Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Science Icon Fires Broadside At Creationists
London Times vis The Statesman (India) ^ | 04 July 2004 | Times of London Editorial

Posted on 07/04/2004 5:19:27 PM PDT by PatrickHenry

Professor Ernst Mayr, the scientist renowned as the father of modern biology, will celebrate his 100th birthday tomorrow by leading a scathing attack on creationism.

The evolutionary biologist, who is already acclaimed as one of the most prolific researchers of all time, has no intention of retiring and is shortly to publish new research that dismantles the fashionable creationist doctrine of “intelligent design”.

Although he has reluctantly cut his workload since a serious bout of pneumonia 18 months ago, Prof. Mayr has remained an active scientist at Harvard University throughout his 90s. He has written five books since his 90th birthday and is researching five academic papers. One of these, scheduled to appear later this year, will examine how “intelligent design” — the latest way in which creationists have sought to present a divine origin of the world — was thoroughly refuted by Charles Darwin a century and a half ago.

His work is motivated in part by a sense of exasperation at the re-emergence of creationism in the USA, which he compares unfavourably with the widespread acceptance of evolution that he encountered while growing up in early 20th-century Germany.

The states of Florida, Mississippi, Missouri, Illinois, Kentucky and Oklahoma currently omit the word “evolution” from their curriculums. The Alabama state board of education has voted to include disclaimers in textbooks describing evolution as a theory. In Georgia, the word “evolution” was banned from the science curriculum after the state’s schools superintendent described it as a “controversial buzzword”.

Fierce protest, including criticism from Jimmy Carter, the former President, reversed this.

Prof. Mayr, who will celebrate his 100th birthday at his holiday home in New Hampshire with his two daughters, five grandchildren and 10 great-grandchildren, was born on 5 July 1905 in Kempten, Germany. He took a PhD in zoology at the University of Berlin, before travelling to New Guinea in 1928 to study its diverse bird life. On his return in 1930 he emigrated to the USA. His most famous work, Systematics and the Origin of Species, was published in 1942 and is regarded still as a canonical work of biology.

It effectively founded the modern discipline by combining Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection with Gregor Mendel’s genetics, showing how the two were compatible. Prof. Mayr redefined what scientists mean by a species, using interbreeding as a guide. If two varieties of duck or vole do not interbreed, they cannot be the same species.

Prof. Mayr has won all three of the awards sometimes termed the “triple crown” of biology — the Balzan Prize, the Crafoord Prize and the International Prize for Biology. Although he formally retired in 1975, he has been active as an Emeritus Professor ever since and has recently written extensively on the philosophy of biology.


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: crevolist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 1,201-1,207 next last
To: P-Marlowe
"Then I suggest that maybe we can't believe the rest of the article either."

You could - but wouldn't that be a bit excessive?

61 posted on 07/04/2004 7:39:33 PM PDT by azhenfud ("He who is always looking up seldom finds others' lost change...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat
Theology is a science.

My undergraduate degree is in political science. Does that make me a scientist, too?

62 posted on 07/04/2004 7:39:37 PM PDT by Modernman ("I don't care to belong to a club that accepts people like me as members" -Groucho Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: dmcnash
There is a simple way out if you want to accept both God(which I don't) and evolutionary theory. My schoolmate formulated it in a simple way. Something perhaps started the experiment that is universe maybe it was what people call God? Nobody really knows for sure. God didn't have to create humans the way we are now for him to be the creator.

In Computer Science when working with Genetic Search algorithms or Genetic programming, the initial population is created by human or randomly(Creator) rules of interaction are set and then the process is set in motion. Perhaps life is one of the outcomes of the initial experiment? Maybe "Life solution" is very common(this is what missions to other planets are trying to check).

What this professor is speaking against is banning good science which is evolutionary theory that can be seen working everywhere from schools. It just isn't right.
63 posted on 07/04/2004 7:42:47 PM PDT by dimk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
" Never heard of peer review?

Of course I've heard of peer review. That's when evolutionists get reviewed by other evolutionists.

64 posted on 07/04/2004 7:43:44 PM PDT by cookcounty (LBJ sent him to VN. Nixon expressed him home. And JfK's too dumb to tell them apart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Modernman

:sigh: a scientist of politics, yes. a science is simply a study, and a scientist is simply one who studies. your science does not relate to this chemical/biological science that is being discussed however.

a Theologist is one who studies God or other Ultimate Wills, though typically it is the Judeo-Chritian God that is most accepted, as "Theo" means roughly "One most in charge"... note the "One"


65 posted on 07/04/2004 7:46:18 PM PDT by MacDorcha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas
If you have the time, would you please explain how?

Simple. Some of the diversity of life on this planet is a result of evolution, but not all.

While there may be reasonable debates about whether particular aspects of biodiversity were created or evolved, I see the issue as being far more quantitative than qualitative. Of course, there's still the big question about the origin of Man, but even that wouldn't pose a problem if one regards human beings as being more than their biological components: even if non-human anthropods evolved, it would still take an act of God to impart the human soul.

