PvM posted Entry 1423 on August 30, 2005 11:12 PM.
Trackback URL: http://www.pandasthumb.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.fcgi/1419
In the August 29 issue of the Scientist, Phil Skell writes in his opinion piece “Why Do We Invoke Darwin? Evolutionary theory contributes little to experimental biology” the following:
Despite this and other daculties, the modem form of Darwin’s theory has been raised to its present high status because it’s said to be the comerstone ofmodem experimental biology. But is that correct? “While
the great majority of biologists would probably agree with Theodosius Dobzhansky‘s dictum that ‘nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution,’ most can conduct their work quite happily without
particular reference to evolutionary ideas,”
A.S. Wilkins, editor of the journal BioEssays, wrote in 2000. “Evolution would appear to be the indispensable unifying idea and, at the same time, a highly superfluous one.”
I decided to investigate the quote. Guess what?
The same quote was mined on ARN and Grape Ape responded
You forgot to post the very next passage:
Yet, the marginality of evolutionary biology may be changing. More and more issues in biology, from diverse questions about human nature to the vulnerability of ecosystems, are increasingly seen as reflecting evolutionary events. A spate of popular books on evolution testifies to the development. If we are to fully understand these matters, however, we need to understand the processes of evolution that, ultimately, underlie them.
So I did a search on Google and found the quote mined on the Discover Institute in Skell’s article. A creationist website John Mark Ministries, Answer In Genesis Feedback and a Skeptics page about an AIF debate
Is it not time to put to rest this canard?
Commenters are responsible for the content of comments. The opinions expressed in articles, linked materials, and comments are not necessarily those of PandasThumb.org. See our full disclaimer.