[Natural Law]

This is a completely disingenuous article. You are criticizing Darwin for not having the benefit of information and tools that would not be available until 100 years after his death. This only serves to reinforce the significance of his contribution to science.

Ironically, and unknown to non-scientific types, theories evolve and get refined as new data becomes available. Because Darwin did not have benefit of a thorough knowledge of DNA is meaningless. Even today there is still an incomplete understanding of DNA.

[tacticalogic]

It’s all about Number 10. 1-9 are just the end justifying the means.

[DouglasKC]

Ironically, and unknown to non-scientific types, theories evolve and get refined as new data becomes available. Because Darwin did not have benefit of a thorough knowledge of DNA is meaningless. Even today there is still an incomplete understanding of DNA.

I agree. Someday soon the weight of scientific evidence bolstering creation will be such that there will be no denying its source. When that happens scientific understanding and knowledge will make what we currently know look like the dark ages.

[OldNavyVet]

Darwin’s work was updated ten years ago by Steve Jones in the book “Darwin’s Ghost, the Origin of Species Updated.”

One review reads ... “The echoes of the master go elegantly beyond the mere re-use of chapter and section headings .. Bristles with splendidly informative illustrations and crisply executed demonstrations, liberally spiced with anecdote and curiosity. [it] will be rightly hailed.”

As was Darwin’s “Origin,” Jones’ book is a must read.