[gobucks]

Bringing them into the picture would spoil the halo over Darwin’s head and cast doubt on his singularity.

Someone once said it even better: "The little people first!!"

[Coyoteman]

Lets all bash Darwin. Then maybe his theory will just go away ===> Placemarker <===.

[ClearCase_guy]

Darwinians of the day recoiled in horror from these splendid discoveries. They proudly declared their “faith” in the master while hurling themselves vehemently at the new science. One, the brilliant Karl Pearson, persisted in dogged opposition to genetics until his death in 1936! So much for evidence.

Those dogmatic Darwinists just stuck to their pet theory like glue. Nothing would make them begin to question its validity!

Of course, as this article points out, Darwin HAS been refuted. Clever guy, but he got it wrong. "Darwinism" has been replaced by the much more modern "Theory of Evolution".

Nowadays, it is the proponents of the Theory of Evolution who dogmatically stick to their pet theory like glue. Nothing will make them begin to question its validity!

My, how times have changed.

[jocon307]

pinging myself for the AM, too late to digest all this.

[MRMEAN]

This is silliness...to say that Darwin didn't accomplish anything significant because he didn't discover Mendelian inheritance is like saying Newton didn't do much because he didn't discover quantum mechanics.

The fact is that Darwin was a prodigious observer and collector of data, he did numerous experiments, a great systematizer, and his insights provided powerful explanations as to how and why the observed natural world is as it is, and revolutionized the scientific understanding of the biological world. The basics of his theory, inheritance, with modification, and natural selection, leading to new species adapted to their environment, has been continuously confirmed since the theory was first published in 1858.

Darwin's publications are interesting and readable, Creationists who want to slime him should have the intellectual honesty to read his works, at least Origin of Species.

[Right Wing Professor]

Hiram Caton also believes that HIV does not cause AIDS. As I've often observed, look carefully at a creationist, and you'll usually find several other completely loony ideas.

[kajingawd]

ping

[JCEccles]

That's a lot of pomp and ceremony to celebrate the life of a man whose admirers, in the main, are only too pleased to assure everyone that life is undirected, random, meaningless, pointless, and that man is bereft of free will.

[GSlob]

"What grading system ranks Origin as the greatest book in science? What titles were runners-up? What were those signal discoveries that transformed the biological sciences of his day? What was his new concept of humankind?"
Well, there is Charles Murray's book on human accomplishment. He explicitly used the econometric criteria to grade the relative importance of various prominent scientists in several different fields, and came to the same conclusion: in the field of biology Charles Darwin IS the greatest.

[RoadTest]

I heard he repented on his deathbed. I hope he did. His "theory" has done a lot of damage to men's souls.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

The legend-credulous express dismay when challenged to produce just one instance of a Darwin discovery that was taken over by experimental biologists.

Hiram must be a scientific ignoramus. Took me all of 10 seconds to come up with "an instance". There are more all over the web.

Here's one:

"Jeffrey Podos, Joel A. Southall, and Marcos R. Rossi-Santos

Vocal mechanics in Darwin's finches: correlation of beak gape and song frequency

JEB 2004; 207(4): 607-619"

[Varda]

"Mendel believed that his discovery disproved Darwin’s theory."

Did Mendel ever mention Darwin? I've never read that he did. Mendel's work shows that he thought he was working on a different mechanism for evolution. I don't think he and Darwin were at cross purposes.

[kittymyrib]

Mendel and Pasteur were Christians, and only fools would say this limited their scientific accomplishments. That's why the secular monkey-men of today refuse to acknowledge them as superior to their imam, Darwin. You can't argue with their religious convictions.

[webstersII]

"The reality: Darwin’s science was in the amateur mode of the naturalist, whereas the physical and biological sciences had shifted into the precision instrument mode of the modern laboratory."

And that is still true today.

[NotJustAnotherPrettyFace]

The best tribute to Charles Darwin is undoubtedly the Darwin Awards!

[Stultis]

The most grotesque distortion is the claim that Darwin’s discoveries reformed the biological sciences of his day. The reality: Darwin’s science was in the amateur mode of the naturalist, whereas the physical and biological sciences had shifted into the precision instrument mode of the modern laboratory. This difference was well established in the public mind.

That's a bit of a stretch. The broad professionalizing of science only got going well into the 1860s. Darwin was not at all behind the times as the article seeks to suggest. Plus Darwin did plenty of lab type work, e.g. his extensive dissections, especially of barnacles.

[trisham]

Interesting article. At one time, Freud was adored by the psychiatric community. Times change.

[RightWhale]

The Triumvirate of Modernism were Darwin, Freud, and Marx. Marx and Freud are already on the skids, which leaves Darwin as a primary target of the Post-moderns--that's us.