Jogga

I’m sure that you all know that this year is the 150 anniversary of the publication of The Origin of Species. In celebration of Darwin’s seminal work, the BBC is running a series of programmes, events and publications that describe the man and the continuing influence of his work.

One such publication is an online e-zine, the BBC’s Focus magazine: Darwin 200 (200 because Darwin was born in 1809).

Contents:

• Introduction by Richard Dawkins
• Evolution in Action – Carl Zimmer on Richard Lenski’s work on E-coli evolution
• Unnatural Selection – how the selection process is adopted in unnatural settings (engineering, etc)
• What Darwin Didn’t Know (genetics, inheritance, etc.)
• Is Evolution Dead? – Steve Jones and PZ Myers go head-to-head
• How to Win an Argument with a Creationist

All told, the commitment to read everything is about forty minutes – an investment well worth the time.

Link to the publication.

You’ll need Flash Player to read it and you can also download an off-line version!

Box

A very nice read, thanks Jogga.

But I must ask, have you any evidence that this publication was written by the actual people credited?
Is it not possible that some authority with an agenda of it's own, is simply putting together various vague and unproven anecdotal stories in an attempt to make everyone follow the party line?

Jogga

Originally Posted by Box

A very nice read, thanks Jogga.

You're very welcome Box. One endeavours to assist all members in maintaining a decent education in such important topics and strives to develop scientific literacy at every opportunity.

Originally Posted by Box

But I must ask, have you any evidence that this publication was written by the actual people credited?

You're absolutely right to pose such a question! I confess that I have no first hand experience that the authors of the various articles are who they claim to be: further, one must also acknowledge that one has taken the claims of authorship at face value.

That said, the evidential chain that leads one to believe in the validity of the claim is irrefutable! One needs only study the style and content of the articles to see (beyond any doubt) that these scientists are who they claim that they are (oh, and visiting the richarddawkins.net or phayngula websites helps too )

Originally Posted by Box

Is it not possible that some authority with an agenda of it's own, is simply putting together various vague and unproven anecdotal stories in an attempt to make everyone follow the party line?

I do accept this explanation as a possibility, although the dearth of evidence for such a crime ever being perpetrated in the past has led one to reject the notion outright. ;)