66 posted on 07/04/2004 7:50:02 PM PDT by supercat (Why is it that the more "gun safety" laws are passed, the less safe my guns seem?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: dimk

hmmm, intersting... so if God is truly simply "force" (according to that Biblical review earlier) that would mean that

"God Created us in His Image" would be about "in essence, we're all force (or energy, or whatever) and we all came from teh same source"

which would still fit into the Bible neatly.


67 posted on 07/04/2004 7:50:25 PM PDT by MacDorcha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: supercat

"even if non-human anthropods evolved, it would still take an act of God to impart the human soul."

bingo!


68 posted on 07/04/2004 7:51:29 PM PDT by MacDorcha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: CyberAnt
His friend laughed and told him he could have saved himself 25 years by just reading the first sentence of the Bible:

Evolution was, is and always will be. I'm a conservative, but I see these Creationist rants as a waste of time. Isn't there a special bible-thumper site for this topic??

69 posted on 07/04/2004 8:01:02 PM PDT by ExtremeUnction
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Modernman
My undergraduate degree is in political science. Does that make me a scientist, too?

No, but it may give you an understanding of theology and what it's about.

70 posted on 07/04/2004 8:06:02 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (/"Despise not the jester. Often he is the only one speaking the truth")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: ExtremeUnction

Evolution was, is and always will be.

and for several eons, scientists believed that matter could come from nothing (worms appearing when it rains, not coming out of the ground)

they also thought they could extract gold from silver, or iron.

and it was also stated in the late 19th centuray that "all things that can be invented, have been invented"

never say never.


71 posted on 07/04/2004 8:08:04 PM PDT by MacDorcha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Modernman
Theology is a science.

My undergraduate degree is in political science. Does that make me a scientist, too?


If the scientific method is applied to a set of facts, then it is science. Theology is a science.
72 posted on 07/04/2004 8:13:25 PM PDT by GarySpFc (Sneakypete, De Oppresso Liber)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: ExtremeUnction

Tsk Tsk .. poor thing .. can't handle the truth of the Bible .. huh ..??

And .. I don't thump the Bible .. I believe it!!


73 posted on 07/04/2004 8:19:10 PM PDT by CyberAnt (President Bush: a core set of principles from which he will not deviate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Fiercely Independent Independence Day placemarker (insert fireworks here)
74 posted on 07/04/2004 8:20:27 PM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Not as impressive as your average creationist, I suppose...

LOL.

Completely beside the point, but I just have to say that HBO is playing a really wonderful family movie this week -- "FairyTale: A True Story" -- a Mel Gibson production. It's about the most famous photographic hoax of the twentieth century (before Registered).

Perhaps it's not off topic after all.

75 posted on 07/04/2004 8:52:12 PM PDT by js1138 (In a minute there is time, for decisions and revisions which a minute will reverse. J Forbes Kerry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ExtremeUnction

Evolution: A fairy tale for adults who should know better.


76 posted on 07/04/2004 8:53:10 PM PDT by Wycowboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty
Of course the scientists don't complain about the constant errors because they really enjoy being fawned over and the lack of tough questions.

Wrong-o. The constant errors in media and popular representations of science are at the very top of most scientists' pet peeves (for conservative scientists, people who make the same errors and erroneous assumptions about science on FR are number two.) And the job of a scientist is to take on tough questions, and try their best to answer them.

77 posted on 07/04/2004 9:55:25 PM PDT by RightWingAtheist (Ni Jesus, Ni Marx..OUI REAGAN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Strategerist

"The origin of life has NOTHING TO DO WITH evolution either. You can believe God created life and still be an ardent evolutionist."

Well, you certainly made it clear that you do not couple evolutionary theory with abiogenesis. However, you must know that secularists do. If "creationists" always bring up abiogenesis, it is because this is a logical extension of evolutionary thought. Like I said before, theistic evolutionists are not respected either by secular evolutionists or creationists.

Do you think that God created life and then used evolution as a guided mechanism to complete His creation? Or do you think God was passive, allowing evolution to do it all? Can you personally define your position clearly? Do you think a hard core atheist evolutionist would "respect" your views?

Where do you really stand? Do you want the "comfort" Christianity affords, but still want to bow to secular efforts to eliminate the need for God in thought? Remember, this thread started over an attack on "intelligent design." Do you see intelligence in the design of this world, life, DNA?


78 posted on 07/04/2004 10:23:44 PM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas
However, you must know that secularists do.

Every single one of them in the world? Not a person among them have a different view.

Doubtful,

for most,

but not for those who know every thought God has had or will ever make.

79 posted on 07/04/2004 11:02:18 PM PDT by highpockets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: supercat

"even if non-human anthropods evolved, it would still take an act of God to impart the human soul."

What is a soul? The secularist evolutionist would say that a soul, or anything spiritual, is just the way evolved humans try to explain what is not explainable. They would say that we inately want to exist in some other form than flesh. So, we invent the concept of soul, God, etc. To them we just can't accept we are just a random part of "star stuff" as Sagan would say.


80 posted on 07/04/2004 11:08:45 PM PDT by Sola Veritas (Trying to speak truth - not always with the best grammar or spelling)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 1,201-1,207 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson