• Moe Factz with Adam Curry for July 16th 2022, Episode number 84 - "More or Less"

• ----
  • The Summer Media Schedule of Trauma based Entertainment is in full effect, time to take a breath!
  • I'm Adam Curry coming to you from the heart of The Texas Hill Country and it's time once again to spin the wheel of Topics from here to Northern Virginia, please say hello to my friend on the other end: Mr. Moe Factz

• "More or Less"

• Description
  • Adam and Moe discuss Roe. Like you've never heard before

• Download the mp3

• Chapter Architect: Dreb Scott

• Big Ballers
  • Sir Vesa of the Backside of Pike's

• Executive Producers:
  • Sir Vesa of the Backside of Pike's
  • HotShot
  • Daniel Worrad
  • Joe

• Associate Executive Producers
  • WE HERE THO
  • Frannie N
  • C.Davis
  • Erik Höchel
  • TigardKent
  • Joseph Payne
  • David K

• Transcript Database

• Check out the show on Podcasting 2.0!

• Boost us with Value 4 Value on:
  • Breez
  • Curiocaster
  • Fountain
  • Podfriend
  • Podstation
  • Podverse
  • Sphinx Chat

• ShowNotes
  • Dysgenics - Wikipedia
    • Link to Article
    • Archived Version
    • Sat, 16 Jul 2022 16:14
    •  
    • Decrease in genetic traits deemed desirable
    • Dysgenics (also known as cacogenics) is the decrease in prevalence of traits deemed to be either socially desirable or well adapted to their environment due to selective pressure disfavoring the reproduction of those traits.[1]
    • The adjective "dysgenic" is the antonym of "eugenic". In 1915 the term was used by David Starr Jordan to describe the supposed deleterious effects of modern warfare on group-level genetic fitness because of its tendency to kill physically healthy men while preserving the disabled at home.[2][3] Similar concerns had been raised by early eugenicists and social Darwinists during the 19th century, and continued to play a role in scientific and public policy debates throughout the 20th century.[4] More recent concerns about supposed dysgenic effects in human populations have been advanced by the controversial psychologist Richard Lynn, notably in his 1996 book Dysgenics: Genetic Deterioration in Modern Populations, which argued that a reduction in selection pressures and decreased infant mortality since the Industrial Revolution have resulted in an increased propagation of deleterious traits and genetic disorders.[5] In popular culture, concerns about dysgenics have also formed the basis for speculative fiction, notably the 2006 film Idiocracy.
    • Despite these concerns, genetic studies have shown no evidence for dysgenic effects in human populations.[6][7][8][9]
    • In fiction [ edit ] Cyril M. Kornbluth's 1951 short story "The Marching Morons" is an example of dysgenic fiction, describing a man who accidentally ends up in the distant future and discovers that dysgenics has resulted in mass stupidity. Mike Judge's 2006 film Idiocracy has the same premise, with the main character the subject of a military hibernation experiment that goes awry, taking him 500 years into the future. While in "The Marching Morons", civilization is kept afloat by a small group of dedicated geniuses, in Idiocracy, voluntary childlessness among high-IQ couples leaves only automated systems to fill that role in[10]
    • See also [ edit ] Devolution (biology)Flynn effectHeritability of IQList of congenital disordersList of biological development disordersNotes [ edit ] ^ R(C)dei, George P. (2008). Encyclopedia of Genetics, Genomics, Proteomics, and Informatics, Volume 1. Springer. p. 572. ISBN 978-1-4020-6755-6. ^ Jordan, David Starr (2003). War and the Breed: The Relation of War to the Downfall of Nations (Reprint ed.). Honolulu: University Press of the Pacific. ISBN 978-1-4102-0900-9. ^ Carlson, Elof Axel (2001). The Unfit: A History of a Bad Idea. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. pp. 189''193. ISBN 9780879695873. ^ Carlson, Elof Axel (2001). The Unfit: A History of a Bad Idea. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press. ISBN 9780879695873. ^ Richard Lynn: Dysgenics: genetic deterioration in modern populations Westport, Connecticut. : Praeger, 1996., ISBN 978-0-275-94917-4. ^ Fischbach, Karl-Friedrich; Niggeschmidt, Martin (2022). "Do the Dumb Get Dumber and the Smart Get Smarter?". Heritability of Intelligence. Springer. pp. 37''39. doi:10.1007/978-3-658-35321-6_9. ISBN 978-3-658-35321-6. S2CID 244640696. Since the nineteenth century, a 'race deterioration' has been repeatedly predicted as a result of the excessive multiplication of less gifted people (Galton 1869; see also Fig. 9.1). Nevertheless, the educational and qualification level of people in the industrialized countries has risen strongly. The fact that the 'test intelligence' has also significantly increased (Flynn 2013), is difficult to explain for supporters of the dysgenic thesis: they suspect that the 'phenotypic intelligence' has increased for environmental reasons, while the 'genotypic quality' secretly decreases (Lynn 1996, p. 111). There is neither evidence nor proof for this theory. ^ Conley, Dalton; Laidley, Thomas; Belsky, Daniel W.; Fletcher, Jason M.; Boardman, Jason D.; Domingue, Benjamin W. (14 June 2016). "Assortative mating and differential fertility by phenotype and genotype across the 20th century". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 113:24 (24): 6647''6652. doi:10.1073/pnas.1523592113 . PMC 4914190 . PMID 27247411. ^ Bratsberg, Bernt; Rogeberg, Ole (26 June 2018). "Flynn effect and its reversal are both environmentally caused". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 115:26 (26): 6674''6678. doi:10.1073/pnas.1718793115 . PMC 6042097 . PMID 29891660. ^ Neisser, Ulric (1998). The Rising Curve: Long-Term Gains in IQ and Related Measures. American Psychological Association. pp. xiii''xiv. ISBN 978-1557985033. There is no convincing evidence that any dysgenic trend exists. . . . It turns out, counterintuitively, that differential birth rates (for groups scoring high and low on a trait) do not necessarily produces changes in the population mean. ^ Mitchell, Dan (2006-09-09). "Shying away from Degeneracy". The New York Times . Retrieved 2008-06-29 . Further reading [ edit ] Devlin, Bernie; Fienberg, Stephen E.; Resnick, Daniel P.; et al., eds. (1997). Intelligence, Genes, and Success: Scientists Respond to the Bell Curve . New York: Springer. ISBN 978-0-387-94986-4. Neisser, Ulric, ed. (1998). The Rising Curve: Long-Term Gains in IQ and Related Measures . APA Science Volume Series. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. ISBN 978-1-55798-503-3. Beauchamp, Jonathan P. (11 July 2016). "Genetic evidence for natural selection in humans in the contemporary United States". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 113 (28): 7774''7779. doi:10.1073/pnas.1600398113 . PMC 4948342 . PMID 27402742. Barban et al. 2016, "Genome-wide analysis identifies 12 loci influencing human reproductive behavior"
  • In Texas, even possession of a sex toy is regulated
  • On the Origin of Species - Darwin Cover
    • 
  • Gattaca - Wikipedia
    • Link to Article
    • Archived Version
    • Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:25
    •  
    • 1997 film directed by Andrew Niccol
    • Gattaca is a 1997 American dystopian science fiction thriller film written and directed by Andrew Niccol in his filmmaking debut. It stars Ethan Hawke and Uma Thurman, with Jude Law, Loren Dean, Ernest Borgnine, Gore Vidal, and Alan Arkin appearing in supporting roles.[4] The film presents a biopunk vision of a future society driven by eugenics where potential children are conceived through genetic selection to ensure they possess the best hereditary traits of their parents.[5] The film centers on Vincent Freeman, played by Hawke, who was conceived outside the eugenics program and struggles to overcome genetic discrimination to realize his dream of going into space.
    • The film draws on concerns over reproductive technologies that facilitate eugenics, and the possible consequences of such technological developments for society. It also explores the idea of destiny and the ways in which it can and does govern lives. Characters in Gattaca continually battle both with society and with themselves to find their place in the world and who they are destined to be according to their genes.
    • The film's title is based on the letters G, A, T, and C, which stand for guanine, adenine, thymine, and cytosine, the four nucleobases of DNA.[6] It was a 1997 nominee for the Academy Award for Best Art Direction and the Golden Globe Award for Best Original Score.
    • Plot [ edit ] In the "not-too-distant" future, eugenics is common. A genetic registry database uses biometrics to classify those created as "Valids" while those conceived naturally and more susceptible to genetic disorders are known as "In-Valids". Genetic discrimination is illegal, but in practice genotype profiling is used to identify Valids to qualify for professional employment while In-Valids are relegated to menial jobs.
    • Vincent Freeman was conceived naturally and his genetic profile indicates a high probability of several disorders and an estimated lifespan of 30.2 years. His parents, regretting their decision, use IVF, PIGD, and genetic engineering in creating their second child, Anton. Growing up, the two brothers often play a game of "chicken" by swimming out to sea as far as possible, with the first one returning to shore considered the loser; Vincent always loses. Vincent dreams of a career in space travel but is always reminded of his genetic inferiority. One day, Vincent challenges Anton to a game of chicken and beats him. Anton starts to drown and is saved by Vincent. Shortly after, Vincent leaves home.
    • Years later, Vincent works as an In-Valid, cleaning office spaces including that of spaceflight conglomerate Gattaca Aerospace Corporation. He gets a chance to masquerade as a Valid by using donated hair, skin, blood and urine samples from former swimming star Jerome Eugene Morrow, who was paralyzed after being hit by a car. With Jerome's genetic makeup, Vincent gains employment at Gattaca, and is assigned as navigator for an upcoming mission to Saturn's moon Titan. To conceal his identity, Vincent must meticulously groom and scrub down daily to remove his own genetic material, pass daily DNA scanning and urine tests using Jerome's samples, and hide his heart defect.
    • When a Gattaca administrator is murdered a week before a possible launch, the police find one of Vincent's eyelashes near the crime scene. Recognizing it as from an In-Valid rather than an employee, they immediately assume the owner to be a suspect and launch an investigation. During this, Vincent becomes close to a co-worker, Irene Cassini, with whom he shares a mutual attraction. Though a Valid, Irene has an accidental higher risk of heart failure that will bar her from any space mission. Vincent also learns that Jerome's paralysis is self-inflicted; after placing silver in the Olympics, Jerome threw himself in front of a car. Jerome maintains that he was designed to be the best, yet still wasn't, and suffers under the 'burden of perfection'.
    • Vincent repeatedly evades the grasp of the investigators. It is finally revealed that one of Gattaca's directors (Josef) killed the mission director because he threatened to cancel the mission. Vincent learns that the detective who closed the case was his brother Anton, who consequently has discovered Vincent's presence at Gattaca. The brothers meet, and Anton warns Vincent about his illegal actions, but Vincent asserts that he has gotten to this position on his own merits. Anton, unwilling to believe this, challenges Vincent to a final game of chicken. As the two swim out at night, Vincent's stamina surprises Anton, and Vincent reveals that he won by not saving energy for the swim back. Anton turns back and begins to drown, but Vincent rescues him again and swims them both back to shore, proving to Anton that his status does not define him.
    • On the day of the launch, Jerome reveals that he has stored enough DNA samples for Vincent to last 'two lifetimes' upon his return, and gives him an envelope to open 'upstairs'. After saying goodbye to Irene, Vincent prepares to board but discovers there is a final urine test, and he currently lacks any of Jerome's samples. He is surprised when Dr. Lamar, who oversees health checks, reveals that he knows Vincent has been posing as a Valid. Lamar admits that his son looks up to Vincent and wonders whether he, genetically selected but "not all that they promised", could exceed his potential just as Vincent has. The doctor changes the test results, allowing Vincent to pass. As the rocket launches, Jerome dons his swimming medal and immolates himself in his home's incinerator; in space, Vincent opens the note from Jerome to find a lock of Jerome's hair. As the film ends, Vincent muses that "For someone who was never meant for this world, I must confess, I'm suddenly having a hard time leaving it. Of course, they say every atom in our bodies was once a part of a star. Maybe I'm not leaving; maybe I'm going home."
    • Cast [ edit ] Production [ edit ] The film was shot under the working title The Eighth Day, a reference to the seven days of creation in the Bible. However, by the time its release was scheduled for the fall of 1997, the Belgian film Le huiti¨me jour had already been released in the US under the title The Eighth Day. As a result, the film was retitled Gattaca.[7]
    • Filming [ edit ] The exteriors (including the roof scene) and some of the interior shots of the Gattaca complex were filmed at Frank Lloyd Wright's 1960 Marin County Civic Center in San Rafael, California.[8] The speakers in the complex broadcast announcements both in Esperanto and English; Miko Sloper from the Esperanto League of North America went to the recording studio to handle the Esperanto part.[9] The parking lot scenes were shot at the Otis College of Art and Design, distinguished by its punch card-like windows, located near Los Angeles International Airport. The exterior of Vincent Freeman's house was shot at the CLA Building on the campus of California State Polytechnic University, Pomona. Other exterior shots were filmed at the bottom of the spillway of the Sepulveda Dam and outside The Forum in Inglewood. The solar power plant mirrors sequence was filmed at the Kramer Junction Solar Electric Generating Station.
    • The film is noted for its unique use of color. Cinematographer Slawomir Idziak employed vibrant gold, green, and electric blue tones throughout the film, and shot the film in Super 35mm format, which adds an enlarged layer of grain.
    • Design [ edit ] The movie uses a swimming treadmill in the opening minutes to punctuate the swimming and futuristic themes.[10] The production design makes heavy use of retrofuturism; the futuristic electric cars[11] are based on 1960s car models like Rover P6, Citron DS19 and Studebaker Avanti.[12]
    • Title sequence [ edit ] The opening title sequence, created by Michael Riley, features closeups of body matter (fingernails and hair), which are later revealed to be from Vincent's daily bodily scourings, hitting the floor accompanied by loud sounds as the objects strike the ground. According to Riley, oversized models of the fingernails and hair were created for the effect.[13]
    • Music and soundtrack [ edit ] The score for Gattaca was composed by Michael Nyman, and the original soundtrack was released on October 21, 1997.[14]
    • Release [ edit ] Box office [ edit ] Gattaca was released in theaters on October 24, 1997 in the United States by Columbia Pictures and opened at number 5 at the box office; trailing I Know What You Did Last Summer, The Devil's Advocate, Kiss the Girls and Seven Years in Tibet.[15] Over the first weekend the film brought in $4.3 million. It ended its theatrical run with a domestic total of $12.5 million against a reported production budget of $36 million.[16]
    • Home media [ edit ] Gattaca was released on DVD on July 1, 1998,[17] and was also released on Superbit DVD.[18] Special Edition DVD and Blu-ray versions were released on March 11, 2008.[19][20] Both editions contain a deleted scene featuring historical figures like Einstein, Lincoln, etc., who are described as having been genetically deficient.[16]
    • Gattaca was released on Ultra HD Blu-ray in 2021.[21]
    • Reception [ edit ] Critical response [ edit ] Gattaca received positive reviews from critics. On review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes the film received an approval rating of 81% based on 64 reviews, with a rating average of 7.1/10. The site's critical consensus states that "Intelligent and scientifically provocative, Gattaca is an absorbing sci-fi drama that poses important interesting ethical questions about the nature of science."[22] On Metacritic, the film received "generally favorable reviews" with a score of 64 out of 100, based on 20 reviews.[23] Roger Ebert stated, "This is one of the smartest and most provocative of science fiction films, a thriller with ideas."[24] James Berardinelli praised it for "energy and tautness" and its "thought-provoking script and thematic richness."[25]
    • Although critically acclaimed, Gattaca was not a box office success, but it is said to have crystallized the debate over the controversial topic of human genetic engineering.[26][27][28] The film's dystopian depiction of "genoism" has been cited by many bioethicists and laypeople in support of their hesitancy about, or opposition to, eugenics and the societal acceptance of the genetic-determinist ideology that may frame it.[29] In a 1997 review of the film for the journal Nature Genetics, molecular biologist Lee M. Silver stated that "Gattaca is a film that all geneticists should see if for no other reason than to understand the perception of our trade held by so many of the public-at-large".[30]
    • Accolades [ edit ] Legacy [ edit ] Television series [ edit ] On October 30, 2009, Variety reported that Sony Pictures Television was developing a television adaptation of the feature film as a one-hour police procedural set in the future. The show was to be written by Gil Grant, who has written for 24 and NCIS.[31]
    • Influence on In Time [ edit ] Writer-director Andrew Niccol has called his 2011 film In Time a "bastard child of Gattaca".[32][33] Both films feature classic cars in a futuristic dystopia as well as a caste privilege schism which the protagonist challenges and which prejudices the authorities into neglecting a thorough investigation in favor of condemning the protagonist.
    • Political references [ edit ] U.S. Senator Rand Paul used near-verbatim portions of the plot summary from the English Wikipedia entry on Gattaca in a speech at Liberty University on October 28, 2013 in support of Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli's campaign for Governor of Virginia. Paul accused pro-choice politicians of advocating eugenics in a manner similar to the events in Gattaca.[34][35]
    • Transhumanism [ edit ] In the 2004 democratic transhumanist book Citizen Cyborg, bioethicist James Hughes criticized the premise and influence of the film as fear-mongering, arguing:
    • Astronaut-training programs are entirely justified in attempting to screen out people with heart problems for safety reasons;In the United States, people are already screened by insurance companies on the basis of their propensities to disease, for actuarial purposes;Rather than banning genetic testing or genetic enhancement, society should develop genetic information privacy laws such as the U.S. Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act signed into law on May 21, 2008 that allow justified forms of genetic testing and data aggregation, but forbid those that are judged to result in genetic discrimination. Citizens should then be able to make a complaint to the appropriate authority if they believe they have been discriminated against because of their genotype.[36]See also [ edit ] List of films featuring surveillanceGattaca argumentTranshumanism § Genetic divideGerminal choice technologyReferences [ edit ] ^ "Gattaca (15)". British Board of Film Classification. November 5, 1997 . Retrieved February 21, 2019 . ^ "Gattaca Financial Information". The Numbers . Retrieved February 21, 2019 . ^ "Gattaca (1997)". Box Office Mojo. ^ "Review of Gattaca". Challengingdestiny.com. 2004-02-25 . Retrieved 2009-10-10 . ^ "NEUROETHICS | The Narrative Perspectives". Neuroethics.upenn.edu . Retrieved 2018-02-22 . ^ Zimmer, Carl (November 10, 2008). "Now: The Rest of the Genome". The New York Times. ^ "Gattaca on Hulu". Slashfilm. 28 November 2008. ^ "Gattaca a Not-So-Perfect Specimen", Mick LaSalle, San Francisco Chronicle, Friday, October 24, 1997, URL retrieved 19 February 2009 ^ "Esperanto in 'Gattaca' (NPR pt 11, NASK 2000 pt 19)". Archived from the original on 2021-12-11. ^ "Endless Pools in the Press". Endlesspools.com . Retrieved 2012-09-07 . ^ "Avanti in the Science Fiction Film Gattaca". www.theavanti.com . Retrieved 2020-12-29 . ^ " "Gattaca, 1997": cars, bikes, trucks and other vehicles". IMCDb.org . Retrieved 2009-10-10 . ^ Vlaanderen, Remco. "Gattaca title sequence - Watch the Titles". watchthetitles.com . Retrieved 2018-10-11 . ^ "Gattaca soundtrack overview". AllMusic . Retrieved 2008-10-30 . ^ "US Movie Box Office Chart Weekend of October 24, 1997". The Numbers. 1997-10-24 . Retrieved 2009-10-10 . ^ a b "Movie Gattaca - Box Office Data, News, Cast Information". The Numbers . Retrieved 2009-10-10 . ^ Amazon.com: Gattaca (1997). ISBN 0767805712. ^ "Amazon.com: Gattaca (Superbit Collection) (1997)" . Retrieved April 7, 2013 . ^ "Amazon.com: Gattaca (Special Edition) (1997)" . Retrieved April 7, 2013 . ^ "Amazon.com: Gattaca [Blu-ray] (1997)" . Retrieved April 7, 2013 . ^ "Gattaca '' Media Play News" . Retrieved 2021-04-24 . ^ "Gattaca (1997)". Rotten Tomatoes . Retrieved 2009-08-01 . ^ "Gattaca reviews at". Metacritic.com . Retrieved 2011-10-05 . ^ Roger Ebert (1997-10-24). "Gattaca :: rogerebert.com :: Reviews". Rogerebert.suntimes.com . Retrieved 2009-10-10 . ^ "Review: Gattaca". Reelviews.net . Retrieved 2009-10-10 . ^ Jabr, Ferris (2013). "Are We Too Close to Making Gattaca a Reality?" . Retrieved 2014-04-30 . ^ Darnovsky, Marcy (2008). "Are We Headed for a Sci-Fi Dystopia?" . Retrieved 2008-03-23 . ^ Pope, Marcia; McRoberts, Richard (2003). Cambridge Wizard Student Guide Gattaca. Cambridge University press. ISBN 0-521-53615-4. ^ Kirby, D.A. (2000). "The New Eugenics in Cinema: Genetic Determinism and Gene Therapy in GATTACA. Science Fiction Studies, 27: 193-215" . Retrieved 2008-01-08 . ^ Silver, Lee M. (1997). "Genetics Goes to Hollywood". Nature Genetics. 17 (3): 260''261. doi:10.1038/ng1197-260. S2CID 29335234. ^ Schneider, Michael (2009-10-29). "Apostle preps for post-'Rescue' life". www.variety.com. Archived from the original on 2010-01-06. ^ Capps, Robert (October 6, 2011). "Director Calls In Time 'Bastard Child of Gattaca' ". Wired . Retrieved August 15, 2019 . ^ McCarthy, Eric (October 28, 2011). "In Time: Andrew Niccol on His Gattaca-Inspired New Film". Popular Mechanics . Retrieved August 15, 2019 . ^ Carroll, James R. (October 28, 2013). "Senator: Scientific advances could bring back eugenics". The Courier-Journal. USA Today . Retrieved October 29, 2013 . ^ Kopan, Tal (October 28, 2013). "Rachel Maddow: Rand Paul ripped off Wikipedia". Politico. Sinclair Broadcast Group . Retrieved October 29, 2013 . ^ Hughes, James (2004). Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future. Westview Press. ISBN 0-8133-4198-1. Further reading [ edit ] Frauley, Jon (2010). "Biopolitics and the Governance of Genetic Capital in GATTACA". Criminology, Deviance and the Silver Screen: The Fictional Reality and the Criminological Imagination. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 195''216. doi:10.1057/9780230115361_7. ISBN 978-0230615168. Interview with Dr. Paul Durham, Director of Cell Biology and the Center for Biomedical and Life Sciences at Missouri State University, about Gattaca.External links [ edit ] Wikiquote has quotations related to
    • Gattaca.
    • Official website Gattaca at IMDbGattaca at AllMovieGattaca at Box Office MojoGattaca at Rotten TomatoesGattaca at Metacritic Gattaca ScreenplayGenetic Determinism in Gattaca
  • On the Origin of Species - Wikipedia
    • Link to Article
    • Archived Version
    • Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:14
    •  
    • 1859 book on evolutionary biology by Charles Darwin
    • On the Origin of Species (or, more completely, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life),[3] published on 24 November 1859, is a work of scientific literature by Charles Darwin that is considered to be the foundation of evolutionary biology. Darwin's book introduced the scientific theory that populations evolve over the course of generations through a process of natural selection. The book presented a body of evidence that the diversity of life arose by common descent through a branching pattern of evolution. Darwin included evidence that he had collected on the Beagle expedition in the 1830s and his subsequent findings from research, correspondence, and experimentation.[5]
    • Various evolutionary ideas had already been proposed to explain new findings in biology. There was growing support for such ideas among dissident anatomists and the general public, but during the first half of the 19th century the English scientific establishment was closely tied to the Church of England, while science was part of natural theology. Ideas about the transmutation of species were controversial as they conflicted with the beliefs that species were unchanging parts of a designed hierarchy and that humans were unique, unrelated to other animals. The political and theological implications were intensely debated, but transmutation was not accepted by the scientific mainstream.
    • The book was written for non-specialist readers and attracted widespread interest upon its publication. Darwin was already highly regarded as a scientist, so his findings were taken seriously and the evidence he presented generated scientific, philosophical, and religious discussion. The debate over the book contributed to the campaign by T. H. Huxley and his fellow members of the X Club to secularise science by promoting scientific naturalism. Within two decades, there was widespread scientific agreement that evolution, with a branching pattern of common descent, had occurred, but scientists were slow to give natural selection the significance that Darwin thought appropriate. During "the eclipse of Darwinism" from the 1880s to the 1930s, various other mechanisms of evolution were given more credit. With the development of the modern evolutionary synthesis in the 1930s and 1940s, Darwin's concept of evolutionary adaptation through natural selection became central to modern evolutionary theory, and it has now become the unifying concept of the life sciences.
    • Summary of Darwin's theory [ edit ] Darwin pictured shortly before publication
    • Darwin's theory of evolution is based on key facts and the inferences drawn from them, which biologist Ernst Mayr summarised as follows:[6]
    • Every species is fertile enough that if all offspring survived to reproduce, the population would grow (fact).Despite periodic fluctuations, populations remain roughly the same size (fact).Resources such as food are limited and are relatively stable over time (fact).A struggle for survival ensues (inference).Individuals in a population vary significantly from one another (fact).Much of this variation is heritable (fact).Individuals less suited to the environment are less likely to survive and less likely to reproduce; individuals more suited to the environment are more likely to survive and more likely to reproduce and leave their heritable traits to future generations, which produces the process of natural selection (fact).This slowly effected process results in populations changing to adapt to their environments, and ultimately, these variations accumulate over time to form new species (inference).Background [ edit ] Developments before Darwin's theory [ edit ] In later editions of the book, Darwin traced evolutionary ideas as far back as Aristotle;[7] the text he cites is a summary by Aristotle of the ideas of the earlier Greek philosopher Empedocles.[8] Early Christian Church Fathers and Medieval European scholars interpreted the Genesis creation narrative allegorically rather than as a literal historical account;[9] organisms were described by their mythological and heraldic significance as well as by their physical form. Nature was widely believed to be unstable and capricious, with monstrous births from union between species, and spontaneous generation of life.[10]
    • Cuvier's 1799 paper on living and fossil elephants helped establish the reality of
    • extinction.
