Mithcoriel
Member
Hey guys. I'm working on debunking Life: How did it get here? By evolution or creation?, and they have tons of quotes by supposedly famous scientists denouncing evolution. I'm working my way through them figuring out which are quote mines, which were said by creationists without credentials, etc. And there's this one:
Thompson,W.R. Director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control of Ottawa
who wrote a preface to the 1956 edition of "The Origin of species" is quoted as writing in it:
I found the complete preface here: http://www.oocities.org/catholiccreation/essay.htm
He seems very critical of evolution.
[showmore=Here is my summary for those who want a shorter read]He describes random variation and natural selection, and admits that a wide diversity of organic forms exists, but isn't convinced natural selection has produced it. He says Darwin's arguments were
- Great variation
- Progression of organic forms in geological strata
- Many organisms now extinct
- Similarity embryonic stages
- Rudimentary organs
- Nested Hierarchy
"The facts and interpretations he relied on ceased to convince" because we know acquired changes are not heredetary. By mating houseflies with long wings, we can't produce a progressive increase of wing length.
Mutations are heredetary, but such forms must be eliminated
in nature, cause they're usually useless, detrimental, or
lethal.
"Neo-Darwinians" insist every character must have survival value, and Darwin's "modern disciples" simply ignore correlation (e.g. blue eyes and deafness in cats etc.).
Organs previously thought to be vestigial ("rudiment") turned out to be well developed and functional.
We have no proof whales descended from ancestors in which their pelvis-rudiments were more strongly developed.
"The Origin of Species" converted the majority of its readers to a belief in Darwinian evolution. We must now ask whether this was an unadulterated benefit to biology and to mankind!"
Zoologists "demonstrated" the descent of vertebrates from almost every other group of invertebrates.
Mentions Piltdown hoax, only recently uncovered at the time, and Pithecanthropus (Java man), whose discoverer admitted "that he had found in the same deposits bones that are definitely human"
Biologists disagree about causes and actual process of evolution, because the evidence is unsatisfactory. "It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution"
Also mentions Hesperopithicus (Nebraska man), from 1922.
Darwin's work probably caused a lot of decline of belief in the supernatural, and Christianity. "Propagandists" like T.H.Huxley argue that Christianity implies a literal interpretation of Genesis irreconcilable with Evolution. The Darwinians reject the idea that God controls Evolution. It's irresponsible of Darwin and his successors to fail to asses the religious issues at stake.[/showmore]
So anyway, does anyone know if this is a legitimate edition of the Origin of Species, or wether it's maybe one of those creationist gimmicks like when Ray Comfort published a version of "Origins" with his own preface?
Thompson,W.R. Director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control of Ottawa
who wrote a preface to the 1956 edition of "The Origin of species" is quoted as writing in it:
I found the complete preface here: http://www.oocities.org/catholiccreation/essay.htm
He seems very critical of evolution.
[showmore=Here is my summary for those who want a shorter read]He describes random variation and natural selection, and admits that a wide diversity of organic forms exists, but isn't convinced natural selection has produced it. He says Darwin's arguments were
- Great variation
- Progression of organic forms in geological strata
- Many organisms now extinct
- Similarity embryonic stages
- Rudimentary organs
- Nested Hierarchy
"The facts and interpretations he relied on ceased to convince" because we know acquired changes are not heredetary. By mating houseflies with long wings, we can't produce a progressive increase of wing length.
Mutations are heredetary, but such forms must be eliminated
in nature, cause they're usually useless, detrimental, or
lethal.
"Neo-Darwinians" insist every character must have survival value, and Darwin's "modern disciples" simply ignore correlation (e.g. blue eyes and deafness in cats etc.).
Organs previously thought to be vestigial ("rudiment") turned out to be well developed and functional.
We have no proof whales descended from ancestors in which their pelvis-rudiments were more strongly developed.
"The Origin of Species" converted the majority of its readers to a belief in Darwinian evolution. We must now ask whether this was an unadulterated benefit to biology and to mankind!"
Zoologists "demonstrated" the descent of vertebrates from almost every other group of invertebrates.
Mentions Piltdown hoax, only recently uncovered at the time, and Pithecanthropus (Java man), whose discoverer admitted "that he had found in the same deposits bones that are definitely human"
Biologists disagree about causes and actual process of evolution, because the evidence is unsatisfactory. "It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of the non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution"
Also mentions Hesperopithicus (Nebraska man), from 1922.
Darwin's work probably caused a lot of decline of belief in the supernatural, and Christianity. "Propagandists" like T.H.Huxley argue that Christianity implies a literal interpretation of Genesis irreconcilable with Evolution. The Darwinians reject the idea that God controls Evolution. It's irresponsible of Darwin and his successors to fail to asses the religious issues at stake.[/showmore]
So anyway, does anyone know if this is a legitimate edition of the Origin of Species, or wether it's maybe one of those creationist gimmicks like when Ray Comfort published a version of "Origins" with his own preface?
