Posted on 01/16/2009 12:31:14 PM PST by js1138
An Amazon of words flowed from Charles Darwin's pen. His books covered the gamut from barnacles to orchids, from geology to domestication. At the same time, he filled notebooks with his ruminations and scribbled thousands of letters packed with observations and speculations on nature. Yet Darwin dedicated only a few words of his great verbal flood to one of the biggest questions in all of biology: how life began.
(Excerpt) Read more at carlzimmer.com ...
Funny. I don’t see creationists pinging each other to make fun of this article.
Speaking of John Dewey, read his essay The Influence of Darwin.
Yes, and the following thread article is an illustration of what you say: An Exhibit at the Museum of Rationalism.
How Eye Glasses Formed:
In warm pool of sand minerals had been mixed by the wind or something, in just the right proportions when either lighten strikes or a volcano melted the sand into glass that cooled into lens. Then metal oxides were somehow refined and melted so they formed frames around the lens.
In some way, as yet unknown, fine sand polished the newly formed glass into bi-focals. Tri-focals and sun glasses would evolve later.
This is the Foster-Grant theory of eye grasses.
Speaking of John Dewey, read his essay The Influence of Darwin.
Bah, the John Dewey essay is here:
|
|||
Gods |
Note: this topic is from January 16, 2009. |
||
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
The Thunder God went for a ride
upon his favorite filly
I’m THOR! he cried,
his steed replied,
You forgot the thaddle, thilly.
I like Zimmer. I picked up his easy to read book on evolution (necessarily so for me) some yrs back and bought copies for my nephew and nieces. According to my sister they insist to this day that I corrupted them.
Darwin was interested in adaptation and natural selection...not the origins of life.
Exactly. And people should note that he was born a good 150 years BEFORE dna was even discovered.
So if evolution is happening, and the cause is mutations/changes to the DNA that get passed on, don’t even DARE blaming Darwin for it.
I’ve read both “Origin of the Species” and “The Voyage of the Beagle”. He was a naturalist and social observer.
A damn good one.
Thank you...thank you for the one coherent and sympathetic view. Many blame him for everything from the potato blight to Naziism. He was a naturalist pure and simple whose great powers of observation gave us the foundation for biological evolution. (Which he shares with Alfred Russel Wallace)
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.