Skip to main content

A Day For Darwin

Image
By
Happy Darwin Day, everyone! Today is the 202nd birthday of one of the greatest men in science, Mr. Charles Darwin (also, oddly enough, the birthday of Abraham Lincoln). It is hard to overstate the importance of Darwin in all of modern life; his theory changed the world, changed not just biology but endless other branches of science and led to the creation of countless other branches. Few others can claim to have changed the way we view the world like Darwin can, and for a person so modest and retiring as he this is especially something.

Yet while the scientific community has overwhelmingly accepted Darwin and his great theory, outside of the bastions of scientific thought the majority in this country reject evolution and its implications, worried that somehow it is a threat to their religion, their morals or cherished notions of what humans are. These are unfounded fears. Evolution is no threat to God or religion and makes no claims about morals except perhaps to wonder at what point in our long journey they developed.

Instead, evolution opens us up to a wider picture, a grand view of life and its creatures that speaks to our interconnectedness, how in a very real sense all life is related through a common ancestor. What could be more wonderful than this?

On Darwin Day, I ask that you put aside your reservations, accept what science is telling us in the knowledge that in no way should it conflict with your faith. Let go of your fears, and come along with us on the great journey of science, still in the process of imagining the new world that Darwin first discovered.
Labels:

Comments

  1. Herla cyningFebruary 12, 2011 at 6:21 PM

    That's nice. I'm not sure that he discovered this, but he certainly popularized it. I've heard of other scholars who have published some obscure works before him who have at least hinted on the subject, but I can't say that I remember who they were. Prof. R.M.F. said something about some ancient Grecian aswell, though his name alludes me.

    I would still credit him as being the "Father" of this science, however, much like I would consider our good friend from Halicarnassus the "Father of History."

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Today I Am Ashamed of My Alma Mater

By
Over a week ago, my alma mater, Clarion University of Pennsylvania, released what it touted as a "bold" and "ambitious" workforce plan for the next several years. The backlash was both strong and immediate, forcing the University Administration, currently headed by President Karen Whitney, to release a " Frequently Asked Questions " for its plan. The outrage on social media, as well as a MoveOn.org petition with several thousand signatures, doubtless have already channeled the displeasure of the community, alumni, and students with the plan. The University is accepting public feedback, but this seems to be only a political window-dressing for a plan that Whitney herself was  quoted  as saying "...is 95-98% a done deal." For over a week I debated over what form a blog on the topic would take, and while I realize that what I have to say here is little different from what I and others have already stated elsewhere, I feel the need to address thi...
18 comments
Read more

How I Left Creationism

By
There is a discussion going on right now in the science community about whether or not we should debate creationists: it is a debate within a debate, if you will. There are good arguments on both sides, but I have to think that we should debate creationists, and we should do it as often as we can stand it. Why do I think this? Last week, I saw that Michael Shermer posted a link to a story of a woman who argued this very point. As a former creationist, it was going to debates between Shermer and Kent Hovind that began to convince her of the legitimacy of evolution and of science. I too was once a creationist. Without ever having read anything about it, without it ever having been mentioned in class (I never heard a word about evolution in high school), I was ready to pounce at the merest mention of the topic as false and godless, two of the favorite creationist talking-points. I look back at this self in amazement, at how ignorant and proud of that ignorance I was, how I failed to ...
23 comments
Read more

What Creationists Don't Understand

By
There are quite a number of concepts that one could successfully argue that creationists fail to understand; whether this is out of a simple lack of knowledge or willful ignorance is hard to say and certainly can't be generalized to every creationist. Some, the everyday creationist, I would like to think simply haven't been exposed to the evidence. Others, the holders of Ph.D's in various fields, especially in the sciences, who happily reject evolutionary theory are willfully ignorant (John Whitmore comes to mind). But I think there is one idea that creationists of all stripes simply fail to understand; evolution is based on solid, visible evidence. Evolution is not some tenant of a "science religion" that descended down to Darwin from on high, it is an explanatory framework based on quite a lot of facts and mountains of evidence. It is evidence that leads to the conclusions of evolution, that life changes over time and, given the long history of the earth, all ...
Post a Comment
Read more