Good quote from a pre-Darwin 'Creationist'

[Jerry Smith]

Linnaeus is sometimes mentioned in the group of "great scientists who 'believed in Creation' ". Never mind that there was no Darwininan theory of evolution when he lived and worked. It is true, however, that he saw the hand of the Creator in the nature that he studied, so a half point for the creationists there. I found this interesting quote from him in an article that argues (incorrectly, IMO) that the human and chimp divergence occurred after the development of bipedalism, making the australopithecines common ancestors of humans and chimps. I don't think that the supporters of that view will get anywhere with it, but they did include this nice quote from Carl Linnaeus in their article, and for that I am grateful:

I demand of you, and of the whole world, that you show me a generic character ... by which to distinguish between Man and Ape. I myself most assuredly know of none. I wish somebody would indicate one to me. But, if I had called man an ape, or vice versa, I would have fallen under the ban of all ecclesiastics. It may be that as a naturalist I ought to have done so.

Carolus Linnaeus, Letter to J. G. Gmelin, February 14, 1747

from here: http://www.greatapeproject.org/newsletters/BtG1P6.html

 

[Jerry Smith]

shameless bump

edited to add: (could be the next teen dance craze?)

 

[Sauron]

Originally posted by Jerry Smith
shameless bump

edited to add: (could be the next teen dance craze?)

Gratuitous bump - where are all the creationists who slander Darwin?  How come one of their favorite christian "scientists" was reaching the same conclusion, almost a century before Darwin?

Probably shouldn't ask those kinds of questions....too much uncomfortable silence around here......

 

[strathyboy]

I was recently reading about an ancient Greek philosopher named Anaximander, who lived circa 610 BC. He believed that life first developed in small pools of water that were heated by the sun. These first life forms were aquatic, and all other animal life developed from them.
Have we perhaps found the first evolutionist?

 

[D. Scarlatti]

Originally posted by strathyboy
Have we perhaps found the first evolutionist?

I think Kent Hovind says the first "evolutionist" was Satan.

Interesting point about Anaximander though, Strathyboy. Poor Chuck D. (the non-Rapper) takes a lot of heat for Marxism, Nazism, Stalinism, moral relativism, the Bloodhound Gang, the Decline of American Morality, etc. etc. So it's all those wacky Greeks' fault after all.

 

[RufusAtticus]

Strathy,

I don't know. There are some ancient philosophers that did advocate some form of common descent. I think there even might be a passage or two that discuss something similar to selection. I haven't read them. Although i plan to in the future.

An interesting thing is that Lucretius in the first century AD (or so), wrote an epic poem, De Rerum Naturum, in which he advocates the particulate make up of nature, i.e. matter is made from atoms. The interesting thing is that he discusses inheritance and predicts recessive genes.

 

[Jerry Smith]

Originally posted by RufusAtticus

An interesting thing is that Lucretius in the first century AD (or so), wrote an epic poem, De Rerum Naturum, in which he advocates the particulate make up of nature, i.e. matter is made from atoms. The interesting thing is that he discusses inheritance and predicts recessive genes. [/B]

Really? You wouldn't happen to know how the language of the poem goes that is interpreted as recessive genes, would you?

 

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by Jerry Smith


Really? You wouldn't happen to know how the language of the poem goes that is interpreted as recessive genes, would you?

Yeah, but I'm in the process of moving, and my Loeb Edition copy is packed up, so I can't get you the translation right now.

Basicially, Lucretius says that inheirtiance is particulate. (His entire theme is that everything is particulate.) And sometimes these "particules" of inheritance lie dormant for a generation or so, and thus children occationally look like grandparents or some other ancestor.

 

[Jerry Smith]

Very interesting. Thanks!

 

[Raging Atheist]

evolution was prophecied by an ancient greek philosopher?  hahahaha... nick would have a hay day... "EVOLUTIONARY CULT TRACED BACK TO ANCIENT PAGAN!"

 

[AV1611VET]

I think Kent Hovind says the first "evolutionist" was Satan.

No argument there.

 

[USincognito]

Oh, the clown is back to bumping threads from 2002 in order to troll.

 

[florida2]

No argument there.

Have you ever thought about getting a hobby?

 

[AV1611VET]

Have you ever thought about getting a hobby?

Any suggestions?

 

[HitchSlap]

Any suggestions?

Well, you could spend every waking moment on an internet for... Oh, NVM.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, you could spend every waking moment on an internet for... Oh, NVM.

Hey, Hitch!

How's it going?

 

[AdamSK]

I was recently reading about an ancient Greek philosopher named Anaximander, who lived circa 610 BC. He believed that life first developed in small pools of water that were heated by the sun. These first life forms were aquatic, and all other animal life developed from them.
Have we perhaps found the first evolutionist?

His mechanism for different species developing had to do with how much water they retained from the water-filled world. That would make him more of a Lamarckianist than an evolutionist. It would be accurate, though, to note that like many of the classic Greek philosophers he did postulate a history of the world that involved a natural, not divine, origin for life and mankind.

 

[HitchSlap]

Hey, Hitch!

How's it going?

Great AV!

Good to see you're back

 

[AV1611VET]

Great AV!

Good to see you're back

Thank you!

 

[USincognito]

His mechanism for different species developing had to do with how much water they retained from the water-filled world. That would make him more of a Lamarckianist than an evolutionist. It would be accurate, though, to note that like many of the classic Greek philosophers he did postulate a history of the world that involved a natural, not divine, origin for life and mankind.

You're replying to a post from 2002 and someone who hasn't participated here in at least a decade. Our resident clown likes to troll by bumping threads threads from that time with a nonsense comment.