More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Roy Speckhardt

GET UPDATES FROM Roy Speckhardt

Celebrating Darwin Day

Posted: 02/12/11 12:55 PM ET

Considered the Father of Modern Biology, it's hard to imagine Charles Darwin falling asleep during a medical lecture. Yet, it was riding and shooting, taxidermy, and beetle collecting that instead fascinated young Darwin. Ignoring his studies in medical school, his father sent him to Christ College to become a parson, where instead he became deeply interested in natural history. After graduating, he was invited to join the HMS Beagle, which was integral to Darwin's famous volume The Origins of Species. Its publication inaugurated the beginning of modern science and thwarted religious and unfounded accounts about how life as we knew it came about.

Despite the continually growing body of evidence supporting Darwin's primary conclusions, as well as a consensus agreement from the world's top scientists, many conservative religious people continue to strive for an alternative explanation for life as we know it.

Call it intelligent design or creationism, the resistance to Darwin's theory of evolution unscientifically aims to reconcile unruly evidence with a premise that a god is responsible for the diversity of life on earth, not evolution. The scientific community-at-large sees these arguments as just religiously motivated pseudoscience. The United States National Academy of Sciences, for example, holds as a matter of policy that "Creationism, Intelligent Design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are not science." In fact, teaching intelligent design in public schools was deemed unconstitutional in the Tammy Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District case.

Nevertheless, proponents for the creationist account of the origin of life continue to propose that it be taught in American classrooms as science. Most recently, they are advocating that we "teach the debate," which is simply a misleading statement. There is no debate among reputable scientists about whether or not evolution is the right explanation for the diversity of life we see today.

Unfortunately, the combined efforts of religious right organizations are having an impact on the teaching of science in the United States. In a recent national survey of 900 biology teachers, 60 percent say they don't endorse either theory, while 13 percent say that they explicitly teach intelligent design. Something is obviously wrong with the education system when more than half of biology teachers are afraid to present hard scientific evidence, while so many others feel free to teach kids unfounded sectarian beliefs. One sad result, as President Obama deftly reminded the country in last month's State of the Union address, is that, "The quality of our math and science education lags behind many other nations."

On Saturday, February 12th people around the world observe Darwin's birthday and his theory of evolution. First celebrated in 1909, Darwin Day was celebrated occasionally throughout the 20th century, but has recently been revitalized by educators around the world.

This year alone there are over 500 planned public events are listed at DarwinDay.org, with gatherings hosted internationally and in all fifty states. Events range from small, low-key dinners to educational seminars designed to inform the young and old about Darwin's impact on our everyday life. And for the first time, Rep. Pete Stark of California proposed a resolution on the floor of the House of Representatives that "recognizes Charles Darwin as a worthy symbol on which to celebrate the achievements of reason, science, and the advancement of human knowledge."

While holidays are meant for fun and celebration, an annual event like Darwin Day is important in today's educational climate. As a national holiday, it trumpets not only the achievements of its namesake, but the accomplishments of the scientific community as a whole. Darwin's discoveries greatly advanced the human understanding of fields as various as genetics to epidemiology and his example is one worth emulating and celebrating.

 

Follow Roy Speckhardt on Twitter: www.twitter.com/americnhumanist

 
 
  • Comments
  • 169
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DangerousTalk
National Atheist Examiner - http://exm.nr/j1EA0c
11:40 AM on 02/14/2011
But the bronze-aged book written by scientifically illiterate sheep herders says that the God did it. What are you going to believe? lol
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hagagaga
My comments are funnier than yours.
08:30 AM on 02/14/2011
Creationism is harmful to humanity.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Oceras
A little inductive reasoning is a dangerous thing.
12:23 PM on 02/13/2011
I celebrated Darwin by existing, secure in the fact that evolution has given me deep connection to all other life forms.
Thank you so much, Charles Darwin.
10:33 AM on 02/13/2011
I will never accept the notion that humans are the highest form of life on the planet.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Oceras
A little inductive reasoning is a dangerous thing.
10:45 AM on 02/13/2011
The concept of "highest form of life" doesn't even have any real meaning.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cayuse
Soaring Eagle, soaring to Spirit from the ego self
12:01 PM on 02/13/2011
I know with all the scientific evidence displayed about genetic CREEP there are millions of species beyond man.

