[Aquinasfan]

he might never have recognized what his eyes and his notebooks were telling him during and after the voyage of the Beagle.

Like the "evolution" of finch beak size?

[snarks_when_bored]

Darwin did take note of the variation among finch beaks, that is true.

But, Aquinasfan, with reference to two of our earlier topics:

1. with regard to this matter of 'laws of nature', I don't understand your insistence on grabbing onto the word 'law' and insisting that it implies a 'lawgiver'. In some contexts it does, in others it doesn't. If you're truly a fan of Aquinas, you should be able to make such distinctions.
    
2. with regard to this question of Professor Ruse's sex life, that's the question you never answered (referring to our earlier exchange): How could you possibly know what sort of attitudes Ruse and his partners had towards one another? Your willingness to condemn the man without evidence is disturbing and calls into question your judgment. Moreover, even if he were a libertine (which I don't grant), his personal habits are irrelevant to the truth or falsity of the scientific and philosophical claims he makes. You should know this.

[b_sharp]

"Like the "evolution" of finch beak size?

Are you trying to imply that the adaptation of beak size and shape is *not* evolution?