A Brief Look at Steve Jay Gould

Gould espouses more of the ideology of Williams and Colomb regarding why the theories of dinosaurs being incapable of having children and overdosing on psychoactive plants are entirely without merit. Williams and Colomb say, “we engage one another cooperatively in arguments, we aim not to coerce or seduce others into mindless agreement, but to enlist them into helping us to find the best, most reasonable solution to a shared problem”(67). Williams

The riddle of the origin of man has been subject to many ponderings and theories for thousands of years. In America, two theories concerning this timeless question have driven a spike through the general populace. These two beliefs, Evolution and Christianity, have driven a riff through the American populace and fueled several debates and conflicts over which is the truer theory. Incidents such as the decision of the Kansas school board to ban schools from including the Evolution Theory from their curriculum are becoming a tragically frequent and threaten to escalate if not checked soon. However, there is a growing belief in America today in the possibility of believing that evolution is an inescapable fact while still

Through the 1920s, conflicts regarding the teachings of religious values versus Evolution, along with the increasing fight for women’s independence, caused a great deal of tension within America. Prior to the ‘20s schools taught the Bible and Christianity’s principles were stressed. It was in 1925 when Clarence Darrow defended John Scopes, a biology teacher, who was put on trial in the court for teaching the theory of Evolution (Doc C). This document illustrates the dialogue of

Through the analysis of the major televised debate, held February this year, between the popular science communicator, Bill Nye, and the US-based Australian creationist, Ken Ham. It has come to light that through careful analysis and research it is my belief that scientists should not be involved within any debates “scientific” or otherwise regarding topics pertaining to creationism or any other religious perspective. The inappropriate use of the loose definitions of science and religion lead to the intertwining of the two subjects that are extremely different in methodology, leaving the audience up for misinterpretation. While the debate did bring about the topic to the forefront of the public, which in itself was a positive, I do not believe that the post debate result was a win for science. Bill Nye’s derogatory demeanour represented post debate towards Ken Ham was in turn a representation of institutional science. Leading to which the validity of the debate and post debate could be brought into question.

Although Darwin’s (1809-1882) work in evolutionary observation might appear radically different from those focused on other areas, the theories he developed from these observation lead to such groundbreaking publishing’s as The Origin of Species. These intern caused an upset within the then accepted norms of philosophy and religion, had a profound impact on the academia, and further

Jerome Lawrence and Robert E. Lee’s Inherit the Wind provides a realistic interpretation of the 1925 Scopes Trial through the tale of Bertram Cates, an educator incarcerated for including evolution in his curriculum. One word, a colon and two simple sentences reiterate the point that society is still far from being fully scientifically advanced and tolerant of outside views. The unwillingness of society to adopt more modern viewpoints persists in society today as it did 92 years prior.

At age 5, Stephen saw his first fossils. A T. rex. When he visited the American Museum of Natural History. He decided to become a paleontologist and study dinosaurs. He received a bachelor’s degree in geology from Antioch College in Ohio in 1963.

Stephen’s most notable characteristics have been evident almost from birth, but have been shaped and refined through his unique life experiences. Early in life, he demonstrated a tenacity in pursuing his heart’s desires, so while he might allow himself to be re-engaged in a different activity, he rarely forgot his original goal and returned to is as soon as possible. Thinking and debating have long been appealing to him as, from a young age, he has been seeking to understand life and truth, and his question of “why?” was not easily satisfied. Strong curiosity was another facet of this questioning, which lead him to experiment and innovate to find out what would

“You have eight months to live” that statement may elicit fear into a normal patient sitting in their doctors’ office. Or perhaps it becomes a death sentence for that particular person. Yet, for Stephen Jay Gould it became a motivator. Stephen Jay Gould, a Paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and historian of science, was diagnosed with abdominal mesothelioma in 1982. When he was told his life expectancy was eight months he did what most would not; he looked at the statistics. Gould was not an average patient suffering from cancer. He had training in statistics and a remarkable attitude. He was also one of the most influential authors of his generation so, naturally, he wrote an article about his battle. Gould’s article brought up an endearing point: the median is not the message. Well then, what is the point? Let’s see if we can get a clearer answer on the message.

Darwin’s theories and discoveries caused much controversy to the world and still does today. These controversies occur more in

Richard Dawkins was born in 1941 and moved to England when he was nine years old. Dawkins was always interested by science, but not the study and meaning of life until college where he graduated in 1962 from Oxford University. Soon after he graduated he became a zoology professor at Oxford University and then later wrote his first best-selling book, "The Selfish Gene. " This book shows how life works on a biological level and explains how animals react and adapt to certain situations and environments.

Biology professor Kenneth Miller’s central argument is that science should not undermine one’s faith in God. “Science itself does not contradict the hypothesis of God.” He makes this argument by stating that science explains the things that God has made and in doing so, trying to prove the existence of God through natural or scientific means does not make sense. Once the supernatural is introduced, there is no way to use nature, thus science, to prove or disprove its existence. Miller argues that science gives us the window to the dynamic and creative universe that increases our appreciation of God’s work. The central point of his argument is evolution. Creationists, of the intelligent design movement, argue that nature has irreducible complex systems that could have only arisen from a creature or designer. This theory is widely supported among devout believers in the Bible and God. Miller argues that if they truly believe this, completely ignoring hard facts and theories, then they are seeking their God in the darkness. Miller, a Christian himself, believes that this “flow of logic is depressing”; to fear the acquisition of knowledge and suggest that the creator dwells in the shadows of science and understanding is taking us back to the Middle Ages, where people used God as an explanation for something they have yet to or want

Creationists, mistaking the uncertain in science for the unscientific, see the debate among evolutionists regarding how best to explain evolution as a sign of weakness. Scientists, on the other hand, see uncertainty as simply an inevitable element of scientific knowledge. They regard debates on fundamental theoretical issues as healthy and stimulating. Science, says evolutionary biologist Stephen Jay Gould, is "most fun when it plays with interesting ideas, examines their implications, and recognizes that old information may be explained in surprisingly new ways." Thus, through all the debate over evolutionary mechanisms biologists have not been led to doubt that evolution has occurred. "We are debating how it happened," says Gould (1983, p.256).

The article, “A Matter of Scale,” urges the audience to observe the small and extraordinary components of the biosphere and acknowledge its genetic variations as explained by Darwin’s theory of evolution. However, Kelly’s essay, “Evolution: An Article of Faith,” considers Darwin’s theory as a “false religion” suppressing God’s ability to create the “work of intelligence.” (Evolution) The heated debate over the credibility of Darwin’s theory of evolution has led to the division of scientific and religious groups. Devoted, religious people discover two major flaws with Darwin’s theory of evolution regarding the inaccuracies of the fossil record and the contradicting phrase “survival of the fittest” that has passed on harmful mutations to next

In 1859, Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species, introducing the theory of evolution. One hundred and fifty-six years later, scientists still accept this senseless philosophy. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay states, “Our school systems teach the children that they are nothing but glorified apes who are evolutionized out of some primordial soup” (Snyder). Schools worldwide have presented exactly this to the young, impressionable minds of your future doctors, engineers, scientists, and presidents. They assure us that if we give a small amount of mud enough time it can, by itself, bring about the art of da Vinci, the plays of Shakespeare, the music of Mozart, and the brilliant mind of Einstein.