You just cannot see them. the are hiding in the DNA
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Oceras
A little inductive reasoning is a dangerous thing.
12:15 PM on 02/13/2011
Time to get some nourishment and take a nap. And stay off the weed.
photo
Uncle Bob
Darwin loves you.
01:03 AM on 02/13/2011
Could you picture every time Einstein was mentioned, or the order of the planets was mentioned, that religion was invoked and the science was questioned? Perhaps they would dismiss believers of General Relativity as "Einstein worshipers" or Einsteinists.

And that is the level of silliness these never ending arguments about Darwin and religion is. Evolution is a fact whether the religious want to find issue with it or not, much like the order of the planets is a fact, no matter what the religious would say otherwise.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cayuse
Soaring Eagle, soaring to Spirit from the ego self
10:31 AM on 02/13/2011
Evolution is a fact

Can I have some of that. Or do I have to have Faith it is true.

Is it the fish layed and egg. Is it once a species breaks out of it species it quits breaking out of its species, or is it simply GOD is playing trick with science making them believers of the material physical world evolving from him the first Amoeba, instead of DEED and GRACE
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Oceras
A little inductive reasoning is a dangerous thing.
12:17 PM on 02/13/2011
You don't need faith to accept the Theory of Evolution as a fact. You simply have to judge the evidence for evolution by the same thought processes that you use to judge that the peanut butter and jelly sandwich in front of you is actually a peanut butter and jelly sandwich.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cayuse
Soaring Eagle, soaring to Spirit from the ego self
10:47 AM on 02/13/2011
Good grief

Einstein theory of relativity was science "objective observation of nature"

It was not a concoction of unobservable species, like fish laying chicken eggs or chickens lay apes or ape minds becoming people minds. With no intergap species creating downward or sideways evolution. Just man form a single cell supporting what Creationism itself. Maybe Genesis was just one bad book in a good series. LOL

This sounds like the Old Testament to me:

In The Descent of Man, Darwin applies evolutionary theory to human evolution, and details his theory of sexual selection. The book discusses many related issues, including evolutionary psychology, evolutionary ethics, differences between human races, differences between sexes, the superiority of men to women, and the relevance of the evolutionary theory to society.

The major sticking point for many in the question of human evolution was whether human mental faculties could have possibly been evolved. The gap between humans and even the smartest ape seemed too large, even for those who were sympathetic to Darwin's basic theory
photo
Uncle Bob
Darwin loves you.
01:19 PM on 02/13/2011
I would assume you will admit fossils exist, that DNA exists, that all the current species exist. That is far more than enough to demonstrate evolution.

Keep in mind, evolution was a well known fact before Darwin came around. Darwin didn't invent evolution. What Darwin invented was a sensible mechanism for how evolution worked. You see, scholars had all of these fossils and taxotomists had already started devoloping trees of life connecting the various connected species by their anatomy, both living and fossils. There was a very obvious connection over time even to those people over 250+ years ago.

It is also noteworthy, those trees of life that those ancients produced? They match our current tree of life that our knowledge of DNA hierarchy demonstrates. Turns out those bumbling scholars knew what they were doing, before Darwin came along.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Eric Mann
Do you want to be on the opposite side of Progress
03:14 PM on 02/13/2011
There is evidence that we Homo Sapiens worked hard to kill off any other species that came close to us in intelligence and sophistication. The Neanderthals were just the last of them to die off.
12:40 AM on 02/13/2011
It is possible to believe in a God or a divine being and believe in evolution, too. The argument is so often framed as one or the other, but it need not be that way. If one believes in God, one can also believe that he/she also set the events and processes of evolution in place. But, of course, that would take away the fun of a lot of people who enjoy arguing this endlessly. So, keep up the good work ....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TMMA
your micro-bio did not meet our guidelines
01:08 AM on 02/13/2011
There is room for both Science and God.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cayuse
Soaring Eagle, soaring to Spirit from the ego self
10:56 AM on 02/13/2011
Nature and Nature's GOD has a very intellectual expression.

Since we all now there is something out there science cannot explain and maybe never will and the Old Testament may have got it wrong.

Not sure what KNOWING something exists beyond our understanding, whether you call it GOD or UNKNOWN make little difference.

That science is mans recored history of what he does know and GOD is the name of the unknown by others.

Has little to do with the one fact. Both science and the OLD Testament have made WAR, Atomic Bomb, Biological Weapons, and DRONES.

