Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Soothesayer

==Darwin was contracting his own work with those racist remarks. He is still one of the most important and influential natural historians of all time despite this stupidity.

How do you figure. Darwin’s only earned degree was in theology. Darwin was not a scientist, nor did he practice the scientific method. He was a med-school dropout turned amateur naturalist. His book Origins didn’t contain any data. It was just a long argument based on practically nothing, except a few minor variations between finches. He didn’t even discover natural selection. That was discovered some 25 years ealier by a creationist. And yet, despite his lack of expertise, and his woeful lack of evidence, the science establishment allowed him to re-interpret the entire history of biology based on nothing more than a fantasy Darwin pulled out of his own head.


38 posted on 02/24/2009 8:12:19 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies ]


To: GodGunsGuts

He did do quite a few controlled experiments, such as the little known study of earthworms, seeds in salt water, the weed patch experiment just to name a few that I remember off the top of my head. Yes, he wasn’t the first to come up with natural selection and he did quite a few thought experiments to come up with “The Origin of Species”. Nevertheless, much of his work was verified in the 20th century by controlled experiments. See my first post for an example of a contemporary experiment regarding the famous Finch.


50 posted on 02/24/2009 8:59:41 PM PST by Soothesayer (The United States of America Rest in Peace November 4 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts

The Evo-atheists can’t stand the FACT that their big hero was a nobody who was an academic failure. He was a pathetic dabbler in a sea of professionals. He was simply out of his league. He was pontificating on botany and geology and natural history, but was studying theology, which he couldn’t even get right. The man with no scientific training whatsoever is the “scientist” we are supposed to worship? Sounds more like L Ron Hubbard than Isaac Newton. lol


60 posted on 02/25/2009 4:11:02 AM PST by ToGodBeTheGlory ("Darwinism" is Satanism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

To: GodGunsGuts
His book Origins didn’t contain any data.

Really. If I were to pretend this is true, what say you about all of his other books?

It was just a long argument based on practically nothing, except a few minor variations between finches.

Which have thusly been verified and confirmed in the 150 years since. Rather amazing, actually.

He didn’t even discover natural selection. That was discovered some 25 years ealier by a creationist.

Pssst. He was a creationist before examining the evidence. Which maybe someday you and your ilk will do as well. And btw, you (and others) like to pretend Darwin's impact is diminished by mentioning that his idea wasn't original. This is hardly a secret as he work word Wallace before publishing. In fact, Wallace gave Darwin his "blessing" to publish "Origin."

Furthermore, by bringing this up every 10 or so threads of yours, aren't you shining a bright light on the fact that the idea of Natural Selection as a means of evolution was A) independently arrived at by others and B) would have been published on at some point by someone else anyway? Where's your irrational hatred for Wallace?
82 posted on 02/25/2009 7:27:57 AM PST by whattajoke (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson