... their possible role in evolution. ... by dissecting what Darwin wrote you'll find the evidence you need to falsify ...
    (talk.origins)