Then there is Krishna, Buddha and Christ who teach righteousness (right action) and evolving the ego self to the enlightenment that we all are but ONE SELF a single consciousness of the universe. Not from belief, but FACT. NON-VIOLENCE cannot be done to yourself the SELF
photo
Tox of Oz
Australian, Atheist, Left of Gandhi & Cynic
05:40 AM on 02/13/2011
True, it is possible to believe in a god in an abstract sense and evolution, but simply put you cannot be a christian (or any other major religion for that matter) and believe in evolution given the fictional books on which that belief are based completely contradict scientific reality.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cayuse
Soaring Eagle, soaring to Spirit from the ego self
11:06 AM on 02/13/2011
Say What? Maybe you are right about the Old Testament

But have missed most the entire worlds population and spiritual teaching of Christ, Buddha and Krishna. Right action of non-violence becoming your true nature true spiritual self, the Cosmic Consciousness of the universe

Science is not twisting the data to make it true. It is not perceiving you came from the same cell or GOD create the one or many. There is no "object observation of nature",science, or fact. What every your belief system is the fact that we exist is true and scientifically provable. The evolution theory and creationism, cannot be proven by physical Science or the Old Testament.
11:41 AM on 02/13/2011
You had me in th first phrase, then lost me completely in the second. We disagree.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:30 AM on 02/13/2011
I read an article about Charles Darwin and then I browse the comments, and without actually counting it becomes obvious that a large portion of them refer to 'god' or the bible. Darwin seems to have posthumously done more for promoting a general interest in the bible and religion than any christian of his time, or since. If it wasn't for Darwin and evolutionary science the bible may have faded into the background of the public discourse, and remained on the shelf harmlessly collecting dust. Personaly, I think the bible and evolutionary science are as unrelated as chalk and cheese, and all attempts to refute one against the other are futile. The bible is literature, not science; ancient and intrinsically interesting literature, bristling with homilies, metaphors and allegories, and perhaps a sprinkling of history, but definitely not science. As much as we demand the separation of church and state we should also demand the separation of science and literature.
09:07 AM on 02/13/2011
Very well said! Truth of the matter is, that there will always be people who want to believe in something. This is exactly why you can make up a religion nowadays and you WILL have a group of believers. Even if it is complete nonsense like Scientology. You can say that earth, mankind and the universe was created by aliens, no problem. You will have believers. Especially in America. Also, the older a religion becomes the more people will call it true, no matter how abstruse the story is. I would not be surprised if some tea-bagger suddenly calls himself the reincarnation of Jesus in 2012 and will have a huge crowd of supporters/believers. This country needs to have better science teachers AND less drop-outs. Our only way to fight ignorance and religious naivety seems to be a good education.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
msmanatee
“A hundred years from now? All new people.” AL
04:00 PM on 02/13/2011
#3 fan.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Oceras
A little inductive reasoning is a dangerous thing.
11:03 AM on 02/13/2011
You can't refute the Bible or science just as you can't refute chalk or cheese. Science is a field of study. While you might be able to refute some findings in science (it happens every day), you can't refute the field. It doesn't make sense. Similarly, you can't refute the Bible although you can refute many parts of it, especially using the methodology of science. Most of the Bible's statements are irrefutable because there is no evidence for or against them. We don't need to "demand the separation of science and literature" because they are intrinsically separate, except insofar as science might help explain some characteristics of literature.
The Bible/Koran should be kept in the Church/Synagogue/Mosque. Science should be kept everywhere.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Titanshanks
Back for more
11:54 PM on 02/12/2011
When evolution is taught in American schools, it's often so diluted as to be of very little interest. Students should be impressed to see how a simple, natural process can create the illusion of design and the amazing diversity of life, and that can't happen with teachers nervously shuffling between science and a fear of nutty parents or even the school system.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cayuse
Soaring Eagle, soaring to Spirit from the ego self
11:27 AM on 02/13/2011
I would strongly suggest you do not PUSH scientific theory or the Old Testament on to your children.

You could teach them to be good citizens, to become self actualized and realized with free minds and to find happiness without material possessions. And the cost would be much less than producing illiteracy and lack of think we do

But you won't
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ConfuciusSay-
Aglets: their purpose is sinister.
11:42 AM on 02/13/2011
Happiness without material things is very good.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Titanshanks
Back for more
08:11 PM on 02/13/2011
Teaching isn't pushing, and learning science doesn't preclude any of the goals you mention in paragraph 2.
11:01 PM on 02/12/2011
As a Catholic, I know that "resistance to Darwin's theories" comes from other areas besides "American Fundamenta­list Protestant­s", including many Catholics.

