Skip to comments.
Charles Darwin: Evolution of a Scientist [Newsweek's cover story]
Newsweek ^
| 28 November 2005 (mag's date)
| Jerry Adler
Posted on 11/20/2005 4:48:01 PM PST by PatrickHenry
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 241-249 next last
Newsweek cover story. MSM big time!
To: VadeRetro; Junior; longshadow; RadioAstronomer; Doctor Stochastic; js1138; Shryke; RightWhale; ...
2
posted on
11/20/2005 4:49:17 PM PST
by
PatrickHenry
(Expect no response if you're a troll, lunatic, retard, or incurable ignoramus.)
To: PatrickHenry
3
posted on
11/20/2005 4:49:50 PM PST
by
RadioAstronomer
(Senior member of Darwin Central)
To: PatrickHenry
Dang, tried to get in before the ping.
4
posted on
11/20/2005 4:50:23 PM PST
by
RadioAstronomer
(Senior member of Darwin Central)
To: RadioAstronomer
5
posted on
11/20/2005 4:57:49 PM PST
by
PatrickHenry
(Expect no response if you're a troll, lunatic, retard, or incurable ignoramus.)
To: PatrickHenry
Why do they keep insisting on lumping in Freud and Marx with Darwin, when neither of them are worthy of shining Chuckie's shoes?
To: PatrickHenry
Nice.
In part, the fascination with the man is being driven by his enemies, who say they're fighting "Darwinism," rather than evolution or natural selection. "It's a rhetorical device to make evolution seem like a kind of faith, like 'Maoism'," says Harvard biologist E. O. Wilson, editor of one of the two Darwin anthologies just published. (James D. Watson, codiscoverer of DNA, edited the other, but both include the identical four books.) "Scientists," Wilson adds, "don't call it 'Darwinism'."
7
posted on
11/20/2005 5:00:01 PM PST
by
balrog666
(A myth by any other name is still inane.)
To: PatrickHenry
Is this where the action is ===> Placemarker <=== ?
8
posted on
11/20/2005 5:00:20 PM PST
by
Coyoteman
(I love the sound of beta decay in the morning!)
To: RightWingAtheist
Why do they keep insisting on lumping in Freud and Marx with Darwin, when neither of them are worthy of shining Chuckie's shoes?Yeah, and it hasn't been proven that Chuckie was an atheist like Freud and Marx.
9
posted on
11/20/2005 5:02:30 PM PST
by
taxesareforever
(Government is running amuck)
To: PatrickHenry
The greatest scientist who ever lived. Darwin shook our place in the scheme of Creation by showing us the variety of life on earth before our appearance on the planet and all life is governed by laws as fixed as the rising and setting of the sun. Life is not immutable - it a dynamic and on-going process in which living things struggle to obtain food, shelter and to reproduce. Now we can see how speciation occurs and why some species are found in some habitats and not in others. Where Darwin changed history was to discover a beautifully simple explanation for the birth and death of species. And since then the world has never been the same and none of us after having reading the
Origin can avoid the "universal acid" that burns through our certainty about life around us. Darwin ensured above all we never see Nature in the same light again.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie.Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
10
posted on
11/20/2005 5:02:50 PM PST
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: RightWingAtheist
Freud's theory of psychoanalysis has been discredited and Marx's doctrines no longer command universal appeal. But Darwin of all the modern thinkers, still remains hugely relevant to our understanding of the natural world.
(Denny Crane: "I Don't Want To Socialize With A Pinko Liberal Democrat Commie.Say What You Like About Republicans. We Stick To Our Convictions. Even When We Know We're Dead Wrong.")
11
posted on
11/20/2005 5:04:48 PM PST
by
goldstategop
(In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
To: goldstategop
Darwin is perceived as having caused Britian to abandon Christianity. That is why he is controversial. Some see his ideas as inimical to faith.
12
posted on
11/20/2005 5:07:26 PM PST
by
Torie
To: PatrickHenry
Charles Darwin, the son of a prosperous country doctor, who was recruited for the voyage largely to provide company for the Beagle's aloof and moody captain, Robert FitzRoy. Err, um, what type company was this young man expected to provide?
13
posted on
11/20/2005 5:08:15 PM PST
by
fso301
To: fso301
That is a question more appropriate to this era, than the Victorian one. :)
14
posted on
11/20/2005 5:10:21 PM PST
by
Torie
To: PatrickHenry
We hit the MSM bigtime PH.
15
posted on
11/20/2005 5:10:56 PM PST
by
narby
(Hillary! The Wicked Witch of the Left)
To: RightWingAtheist
Considering they both pointed to Darwin as influential in shaping their thinking, I think is quite appropriate!
16
posted on
11/20/2005 5:11:06 PM PST
by
LiteKeeper
(Beware the secularization of America)
To: fso301
"Err, um, what type company was this young man expected to provide?"
Intellectual. As the captain of the ship, it was considered improper for Fitzroy to mingle with the common crew. It was the usual practice to bring along a man of some rank in society to keep the Captain from going bonkers on the long voyage. Darwin's family was well respected, and he was educated.
17
posted on
11/20/2005 5:11:35 PM PST
by
CarolinaGuitarman
("There is a grandeur in this view of life...")
To: LiteKeeper
"Considering they both pointed to Darwin as influential in shaping their thinking, I think is quite appropriate!"
Marx published the Communist Manifesto in 1848; Darwin published the Origin of Species in 1859. Hard to see how Darwin helped shape Marx's ideas when Marx's ideas came first.
18
posted on
11/20/2005 5:13:32 PM PST
by
CarolinaGuitarman
("There is a grandeur in this view of life...")
To: goldstategop
Freud's theory of psychoanalysis has been discredited...Not really. In actual practice, Freudian theory is very useful.
19
posted on
11/20/2005 5:23:18 PM PST
by
Rudder
To: fso301
Ship's captains at the time were not to socialize with the crew who were all commoners. Darwin was of Fitzroy's status and his purpose on the Beagle was to be a social companion, sharing meals and conversations and this was a common practice on long sailing voyages. The two did not get along because of their opposing political ideas and because Darwin argued against Fitzroy's belief in the inherent righteousness of slavery.
20
posted on
11/20/2005 5:34:32 PM PST
by
spinestein
(Forget the Golden Rule. Follow the Brazen Rule.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80 ... 241-249 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson