Home Critic's Corner

Discuss a review. Provide constructive feedback. Talk to the industry.

[ Follow Ups ] Thread: [ Display  All  Email ] [ Critic's Corner ]
[ Alert Moderator ]

Scratch another one

This takes some time as its a long list
I have indeed done Mendel an injustice as the monastery had a copy and he lectured

To quote from an article on Mendel and what he was trying to discover

Darwinian theory was well known by the time of Mendel's presentation. The German translation of On the Origin of Species was published in 1863, and the monastery copy has marginal notes in Mendel's handwriting (1). In January, 1865, at the monthly meeting of the Brno Natural History Society, A. Makowsky, one of Mendel's friends, lectured on the theory of natural selection. Mendel gave the next two lectures, and thus he could easily have focused on the evolutionary angle had he wished.

So I don't think he was openly campaigning against evolution
He was a hydridizationist and he was trying to understand this process
He did at one stage consider whether he's experiment might contradict the idea of plasticity inherent in Darwinian evolution of species,however his follow-up experiment was a total failure in this regard, so I think we cannot be certain of his view at the end, unless you have something i haven't found yet(to be 100% on this might take soem time).
Of course, rather than being a dichotomy, inheritance and evolution are interrelated.
I don't think this means he didn't believe in evolutiuon, but as a pioneer scientist was testing its validity in its his own area of expertise. He failed. I don't think that means he was opposed. Actually this is the nature of good science.
Scientists view are not necesarily always fixed implacably for all time, especially in an evolving field(sorry for pun)

I think I can have it both ways on Kelvin.
I can be opposed to speeding, doesn't mean I don't like cars. Kelvin was opposed to the concept of deep time, implicit in Darwin's geological world view.
He's calculation of earth's age claimed it was not as old
I think that opposing a tenant of a theory, is different from opposing the paradigm itself. Also the fact that the reason for manifestly opposing it was proved wrong, you don't seem to address, so like was his supposed opposition of any consequence, despite being a scientist.

On this point, I find it hard to believe any astrophysicist you cite as opposed to evolution, would be opposed to concept of deep time?

Thanks anyway, you have given me the opportunity to explore this fascinating subject further, and redress Mendel.

Enjoy

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
  Parts Connexion  

Follow Ups Full Thread
Follow Ups
  • Scratch another one - awsmone 04/27/0623:29:19 04/27/06 (0)
You can not post to an archived thread.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]