For example, see:
Creation Doctrine
What Does The Catholic Church Teach about Origins?
http://www.kolbecenter.org/resources/creation-doctrine/83-creation-doctrine.html

- Genesis contains real history - it gives an account of things that really happened. (Pius XII)
- Adam and Eve were real human beings—the first parents of all mankind. (Pius XII).
- All the Fathers who wrote on the subject believed that the Creation days were no longer than 24-hour-days. (Consensus of the Fathers of the Church).
- Evolution must not be taught as fact, but instead the pros and cons of evolution must be taught. (Pius XII, Humani Generis)

What Does Cutting-Edge Science Teach about Origins?
- Molecules-to-man evolutionism violates the Law of Biogenesis: Life does not come from non-life.
- The specific complexity of genetic information in the genome does not increase spontaneously.
Therefore, there is no natural process whereby reptiles can turn into birds, land mammals into whales, or chimpanzees into human beings..

Additional references:
Genesis 1: 31
"God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning - the sixth day."
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis1-11&version=NIV1984
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ConfuciusSay-
Aglets: their purpose is sinister.
12:24 AM on 02/13/2011
"chimpanzee­s into human beings"

Chimps never turned into humans. Your understanding of evolutionary theory is flawed. Both of those species have a common ancestor, explaining why 95% of their genomes is identical.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TMMA
your micro-bio did not meet our guidelines
01:13 AM on 02/13/2011
There's a huge lack of understanding of the evolutionary process - most likely from the way it's framed in mainstream 'science' TV shows. I give props to anyone who believes in evolution, even if they don't have a tight grip on the particulars.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cayuse
Soaring Eagle, soaring to Spirit from the ego self
11:32 AM on 02/13/2011
Proving that what GOD created the first Amoeba and that create the world. And 7 days really meant 7,000,000 years

If there was life on mars would not all life have the same physical characteristics. That must be why Rich drive porches and the Apes drive Chevys and Fords

With all these similarities the evolution of the brain has not made people come together because what? Sibling Rivalry. I have got it
photo
Tox of Oz
Australian, Atheist, Left of Gandhi & Cynic
05:49 AM on 02/13/2011
'chimpanzee­s into human beings'

That is always been a major lie in the arguements by religious types, Darwn never said anything about chimpanzee­s turning into human beings, it was the major piece of missinformation used against his theory at its release designed to rile up the religious types.
10:36 AM on 02/13/2011
But there is strong evidence of some humans turning into chimps.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
caneca
10:13 PM on 02/12/2011
The resistance to Darwin's theories comes from an specific group : American Fundamentalist Protestants. This loud minority has somehow managed to change education curriculum and has had a profound influence in how science is taught in our country. It is time for the silent majority to say: "enough of this crap" and take back control of our education system.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
General Public
liberal, progressive, atheist, Democrat, SubGenius
10:53 PM on 02/12/2011
If only our schools actually taught people evolution is correct and showed all of the proof, such as ancient fossils, the way bacteria can evolve to be drug-resistant, and all of the inherited similarities between different species that point to common ancestors, we would not have so many people campaigning against schools teaching that evolution is correct. There is plenty of proof to prove evolution correct, yet most of it can only fully be understood once you reach college-level biology, so since most people do not study advanced biology in college, people can be swayed to believe in nonsensical Creationism rather than the scientific truth of evolution. If people realize the technological devices we Americans all use every day such as computers, televisions, cars, etc. are all based on science, and that rejection of science by someone means they are unable to invent or understand any technological devices, I think people would have more respect for science and take it more seriously. Unfortunately most scientists are too busy actually doing research to bother with educating people about science, and the mainstream media, with its "show both sides of every argument" addiction and its short soundbites, isn't suited to actually telling people the truth about things and educating them. And many teachers who educate the young just aren't that well educated themselves. Sure, the teachers usually have college degrees, but in elementary school, for instance, teachers likely don't understand all of the subjects they teach in great detail...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Oceras
A little inductive reasoning is a dangerous thing.
11:33 AM on 02/13/2011
I think the basics of evolution can be perfectly understood by even an elementary school student. If the Creationists won, and the world was never taught evolution, only creation, the biological and medical sciences would end. Geology would also have to end because it demonstrates the impossibility of a single flood having layed down all the sedimentary layers that have fossils in them.
Your last comment demonstrates why it is best to make sure that teachers have a degree in the subject they are hired to teach.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
hagagaga
My comments are funnier than yours.
08:28 AM on 02/14/2011
FF for the picture.

Creationism is antithetical to slack.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cayuse
Soaring Eagle, soaring to Spirit from the ego self
10:02 PM on 02/12/2011
Poster, You show 0 posts, but have at least 2 of mine. You showing divine providence here
09:30 PM on 02/12/2011
There are numerous subjects that people take an ignorant stand on, without reading the material or asking themselves why they believe a certain thing. The ERA is a more recent example of those not reading the 43 words for themselves and allowing themselves to be captured by threats of "unisex toilets", etc.. Charles Darwin is a fascinating example of modern day fear mongers' attacks against what they see as blasphemy by a heretic. Ho hum. This started while he was alive and will continue long after we're gone. There will always be people afraid of their own shadow.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cayuse
Soaring Eagle, soaring to Spirit from the ego self
09:42 PM on 02/12/2011
Interesting with all my WITHIN SPECIES science a 160 years later all I get is Plenty and Modern Science. Sounds like people in the shadow's on both side with not much in their hands but a whole lot of FAITH BELIEVING.

Me I put little into the Old Testament and surely don't care much about physical science except what is proven and useful. I have transcended beyond the material world. Except what is keep this body functioning.

Just seems damn stupid that I have to work every day just to feed, cloth and provide shelter. Only man can take such a simple concept and make it harder work than it takes. Wealth Accumulators unsatisfied collecting more wealth than they need. Government taking money from the worker and handing it back to Owners who paid the worker the cash in the first place. Using the money taken from the worker in tax to subsidies the Owner.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Oceras
A little inductive reasoning is a dangerous thing.
11:36 AM on 02/13/2011
You don't need the internet to keep your body functioning.
photo
Victoria Tripple
Atheist Scientist
09:20 PM on 02/12/2011
I had an amazing Darwin Day!! I decided to go to the San Diego Museum of Man and then posted this intent as a fb status. After driving around for food then deciding to just go straight there, I ran into my highschool biology teacher (who lives 2.5 hrs away in my childhood home town).......he was coming down here anyway and saw my status and decided to check that out too!! It was awesome!!! Will not forget this one!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cayuse
Soaring Eagle, soaring to Spirit from the ego self
09:52 PM on 02/12/2011
I had very interesting biological experience with my student too
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
General Public
liberal, progressive, atheist, Democrat, SubGenius
10:55 PM on 02/12/2011
For some reason I don't want to know... you are making a double entendre here about inappropriate relations between a teacher and a student. I hope you do not actually engage in such behavior and are merely joking.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cayuse
Soaring Eagle, soaring to Spirit from the ego self
11:45 AM on 02/13/2011
GENERAL PUBLIC

You blow much smoke with your assUmption. Single adults are allowed to have hetro biological activity. A teach can be an adult, A student can be an adult. A and B is very logical and legal.

Sorry Charley
This comment has been removed due to violations of our [Guidelines]
photo
laymancanuck
Left of centre, because it works for everyone.
08:07 PM on 02/12/2011
It's bazaar, to allow people who's belief system is unable to integrate modern knowledge to influence the education system.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Paul Houston
British and a London resident
08:26 PM on 02/12/2011
I suppose you could attribute to the fact that in the "Good old days" everything was better, like if you were 18 you would be called up for military service, the chances of you dying of a simple infection were high. It is seen in Germany where it is called Ostalgia where some believe it was better under Communism.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
cayuse
Soaring Eagle, soaring to Spirit from the ego self
09:03 PM on 02/12/2011
I agree, can we at least educate that Darwin studied "survival of the fittest" within a species and had no science of evolution of the first single cell becoming a fish, that became and egg that became a chicken, that hatch an Ape, that gave birth to a man.

This non science FAITH Believing of evolution and Old Testament stuff does not belong in our education system as you say
photo
Victoria Tripple
Atheist Scientist
09:25 PM on 02/12/2011
you're right Darwin knew nothing of abiogenesis (the beginning of all life)......he only theorized on the progressive path of life and species diviersity through natural selection. As for abiogenesis we have infinately more information that Darwin could not have dreamed of. Its brilliantly fascinating that he came up with the theory of natural selection and the descent of man with no knowledge of DNA or chromosomal inheritance.