    • The Protestant Reformation inspired a literal interpretation of the Bible, with concepts of creation that conflicted with the findings of an emerging science seeking explanations congruent with the mechanical philosophy of Ren(C) Descartes and the empiricism of the Baconian method. After the turmoil of the English Civil War, the Royal Society wanted to show that science did not threaten religious and political stability. John Ray developed an influential natural theology of rational order; in his taxonomy, species were static and fixed, their adaptation and complexity designed by God, and varieties showed minor differences caused by local conditions. In God's benevolent design, carnivores caused mercifully swift death, but the suffering caused by parasitism was a puzzling problem. The biological classification introduced by Carl Linnaeus in 1735 also viewed species as fixed according to the divine plan. In 1766, Georges Buffon suggested that some similar species, such as horses and asses, or lions, tigers, and leopards, might be varieties descended from a common ancestor. The Ussher chronology of the 1650s had calculated creation at 4004 BC, but by the 1780s geologists assumed a much older world. Wernerians thought strata were deposits from shrinking seas, but James Hutton proposed a self-maintaining infinite cycle, anticipating uniformitarianism.[11]
    • Charles Darwin's grandfather Erasmus Darwin outlined a hypothesis of transmutation of species in the 1790s, and French naturalist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck published a more developed theory in 1809. Both envisaged that spontaneous generation produced simple forms of life that progressively developed greater complexity, adapting to the environment by inheriting changes in adults caused by use or disuse. This process was later called Lamarckism. Lamarck thought there was an inherent progressive tendency driving organisms continuously towards greater complexity, in parallel but separate lineages with no extinction.[12] Geoffroy contended that embryonic development recapitulated transformations of organisms in past eras when the environment acted on embryos, and that animal structures were determined by a constant plan as demonstrated by homologies. Georges Cuvier strongly disputed such ideas, holding that unrelated, fixed species showed similarities that reflected a design for functional needs.[13] His pal...ontological work in the 1790s had established the reality of extinction, which he explained by local catastrophes, followed by repopulation of the affected areas by other species.[14]
    • In Britain, William Paley's Natural Theology saw adaptation as evidence of beneficial "design" by the Creator acting through natural laws. All naturalists in the two English universities (Oxford and Cambridge) were Church of England clergymen, and science became a search for these laws.[15] Geologists adapted catastrophism to show repeated worldwide annihilation and creation of new fixed species adapted to a changed environment, initially identifying the most recent catastrophe as the biblical flood.[16] Some anatomists such as Robert Grant were influenced by Lamarck and Geoffroy, but most naturalists regarded their ideas of transmutation as a threat to divinely appointed social order.[17]
    • Inception of Darwin's theory [ edit ] Darwin went to Edinburgh University in 1825 to study medicine. In his second year he neglected his medical studies for natural history and spent four months assisting Robert Grant's research into marine invertebrates. Grant revealed his enthusiasm for the transmutation of species, but Darwin rejected it.[18] Starting in 1827, at Cambridge University, Darwin learnt science as natural theology from botanist John Stevens Henslow, and read Paley, John Herschel and Alexander von Humboldt. Filled with zeal for science, he studied catastrophist geology with Adam Sedgwick.[19][20]
    • In mid-July 1837 Darwin started his "B" notebook on
    • Transmutation of Species, and on page 36 wrote "I think" above his first
    • evolutionary tree.
    • In December 1831, he joined the Beagle expedition as a gentleman naturalist and geologist. He read Charles Lyell's Principles of Geology and from the first stop ashore, at St. Jago, found Lyell's uniformitarianism a key to the geological history of landscapes. Darwin discovered fossils resembling huge armadillos, and noted the geographical distribution of modern species in hope of finding their "centre of creation".[21] The three Fuegian missionaries the expedition returned to Tierra del Fuego were friendly and civilised, yet to Darwin their relatives on the island seemed "miserable, degraded savages",[22] and he no longer saw an unbridgeable gap between humans and animals.[23] As the Beagle neared England in 1836, he noted that species might not be fixed.[24][25]
    • Richard Owen showed that fossils of extinct species Darwin found in South America were allied to living species on the same continent. In March 1837, ornithologist John Gould announced that Darwin's rhea was a separate species from the previously described rhea (though their territories overlapped), that mockingbirds collected on the Galpagos Islands represented three separate species each unique to a particular island, and that several distinct birds from those islands were all classified as finches.[26] Darwin began speculating, in a series of notebooks, on the possibility that "one species does change into another" to explain these findings, and around July sketched a genealogical branching of a single evolutionary tree, discarding Lamarck's independent lineages progressing to higher forms.[27][28][29] Unconventionally, Darwin asked questions of fancy pigeon and animal breeders as well as established scientists. At the zoo he had his first sight of an ape, and was profoundly impressed by how human the orangutan seemed.[30]
    • In late September 1838, he started reading Thomas Malthus's An Essay on the Principle of Population with its statistical argument that human populations, if unrestrained, breed beyond their means and struggle to survive. Darwin related this to the struggle for existence among wildlife and botanist de Candolle's "warring of the species" in plants; he immediately envisioned "a force like a hundred thousand wedges" pushing well-adapted variations into "gaps in the economy of nature", so that the survivors would pass on their form and abilities, and unfavourable variations would be destroyed.[31][32][33] By December 1838, he had noted a similarity between the act of breeders selecting traits and a Malthusian Nature selecting among variants thrown up by "chance" so that "every part of newly acquired structure is fully practical and perfected".[34]
    • Darwin now had the basic framework of his theory of natural selection, but he was fully occupied with his career as a geologist and held back from compiling it until his book on The Structure and Distribution of Coral Reefs was completed.[35][36] As he recalled in his autobiography, he had "at last got a theory by which to work", but it was only in June 1842 that he allowed himself "the satisfaction of writing a very brief abstract of my theory in pencil".[37]
    • Further development [ edit ] Darwin continued to research and extensively revise his theory while focusing on his main work of publishing the scientific results of the Beagle voyage.[35] He tentatively wrote of his ideas to Lyell in January 1842;[38] then in June he roughed out a 35-page "Pencil Sketch" of his theory.[39] Darwin began correspondence about his theorising with the botanist Joseph Dalton Hooker in January 1844, and by July had rounded out his "sketch" into a 230-page "Essay", to be expanded with his research results and published if he died prematurely.[40]
    • Darwin researched how the skulls of different pigeon breeds varied, as shown in his
    • Variation of Plants and Animals Under Domestication of 1868.
    • In November 1844, the anonymously published popular science book Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation, written by Scottish journalist Robert Chambers, widened public interest in the concept of transmutation of species. Vestiges used evidence from the fossil record and embryology to support the claim that living things had progressed from the simple to the more complex over time. But it proposed a linear progression rather than the branching common descent theory behind Darwin's work in progress, and it ignored adaptation. Darwin read it soon after publication, and scorned its amateurish geology and zoology,[41] but he carefully reviewed his own arguments after leading scientists, including Adam Sedgwick, attacked its morality and scientific errors.[42] Vestiges had significant influence on public opinion, and the intense debate helped to pave the way for the acceptance of the more scientifically sophisticated Origin by moving evolutionary speculation into the mainstream. While few naturalists were willing to consider transmutation, Herbert Spencer became an active proponent of Lamarckism and progressive development in the 1850s.[43]
    • Hooker was persuaded to take away a copy of the "Essay" in January 1847, and eventually sent a page of notes giving Darwin much-needed feedback. Reminded of his lack of expertise in taxonomy, Darwin began an eight-year study of barnacles, becoming the leading expert on their classification. Using his theory, he discovered homologies showing that slightly changed body parts served different functions to meet new conditions, and he found an intermediate stage in the evolution of distinct sexes.[44][45]
    • Darwin's barnacle studies convinced him that variation arose constantly and not just in response to changed circumstances. In 1854, he completed the last part of his Beagle-related writing and began working full-time on evolution. He now realised that the branching pattern of evolutionary divergence was explained by natural selection working constantly to improve adaptation. His thinking changed from the view that species formed in isolated populations only, as on islands, to an emphasis on speciation without isolation; that is, he saw increasing specialisation within large stable populations as continuously exploiting new ecological niches. He conducted empirical research focusing on difficulties with his theory. He studied the developmental and anatomical differences between different breeds of many domestic animals, became actively involved in fancy pigeon breeding, and experimented (with the help of his son Francis) on ways that plant seeds and animals might disperse across oceans to colonise distant islands. By 1856, his theory was much more sophisticated, with a mass of supporting evidence.[44][46]
    • Publication [ edit ] Time taken to publish [ edit ] In his autobiography, Darwin said he had "gained much by my delay in publishing from about 1839, when the theory was clearly conceived, to 1859; and I lost nothing by it".[47] On the first page of his 1859 book he noted that, having begun work on the topic in 1837, he had drawn up "some short notes" after five years, had enlarged these into a sketch in 1844, and "from that period to the present day I have steadily pursued the same object."[48]
    • Various biographers have proposed that Darwin avoided or delayed making his ideas public for personal reasons. Reasons suggested have included fear of religious persecution or social disgrace if his views were revealed, and concern about upsetting his clergymen naturalist friends or his pious wife Emma. Charles Darwin's illness caused repeated delays. His paper on Glen Roy had proved embarrassingly wrong, and he may have wanted to be sure he was correct. David Quammen has suggested all these factors may have contributed, and notes Darwin's large output of books and busy family life during that time.[50]
    • A more recent study by science historian John van Wyhe has determined that the idea that Darwin delayed publication only dates back to the 1940s, and Darwin's contemporaries thought the time he took was reasonable. Darwin always finished one book before starting another. While he was researching, he told many people about his interest in transmutation without causing outrage. He firmly intended to publish, but it was not until September 1854 that he could work on it full-time. His 1846 estimate that writing his "big book" would take five years proved optimistic.[48]
    • Events leading to publication: "big book" manuscript [ edit ] An 1855 paper on the "introduction" of species, written by Alfred Russel Wallace, claimed that patterns in the geographical distribution of living and fossil species could be explained if every new species always came into existence near an already existing, closely related species.[51] Charles Lyell recognised the implications of Wallace's paper and its possible connection to Darwin's work, although Darwin did not, and in a letter written on 1''2 May 1856 Lyell urged Darwin to publish his theory to establish priority. Darwin was torn between the desire to set out a full and convincing account and the pressure to quickly produce a short paper. He met Lyell, and in correspondence with Joseph Dalton Hooker affirmed that he did not want to expose his ideas to review by an editor as would have been required to publish in an academic journal. He began a "sketch" account on 14 May 1856, and by July had decided to produce a full technical treatise on species as his "big book" on Natural Selection. His theory including the principle of divergence was complete by 5 September 1857 when he sent Asa Gray a brief but detailed abstract of his ideas.[52][53]
    • Joint publication of papers by Wallace and Darwin [ edit ] Darwin was hard at work on the manuscript for his "big book" on Natural Selection, when on 18 June 1858 he received a parcel from Wallace, who stayed on the Maluku Islands (Ternate and Gilolo). It enclosed twenty pages describing an evolutionary mechanism, a response to Darwin's recent encouragement, with a request to send it on to Lyell if Darwin thought it worthwhile. The mechanism was similar to Darwin's own theory.[52] Darwin wrote to Lyell that "your words have come true with a vengeance, ... forestalled" and he would "of course, at once write and offer to send [it] to any journal" that Wallace chose, adding that "all my originality, whatever it may amount to, will be smashed".[54] Lyell and Hooker agreed that a joint publication putting together Wallace's pages with extracts from Darwin's 1844 Essay and his 1857 letter to Gray should be presented at the Linnean Society, and on 1 July 1858, the papers entitled On the Tendency of Species to form Varieties; and on the Perpetuation of Varieties and Species by Natural Means of Selection, by Wallace and Darwin respectively, were read out but drew little reaction. While Darwin considered Wallace's idea to be identical to his concept of natural selection, historians have pointed out differences. Darwin described natural selection as being analogous to the artificial selection practised by animal breeders, and emphasised competition between individuals; Wallace drew no comparison to selective breeding, and focused on ecological pressures that kept different varieties adapted to local conditions.[55][56][57] Some historians have suggested that Wallace was actually discussing group selection rather than selection acting on individual variation.[58]
    • Abstract of Species book [ edit ] Soon after the meeting, Darwin decided to write "an abstract of my whole work" in the form of one or more papers to be published by the Linnean Society, but was concerned about "how it can be made scientific for a Journal, without giving facts, which would be impossible." He asked Hooker how many pages would be available, but "If the Referees were to reject it as not strictly scientific I would, perhaps publish it as pamphlet."[59][60] He began his "abstract of Species book" on 20 July 1858, while on holiday at Sandown,[61] and wrote parts of it from memory, while sending the manuscripts to his friends for checking.[62]
    • By early October, he began to "expect my abstract will run into a small volume, which will have to be published separately."[63] Over the same period, he continued to collect information and write large fully detailed sections of the manuscript for his "big book" on Species, Natural Selection.[59]
    • Murray as publisher; choice of title [ edit ] On the Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, 2nd edition. By Charles Darwin, John Murray, London, 1860. National Museum of Scotland.
    • By mid-March 1859 Darwin's abstract had reached the stage where he was thinking of early publication; Lyell suggested the publisher John Murray, and met with him to find if he would be willing to publish. On 28 March Darwin wrote to Lyell asking about progress, and offering to give Murray assurances "that my Book is not more un-orthodox, than the subject makes inevitable." He enclosed a draft title sheet proposing An abstract of an Essay on the Origin of Species and Varieties Through natural selection, with the year shown as "1859".[64]
    • Murray's response was favourable, and a very pleased Darwin told Lyell on 30 March that he would "send shortly a large bundle of M.S. but unfortunately I cannot for a week, as the three first chapters are in three copyists' hands". He bowed to Murray's objection to "abstract" in the title, though he felt it excused the lack of references, but wanted to keep "natural selection" which was "constantly used in all works on Breeding", and hoped "to retain it with Explanation, somewhat as thus",'-- Through Natural Selection or the preservation of favoured races.[66]On 31 March Darwin wrote to Murray in confirmation, and listed headings of the 12 chapters in progress: he had drafted all except "XII. Recapitulation & Conclusion".[67] Murray responded immediately with an agreement to publish the book on the same terms as he published Lyell, without even seeing the manuscript: he offered Darwin '…-- of the profits.[68] Darwin promptly accepted with pleasure, insisting that Murray would be free to withdraw the offer if, having read the chapter manuscripts, he felt the book would not sell well[69] (eventually Murray paid £180 to Darwin for the first edition and by Darwin's death in 1882 the book was in its sixth edition, earning Darwin nearly £3000[70]).
    • On 5 April, Darwin sent Murray the first three chapters, and a proposal for the book's title.[71] An early draft title page suggests On the Mutability of Species.[72] Murray cautiously asked Whitwell Elwin to review the chapters.[59] At Lyell's suggestion, Elwin recommended that, rather than "put forth the theory without the evidence", the book should focus on observations upon pigeons, briefly stating how these illustrated Darwin's general principles and preparing the way for the larger work expected shortly: "Every body is interested in pigeons."[73] Darwin responded that this was impractical: he had only the last chapter still to write.[74] In September the main title still included "An essay on the origin of species and varieties", but Darwin now proposed dropping "varieties".[75]
    • With Murray's persuasion, the title was eventually agreed as On the Origin of Species, with the title page adding by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life.[3] In this extended title (and elsewhere in the book) Darwin used the biological term "races" interchangeably with "varieties", meaning varieties within a species.[76][77] He used the term broadly,[78] and as well as discussions of "the several races, for instance, of the cabbage" and "the hereditary varieties or races of our domestic animals and plants",[79] there are three instances in the book where the phrase "races of man" is used, referring to races of humans.[80]
    • Publication and subsequent editions [ edit ] On the Origin of Species was first published on Thursday 24 November 1859, priced at fifteen shillings with a first printing of 1250 copies.[81] The book had been offered to booksellers at Murray's autumn sale on Tuesday 22 November, and all available copies had been taken up immediately. In total, 1,250 copies were printed but after deducting presentation and review copies, and five for Stationers' Hall copyright, around 1,170 copies were available for sale.[2] Significantly, 500 were taken by Mudie's Library, ensuring that the book promptly reached a large number of subscribers to the library.[82] The second edition of 3,000 copies was quickly brought out on 7 January 1860,[83] and incorporated numerous corrections as well as a response to religious objections by the addition of a new epigraph on page ii, a quotation from Charles Kingsley, and the phrase "by the Creator" added to the closing sentence.[84] During Darwin's lifetime the book went through six editions, with cumulative changes and revisions to deal with counter-arguments raised. The third edition came out in 1861, with a number of sentences rewritten or added and an introductory appendix, An Historical Sketch of the Recent Progress of Opinion on the Origin of Species,[85] while the fourth in 1866 had further revisions. The fifth edition, published on 10 February 1869, incorporated more changes and for the first time included the phrase "survival of the fittest", which had been coined by the philosopher Herbert Spencer in his Principles of Biology (1864).[86]
    • In January 1871, George Jackson Mivart's On the Genesis of Species listed detailed arguments against natural selection, and claimed it included false metaphysics.[87] Darwin made extensive revisions to the sixth edition of the Origin (this was the first edition in which he used the word "evolution" which had commonly been associated with embryological development, though all editions concluded with the word "evolved"[88][89]), and added a new chapter VII, Miscellaneous objections, to address Mivart's arguments.[2][90]
    • The sixth edition was published by Murray on 19 February 1872 as The Origin of Species, with "On" dropped from the title. Darwin had told Murray of working men in Lancashire clubbing together to buy the fifth edition at 15 shillings and wanted it made more widely available; the price was halved to 7s 6d by printing in a smaller font. It includes a glossary compiled by W.S. Dallas. Book sales increased from 60 to 250 per month.[3][90]
    • Publication outside Great Britain [ edit ] American botanist Asa Gray (1810''1888)
    • In the United States, botanist Asa Gray, an American colleague of Darwin, negotiated with a Boston publisher for publication of an authorised American version, but learnt that two New York publishing firms were already planning to exploit the absence of international copyright to print Origin.[91] Darwin was delighted by the popularity of the book, and asked Gray to keep any profits.[92] Gray managed to negotiate a 5% royalty with Appleton's of New York,[93] who got their edition out in mid-January 1860, and the other two withdrew. In a May letter, Darwin mentioned a print run of 2,500 copies, but it is not clear if this referred to the first printing only, as there were four that year.[2][94]
    • The book was widely translated in Darwin's lifetime, but problems arose with translating concepts and metaphors, and some translations were biased by the translator's own agenda.[95] Darwin distributed presentation copies in France and Germany, hoping that suitable applicants would come forward, as translators were expected to make their own arrangements with a local publisher. He welcomed the distinguished elderly naturalist and geologist Heinrich Georg Bronn, but the German translation published in 1860 imposed Bronn's own ideas, adding controversial themes that Darwin had deliberately omitted. Bronn translated "favoured races" as "perfected races", and added essays on issues including the origin of life, as well as a final chapter on religious implications partly inspired by Bronn's adherence to Naturphilosophie.[96] In 1862, Bronn produced a second edition based on the third English edition and Darwin's suggested additions, but then died of a heart attack.[97] Darwin corresponded closely with Julius Victor Carus, who published an improved translation in 1867.[98] Darwin's attempts to find a translator in France fell through, and the translation by Cl(C)mence Royer published in 1862 added an introduction praising Darwin's ideas as an alternative to religious revelation and promoting ideas anticipating social Darwinism and eugenics, as well as numerous explanatory notes giving her own answers to doubts that Darwin expressed. Darwin corresponded with Royer about a second edition published in 1866 and a third in 1870, but he had difficulty getting her to remove her notes and was troubled by these editions.[97][99] He remained unsatisfied until a translation by Edmond Barbier was published in 1876.[2] A Dutch translation by Tiberius Cornelis Winkler was published in 1860.[100] By 1864, additional translations had appeared in Italian and Russian.[95] In Darwin's lifetime, Origin was published in Swedish in 1871,[101] Danish in 1872, Polish in 1873, Hungarian in 1873''1874, Spanish in 1877 and Serbian in 1878. By 1977, Origin had appeared in an additional 18 languages,[102] including Chinese by Ma Ch¼n-wu who added non-Darwinian ideas; he published the preliminaries and chapters 1''5 in 1902''1904, and his complete translation in 1920.[103][104]
    • Content [ edit ] Title pages and introduction [ edit ] John Gould's illustration of
    • Darwin's rhea was published in 1841. The existence of two rhea species with overlapping ranges influenced Darwin.
    • Page ii contains quotations by William Whewell and Francis Bacon on the theology of natural laws,[105] harmonising science and religion in accordance with Isaac Newton's belief in a rational God who established a law-abiding cosmos.[106] In the second edition, Darwin added an epigraph from Joseph Butler affirming that God could work through scientific laws as much as through miracles, in a nod to the religious concerns of his oldest friends.[84] The Introduction establishes Darwin's credentials as a naturalist and author,[107] then refers to John Herschel's letter suggesting that the origin of species "would be found to be a natural in contradistinction to a miraculous process":[108]
    • WHEN on board HMS Beagle, as naturalist, I was much struck with certain facts in the distribution of the inhabitants of South America, and in the geological relations of the present to the past inhabitants of that continent. These facts seemed to me to throw some light on the origin of species'--that mystery of mysteries, as it has been called by one of our greatest philosophers.[109]
    • Darwin refers specifically to the distribution of the species rheas, and to that of the Galpagos tortoises and mockingbirds. He mentions his years of work on his theory, and the arrival of Wallace at the same conclusion, which led him to "publish this Abstract" of his incomplete work. He outlines his ideas, and sets out the essence of his theory:
    • As many more individuals of each species are born than can possibly survive; and as, consequently, there is a frequently recurring struggle for existence, it follows that any being, if it vary however slightly in any manner profitable to itself, under the complex and sometimes varying conditions of life, will have a better chance of surviving, and thus be naturally selected. From the strong principle of inheritance, any selected variety will tend to propagate its new and modified form.[110]
    • Starting with the third edition, Darwin prefaced the introduction with a sketch of the historical development of evolutionary ideas.[111] In that sketch he acknowledged that Patrick Matthew had, unknown to Wallace or himself, anticipated the concept of natural selection in an appendix to a book published in 1831;[112] in the fourth edition he mentioned that William Charles Wells had done so as early as 1813.[113]
    • Variation under domestication and under nature [ edit ] Chapter I covers animal husbandry and plant breeding, going back to ancient Egypt. Darwin discusses contemporary opinions on the origins of different breeds under cultivation to argue that many have been produced from common ancestors by selective breeding.[114] As an illustration of artificial selection, he describes fancy pigeon breeding,[115] noting that "[t]he diversity of the breeds is something astonishing", yet all were descended from one species of rock pigeon.[116] Darwin saw two distinct kinds of variation: (1) rare abrupt changes he called "sports" or "monstrosities" (example: Ancon sheep with short legs), and (2) ubiquitous small differences (example: slightly shorter or longer bill of pigeons).[117] Both types of hereditary changes can be used by breeders. However, for Darwin the small changes were most important in evolution. In this chapter Darwin expresses his erroneous belief that environmental change is necessary to generate variation.[118]
    • In Chapter II, Darwin specifies that the distinction between species and varieties is arbitrary, with experts disagreeing and changing their decisions when new forms were found. He concludes that "a well-marked variety may be justly called an incipient species" and that "species are only strongly marked and permanent varieties".[119] He argues for the ubiquity of variation in nature.[120] Historians have noted that naturalists had long been aware that the individuals of a species differed from one another, but had generally considered such variations to be limited and unimportant deviations from the archetype of each species, that archetype being a fixed ideal in the mind of God. Darwin and Wallace made variation among individuals of the same species central to understanding the natural world.[115]
    • Struggle for existence, natural selection, and divergence [ edit ] In Chapter III, Darwin asks how varieties "which I have called incipient species" become distinct species, and in answer introduces the key concept he calls "natural selection";[121] in the fifth edition he adds, "But the expression often used by Mr. Herbert Spencer, of the Survival of the Fittest, is more accurate, and is sometimes equally convenient."[122]
    • Owing to this struggle for life, any variation, however slight and from whatever cause proceeding, if it be in any degree profitable to an individual of any species, in its infinitely complex relations to other organic beings and to external nature, will tend to the preservation of that individual, and will generally be inherited by its offspring ... I have called this principle, by which each slight variation, if useful, is preserved, by the term of Natural Selection, in order to mark its relation to man's power of selection.[121]
    • He notes that both A. P. de Candolle and Charles Lyell had stated that all organisms are exposed to severe competition. Darwin emphasizes that he used the phrase "struggle for existence" in "a large and metaphorical sense, including dependence of one being on another"; he gives examples ranging from plants struggling against drought to plants competing for birds to eat their fruit and disseminate their seeds. He describes the struggle resulting from population growth: "It is the doctrine of Malthus applied with manifold force to the whole animal and vegetable kingdoms." He discusses checks to such increase including complex ecological interdependencies, and notes that competition is most severe between closely related forms "which fill nearly the same place in the economy of nature".[123]
    • Chapter IV details natural selection under the "infinitely complex and close-fitting ... mutual relations of all organic beings to each other and to their physical conditions of life".[124] Darwin takes as an example a country where a change in conditions led to extinction of some species, immigration of others and, where suitable variations occurred, descendants of some species became adapted to new conditions. He remarks that the artificial selection practised by animal breeders frequently produced sharp divergence in character between breeds, and suggests that natural selection might do the same, saying:
    • But how, it may be asked, can any analogous principle apply in nature? I believe it can and does apply most efficiently, from the simple circumstance that the more diversified the descendants from any one species become in structure, constitution, and habits, by so much will they be better enabled to seize on many and widely diversified places in the polity of nature, and so be enabled to increase in numbers.[125]
    • Historians have remarked that here Darwin anticipated the modern concept of an ecological niche.[126] He did not suggest that every favourable variation must be selected, nor that the favoured animals were better or higher, but merely more adapted to their surroundings.
    • This tree diagram, used to show the divergence of species, is the only illustration in the
    • Origin of Species.
    • Darwin proposes sexual selection, driven by competition between males for mates, to explain sexually dimorphic features such as lion manes, deer antlers, peacock tails, bird songs, and the bright plumage of some male birds.[127] He analysed sexual selection more fully in The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (1871). Natural selection was expected to work very slowly in forming new species, but given the effectiveness of artificial selection, he could "see no limit to the amount of change, to the beauty and infinite complexity of the coadaptations between all organic beings, one with another and with their physical conditions of life, which may be effected in the long course of time by nature's power of selection". Using a tree diagram and calculations, he indicates the "divergence of character" from original species into new species and genera. He describes branches falling off as extinction occurred, while new branches formed in "the great Tree of life ... with its ever branching and beautiful ramifications".[128]
    • Variation and heredity [ edit ] In Darwin's time there was no agreed-upon model of heredity;[129] in Chapter I Darwin admitted, "The laws governing inheritance are quite unknown."[130] He accepted a version of the inheritance of acquired characteristics (which after Darwin's death came to be called Lamarckism), and Chapter V discusses what he called the effects of use and disuse; he wrote that he thought "there can be little doubt that use in our domestic animals strengthens and enlarges certain parts, and disuse diminishes them; and that such modifications are inherited", and that this also applied in nature.[131] Darwin stated that some changes that were commonly attributed to use and disuse, such as the loss of functional wings in some island-dwelling insects, might be produced by natural selection. In later editions of Origin, Darwin expanded the role attributed to the inheritance of acquired characteristics. Darwin also admitted ignorance of the source of inheritable variations, but speculated they might be produced by environmental factors.[132][133] However, one thing was clear: whatever the exact nature and causes of new variations, Darwin knew from observation and experiment that breeders were able to select such variations and produce huge differences in many generations of selection.[117] The observation that selection works in domestic animals is not destroyed by lack of understanding of the underlying hereditary mechanism.
