Doubting Darwin?

i've just started reading Doubting Darwin? Creationist Designs On Evolution by Sahotra Sarkar and i was wondering if anyone else had picked it up.


Written by Professor of Integrative Biology and of Philosphy at the University of Texas, Austin, the book is a scientifically minded book dealing with evolution and Intelligent Design, the claims of the latter and why they don't stand up. unlike other books i have read on the subject it does an excellent job of explaining just how bumpy and well trodden the road has for Evolution, the doubts the trials and tribulations but importantly why it has weathered those storms and come out as the only viable mechanism to explain the origins of modern species.

the book is well written and at a high academic standard (the 'simple' account of evolution was over a page long) and avoids many of the almost ad hominem moments that (nonetheless good) works by the likes of Richard Dawkins can fall in to.

So far in Chapter two we have covered a history of evolution with details of Darwins contemporaries and not just himself (Wallace, Weisman and others) that briliantly accounts the rise of evolution and the scientific challenges it has faced along the way. it doesn't needlessly exalt Darwin either, continually pointing out flaws in his thinking and explaining not only why these were wrong but later on showing what followed on and improved the theory, it uses this as a great chance to point out the faux pas of ID creationists in labeling evolution as 'darwinism' and various other faults the ID movement has. it also shows helps to show that the harshest and best critiques of evolutionary theory have come from science itself, even darwin setting his own theory challenges far stiffer than any ID proponent has.

so far the book is looking really good, it sets out what it intends to do, does it and doesn't go of on a tangent. the chance to veer of the intended topic is never taken with the course always firmly steered on showing the flaws with ID trying to replace evolution. its a good read and i would recomend it for anyone looking for a moderately high level work on the subject.

It's a very good work. Sarkar is fighting back against the misuse of his molecular biology work by the ID people. They grossly reinterpreted some of his work and then used him as a source for some pretty blatant silliness. Now he's taking the fight back to them, fivefold.

while Darwin was not completely right, his research got us where we all are today in terms of our knowledge

while Darwin was not completely right, his research got us where we all are today in terms of our knowledge

Darwin's work was done over 130 years ago, so much research has gone on since then that has built on, improved or shown wrong parts of his work that the title Darwinism is a misnomer. for a start most people will recognise that Darwin's contempory Wallace is at least worthy of some praise in the work which lead to the theory. its ironic that ID creationists don't use Wallace more often considering the fact he so favoured Extra-natural or supernatural explanations for much of what he saw in evolution. of course its typical of the shallowness of ID creationism that they probably haven't bothered to research him.

Originally Posted by Gary88

Darwin's work was done over 130 years ago, so much research has gone on since then that has built on, improved or shown wrong parts of his work that the title Darwinism is a misnomer. for a start most people will recognise that Darwin's contempory Wallace is at least worthy of some praise in the work which lead to the theory. its ironic that ID creationists don't use Wallace more often considering the fact he so favoured Extra-natural or supernatural explanations for much of what he saw in evolution. of course its typical of the shallowness of ID creationism that they probably haven't bothered to research him.

okay. lets just completely discredit the one who started all of the ideas and got the wheels turning.

i'm not discrediting him at all but the truth is the theory of evolution as a firm scientific theory wasn't fully formed until the 1930s long after his death and through the scepticism and work of many many scientists. the theory today is quite different from the one laid down in the origin and while many of his ideas remain many were false, the fact that the theory of evolution is different now to his original is reason enough for it to be a misnomer to call it darwinism, all of this is brilliantly detailed in the book.