Charles Darwin developed his early theories on board the Beagle
Posted on 07/19/2006 3:55:15 AM PDT by PatrickHenry
Plans are being drawn up to build a £3.3m working replica of the boat that took Charles Darwin around the world at Milford Haven in Pembrokeshire.
Fundraising for the project, which would mark the 200th anniversary of Darwin's birth in 2009, is under way.
The aim is to built a seaworthy vessel identical to the HMS Beagle on the outside, but with a modern interior.
Darwin, who showed how natural selection could explain evolution, sailed on the Beagle between 1831-36.
Sitting opposite him on the expedition was mate and surveyor John Lort Stokes.
One of Stokes' descendents, Pembrokeshire farmer David Lort Philips, together with commercial yacht master Peter McGrath, have founded the Beagle Project Pembrokeshire.
Mr McGrath said the ship would look identical to the original Beagle on the outside but would have a 21st century interior with diesel auxiliary engines and generators.
He said he hoped the fished vessel would inspire the scientists of the future and be used by researchers and scientists from across the world.
"Externally it will be exactly the same but we want it to do some serious scientific work and you would not want the crew living like they did in the 18th Century," he said.
The pair have spent three years putting their plans together and aim to raise the money through private and institutional investors along with public subscription.
"With all the Darwin 200 celebrations there is not one big project to focus the attention on," added Mr McGrath.
"I know the effect a square rigger has on young people - it's a jaw dropping site.
"But we do not want this just to be a replica - we want it to have genuine scientific benefits.
"We have started the fundraising. Construction will take 14 months and it has to be finished by early 2009.
"She will be built in Milford Haven and it will be her home. But what we want to do when she is built is visit the significant sights in Darwin's and the Beagle's life."
Researchers believe the original remains of the 27m-long Navy brig, that was sold for scrap in 1870, are embedded in a marsh near Potton Island in Essex.
Darwin, who published On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection in 1859, came fourth in a poll run by the BBC in 2002 to find the public's greatest Briton of all time.
His voyage on the Beagle allowed him to form the basis for much of his later work.
Aside from being a ship of fools, evolution is a ship of ingrates. The victory over the adherents of these ideas was not achieved with super weapons, but was purchased with an ocean of American, British, Canadian, Australian, and Russian blood. Those people laid down their lives and asked very little in return other than that we conduct our own lives in such a manner as to occasionally justify the sacrafice. There is no rationial way in which adopting the same idiologies which were the foundations of the Nazi and fascist states may be construed as doing that.
And in some language that's English?
The numbers total up to the 'age' of man in the flesh NOT the age of this earth. The statement is made "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." AND starts the next verse which describes an event that made this earth void, and without form.
Then we get to what sounds like an environmental clean up of this earth, there are two different days of man being created in this flesh described.
"You are the one who is wrong. Plenty of people have died for believing the Theory of Evolution."
Ah, but they died because of Stalin. :)
Huh? Please try to punctuate that, so I can understand what you are trying to say....
And the statement stands (in case you are trying to refute my comment). The belief in the ToE is un-related to one's religious beliefs.
The Origin of Species was published in 1859.
Mein Kampf was published in 1925.
Neither publication is particularly scientific, the former serving as a kind of biblical text for the avid evolutionist. As for Hitler, he was just following the "course of nature."
Theory of evolution. It's an explaination about the diversity of life, not a dictate, So it cannot be an ideology.
Anyone who thinks it is are as wrong as a person who would treat gravity as an ideology that says they must go around pushing things off high places.
Just like all those "We found Noah's Ark" threads.
I guess they can't stand the fact that the Beagle was a real ship.
Evolution is a field of science engaged in by researchers from a wide variety of disciplines.
It is opposed vehemently (such as you are doing) not by scientists but by adherents of certain religious beliefs.
You should really get in line with the other anti-Darwinians who feel the Russkis based their society on Darwin's work.
Amd the Brits buried Darwin in Westminster Cathedral.
Thw Australians nmaed a city after him
Dunno what the Canadians did, but the Americans used to have a National Holiday on Darwin's birthday.
Repeating your false statements does not give them credibility.
Stop it.
The idea that all those ideologies are evolution-based is nonsense. You know that - you are merely trolling now.
The Dali Lama and Hitler are similar insofar as neither accept the biblical texts for what they plainly say, just like Darwin in his latter days.
Nothing in astronomy conflicts with the plain and simple meaning of the biblical texts.
Perhaps you should go back and re-read my post. The "market" I referred to was....the ACTUAL market. You know, where goods and services are exchanged. The imaginary "market" in your example, where your precious 'ism' is banned, doesn't really exist. Just ask Kent Hovind if anti-evolutionism has made him (er, excuse me, "God") scads of money.
Please do.
Indeed--he deserves great credit. His home, now a museum in Hull, is well worth the visit (perhaps the only thing worth a visit in Prescott's constituency). A bit of a pity about his son, "Soapy" Sam -- but one must make allowances for the age; he wasn't really a bad chap, but never really grasped Darwin's work.
"The Dali Lama and Hitler are similar insofar as neither accept the biblical texts for what they plainly say, just like Darwin in his latter days."
I was correct then. You likened anybody who doesn't accept the authority of the bible with Hitler. There is only one reason to bring up Hitler in that context, Fester.
That being said, I know of nothing that would suggest that Hitler didn't accept the authority of the Bible, however warped his interpretation of it was.
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.