Difference between revisions of "Talk:Charles Darwin"

Revision as of 21:25, March 15, 2007

Evolution is not an institution to be founded, it is a scientific theory. Darwin was the first to coherently describe part of the process by which it occurs.--Eldepeche 19:20, 21 February 2007 (EST)

Deleted the deathbed recanting lie. There is no point putting a lie and simply saying it needs a citation. --

More deletions

I also deleted the quote mine AND the line about him being worshipped.

Yeah, it looks like the deathbed conversion stroy isn't true. I re-deleted it.

It has not been proved to be un-true. The section is awaiting citation. Do not delete sections until they are documented as untrue. Thank you. --David R 12:09, 22 February 2007 (EST)

Wait, what? Undocumented claims are to be left in unless they can be proven false? That seems like rather an odd standard of evidence, to say the least... Tsumetai 12:15, 22 February 2007 (EST)

Even the creationists a Answers In Genesis know that it isnt true. You dont put up unsupported lies and just label them as citation needed. You support what you put up.

Someone else added it, I just marked it as "citation needed" rather than deleting it outright. I just wanted to give people a chance to cite it, as I wasn't sure about it.--Monotreme 12:19, 22 February 2007 (EST)

It was there when I edited it, so I included it with my stuff, but noted that it is only a rumor. But further research shows it is totally untrue, so I took it out of my second edit. There are plenty of facts about Darwin and Darwinsim that demonstrate its a sham - why not put them in its place? I mean, Darwinism is full of lies, lets not sink to their level, ok?

Religious Views

I have completely revamped the Religious Beliefs section. I urge everyone to compare what I wrote with the previous counterfactual drivel.

Ray Martinez 17:50, 9 March 2007 (EST)

Read a credible biography for once. He did not intend to abrogate Christianity, nor did he give it up after his voyage.--AmesG 18:15, 9 March 2007 (EST)

Oops, I stand corrected. He did give up Christianity, but only after his daughter's death. Desmond, Adrian & James Moore (1991), Darwin, London: Michael Joseph, Penguin Group. --AmesG 18:30, 9 March 2007 (EST)

You are ignorant to say Janet Browne is not credible. She is the most acclaimed Darwin biographer, as are Desmond & Moore and John van Wyhe. These are the big four (and all of them are evolutionists). Browne is Professor of the History of Biology. Your implied snipe at Browne is because the fact she produced is at odds with your subjective view of Darwin. You also failed to understand that Darwin's harsh dismissal of the Bible, God and Christianity in his Autobiography is dated to be speaking of the years 1836 to 1839. Read Barlow 1958:85 who retained the dating as established by Francis Darwin, original editor of his Father's autobiography (1887). Also, you have erred concerning Desmond & Moore. They said what was left of Darwin's faith (in 1851) was extinguished by the death of Annie. They did not say Darwin was a full blown Christian who lost his faith when Annie died. The context was "whatever was left" after the late 1830s apostasy. Regardless, all my claims are supported by mainstream scholars and whatever happened in 1851 means Darwin was a hardened atheist eight years later when he wrote and published Origin of Species (1859). By the way I own every book mentioned in the References.

Ray Martinez 19:50, 9 March 2007 (EST)

Missed my "you were right" comment I added, buddy.--AmesG 22:04, 9 March 2007 (EST)

I created an article at another website

I created an article at another website:

Darwin's illness

Conservative 15:50, 15 March 2007 (EDT)conservative

Do you think his illness was just a punishment from God? There are a lot of people who think so since Darwin turned so many people against The Almighty. Should we add that to the article? Miles 17:25, 15 March 2007 (EDT)