    • Breeding of animals and plants showed related varieties varying in similar ways, or tending to revert to an ancestral form, and similar patterns of variation in distinct species were explained by Darwin as demonstrating common descent. He recounted how Lord Morton's mare apparently demonstrated telegony, offspring inheriting characteristics of a previous mate of the female parent, and accepted this process as increasing the variation available for natural selection.[134][135]
    • More detail was given in Darwin's 1868 book on The Variation of Animals and Plants Under Domestication, which tried to explain heredity through his hypothesis of pangenesis. Although Darwin had privately questioned blending inheritance, he struggled with the theoretical difficulty that novel individual variations would tend to blend into a population. However, inherited variation could be seen,[136] and Darwin's concept of selection working on a population with a range of small variations was workable.[137] It was not until the modern evolutionary synthesis in the 1930s and 1940s that a model of heredity became completely integrated with a model of variation.[138] This modern evolutionary synthesis had been dubbed Neo Darwinian Evolution because it encompasses Charles Darwin's theories of evolution with Gregor Mendel's theories of genetic inheritance.[139]
    • Difficulties for the theory [ edit ] Chapter VI begins by saying the next three chapters will address possible objections to the theory, the first being that often no intermediate forms between closely related species are found, though the theory implies such forms must have existed. As Darwin noted, "Firstly, why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?"[140] Darwin attributed this to the competition between different forms, combined with the small number of individuals of intermediate forms, often leading to extinction of such forms.[141] This difficulty can be referred to as the absence or rarity of transitional varieties in habitat space.
    • Another difficulty, related to the first one, is the absence or rarity of transitional varieties in time. Darwin commented that by the theory of natural selection "innumerable transitional forms must have existed," and wondered "why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?"[142] (For further discussion of these difficulties, see Speciation#Darwin's dilemma: Why do species exist? and Bernstein et al.[143] and Michod.[144])
    • The chapter then deals with whether natural selection could produce complex specialised structures, and the behaviours to use them, when it would be difficult to imagine how intermediate forms could be functional. Darwin said:
    • Secondly, is it possible that an animal having, for instance, the structure and habits of a bat, could have been formed by the modification of some animal with wholly different habits? Can we believe that natural selection could produce, on the one hand, organs of trifling importance, such as the tail of a giraffe, which serves as a fly-flapper, and, on the other hand, organs of such wonderful structure, as the eye, of which we hardly as yet fully understand the inimitable perfection?[145]
    • His answer was that in many cases animals exist with intermediate structures that are functional. He presented flying squirrels, and flying lemurs as examples of how bats might have evolved from non-flying ancestors.[146] He discussed various simple eyes found in invertebrates, starting with nothing more than an optic nerve coated with pigment, as examples of how the vertebrate eye could have evolved. Darwin concludes: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case."[147]
    • In a section on "organs of little apparent importance", Darwin discusses the difficulty of explaining various seemingly trivial traits with no evident adaptive function, and outlines some possibilities such as correlation with useful features. He accepts that we "are profoundly ignorant of the causes producing slight and unimportant variations" which distinguish domesticated breeds of animals,[148] and human races. He suggests that sexual selection might explain these variations:[149]
    • I might have adduced for this same purpose the differences between the races of man, which are so strongly marked; I may add that some little light can apparently be thrown on the origin of these differences, chiefly through sexual selection of a particular kind, but without here entering on copious details my reasoning would appear frivolous.[151]
    • Chapter VII (of the first edition) addresses the evolution of instincts. His examples included two he had investigated experimentally: slave-making ants and the construction of hexagonal cells by honey bees. Darwin noted that some species of slave-making ants were more dependent on slaves than others, and he observed that many ant species will collect and store the pupae of other species as food. He thought it reasonable that species with an extreme dependency on slave workers had evolved in incremental steps. He suggested that bees that make hexagonal cells evolved in steps from bees that made round cells, under pressure from natural selection to economise wax. Darwin concluded:
    • Finally, it may not be a logical deduction, but to my imagination it is far more satisfactory to look at such instincts as the young cuckoo ejecting its foster-brothers, '--ants making slaves, '--the larv... of ichneumonid... feeding within the live bodies of caterpillars, '--not as specially endowed or created instincts, but as small consequences of one general law, leading to the advancement of all organic beings, namely, multiply, vary, let the strongest live and the weakest die.[152]
    • Chapter VIII addresses the idea that species had special characteristics that prevented hybrids from being fertile in order to preserve separately created species. Darwin said that, far from being constant, the difficulty in producing hybrids of related species, and the viability and fertility of the hybrids, varied greatly, especially among plants. Sometimes what were widely considered to be separate species produced fertile hybrid offspring freely, and in other cases what were considered to be mere varieties of the same species could only be crossed with difficulty. Darwin concluded: "Finally, then, the facts briefly given in this chapter do not seem to me opposed to, but even rather to support the view, that there is no fundamental distinction between species and varieties."[153]
    • In the sixth edition Darwin inserted a new chapter VII (renumbering the subsequent chapters) to respond to criticisms of earlier editions, including the objection that many features of organisms were not adaptive and could not have been produced by natural selection. He said some such features could have been by-products of adaptive changes to other features, and that often features seemed non-adaptive because their function was unknown, as shown by his book on Fertilisation of Orchids that explained how their elaborate structures facilitated pollination by insects. Much of the chapter responds to George Jackson Mivart's criticisms, including his claim that features such as baleen filters in whales, flatfish with both eyes on one side and the camouflage of stick insects could not have evolved through natural selection because intermediate stages would not have been adaptive. Darwin proposed scenarios for the incremental evolution of each feature.[154]
    • Geological record [ edit ] Chapter IX deals with the fact that the geological record appears to show forms of life suddenly arising, without the innumerable transitional fossils expected from gradual changes. Darwin borrowed Charles Lyell's argument in Principles of Geology that the record is extremely imperfect as fossilisation is a very rare occurrence, spread over vast periods of time; since few areas had been geologically explored, there could only be fragmentary knowledge of geological formations, and fossil collections were very poor. Evolved local varieties which migrated into a wider area would seem to be the sudden appearance of a new species. Darwin did not expect to be able to reconstruct evolutionary history, but continuing discoveries gave him well-founded hope that new finds would occasionally reveal transitional forms.[155][156] To show that there had been enough time for natural selection to work slowly, he cited the example of The Weald as discussed in Principles of Geology together with other observations from Hugh Miller, James Smith of Jordanhill and Andrew Ramsay. Combining this with an estimate of recent rates of sedimentation and erosion, Darwin calculated that erosion of The Weald had taken around 300 million years.[157] The initial appearance of entire groups of well-developed organisms in the oldest fossil-bearing layers, now known as the Cambrian explosion, posed a problem. Darwin had no doubt that earlier seas had swarmed with living creatures, but stated that he had no satisfactory explanation for the lack of fossils.[158] Fossil evidence of pre-Cambrian life has since been found, extending the history of life back for billions of years.[159]
    • Chapter X examines whether patterns in the fossil record are better explained by common descent and branching evolution through natural selection, than by the individual creation of fixed species. Darwin expected species to change slowly, but not at the same rate '' some organisms such as Lingula were unchanged since the earliest fossils. The pace of natural selection would depend on variability and change in the environment.[160] This distanced his theory from Lamarckian laws of inevitable progress.[155] It has been argued that this anticipated the punctuated equilibrium hypothesis,[156][161] but other scholars have preferred to emphasise Darwin's commitment to gradualism.[162] He cited Richard Owen's findings that the earliest members of a class were a few simple and generalised species with characteristics intermediate between modern forms, and were followed by increasingly diverse and specialised forms, matching the branching of common descent from an ancestor.[155] Patterns of extinction matched his theory, with related groups of species having a continued existence until extinction, then not reappearing. Recently extinct species were more similar to living species than those from earlier eras, and as he had seen in South America, and William Clift had shown in Australia, fossils from recent geological periods resembled species still living in the same area.[160]
    • Geographic distribution [ edit ] Chapter XI deals with evidence from biogeography, starting with the observation that differences in flora and fauna from separate regions cannot be explained by environmental differences alone; South America, Africa, and Australia all have regions with similar climates at similar latitudes, but those regions have very different plants and animals. The species found in one area of a continent are more closely allied with species found in other regions of that same continent than to species found on other continents. Darwin noted that barriers to migration played an important role in the differences between the species of different regions. The coastal sea life of the Atlantic and Pacific sides of Central America had almost no species in common even though the Isthmus of Panama was only a few miles wide. His explanation was a combination of migration and descent with modification. He went on to say: "On this principle of inheritance with modification, we can understand how it is that sections of genera, whole genera, and even families are confined to the same areas, as is so commonly and notoriously the case."[163] Darwin explained how a volcanic island formed a few hundred miles from a continent might be colonised by a few species from that continent. These species would become modified over time, but would still be related to species found on the continent, and Darwin observed that this was a common pattern. Darwin discussed ways that species could be dispersed across oceans to colonise islands, many of which he had investigated experimentally.[164]
    • Chapter XII continues the discussion of biogeography. After a brief discussion of freshwater species, it returns to oceanic islands and their peculiarities; for example on some islands roles played by mammals on continents were played by other animals such as flightless birds or reptiles. The summary of both chapters says:
    • ... I think all the grand leading facts of geographical distribution are explicable on the theory of migration (generally of the more dominant forms of life), together with subsequent modification and the multiplication of new forms. We can thus understand the high importance of barriers, whether of land or water, which separate our several zoological and botanical provinces. We can thus understand the localisation of sub-genera, genera, and families; and how it is that under different latitudes, for instance in South America, the inhabitants of the plains and mountains, of the forests, marshes, and deserts, are in so mysterious a manner linked together by affinity, and are likewise linked to the extinct beings which formerly inhabited the same continent ... On these same principles, we can understand, as I have endeavoured to show, why oceanic islands should have few inhabitants, but of these a great number should be endemic or peculiar; ...[165]
    • Classification, morphology, embryology, rudimentary organs [ edit ] Chapter XIII starts by observing that classification depends on species being grouped together in a Taxonomy, a multilevel system of groups and sub-groups based on varying degrees of resemblance. After discussing classification issues, Darwin concludes:
    • All the foregoing rules and aids and difficulties in classification are explained, if I do not greatly deceive myself, on the view that the natural system is founded on descent with modification; that the characters which naturalists consider as showing true affinity between any two or more species, are those which have been inherited from a common parent, and, in so far, all true classification is genealogical; that community of descent is the hidden bond which naturalists have been unconsciously seeking, ...[166]
    • Darwin discusses morphology, including the importance of homologous structures. He says, "What can be more curious than that the hand of a man, formed for grasping, that of a mole for digging, the leg of the horse, the paddle of the porpoise, and the wing of the bat, should all be constructed on the same pattern, and should include the same bones, in the same relative positions?" This made no sense under doctrines of independent creation of species, as even Richard Owen had admitted, but the "explanation is manifest on the theory of the natural selection of successive slight modifications" showing common descent.[167] He notes that animals of the same class often have extremely similar embryos. Darwin discusses rudimentary organs, such as the wings of flightless birds and the rudiments of pelvis and leg bones found in some snakes. He remarks that some rudimentary organs, such as teeth in baleen whales, are found only in embryonic stages.[168] These factors also supported his theory of descent with modification.[31]
    • [ edit ] The final chapter, "Recapitulation and Conclusion", reviews points from earlier chapters, and Darwin concludes by hoping that his theory might produce revolutionary changes in many fields of natural history.[169] He suggests that psychology will be put on a new foundation and implies the relevance of his theory to the first appearance of humanity with the sentence that "Light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history."[31][170] Darwin ends with a passage that became well known and much quoted:
    • It is interesting to contemplate an entangled bank, clothed with many plants of many kinds, with birds singing on the bushes, with various insects flitting about, and with worms crawling through the damp earth, and to reflect that these elaborately constructed forms, so different from each other, and dependent on each other in so complex a manner, have all been produced by laws acting around us ... Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.[171]
    • Darwin added the phrase "by the Creator" from the 1860 second edition onwards, so that the ultimate sentence begins "There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one".[172]
    • Structure, style, and themes [ edit ] Nature and structure of Darwin's argument [ edit ] Darwin's aims were twofold: to show that species had not been separately created, and to show that natural selection had been the chief agent of change.[173] He knew that his readers were already familiar with the concept of transmutation of species from Vestiges, and his introduction ridicules that work as failing to provide a viable mechanism.[174] Therefore, the first four chapters lay out his case that selection in nature, caused by the struggle for existence, is analogous to the selection of variations under domestication, and that the accumulation of adaptive variations provides a scientifically testable mechanism for evolutionary speciation.[175][176]
    • Later chapters provide evidence that evolution has occurred, supporting the idea of branching, adaptive evolution without directly proving that selection is the mechanism. Darwin presents supporting facts drawn from many disciplines, showing that his theory could explain a myriad of observations from many fields of natural history that were inexplicable under the alternative concept that species had been individually created.[176][177][178] The structure of Darwin's argument showed the influence of John Herschel, whose philosophy of science maintained that a mechanism could be called a vera causa (true cause) if three things could be demonstrated: its existence in nature, its ability to produce the effects of interest, and its ability to explain a wide range of observations.[179]
    • Literary style [ edit ] The Examiner review of 3 December 1859 commented, "Much of Mr. Darwin's volume is what ordinary readers would call 'tough reading;' that is, writing which to comprehend requires concentrated attention and some preparation for the task. All, however, is by no means of this description, and many parts of the book abound in information, easy to comprehend and both instructive and entertaining."[174][180]
    • While the book was readable enough to sell, its dryness ensured that it was seen as aimed at specialist scientists and could not be dismissed as mere journalism or imaginative fiction. Unlike the still-popular Vestiges, it avoided the narrative style of the historical novel and cosmological speculation, though the closing sentence clearly hinted at cosmic progression. Darwin had long been immersed in the literary forms and practices of specialist science, and made effective use of his skills in structuring arguments.[174] David Quammen has described the book as written in everyday language for a wide audience, but noted that Darwin's literary style was uneven: in some places he used convoluted sentences that are difficult to read, while in other places his writing was beautiful. Quammen advised that later editions were weakened by Darwin making concessions and adding details to address his critics, and recommended the first edition.[181] James T. Costa said that because the book was an abstract produced in haste in response to Wallace's essay, it was more approachable than the big book on natural selection Darwin had been working on, which would have been encumbered by scholarly footnotes and much more technical detail. He added that some parts of Origin are dense, but other parts are almost lyrical, and the case studies and observations are presented in a narrative style unusual in serious scientific books, which broadened its audience.[182]
    • Human evolution [ edit ] From his early transmutation notebooks in the late 1830s onwards, Darwin considered human evolution as part of the natural processes he was investigating,[183] and rejected divine intervention.[184] In 1856, his "big book on species" titled Natural Selection was to include a "note on Man", but when Wallace enquired in December 1857, Darwin replied; "You ask whether I shall discuss 'man';'--I think I shall avoid whole subject, as so surrounded with prejudices, though I fully admit that it is the highest & most interesting problem for the naturalist."[185][186]On 28 March 1859, with his manuscript for the book well under way, Darwin wrote to Lyell offering the suggested publisher John Murray assurances "That I do not discuss origin of man".[64]
    • In the final chapter of On the Origin of Species, "Recapitulation and Conclusion", Darwin briefly highlights the human implications of his theory:
    • "In the distant future I see open fields for far more important researches. Psychology will be based on a new foundation, that of the necessary acquirement of each mental power and capacity by gradation. Light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history."[187]
    • Discussing this in January 1860, Darwin assured Lyell that "by the sentence [Light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history] I show that I believe man is in same predicament with other animals.[188] Many modern writers have seen this sentence as Darwin's only reference to humans in the book;[183] Janet Browne describes it as his only discussion there of human origins, while noting that the book makes other references to humanity.[189]
    • Some other statements in the book are quietly effective at pointing out the implication that humans are simply another species, evolving through the same processes and principles affecting other organisms. For example,[183] in Chapter III: "Struggle for Existence" Darwin includes "slow-breeding man" among other examples of Malthusian population growth.[190] In his discussions on morphology, Darwin compares and comments on bone structures that are homologous between humans and other mammals.[191]
    • Darwin's early notebooks discussed how non-adaptive characteristics could be selected when animals or humans chose mates,[192] with races of humans differing over ideas of beauty.[193] In his 1856 notes responding to Robert Knox's The Races of Man: A Fragment, he called this effect sexual selection. He added notes on sexual selection to his "big book on species", and in mid-1857 he added a section heading "Theory applied to Races of Man", but did not add text on this topic.[195]
    • In On the Origin of Species, Chapter VI: "Difficulties on Theory", Darwin mentions this in the context of "slight and unimportant variations":[196]
    • I might have adduced for this same purpose the differences between the races of man, which are so strongly marked; I may add that some little light can apparently be thrown on the origin of these differences, chiefly through sexual selection of a particular kind, but without here entering on copious details my reasoning would appear frivolous."[196]
    • When Darwin published The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex twelve years later, he said that he had not gone into detail on human evolution in the Origin as he thought that would "only add to the prejudices against my views". He had not completely avoided the topic:[197]
    • It seemed to me sufficient to indicate, in the first edition of my 'Origin of Species,' that by this work 'light would be thrown on the origin of man and his history;' and this implies that man must be included with other organic beings in any general conclusion respecting his manner of appearance on this earth.[197][198]
    • He also said that he had "merely alluded" in that book to sexual selection differentiating human races.[199]
    • Reception [ edit ] The book aroused international interest[201] and a widespread debate, with no sharp line between scientific issues and ideological, social and religious implications.[202] Much of the initial reaction was hostile, in a large part because very few reviewers actually understood his theory,[203] but Darwin had to be taken seriously as a prominent and respected name in science. Samuel Wilberforce wrote a review in Quarterly Review in 1860[204] where he disagreed with Darwin's 'argument'. There was much less controversy than had greeted the 1844 publication Vestiges of Creation, which had been rejected by scientists,[201] but had influenced a wide public readership into believing that nature and human society were governed by natural laws.[31] The Origin of Species as a book of wide general interest became associated with ideas of social reform. Its proponents made full use of a surge in the publication of review journals, and it was given more popular attention than almost any other scientific work, though it failed to match the continuing sales of Vestiges.[205] Darwin's book legitimised scientific discussion of evolutionary mechanisms, and the newly coined term 'Darwinism' was used to cover the whole range of evolutionism, not just his own ideas. By the mid-1870s, evolutionism was triumphant.[202]
    • While Darwin had been somewhat coy about human origins, not identifying any explicit conclusion on the matter in his book, he had dropped enough hints about human's animal ancestry for the inference to be made,[206][207] and the first review claimed it made a creed of the "men from monkeys" idea from Vestiges.[208][209] Human evolution became central to the debate and was strongly argued by Huxley who featured it in his popular "working-men's lectures". Darwin did not publish his own views on this until 1871.[210][211]
    • The naturalism of natural selection conflicted with presumptions of purpose in nature and while this could be reconciled by theistic evolution, other mechanisms implying more progress or purpose were more acceptable. Herbert Spencer had already incorporated Lamarckism into his popular philosophy of progressive free market human society. He popularised the terms 'evolution' and 'survival of the fittest', and many thought Spencer was central to evolutionary thinking.[212]
    • [ edit ] Scientific readers were already aware of arguments that species changed through processes that were subject to laws of nature, but the transmutational ideas of Lamarck and the vague "law of development" of Vestiges had not found scientific favour. Darwin presented natural selection as a scientifically testable mechanism while accepting that other mechanisms such as inheritance of acquired characters were possible. His strategy established that evolution through natural laws was worthy of scientific study, and by 1875, most scientists accepted that evolution occurred but few thought natural selection was significant. Darwin's scientific method was also disputed, with his proponents favouring the empiricism of John Stuart Mill's A System of Logic, while opponents held to the idealist school of William Whewell's Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, in which investigation could begin with the intuitive idea that species were fixed objects created by design.[213] Early support for Darwin's ideas came from the findings of field naturalists studying biogeography and ecology, including Joseph Dalton Hooker in 1860, and Asa Gray in 1862. Henry Walter Bates presented research in 1861 that explained insect mimicry using natural selection. Alfred Russel Wallace discussed evidence from his Malay archipelago research, including an 1864 paper with an evolutionary explanation for the Wallace line.[214]
    • Huxley used illustrations to show that humans and apes had the same basic skeletal structure.
    • [215]Evolution had less obvious applications to anatomy and morphology, and at first had little impact on the research of the anatomist Thomas Henry Huxley.[216] Despite this, Huxley strongly supported Darwin on evolution; though he called for experiments to show whether natural selection could form new species, and questioned if Darwin's gradualism was sufficient without sudden leaps to cause speciation. Huxley wanted science to be secular, without religious interference, and his article in the April 1860 Westminster Review promoted scientific naturalism over natural theology,[217][218] praising Darwin for "extending the domination of Science over regions of thought into which she has, as yet, hardly penetrated" and coining the term "Darwinism" as part of his efforts to secularise and professionalise science.[219] Huxley gained influence, and initiated the X Club, which used the journal Nature to promote evolution and naturalism, shaping much of late-Victorian science. Later, the German morphologist Ernst Haeckel would convince Huxley that comparative anatomy and palaeontology could be used to reconstruct evolutionary genealogies.[216][220]
    • The leading naturalist in Britain was the anatomist Richard Owen, an idealist who had shifted to the view in the 1850s that the history of life was the gradual unfolding of a divine plan.[221] Owen's review of the Origin in the April 1860 Edinburgh Review bitterly attacked Huxley, Hooker and Darwin, but also signalled acceptance of a kind of evolution as a teleological plan in a continuous "ordained becoming", with new species appearing by natural birth. Others that rejected natural selection, but supported "creation by birth", included the Duke of Argyll who explained beauty in plumage by design.[222][223] Since 1858, Huxley had emphasised anatomical similarities between apes and humans, contesting Owen's view that humans were a separate sub-class. Their disagreement over human origins came to the fore at the British Association for the Advancement of Science meeting featuring the legendary 1860 Oxford evolution debate.[224][225] In two years of acrimonious public dispute that Charles Kingsley satirised as the "Great Hippocampus Question" and parodied in The Water-Babies as the "great hippopotamus test", Huxley showed that Owen was incorrect in asserting that ape brains lacked a structure present in human brains.[226] Others, including Charles Lyell and Alfred Russel Wallace, thought that humans shared a common ancestor with apes, but higher mental faculties could not have evolved through a purely material process. Darwin published his own explanation in the Descent of Man (1871).[227]
    • Impact outside Great Britain [ edit ] Haeckel showed a main trunk leading to mankind with minor branches to various animals, unlike Darwin's branching evolutionary tree.
    • [228]Evolutionary ideas, although not natural selection, were accepted by German biologists accustomed to ideas of homology in morphology from Goethe's Metamorphosis of Plants and from their long tradition of comparative anatomy. Bronn's alterations in his German translation added to the misgivings of conservatives, but enthused political radicals. Ernst Haeckel was particularly ardent, aiming to synthesise Darwin's ideas with those of Lamarck and Goethe while still reflecting the spirit of Naturphilosophie.[96][229] Their ambitious programme to reconstruct the evolutionary history of life was joined by Huxley and supported by discoveries in palaeontology. Haeckel used embryology extensively in his recapitulation theory, which embodied a progressive, almost linear model of evolution. Darwin was cautious about such histories, and had already noted that von Baer's laws of embryology supported his idea of complex branching.[228]
    • Asa Gray promoted and defended Origin against those American naturalists with an idealist approach, notably Louis Agassiz who viewed every species as a distinct fixed unit in the mind of the Creator, classifying as species what others considered merely varieties.[230] Edward Drinker Cope and Alpheus Hyatt reconciled this view with evolutionism in a form of neo-Lamarckism involving recapitulation theory.[229]
    • French-speaking naturalists in several countries showed appreciation of the much-modified French translation by Cl(C)mence Royer, but Darwin's ideas had little impact in France, where any scientists supporting evolutionary ideas opted for a form of Lamarckism.[99] The intelligentsia in Russia had accepted the general phenomenon of evolution for several years before Darwin had published his theory, and scientists were quick to take it into account, although the Malthusian aspects were felt to be relatively unimportant. The political economy of struggle was criticised as a British stereotype by Karl Marx and by Leo Tolstoy, who had the character Levin in his novel Anna Karenina voice sharp criticism of the morality of Darwin's views.[95]
    • Challenges to natural selection [ edit ] There were serious scientific objections to the process of natural selection as the key mechanism of evolution, including Karl von N¤geli's insistence that a trivial characteristic with no adaptive advantage could not be developed by selection. Darwin conceded that these could be linked to adaptive characteristics. His estimate that the age of the Earth allowed gradual evolution was disputed by William Thomson (later awarded the title Lord Kelvin), who calculated that it had cooled in less than 100 million years. Darwin accepted blending inheritance, but Fleeming Jenkin calculated that as it mixed traits, natural selection could not accumulate useful traits. Darwin tried to meet these objections in the fifth edition. Mivart supported directed evolution, and compiled scientific and religious objections to natural selection. In response, Darwin made considerable changes to the sixth edition. The problems of the age of the Earth and heredity were only resolved in the 20th century.[87][231]
    • By the mid-1870s, most scientists accepted evolution, but relegated natural selection to a minor role as they believed evolution was purposeful and progressive. The range of evolutionary theories during "the eclipse of Darwinism" included forms of "saltationism" in which new species were thought to arise through "jumps" rather than gradual adaptation, forms of orthogenesis claiming that species had an inherent tendency to change in a particular direction, and forms of neo-Lamarckism in which inheritance of acquired characteristics led to progress. The minority view of August Weismann, that natural selection was the only mechanism, was called neo-Darwinism. It was thought that the rediscovery of Mendelian inheritance invalidated Darwin's views.[232][233]
    • Impact on economic and political debates [ edit ] While some, like Spencer, used analogy from natural selection as an argument against government intervention in the economy to benefit the poor, others, including Alfred Russel Wallace, argued that action was needed to correct social and economic inequities to level the playing field before natural selection could improve humanity further. Some political commentaries, including Walter Bagehot's Physics and Politics (1872), attempted to extend the idea of natural selection to competition between nations and between human races. Such ideas were incorporated into what was already an ongoing effort by some working in anthropology to provide scientific evidence for the superiority of Caucasians over non-white races and justify European imperialism. Historians write that most such political and economic commentators had only a superficial understanding of Darwin's scientific theory, and were as strongly influenced by other concepts about social progress and evolution, such as the Lamarckian ideas of Spencer and Haeckel, as they were by Darwin's work. Darwin objected to his ideas being used to justify military aggression and unethical business practices as he believed morality was part of fitness in humans, and he opposed polygenism, the idea that human races were fundamentally distinct and did not share a recent common ancestry.[234]
    • Religious attitudes [ edit ] The book produced a wide range of religious responses at a time of changing ideas and increasing secularisation. The issues raised were complex and there was a large middle ground. Developments in geology meant that there was little opposition based on a literal reading of Genesis,[235] but defence of the argument from design and natural theology was central to debates over the book in the English-speaking world.[236][237]
    • The liberal theologian
    • Baden Powell defended evolutionary ideas by arguing that the introduction of new species should be considered a natural rather than a miraculous process.
    • [238]Natural theology was not a unified doctrine, and while some such as Louis Agassiz were strongly opposed to the ideas in the book, others sought a reconciliation in which evolution was seen as purposeful.[235] In the Church of England, some liberal clergymen interpreted natural selection as an instrument of God's design, with the cleric Charles Kingsley seeing it as "just as noble a conception of Deity".[239][240] In the second edition of January 1860, Darwin quoted Kingsley as "a celebrated cleric", and added the phrase "by the Creator" to the closing sentence, which from then on read "life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one".[172] While some commentators have taken this as a concession to religion that Darwin later regretted,[84] Darwin's view at the time was of God creating life through the laws of nature,[241][242] and even in the first edition there are several references to "creation".[243]
    • Baden Powell praised "Mr Darwin's masterly volume [supporting] the grand principle of the self-evolving powers of nature".[244] In America, Asa Gray argued that evolution is the secondary effect, or modus operandi, of the first cause, design,[245] and published a pamphlet defending the book in terms of theistic evolution, Natural Selection is not inconsistent with Natural Theology.[239][246][247] Theistic evolution became a popular compromise, and St. George Jackson Mivart was among those accepting evolution but attacking Darwin's naturalistic mechanism. Eventually it was realised that supernatural intervention could not be a scientific explanation, and naturalistic mechanisms such as neo-Lamarckism were favoured over natural selection as being more compatible with purpose.[235]
    • Even though the book did not explicitly spell out Darwin's beliefs about human origins, it had dropped a number of hints about human's animal ancestry[207] and quickly became central to the debate, as mental and moral qualities were seen as spiritual aspects of the immaterial soul, and it was believed that animals did not have spiritual qualities. This conflict could be reconciled by supposing there was some supernatural intervention on the path leading to humans, or viewing evolution as a purposeful and progressive ascent to mankind's position at the head of nature.[235] While many conservative theologians accepted evolution, Charles Hodge argued in his 1874 critique "What is Darwinism?" that "Darwinism", defined narrowly as including rejection of design, was atheism though he accepted that Asa Gray did not reject design.[248][249] Asa Gray responded that this charge misrepresented Darwin's text.[250] By the early 20th century, four noted authors of The Fundamentals were explicitly open to the possibility that God created through evolution,[251] but fundamentalism inspired the American creation''evolution controversy that began in the 1920s. Some conservative Roman Catholic writers and influential Jesuits opposed evolution in the late 19th and early 20th century, but other Catholic writers, starting with Mivart, pointed out that early Church Fathers had not interpreted Genesis literally in this area.[252] The Vatican stated its official position in a 1950 papal encyclical, which held that evolution was not inconsistent with Catholic teaching.[253][254]
    • Modern influence [ edit ] Various alternative evolutionary mechanisms favoured during "the eclipse of Darwinism" became untenable as more was learned about inheritance and mutation. The full significance of natural selection was at last accepted in the 1930s and 1940s as part of the modern evolutionary synthesis. During that synthesis biologists and statisticians, including R. A. Fisher, Sewall Wright and J. B. S. Haldane, merged Darwinian selection with a statistical understanding of Mendelian genetics.[233]
    • Modern evolutionary theory continues to develop. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection, with its tree-like model of branching common descent, has become the unifying theory of the life sciences. The theory explains the diversity of living organisms and their adaptation to the environment. It makes sense of the geological record, biogeography, parallels in embryonic development, biological homologies, vestigiality, cladistics, phylogenetics and other fields, with unrivalled explanatory power; it has also become essential to applied sciences such as medicine and agriculture.[255][256] Despite the scientific consensus, a religion-based political controversy has developed over how evolution is taught in schools, especially in the United States.[257]
    • Interest in Darwin's writings continues, and scholars have generated an extensive literature, the Darwin Industry, about his life and work. The text of Origin itself has been subject to much analysis including a variorum, detailing the changes made in every edition, first published in 1959,[258] and a concordance, an exhaustive external index published in 1981.[259] Worldwide commemorations of the 150th anniversary of the publication of On the Origin of Species and the bicentenary of Darwin's birth were scheduled for 2009.[260] They celebrated the ideas which "over the last 150 years have revolutionised our understanding of nature and our place within it".[261]
    • In a survey conducted by a group of academic booksellers, publishers and librarians in advance of Academic Book Week in the United Kingdom, On the Origin of Species was voted the most influential academic book ever written.[262] It was hailed as "the supreme demonstration of why academic books matter" and "a book which has changed the way we think about everything".[263]
    • See also [ edit ] On the Origin of Species '' full text at Wikisource of the first edition, 1859The Origin of Species '' full text at Wikisource of the 6th edition, 1872Charles Darwin bibliographyHistory of biologyHistory of evolutionary thoughtHistory of speciationModern evolutionary synthesisThe Complete Works of Charles Darwin OnlineThe Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex, published in 1871; his second major book on evolutionary theory.Transmutation of speciesReferences [ edit ] ^ Darwin 1859, p. iii ^ a b c d e Freeman 1977 ^ a b c The book's full original title was On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. In the 1872 sixth edition, "On" was omitted, so the full title is The origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. This edition is usually known as The Origin of Species. The 6th is Darwin's final edition; there were minor modifications in the text of certain subsequent issues. See Freeman, R. B. "The works of Charles Darwin: an annotated bibliographical handlist." In Van Wyhe, John, ed. Darwin Online: On the Origin of Species, 2002. ^ "Darwin Manuscripts (Digitised notes on Origin)". Cambridge Digital Library . Retrieved 24 November 2014 . ^ Mayr 1982, pp. 479''480 ^ Darwin 1872, p. xiii ^ Aristotle, Physics, translated by Hardie, R. P. and Gayle, R. K. and hosted by MIT's Internet Classics Archive , retrieved 23 April 2009 ^ Forster & Marston 1999, pp. 26''27 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 27, 43, 45 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 27''36, 39''42, 57''62, 67, 70, 77''80 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 84''90 ^ Desmond 1989, pp. 47''54 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 111''114 ^ Browne 1995, pp. 91, 129 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 115''117 ^ Desmond & Moore 1991, pp. 34''35 ^ Browne 1995, pp. 80''88 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 148''149 ^ Browne 1995, pp. 133''140 ^ Larson 2004, pp. 56''62 ^ Darwin 1845, pp. 205''208 ^ Browne 1995, pp. 244''250 ^ Keynes 2000, pp. xix''xx ^ Eldredge 2006 ^ Quammen 2006, pp. 24''25 ^ Herbert 1980, pp. 7''10 ^ van Wyhe 2008, p. 44 ^ Darwin's Notebook B: Transmutation of species. pp. 1''13, 26, 36, 74 , retrieved 16 March 2009 ^ Desmond & Moore 1991, pp. 240''244 ^ a b c d van Wyhe 2009 ^ Larson 2004, pp. 66''70 ^ Darwin's Notebook D: Transmutation of species. pp. 134''135 , retrieved 8 April 2009 ^ Darwin's Notebook E: Transmutation of species. p. 75 , retrieved 14 March 2009 ^ a b van Wyhe 2007, pp. 186''187 ^ Browne 1995, p. 436 ^ Darwin 1958, p. 120 ^ Desmond & Moore 1991, p. 292 ^ Browne 1995, pp. 436''437 ^ van Wyhe 2007, p. 188 ^ Darwin Correspondence Project '' Letter 814'--Darwin, C. R. to Hooker, J. D., (7 January 1845) , retrieved 24 November 2008 ^ Browne 1995, pp. 461''465 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 135''140 ^ a b Bowler 2003, pp. 169''173 ^ Darwin 1958, pp. 117''121 ^ Quammen 2006, pp. 138''142 ^ Darwin 1958, p. 124 ^ a b van Wyhe 2007 ^ Quammen 2006, pp. 84''92 ^ Wallace, Alfred R. (1855), "On the law which has regulated the introduction of new species", Annals and Magazine of Natural History, 16 (93): 184''196, doi:10.1080/037454809495509 ^ a b Quammen 2006, pp. 135''158 ^ "Darwin in letters, 1856''1857: the 'Big Book' ". Darwin Correspondence Project. 12 June 2015 . Retrieved 21 March 2016 . "Letter 1870 '' Darwin, C. R., to Hooker, J.D., 9 May (1856)". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 21 March 2016 . ^ Darwin Correspondence Project '' Letter 2285'--Darwin to Lyell (June 1858), archived from the original on 28 August 2007 , retrieved 15 March 2008 ^ Larson 2004, pp. 74''75 ^ Quammen 2006, pp. 162''163 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 175''176 ^ Bowler 2013, pp. 61''63 ^ a b c "Darwin in letters, 1858''1859: Origin". Darwin Correspondence Project. 2 June 2015 . Retrieved 17 January 2017 . ^ "Letter 2303 '-- Darwin, C. R. to Hooker, J. D., 5 July (1858)". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 7 September 2010 . ^ Darwin 2006, pp. 36 verso ^ "Letter 2432 '-- Darwin, C. R. to Hooker, J. D., 15 March (1859)". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 7 September 2010 . It [geographical distribution] was nearly all written from memory ^ "Letter 2339 '-- Darwin, C. R. to Hooker, J. D., 12 (October 1858)". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 17 January 2017 . See letter to T. C. Eyton, 4 October (1858), in which CD first mentioned the possibility that his 'abstract' would form a small volume. ^ a b "Letter 2437 '-- Darwin, C. R. to Lyell, Charles, 28 March (1859)". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 16 January 2017 . Would you advise me to tell Murray that my Book is not more un-orthodox, than the subject makes inevitable. That I do not discuss origin of man.'-- That I do not bring in any discussions about Genesis &c, & only give facts, & such conclusions from them, as seem to me fair. Darwin, C. R. proposed title page for Origin of species draft. (1859) APS-B-D25.L[.38] Transcribed by Kees Rookmaaker, edited by John van Wyhe ^ "Letter 2439 '-- Darwin, C. R. to Lyell, Charles, 30 March (1859)". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 16 January 2017 . ^ "Letter 2441 '-- Darwin, C. R. to Murray, John (b), 31 March (1859)". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 16 January 2017 . ^ "Letter 2443 '-- Murray, John (b) to Darwin, C. R., 1 April 1859". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 16 January 2017 . ^ "Letter 2445 '-- Darwin, C. R. to Murray, John (b), 2 April (1859)". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 16 January 2017 . ^ "Charles Darwin and his publisher". Darwin Correspondence Project. 2010. Archived from the original on 7 October 2010 . Retrieved 7 September 2010 . ^ "Letter 2447 '-- Darwin, C. R. to Murray, John (b), 5 April (1859)". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 16 January 2017 . ^ Darwin, C. R. [early draft title of Origin] On the mutability of species [& other notes] CUL-DAR205.1.70 Transcribed by Kees Rookmaaker, edited by John van Wyhe ^ "Letter 2457A '-- Elwin, Whitwell, to Murray, John (b), 3 May 1859". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 16 January 2017 . ^ "Letter 2459 '-- Darwin, C. R. to Murray, John (b), 6 May (1859)". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 16 January 2017 . ^ "Letter 2448 '-- Darwin, C. R. to Murray, John (b), 10 September (1859)". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 16 January 2017 . ^ "Defining Evolution". National Center for Science Education. 24 August 2000 . Retrieved 27 June 2016 . ^ Robert Bernasconi; Tommy Lee Lott (2000). The Idea of Race. Hackett Publishing. p. 54. ISBN 0-87220-458-8. The full title [of the book] employs the term 'race' only in the broad biological use of the word, which refers to varieties throughout organic life; however, speculation about the implications of his views specifically for the question of the human races began almost as soon as the book was published. ^ Sober 2011, p. 45, Quote: "There nonetheless are a few cases in which Darwin does discuss selection processes in which groups are the units, and these will be the focus of the present chapter. But even here it does not matter whether the groups are from different 'races' or from the same race. It is nests of honeybees that compete with each other, and human tribes that compete with other human tribes. For Darwin, the question of group selection had nothing special to do with 'race.' Still, writing in the heyday of empire, Darwin saw European nations outcompeting the nations, kingdoms, and tribes that occupy the rest of the globe. In this one very salient example, Darwin did see races struggling with each other. In any event, the word race in Darwin's subtitle needs to be understood very broadly; it encompasses competition among individuals, competition among groups in the same 'race,' and competition from groups from different 'races.' This is a much broader meaning than the word 'race' tends to have today." ^ Darwin 1859, p. 15 ^ the three instances of the phrase "races of man" are found on Darwin 1859, pp. 199, 382, 422 ^ Dupree, A. Hunter (1988). Asa Gray, American Botanist, Friend of Darwin. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. p. 267. ISBN 978-0-801-83741-8. ^ Browne 2002, p. 89 ^ Darwin 1958, p. 122 ^ a b c Browne 2002, pp. 95''96 ^ Darwin 1861, p. xiii ^ "This survival of the fittest, which I have here sought to express in mechanical terms, is that which Mr. Darwin has called 'natural selection', or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life." Spencer 1864, pp. 1345, 817, 57&source=bookclip 444''445 ^ a b Mivart 1871 ^ Browne 2002, p. 59 ^ Freeman 1977, pp. 79''80. "Evolution" in the transformist sense had been used by Charles Lyell in 1832, Principles of Geology vol 2, p. 11; and was used by Darwin in The Descent of Man in 1871, p. 2 onwards. ^ a b Desmond & Moore 1991, pp. 577, 582, 590, 592''593 ^ Darwin Correspondence Project '' Letter 2592'--Darwin, C. R. to Gray, Asa, 21 December (1859), archived from the original on 13 February 2009 , retrieved 6 December 2008 ^ Darwin Correspondence Project '' Letter 2665'--Darwin, C. R. to Gray, Asa, 28 January (1860), archived from the original on 13 February 2009 , retrieved 6 December 2008 ^ Darwin Correspondence Project '' Letter 2706'--Gray, Asa to Darwin, C. R., 20 February 1860, archived from the original on 13 February 2009 , retrieved 6 December 2008 ^ Desmond & Moore 1991, p. 492 ^ a b c Browne 2002, pp. 256''259 ^ a b Browne 2002, pp. 140''142 ^ a b Darwin Correspondence Project '' The correspondence of Charles Darwin, volume 10: 1862, archived from the original on 5 June 2010 , retrieved 6 March 2009 ^ Darwin Correspondence Project '' The correspondence of Charles Darwin, volume 14: 1866 , retrieved 6 March 2009 ^ a b Browne 2002, pp. 142''144 ^ Ch. Darwin, Het ontstaan der soorten van dieren en planten door middel van de natuurkeus of het bewaard blijven van bevoorregte rassen in de strijd des levens, transl. by T.C. Winkler (Haarlem 1860) Source: Teyler, Winkler, Darwin Archived 2 December 2011 at the Wayback Machine Lecture by Marijn van Hoorn MA at the Congress of the European Botanical and Horticultural Libraries Group, Prague, 23 April 2009 ^ "Freeman Bibliographic Database". ^ Freeman 1977, pp. 83, 100''111 ^ Freeman 1977, p. 100 ^ Jin, Xiaoxing (2018). "Translation and transmutation: the Origin of Species in China". The British Journal for the History of Science. 52 (1): 117''141. doi:10.1017/s0007087418000808. PMID 30587253. S2CID 58605626. ^ Darwin 1859, p. ii ^ Phipps 1983 ^ Secord 2000, p. 510 ^ van Wyhe 2007, p. 197 ^ Darwin 1859, p. 1 ^ Darwin 1859, p. 5 ^ Darwin & Costa 2009, p. 1 ^ Darwin 1861, p. xiii ^ Darwin 1866, pp. xiv''xv ^ Darwin & Costa 2009, p. 7 ^ a b Quammen 2006, pp. 184''186 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 20''28 ^ a b David Reznick (2009) The Origin Then and Now, Princeton University Press, p.49. ^ Winther, Rasmus G. (2000), "Darwin on Variation and heredity", Journal of the History of Biology" 33, pp. 425''455 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 44''59 Chap. II ^ Darwin & Costa 2009, p. 44 ^ a b Darwin 1859, pp. 60''61 Chap. III ^ Darwin 1869, p. 72 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 62''76 ^ Darwin 1859, p. 80 ^ Darwin 1859, p. 112 ^ Quammen 2006, p. 189 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 87''101 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 117''130 ^ Larson 2004, p. 85 ^ Darwin 1859, p. 13 ^ Darwin 1859, p. 134 ^ Larson 2004, pp. 86''87 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 131''150 ^ Quammen 2006, pp. 159''167 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 159''167 ^ Richard Dawkins (8 February 2003). "An early flowering of genetics, Books". The Guardian. UK . Retrieved 24 October 2010 . ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 200''201 ^ Bowler 1989 ^ McBride, P. D., Gillman, L. N., & Wright, S. D. (2009). Current debates on the origin of species. Journal of Biological Education, 43(3), 104''107. ^ Darwin 1859, p. 171 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 171''178 ^ Darwin 1859, p. 172 ^ Bernstein H.; Byerly H.C.; Hopf F.A.; Michod R.E. (December 1985). "Sex and the emergence of species". J. Theor. Biol. 117 (4): 665''90. Bibcode:1985JThBi.117..665B. doi:10.1016/S0022-5193(85)80246-0. PMID 4094459. ^ Michod, Richard E. (1995). Eros and evolution: a natural philosophy of sex . Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley Pub. Co. ISBN 0-201-44232-9. ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 171''172 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 180''181 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 187''190 ^ Darwin & Costa 2009, pp. 194''199Darwin 1859, pp. 197''199, Quote: "We are profoundly ignorant of the causes producing slight and unimportant variations; and we are immediately made conscious of this by reflecting on the differences in the breeds of our domesticated animals in different countries" ^ Darwin & Costa 2009, p. 199Darwin 1874, p. vi, Quote: "'... I gave, however, a tolerably clear sketch of this principle in the first edition of the 'Origin of Species,' and I there stated that it was applicable to man." ^ Darwin 1859, p. 199 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 243''244 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 245''278 ^ Darwin 1872, pp. 168''205 ^ a b c Bowler 2003, p. 182 ^ a b Wesley R. Elsberry (1996), Punctuated Equilibria , retrieved 30 April 2009 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 282''287 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 306''308 ^ Schopf 2000 ^ a b Darwin 1859, pp. 312''345 ^ Rhodes 1987 ^ Darwin & Costa 2009, p. 108 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 350''351 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 346''382 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 408''409 ^ Darwin 1859, p. 420 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 434''435 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 450''451 ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 484''488, Quote: "When the views entertained in this volume on the origin of species, or when analogous views are generally admitted, we can dimly foresee that there will be a considerable revolution in natural history. ..." ^ Darwin 1859, p. 488Darwin 1871, p. 1, Quote: "'... this implies that man must be included with other organic beings in any general conclusion respecting his manner of appearance on this earth." ^ Darwin 1859, pp. 489''490 ^ a b Darwin 1860, p. 490 ^ Darwin 1871, p. 152 ^ a b c Secord 2000, pp. 508''511 ^ Quammen 2006, pp. 183''188 ^ a b Bowler 2003, pp. 180''181 ^ Quammen 2006, pp. 190, 200''201 ^ Larson 2004, pp. 88''89 ^ Darwin & Costa 2009, p. xvii ^ Crawford 1859 ^ Quammen 2006, pp. 176''181 ^ Darwin & Costa 2009, p. ix ^ a b c Carroll, Joseph (2003). On the Origin of Species / Charles Darwin. Broadview Press. pp. 51''52. ISBN 1-55111-337-6. Following Darwin's lead, most commentators cite this one passage as the only reference to man in the Origin, but they thus overlook, as did Darwin himself, two sentences that are, in their own quiet way, even more effective. ^ Browne 2007, p. 42, quoting Darwin, C. R. Notebook C (February to July 1838) pp. 196''197 "Man in his arrogance thinks himself a great work worthy the interposition of a deity, more humble & I believe truer to consider him created from animals." ^ Desmond & Moore 1991, pp. 412''441, 457''458, 462''463Desmond & Moore 2009, pp. 283''284, 290''292, 295 ^ "Letter 2192 '' Darwin, C. R. to Wallace, A. R., 22 December 1857". Darwin Correspondence Project. ^ Darwin 1871, p. 488 ^ "Letter 2647 '' Darwin, C. R. to Charles Lyell, 10 January (1860)". Darwin Correspondence Project . Retrieved 18 September 2017 . ^ For example, Browne 2002, p. 60, "In this book, he was completely silent on the subject of human origins, although he did refer in several places to mankind as an example of biological details. The only words he allowed himself'--and these out of a sense of duty that he must somewhere refer to human beings''were gnomic in their brevity. 'Light will be thrown on the origin of man and his history'." ^ Darwin 1859, p. 64, Quote: "There is no exception to the rule that every organic being naturally increases at so high a rate, that if not destroyed, the earth would soon be covered by the progeny of a single pair. Even slow-breeding man has doubled in twenty-five years, and at this rate, in a few thousand years, there would literally not be standing room for his progeny." ^ van Wyhe 2008Darwin 1859, p. 434, Quote: "What can be more curious than that the hand of a man, formed for grasping, that of a mole for digging, the leg of the horse, the paddle of the porpoise, and the wing of the bat, should all be constructed on the same pattern, and should include the same bones, in the same relative positions?"Darwin 1859, p. 479, Quote: "The framework of bones being the same in the hand of a man, wing of a bat, fin of the porpoise, and leg of the horse '... at once explain themselves on the theory of descent with slow and slight successive modifications." ^ Darwin, C. R. Notebook C, CUL-DAR122.- Transcribed by Kees Rookmaaker. (Darwin Online), notes from de Beer, Gavin ed. 1960. Darwin's notebooks on transmutation of species. Part II. Second notebook [C] (February to July 1838). Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History). Historical Series 2, No. 3 (May): pp. 79 ^ Desmond & Moore 2009, pp. 139''141, quotes "our acquiring the instinct one notion of beauty & negroes another" from Darwin, C. R. Notebook M : [Metaphysics on morals and speculations on expression (1838)]. CUL-DAR125.- Transcribed by Kees Rookmaaker, edited by Paul Barrett. (Darwin Online, p. 32 ^ Desmond & Moore 2009, pp. 290''291 Stauffer, R. C. ed. 1975. Charles Darwin's Natural Selection; being the second part of his big species book written from 1856 to 1858. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. p. 213 Chapter Vi On Natural Selection first draft, completed on 31 March 1857, [The outline of this original form of the chapter appears in the original table of contents] "63 [pencil addition] Theory applied to Races of Man." ^ a b Darwin 1859, pp. 197''199 ^ a b Darwin 1871, p. 1, Quote: "During many years I collected notes on the origin or descent of man, without any intention of publishing on the subject, but rather with the determination not to publish, as I thought that I should thus only add to the prejudices against my views." ^ See also Darwin 1958, pp. 130''131, Quote: "My Descent of Man was published in Feb. 1871. As soon as I had become, in the year 1837 or 1838, convinced that species were mutable productions, I could not avoid the belief that man must come under the same law. Accordingly I collected notes on the subject for my own satisfaction, and not for a long time with any intention of publishing. Although in the Origin of Species, the derivation of any particular species is never discussed, yet I thought it best, in order that no honourable man should accuse me of concealing my views, to add that by the work in question 'light would be thrown on the origin of man and his history.' It would have been useless and injurious to the success of the book to have paraded without giving any evidence my conviction with respect to his origin." ^ Darwin 1871, pp. 4''5, Quote: "During many years it has seemed to me highly probable that sexual selection has played an important part in differentiating the races of man; but in my 'Origin of Species' (first edition, p. 199) I contented myself by merely alluding to this belief." ^ Browne 2002, pp. 376''379 ^ a b van Wyhe 2008, pp. 48''49 ^ a b Bowler 2003, pp. 177''180 ^ "Darwin in letters, 1860: Answering critics". 2 June 2015. ^ Wilberforce, Samuel. "[review of] On the origin of species, by means of natural selection; or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. By Charles Darwin, M. A., F.R.S. London, 1860. Quarterly Review 108: 225''264". darwin-online.org.uk . Retrieved 24 March 2019 . ^ Browne 2002, pp. 102''103 ^ Darwin & Costa 2009, p. 488 ^ a b Radick 2013, pp. 174''175Huxley & Kettlewell 1965, p. 88 ^ Browne 2002, p. 87 ^ Leifchild 1859 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 207''209 ^ Huxley 1863 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 203''207, 220''222 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 179''180, 197''198 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 183''184, 189 ^ Bowler 2003, p. 208 ^ a b Bowler 2003, pp. 184''185 ^ Browne 2002, pp. 105''106 ^ Huxley 1860 ^ Bowler 2003, p. 184 ^ Larson 2004, p. 108 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 124''126 ^ Desmond & Moore 1991, pp. 490''491, 545''547 ^ Secord 2000, p. 512 ^ Lucas 1979 ^ Desmond & Moore 1991, pp. 464''465, 493''499 ^ Browne 2002, pp. 160''161 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 208''211, 214''216 ^ a b Bowler 2003, pp. 169''170, 190''192 ^ a b Bowler 2003, pp. 186''187, 237, 241 ^ Dupree, pp. 216''232 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 198''200, 234''236 ^ Bowler 2003, p. 225 ^ a b Quammen 2006, pp. 205''234 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 294''307 ^ a b c d Bowler 2003, pp. 202''208 ^ Dewey 1994, p. 26 ^ Larson 2004, pp. 89''92 ^ Bowler 2003, p. 139 ^ a b Darwin and design: historical essay, Darwin Correspondence Project, 2007, archived from the original on 21 October 2014 , retrieved 17 September 2008 ^ Darwin Correspondence Project '' Letter 2534'--Kingsley, Charles to Darwin, C. R., 18 November 1859, archived from the original on 29 June 2009 , retrieved 11 April 2009 ^ Quammen 2006, p. 119 ^ Moore 2006 ^ Barlow 1963, p. 207 ^ Desmond & Moore 1991, pp. 487''488, 500 ^ Dewey 1994, p. 27 ^ Miles 2001 ^ Gray, Asa (1860), "Natural Selection is not inconsistent with Natural Theology", Atlantic Monthly, Darwin Correspondence Project '' Essay: Natural selection & natural theology, archived from the original on 20 February 2009 , retrieved 11 April 2009 ^ Forster & Marston 1999, pp. 37''40 ^ Hodge 1874, p. 177 ^ Gray, Asa (28 May 1874), "What is Darwinism?", The Nation, Darwin Correspondence Project, archived from the original on 26 February 2009 , retrieved 3 March 2009 ^ Forster & Marston 1999, pp. 41''43 ^ Bowler 2003, pp. 323''324 ^ Pius XII (1950), Humani generis, Vatican , retrieved 8 June 2009 ^ Kreeft 2001, p. 49 ^ Biography, The Complete Works of Charles Darwin Online, 21 January 2009 , retrieved 23 April 2009 ^ Larson 2004, pp. 287''288, 295 ^ Darwin & Costa 2009, p. x ^ Peckham 1959, recently reprinted. ^ Quammen 2006, pp. 179, 271''283 ^ The ISTC of On the Origin of Species is A02-2009-00000001-4. As a tribute to its influence, this work has been the first one to be registered by The International ISTC Agency. ^ Darwin 200: Celebrating Charles Darwin's bicentenary '' What is Darwin200?, The Natural History Museum, archived from the original on 28 February 2009 , retrieved 23 April 2009 ^ "Darwin's 'Origin of Species' Voted Most Influential Academic Book". Tia Ghose. 11 November 2015 . