From scientist to saint: does Darwin deserve a day?

The Guardian (UK) ^ | Sunday January 13, 2002 | Robin McKie, science editor

[aculeus]

He was the originator of the most dangerous idea in history. He disenfranchised God as our creator and revealed the animal origins of humanity. Many believe his influence was pernicious and evil.

But now a campaign has been launched to establish an international day of celebration on 12 February: birthday of Charles Darwin, author of the theory of evolution by natural selection.

'Along with Shakespeare and Newton, Darwin is our greatest gift to the world,' said Richard Dawkins, honorary president of the Darwin Day Organisation. 'He was our greatest thinker. Any campaign to recognise his greatness should have a significant British contribution.'

The Darwin campaign was launched by US activists two years ago to resist the anti-evolution campaigning of fundamental Christians. Now the aim is to create global celebrations by 2009, the bicentennial of his birthday.

'We have little chance of getting a national holiday for Darwin in the US - there is far too much anti-science and pseudoscience,' said project organiser Amanda Chesworth.'We are more likely to get one established in Europe, particularly in Britain, his birthplace.'

Celebrations will include seminars and lectures, and the showing of films and plays on Darwin's life, though other ideas include an atheist giving Radio 4's Thought for the Day, and a lesson on evolution being preached at Westminster Abbey. 'I'd do it like a shot,' said Dawkins.

Darwin was originally religious. He saw nature's diversity as proof of God's existence. Only a divine creator could be responsible for such marvels, it was then thought. But, after travelling the world in the Beagle, and after years of thought and experiment at his Down House home in Kent, he concluded that natural selection offered a better explanation.

Life forms better suited to their environments live longer and so have more offspring, thus triggering an evolution of species moving into new ecological niches. As philosopher Daniel Dennett said, it was 'the single best idea anyone has ever had... ahead of Newton and Einstein and everyone else.'

It is also remarkably simple. 'You can explain natural selection to a teenager,' said UK biologist John Maynard Smith. 'You have difficulty with Newton and little chance with Einstein. Yet Darwin's idea is the most profound. It still haunts us.'

Nor is opposition to Darwin confined to religious figures. Sociologists, psychologists and others involved in social policy hate natural selection, said Maynard Smith. 'They deny human behaviour is influenced by genes and evolution. They want to believe we are isolated from the animal kingdom. It is damaging, intellectual laziness. That is why we need a Darwin Day.

This point was backed by biologist Steve Jones. 'If you look at Africa, US fundamentalism, and the Muslim world, you realise evolution supporters are outnumbered by creationists. Yet these are people who have deliberately chosen to be ignorant. They are flat-Earthers without the sophistication. We need a Darwin Day to counter that ignorance.'

[memetic]

gosh X not only do we have an ad hominem but then we're treated to an attack on a straw man. did some philosophy professor hire you to demonstrate *all* of the logical fallacies here today?

[mafree]

..But now a campaign has been launched to establish an international day of celebration on 12 February: birthday of Charles Darwin,...

No one has said it yet, but Feb. 12 is the actual birthday of Lincoln too. Boy, what those two started...

[Psycho_Bunny]

Exactly.

I understand how witty you think you are but, you're really not. It's too bad your parents were unable, or unwilling to teach you some basic manners and it's too bad, also, that you're unable to treat your fellow freepers with a modicum of respect.

Just keep typing. You’re looking smarter and smarter all the time.

[Conservative til I die]

LOL, you talking about ad hominem attacks. Aren't you the "enlightened" (funny, weren't the Stalinists and National Socialists and Maoists "enlightened," non-religious folk too?) fellow that feels duty bound to fight against the "hateful Yahweh" and His minions?

I'll say what I said before to you: Piss off.

[Exnihilo]

*yawn* Bunny, when you respond with a snide remark, expect no less in return. I respect people who've earned it. Junior, Pat Henry, and a number of other freepers who totally disagree with me have earned my respect. You have not. Deal with it.

[Conservative til I die]

Yah, I've read sites like that before. Atheists all sound like a bunch of tokin teenagers jaded because God didn't make things the way they wanted them to be.

"Uh, dude, like God sux 'cuz there's hate. Why can't everything be rainbows and puppy dogs. Uh-huh-huh. Pass the bong, brah."

[Celtjew Libertarian]

Demonstrating that even atheists have an urge to celebrate holidays.

[balrog666]

gosh X not only do we have an ad hominem but then we're treated to an attack on a straw man. did some philosophy professor hire you to demonstrate *all* of the logical fallacies here today?

I like the way you think. And, of course, that you do think.

[WalterSkinner]

does Darwin deserve a day?

He already has one -- April 1

[balrog666]

I'll say what I said before to you: Piss off.

With enlightened dialog like this, it's easy to see where FR get's its reputation. Thanks for helping.

[AlGone2001]

Darwin would impress me if he'd attend any such parade-only then.

If he's so great, why hasn't his body overcome the grave?

Oh wait, that gig has already been done.

[Exnihilo]

The site is a great resource if you want to learn how to completely anihilate an atheist in debate. They usually begin with their "argument from evil", which asserts (allow me to simplify) that there is no God because evil exists. Of course, as with every single atheist arguement, the premises that it is built upon are totally ad-hoc, ie. flawed beyond belief. My conclusion over my many years of studying and analyzing atheist rhetoric is that Atheism is a religion, minus the formal pomp and circumstance. Reading Dennett's drivel is entertaining in the same way that reading Euginie Scott's defenses of evolution is entertaining, but altogether very unconvincing, to say the least.

[jlogajan]

if you want to learn how to completely anihilate an atheist in debate.<P. The death of atheism is greatly exaggerated. :-)

[jlogajan]

They usually begin with their "argument from evil", which asserts (allow me to simplify) that there is no God because evil exists.

You would think that if this was the "usual" first assertion, I, as an Atheist, would have heard of it. But alas.

Me thinks you enjoy setting up strawmen and then cutting them down.

[Psycho_Bunny]

lol...sometimes, I wish I was as stupid as you.

[Stultis]

No one has said it yet, but Feb. 12 is the actual birthday of Lincoln too.

Born the same year as well, 1809.

[thinktwice]

Think Copernicus -- the man that was excommunicated from the Catholic church ... You mean Galileo, who was convicted of heresy because of the solar system.

Thank's for the correction -- I always thought it was Copernicus but my encyclopedia doesn't back me up.

[Jay W]

I think a better idea would be to restore George Washington's birthday as a national holiday.

Darwin has become an international joke, as typified by the amusing "Darwin Awards."

[jejones]

Now, be nice. :-) Very smart people can build quite complicated deductive edifices atop bogus premises. Just because creationism is utterly bogus doesn't mean that creationists are necessarily stupid. The village creationist at the university I attended was an engineering professor, and I have no reason to believe he was not quite capable and respected in his field.

[jejones]

If I remember rightly, Copernicus came after Galileo, saw what happened to him, and didn't have De Revolutionibus published until he was just about dead, or possibly posthumously, to avoid getting into the same kind of trouble.