BIOL 1406 Darwin's Dangerous Idea

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

BIOL 1406 Darwin’s Dangerous Idea - Video Exam I Essay Question: (Matching Format) Describe the history of the scientific theory, biological evolution by means of natural selection: and focus on the life of Charles Darwin as portrayed in the PBS production, Darwin’s Dangerous Idea. Be sure to describe the roles of the following: "Raz", Robert FitzRoy, Emma Darwin, Annie Darwin, Richard Owen, Charles Lyell, Thomas Malthus, Samuel Wilberforce, and Thomas Huxley.) 1.Describe Captain Fitzroy’s perspective when it comes to “free-thinking” 2. What does Fitzroy allow Darwin to borrow? 3. Who was “Raz”? 4. Who was Richard Owen? 5. What was Owen’s view on “free-thinking” with regard to human ancestory? 6. What was Owen so afraid of? 7. Who was Emma (Wedgewood) Darwin? How did she influence Charles Darwin with regard to his scientific inquiry ? 8. What type of disease do we now speculate that Darwin may have suffered from? How did he get the disease? 9. Who was Annie Darwin? 10. When Annie left, what affect did this have on Darwin? 11. Who was Charles Lyell? What role did he play in influencing Darwin? 12. Who was Thomas Malthus? What did he do to influence Darwin? 13. What did Richard Owen do that was scientifically unethical? Why did he do this? 14. Who was Samuel Wilberforce? 15. Who was Thomas Henry Huxley? What did he do to influence Darwin? 16. Who was Alfred Russel Wallace? What did he do to influence Darwin? 17. What motivated Darwin to study so many different organisms; i.e. pigeons, barnacles, orchids, worms etc. Modern Day Evolution in Action 18. Describe the basics of evolution by means of the mechanism of Natural Selection. Describe some of the insects have been adapted in the Ecuadorian rainforest to survive their surroundings. 19. Describe Tom Smith’s observations of humming bird speciation comparing rainforest to highland species. What is the new evidence that Dr. Smith used that was not available to Darwin? 20. Describe the happenstance discovery of a new strategy for treating the evolution of HIV within human hosts. 21. Describe the proposed gradual evolution of a natural selection model of mammalian eye evolution. .

Copy Link

Recommended publications

Darwin and Religion
Darwin and religion Activity 3: Controversy Subject: RE 2 x 45 minutes Suggested preparation What do I need? Presentation: Letter 2544 Thomas Huxley to Darwin, Darwin and religion 23 November 1859 Letter 2548 Adam Sedgwick to Darwin 24 November 1859 Letter 2534 Charles Kingsley to Darwin 18 Nov 1859 Letters questions Who’s who The publication of On the Origin of Species challenged and sometimes divided Darwin’s colleagues and peers in relation to their religious belief. Letters show how reactions to Darwin’s work were divided. In this activity we explore whether or not Darwin’s work can be compatible with religious faith. 1 Darwin Correspondence Project www.darwinproject.ac.uk Cambridge University Library CC-BY-ND 2.00 What do I do? 1. Read through the letters, Who’s who? and answer the letter questions. 2. Discuss why Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection might have been controversial at the time. 3. Divide into 3 groups: Group 1: Make a case for why Darwin’s theory might not be acceptable to a religious faith (of your choosing). Group 2: Make a case for how Darwin’s theory might be accommodated by a religious faith. Group 3: Make a case for how Darwin’s theory might reject a religious perspective. 4. Present your argument to the class, using evidence from Darwin’s letters. 2 Darwin Correspondence Project www.darwinproject.ac.uk Cambridge University Library CC-BY-ND 2.00 Letter 2544 Thomas Huxley to Charles Darwin, 23 November 1859 23 Nov 1859 My dear Darwin ...Since I read Von Bär’s Essays nine years ago no work on Natural History Science I have met with has made so great an impression upon me & I do most heartily thank you for the great store of new views you have given me Nothing I think can be better than the tone of the book—it impresses those who know nothing about the subject— As for your doctrines I am prepared to go to the Stake if requisite in support of Chap.
[Show full text]
Introduction
5 Introduction Although the first finds of fossil hominids date back to 1891, thinking about evolution of Man started at least as early as 1844 when Robert Chambers anonymously published his book ‘Vestiges of Natural History of Creation’, in which he presented a development theory. Chambers did not stress the point, but his development hypothesis clearly made Man an immediate descendant of the apes. The anatomist Richard Owen used his expertise to disprove the theory of evolution at its most controversial point –man’s link with the apes by pointing at the heavy eye-brows of the great apes, which were missing in modern Man. As the eyebrows are independently developed, nor influenced by inner or outer factors, Man must have, if Man was descendent from the great apes, heavy eyebrows; and that, he pointed out is not the case. However, a decade later in the Neanderthal near Düsseldorf a skull was found with heavy eyebrows. The fossil came into the hands of Hermann Schaaffhausen, professor of anatomy at the University of Bonn, who was convinced that the remains were very old and hominid. Their strange morphology was caused by deformation, but the oligocephalic form of the skull was, according to Schaaffhausen, not comparable to any modern race, not even with the most ‘barbarian’ races. The heavy eyebrows, characteristic for great apes, were according to Schaaffhausen typical for the Neanderthal. The skull therefore must have belonged to an ‘original wild race of North-western Europe’. Some even considered it as the skull of an idiot, an ‘old Dutchman’ or a Cossack.
[Show full text]
Natural Theology and Natural History in Darwin’S Time: Design
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by ETD - Electronic Theses & Dissertations NATURAL THEOLOGY AND NATURAL HISTORY IN DARWIN’S TIME: DESIGN, DIRECTION, SUPERINTENEDENCE AND UNIFORMITY IN BRITISH THOUGHT, 1818-1876 By Boyd Barnes Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Vanderbilt University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Religion May, 2008 Nashville, Tennessee Approved: Professor James Hudnut-Beumler Professor Dale A. Johnson Professor Eugene A. TeSelle Professor Richard F. Haglund Professor James P. Byrd William Buckland “The evidences afforded by the sister sciences exhibit indeed the most admirable proofs of design originally exerted at the Creation: but many who admit these proofs still doubt the continued superintendence of that intelligence, maintaining that the system of the Universe is carried on by the force of the laws originally impressed upon matter…. Such an opinion … nowhere meets with a more direct and palpable refutation, than is afforded by the subserviency of the present structure of the earth’s surface to final causes; for that structure is evidently the result of many and violent convulsions subsequent to its original formation. When therefore we perceive that the secondary causes producing these convulsions have operated at successive epochs, not blindly and at random, but with a direction to beneficial ends, we see at once the proofs of an overruling Intelligence continuing to superintend, direct, modify, and control the operation of the agents, which he originally ordained.” – The Very Reverend William Buckland (1784-1856), DD, FRS, Reader in Geology and Canon of Christ Church at the University of Oxford, President of the Geological Society of London, President of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Dean of Westminster.
[Show full text]
Press Release
Press Release Issued: Wednesday 12th August 2020 Darwin mentor and geology pioneer Charles Lyell’s archives reunited Fascinating writings of an influential scientist who shaped Charles Darwin’s thinking have become part of the University of Edinburgh’s collections. A rich assortment of letters, books, manuscripts, maps and sketches by Scottish geologist Sir Charles Lyell, have been reassembled at the University Library’s Centre for Research Collections, with the goal of making the collection more accessible to the public. Some 294 notebooks, purchased from the Lyell family following a £1 million fundraising campaign in 2019, form a key part of the collection. Although written in the Victorian era, the works shed light on current concerns, including climate change and threats to biodiversity. Now a second tranche of Lyell material has been allocated to the University by HM Government under the Acceptance in Lieu of Inheritance Tax scheme. These new acquisitions, from the estate of the 3rd Baron Lyell, will join other items that have been part of the University’s collections since 1927. The new archive includes more than 900 letters, with correspondence between Lyell and Darwin, the botanist Joseph Dalton Hooker, the publisher John Murray and Lyell’s wife, Mary Horner Lyell, and many others. It also includes a draft manuscript and heavily annotated editions of Lyell’s landmark book The Principles of Geology and several manuscripts from his lectures. Lyell, who died in 1875, aged 77, mentored Sir Charles Darwin after the latter’s return from his five-year voyage on the Beagle in 1836. The Scot is also credited with providing the framework that helped Darwin develop his evolutionary theories.
[Show full text]
The Correspondence of Julius Haast and Joseph Dalton Hooker, 1861-1886
The Correspondence of Julius Haast and Joseph Dalton Hooker, 1861-1886 Sascha Nolden, Simon Nathan & Esme Mildenhall Geoscience Society of New Zealand miscellaneous publication 133H November 2013 Published by the Geoscience Society of New Zealand Inc, 2013 Information on the Society and its publications is given at www.gsnz.org.nz © Copyright Simon Nathan & Sascha Nolden, 2013 Geoscience Society of New Zealand miscellaneous publication 133H ISBN 978-1-877480-29-4 ISSN 2230-4495 (Online) ISSN 2230-4487 (Print) We gratefully acknowledge financial assistance from the Brian Mason Scientific and Technical Trust which has provided financial support for this project. This document is available as a PDF file that can be downloaded from the Geoscience Society website at: http://www.gsnz.org.nz/information/misc-series-i-49.html Bibliographic Reference Nolden, S.; Nathan, S.; Mildenhall, E. 2013: The Correspondence of Julius Haast and Joseph Dalton Hooker, 1861-1886. Geoscience Society of New Zealand miscellaneous publication 133H. 219 pages. The Correspondence of Julius Haast and Joseph Dalton Hooker, 1861-1886 CONTENTS Introduction 3 The Sumner Cave controversy Sources of the Haast-Hooker correspondence Transcription and presentation of the letters Acknowledgements References Calendar of Letters 8 Transcriptions of the Haast-Hooker letters 12 Appendix 1: Undated letter (fragment), ca 1867 208 Appendix 2: Obituary for Sir Julius von Haast 209 Appendix 3: Biographical register of names mentioned in the correspondence 213 Figures Figure 1: Photographs
[Show full text]
In This Index Fellow of the Royal Society Is Abbreviated to FRS and President to PRS
Index In this index Fellow of the Royal Society is abbreviated to FRS and president to PRS. Abbott, E. C. see Gadow, Hans and E. C. Abbott automata 51, 51nn4–5 Abel, Frederick Augustus 177, 177n1, 179 Avebury, Baron see Lubbock, John Aberdeen University, Huxley as rector 35, 36, 36n1, 42–3; his inaugural address 42, 43n1 Abney, William de Wiveleslie 85, 85n2, 115, 148, 149, 187, 220 Babbage, Charles 269, 269n2 ‘The solar spectrum ...’ 143, 144n1, 145 Baer, Karl Ernst von 12 Acade´mie Royale des Sciences, Paris 145 Autobiography 12n3 Acland, Sir Henry Wentworth 240, 240n3, RS Copley Medal awarded to 12n3 241, 242 Baeyer, Johann Friedrich Wilhelm von 118, 119n4 acquired characteristics 23 [Bale], [unidentified] 31 advertising 261, 261n2 Balfour, Arthur James Macmillan’s advertisement for Huxley: Lessons Foundation of belief 307; Huxley’s reply to: in elementary physiology 136–7 ‘Mr Balfour’s attack on agnosticism’ 307n2, Airy, George Biddell 40, 40n3 308 Albert, Prince Consort 269n2 Balfour, Francis Maitland xvi, 40n4, 44, 44n1, Allchin, William Henry 48, 48n1, 61, 70, 81 52–3, 53n1, 65, 67, 231 Alter, Peter Huxley on 79, 142 The reluctant patron ... xiin5, xviin14 lectures by 68 amphioxus 55, 56, 232, 233 ‘On the development of the spinal nerves in anatomy 8, 28, 80, 81, 234 elasmobranch fishes’ 65n6, 66 animals, cruelty to 73, 73n1 death xvi, 79, 79n1; Foster’s obituary notice 88, see also vivisection 89n1 Antarctic expedition, Australian colonies proposal see also Foster, M. and Francis M. Balfour for 193, 193n1 Bancroft, Marie Effie
[Show full text]
Chapter 10, the Mistaken Extinction, by Lowell Dingus and Timothy Rowe, New York, W
Chapter 10, The Mistaken Extinction, by Lowell Dingus and Timothy Rowe, New York, W. H. Freeman, 1998. CHAPTER 10 Dinosaurs Challenge Evolution Enter Sir Richard Owen More than 150 years ago, the great British naturalist Richard Owen (fig. 10.01) ignited the controversy that Deinonychus would eventually inflame. The word "dinosaur" was first uttered by Owen in a lecture delivered at Plymouth, England in July of 1841. He had coined the name in a report on giant fossil reptiles that were discovered in England earlier in the century. The root, Deinos, is usually translated as "terrible" but in his report, published in 1842, Owen chose the words "fearfully great"1. To Owen, dinosaurs were the fearfully great saurian reptiles, known only from fossil skeletons of huge extinct animals, unlike anything alive today. Fig. 10.01 Richard Owen as, A) a young man at about the time he named Dinosauria, B) in middle age, near the time he described Archaeopteryx, and C) in old age. Dinosaur bones were discovered long before Owen first spoke their name, but no one understood what they represented. The first scientific report on a dinosaur bone belonging was printed in 1677 by Rev. Robert Plot in his work, The Natural History of Oxfordshire. This broken end of a thigh bone, came to Plot's attention during his research. It was nearly 60 cm in circumference--greater than the same bone in an elephant (fig.10.02). We now suspect that it belonged to Megalosaurus bucklandii, a carnivorous dinosaur now known from Oxfordshire. But Plot concluded that it "must have been a real Bone, now petrified" and that it resembled "exactly the figure of the 1 Chapter 10, The Mistaken Extinction, by Lowell Dingus and Timothy Rowe, New York, W.
