Posted on 07/30/2008 5:31:04 AM PDT by Soliton
Ironically, Charles Darwin set great store by his study of earthworms, which effectively mix and make most of the soil on Earth, but his successors in evolutionary science have tended to neglect the creatures that live beneath their feet.
Instead, Professor Blaxter said, they regard the soil as a kind of test bed - or black box - that there is no need to understand. He added that this project would help to redress that issue.
Until the soil collapses, and the ecosystems dies completely, we don't know what's going on. We have to start to get inside the black box' and start looking at parts of it in isolation and ask very specific questions.
Biologists regard earthworms as the great ecosystem engineers, breaking down organic particles, mixing and mashing them up as they make soil. In test conditions they were found to be vulnerable to chemicals that are typically bi-products of industry or routinely applied as herbicide.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
Even when he conjectured that darker skinned people were less evolved than lighter skinned humans?
In the northern forests earth worms are considered an invasive species and a threat to indigenous plants.
Are you arguing that evolution did not affect pigmentation in the skin?
I didn't argue anything. . .I asked you a question. Do you think Darwin was a great thinker even when he conjectured that darker skinned people were less evolved than lighter skinned humans?
Since current science suggests that lighter skin evolved from darker skin, yes I believe Darwin was a great thinker even when he conjectured that darker skinned people were less evolved than lighter skinned people. It looks like he was right too.
There is no such thing as an invasive species, or rather, all species are invasive.
Then you are the one consistent evolutionist I've run into. Every other time I've asked that question, all I've gotten is sputtering and fuming. Often, I've been told that Darwin never put forth such a conjecture.
There are only competing species.
Zactly
The reason is that "less evolved" isn't a Darwinian concept. Nothing is more evolved or less evolved in a qualitative way. You can say more evolved quantitatively if you simply mean more evolutionary steps.
Perhaps that is what Darwin believed. I do know that this view of the evolution of man guided his view of the races. I'm not trying to use this to disparage Darwin any more than I would any other person of his time who thought blacks were less intelligent, less 'human' than whites.
“I didn’t argue anything. . .I asked you a question. Do you think Darwin was a great thinker even when he conjectured that darker skinned people were less evolved than lighter skinned humans?”
Three words:
“The Bell Curve”
- John
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.