What did Darwin say?

[keith99]

Before I start can anyone tell me how to setup a poll.

Not that it would work well here because I have 2 somewhat open ended lines of questions to ask.

When it comes to his groundbreaking work 'The Origin of Species':

Did Darwin say all life is descended from a common ancestor? If so how definitively did he say it and what impact would it have on the theory if it turned out there was more than one.

Did Darwin say Evolution had proceeded at a pretty much constant rate over time?

 

[HitchSlap]

From "Origin."

"Therefore I should infer from analogy that probably all the organic beings which have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form, into which life was first breathed."(p 484)

 

[keith99]

From "Origin."

"Therefore I should infer from analogy that probably all the organic beings which have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form, into which life was first breathed."(p 484)

Very good.

Please wait a bit before commenting on how this being false would impact his theory or the issue of uniformity of the rate of evolution.

Don't want the right answers too early.

 

[Dizredux]

Did Darwin say Evolution had proceeded at a pretty much constant rate over time?

From Punctuated equilibrium - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the fourth edition (1866) of On the Origin of Species Darwin wrote that "the periods during which species have undergone modification, though long as measured in years, have probably been short in comparison with the periods during which they retain the same form."[68] Thus punctuationism in general is consistent with Darwin's conception of evolution.[66]

As I understand it, Darwin placed a lot more emphasis of gradualism but did see the possibility of rapid changes in smaller isolated populations.

There was another Darwin quote expanding on this but I cannot seem to find it.

Dizredux

 

[RichardParker]

Don't want the right answers too early.

*lol*
There is a RIGHT answer for a hypothetical? Really? :-D

I'm actually wondering how it is relevant what Darwin thought about it. He lived over a century ago. We have made extreme progress in evolutionary biology and have found out many things he didn't know about or was even actually wrong about it.

So, why wouldn't you want to know what modern biologists say? Why focus on Darwin's opinion?

 

[keith99]

*lol*
There is a RIGHT answer for a hypothetical? Really? :-D

I'm actually wondering how it is relevant what Darwin thought about it. He lived over a century ago. We have made extreme progress in evolutionary biology and have found out many things he didn't know about or was even actually wrong about it.

So, why wouldn't you want to know what modern biologists say? Why focus on Darwin's opinion?

What Darwin said is not hypothetical. It is objective fact.

How people misrepresent what Darwin said is also fact and is current.

 

[bhsmte]

.

 

[RichardParker]

What Darwin said is not hypothetical. It is objective fact.

Yeeeees, but that wasn't what you asked for, was it?
You've talked about:

"...how this being false would impact his theory or the issue of uniformity of the rate of evolution. "

And THAT (it being false and the impact of it being false) is a hypothetical.

How people misrepresent what Darwin said is also fact and is current.

Also agree.
But this again doesn't seem to be something that poped up in your original request... or did I miss something?

 

[keith99]

Yeeeees, but that wasn't what you asked for, was it?
You've talked about:

"...how this being false would impact his theory or the issue of uniformity of the rate of evolution. "

And THAT (it being false and the impact of it being false) is a hypothetical.



Also agree.
But this again doesn't seem to be something that poped up in your original request... or did I miss something?

Yea you seemed to have missed what site you are on and which froum in that site.

 

[Papias]

Hitchslap -

While that does address the question, it says "probably", and is less prominent than the famous concluding statement of the book.

 

[Papias]

Darwin was not dogmatic about either. As has been pointed out, he saw the possibility of different rates of change.

As to the origin of life, he quite clearly considered both ideas - one or many - as possible. This is very clear in the most famous part of the Origin of Species, the concluding statement:

[FONT=times new roman, times]There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.[/FONT]
​

At the same time, it's helpful to remember (as has been pointed out on this thread), that Darwin's own views are interesting, but not critically important to our modern understanding of evolution. He was just plain wrong in some places (like about DNA), and that's OK.

Have a fun day-

Papias

 

[RichardParker]

Yea you seemed to have missed what site you are on and which froum in that site.

No, didn't miss that at all.
Why?

You asked, what effect on evolution it would have, if we didn't descent from common ancestors, right?
That's a hypothetical question. Which I then pointed out.

And you claimed that it wasn't and that there is a "correct" answer to it.
Which I find amusing, since we are dealing with a hypothetical question.

What forum we are in doesn't change what your question said, or if it is a hypothetical.