The selection of variations plays a pivotal role in driving Darwin’s theory of evolution. In the sixth edition of the Origin of Species, while “natural selection” appears 408 times, the term “variations” appear 303 times.
The intersection of logic and science is tricky to navigate. While science at Christ’s College was not Charles Darwin’s major, as the “father” of evolution with ministry plans, navigating this intersection with conflicting forces determined the course of his theory of natural selection.
In a recent British poll, only the Bible was narrowly voted as more valuable to humanity than the Origin of Species. Darwin argued that life on Earth is united into a single tree of life by common descent – all organisms are from one common ancestor.
Public schools are required to teach evolution as a valid scientific theory. Interestingly enough, not a single science organization in the twenty-first century has successfully developed a scientific consensus on evolution.
Consensus development is a privileged responsibility of science organizations. A scientific consensus, while not synonymous with absolute truth, gives non-scientists guidance to gain scientific understanding.
Eighteen science organizations currently have a consensus statement on climate change, spanning from the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) to the American Medical Association (AMA). A scientific consensus on climate change, from leading science organizations, while silent on a scientific consensus on evolution, is rather telling.
Within just months of returning from a 5-year voyage on the HMS Beagle, Charles Darwin was quick to start working on a new theory in what he called his “notebooks.” The year was 1837. Etched in a leathery notebook with the letter “B” on the cover, now known as Notebook B, with Darwin’s tree diagram. Starting with “1” at the tree trunk, the twigs and branches represent relationships between species, like a family tree. Species were indicated with sequential letters; simple enough.
Scientists, however, have become increasingly skeptical of Darwin’s tree metaphor to explain how biology works. “Evolution is trickier, far more intricate, than we had realized,” David Quammen explains in his new book entitledThe Tangled Tree (2018). Somehow, Darwin’s tree got tangled. What happened?
The industry’s longest-running research experiment reached a milestone in October studying the evolution of more than 68,000 generations. Biologist Richard Lenski started the now legendary experiment in his laboratory early in 1988 with just 12 flasks seeded with genetically identical bacteria known as Escherichia coli (E. coli). The bacteria have since been growing in a carefully measured solution of glucose, a type of sugar – “food” for bacteria.
Each flask contained just a sparse amount of glucose to create a stressful environment along with a high concentration of citrate, a molecular close cousin of glucose, pushing the bacteria to evolve. Every day, since 1988, Lenski’s laboratory team has transferred a small sample into new 50 mL Erlenmeyer flasks. Although wanting to quit this laborious experiment many times, Lenski has continued this process non-stop for over 30 years – now recognized as the industry’s longest evolution experiment dead-end.
Darwin, Then and Now, the Most Amazing Story in the History of Science, is a chronicle of who Darwin was, how he developed his theory, specifically what he said, and what scientists have discovered since the publication of The Origin of Species in 1859.
The book traces the rise and fall of evolution's popularity as a scientifically valid theory. With over 1,000 references from Darwin and scientists, Darwin Then and Now retraces developments in the most amazing story in the history of science. DarwinThenandNow.com focuses on understanding the intersection of biological evolution and science.
The intersection of logic and science is tricky to navigate. While science at Christ’s College was not 
Public schools are required to teach evolution as a valid scientific theory. Interestingly enough, not a single science organization in the twenty-first century has successfully developed a scientific 