[Show full text]
Archibald Geikie (1835–1924): a Pioneer Scottish Geologist, Teacher, and Writer
ROCK STARS Archibald Geikie (1835–1924): A Pioneer Scottish Geologist, Teacher, and Writer Rasoul Sorkhabi, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108, USA; [email protected] years later, but there he learned how to write reports. Meanwhile, he read every geology book he could find, including John Playfair’s Illustrations of the Huttonian Theory, Henry de la Beche’s Geological Manual, Charles Lyell’s Principles of Geology, and Hugh Miller’s The Old Red Sandstone. BECOMING A GEOLOGIST In the summer of 1851, while the Great Exhibition in London was attracting so many people, Geikie decided instead to visit the Island of Arran in the Clyde estuary and study its geology, aided by a brief report by Andrew Ramsay of the British Geological Survey. Geikie came back with a report titled “Three weeks in Arran by a young geologist,” published that year in the Edinburgh News. This report impressed Hugh Miller so much that the renowned geologist invited its young author to discuss geology over a cup of tea. Miller became Geikie’s first mentor. In this period, Geikie became acquainted with local scientists and pri- vately studied chemistry, mineralogy, and geology under Scottish naturalists, such as George Wilson, Robert Chambers, John Fleming, James Forbes, and Andrew Ramsay—to whom he con- fessed his desire to join the Geological Survey. In 1853, Geikie visited the islands of Skye and Pabba off the coast Figure 1. Archibald Geikie as a young geolo- of Scotland and reported his observations of rich geology, including gist in Edinburgh. (Photo courtesy of the British Geological Survey, probably taken in finds of Liassic fossils.
[Show full text]
Report Case Study 25
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. Brief Description of item(s) 294 manuscript notebooks of the geologist Sir Charles Lyell (1797-1875). In two series: 263 numbered notebooks, 1825-1874, on geology, natural history, social and political subjects; 31 additional notebooks, 1818-1871, with indices. Mostly octavo format. For details see Appendix 1. In good condition. 2. Context The nineteenth century saw public debate about how to conduct science reach new heights. Charles Lyell was a pivotal figure in the establishment of geology as a scientific discipline; he also transformed ideas about the relationship between human history and the history of the earth. Above all, he revealed the significance of ‘deep time’. At a time when the Anglican church dominated intellectual culture, geology was a controversial subject. Lyell played a significant part in separating the practice of science from that of religion. Through his major work, The Principles of Geology, he developed the method later adopted by Darwin for his studies into evolution. Lyell observed natural phenomena at first hand to infer their underlying causes, which he used to interpret the phenomena of the past. The method stressed not only a vast geological timescale, but also the ability of small changes to produce, eventually, large ones. The Principles combined natural history, theology, political economy, anthropology, travel, and geography. It was an immediate success, in Britain, Europe, North America and Australia. Scientists, theologians, leading authors, explorers, artists, and an increasingly educated public read and discussed it. Lyell’s inductive method strongly influenced the generation of naturalists after Darwin. Over the rest of his life, Lyell revised the Principles in the light of new research and his own changing ideas.
[Show full text]
Designing the Dinosaur: Richard Owen's Response to Robert Edmond Grant Author(S): Adrian J
Designing the Dinosaur: Richard Owen's Response to Robert Edmond Grant Author(s): Adrian J. Desmond Source: Isis, Vol. 70, No. 2 (Jun., 1979), pp. 224-234 Published by: The University of Chicago Press on behalf of The History of Science Society Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/230789 . Accessed: 16/10/2013 13:00 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The University of Chicago Press and The History of Science Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Isis. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 150.135.115.18 on Wed, 16 Oct 2013 13:00:27 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Designing the Dinosaur: Richard Owen's Response to Robert Edmond Grant By Adrian J. Desmond* I N THEIR PAPER on "The Earliest Discoveries of Dinosaurs" Justin Delair and William Sarjeant permit Richard Owen to step in at the last moment and cap two decades of frenzied fossil collecting with the word "dinosaur."' This approach, I believe, denies Owen's real achievement while leaving a less than fair impression of the creative aspect of science.
[Show full text]
Marsupials As Ancestors Or Sister Taxa?
Archives of natural history 39.2 (2012): 217–233 Edinburgh University Press DOI: 10.3366/anh.2012.0091 # The Society for the History of Natural History www.eupjournals.com/anh Darwin’s two competing phylogenetic trees: marsupials as ancestors or sister taxa? J. DAVID ARCHIBALD Department of Biology, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182–4614, USA (e-mail: [email protected]). ABSTRACT: Studies of the origin and diversification of major groups of plants and animals are contentious topics in current evolutionary biology. This includes the study of the timing and relationships of the two major clades of extant mammals – marsupials and placentals. Molecular studies concerned with marsupial and placental origin and diversification can be at odds with the fossil record. Such studies are, however, not a recent phenomenon. Over 150 years ago Charles Darwin weighed two alternative views on the origin of marsupials and placentals. Less than a year after the publication of On the origin of species, Darwin outlined these in a letter to Charles Lyell dated 23 September 1860. The letter concluded with two competing phylogenetic diagrams. One showed marsupials as ancestral to both living marsupials and placentals, whereas the other showed a non-marsupial, non-placental as being ancestral to both living marsupials and placentals. These two diagrams are published here for the first time. These are the only such competing phylogenetic diagrams that Darwin is known to have produced. In addition to examining the question of mammalian origins in this letter and in other manuscript notes discussed here, Darwin confronted the broader issue as to whether major groups of animals had a single origin (monophyly) or were the result of “continuous creation” as advocated for some groups by Richard Owen.
[Show full text]
Thomas Henry Huxley
A Most Eminent Victorian: Thomas Henry Huxley journals.openedition.org/cve/526 Résumé Huxley coined the word agnostic to describe his own philosophical framework in part to distinguish himself from materialists, atheists, and positivists. In this paper I will elaborate on exactly what Huxley meant by agnosticism by discussing his views on the distinctions he drew between philosophy and science, science and theology, and between theology and religion. His claim that theology belonged to the realm of the intellect while religion belonged to the realm of feeling served as an important strategy in his defense of evolution. Approaching Darwin’s theory in the spirit of Goethe’s Thatige Skepsis or active skepticism, he showed that most of the “scientific” objections to evolution were at their root religiously based. Huxley maintained that the question of “man’s place in nature” should be approached independently of the question of origins, yet at the same time argued passionately and eloquently that even if humans shared a common a origin with the apes, this did not make humans any less special. Because evolution was so intertwined with the questions of belief, of morals and of ethics, and Huxley was the foremost defender of Darwin’s ideas in the English- speaking world, he was at the center of the discussions as Victorians struggled with trying to reconcile the growing gulf between science and faith. Haut de page Entrées d’index Mots-clés : croyance, époque victorienne, Bible, agnosticisme, Metaphysical Society, conversion, catholicisme, Dracula, Martineau (Harriet), Huxley (Thomas Henry) Keywords: belief, Victorian times, Bible, agnosticism, Metaphysical Society, conversion, Catholicism, Dracula, Martineau (Harriet), Huxley (Thomas Henry) Haut de page 1/19 Texte intégral PDF Signaler ce document The line between biology, morals, and magic is still not generally known and admitted.
[Show full text]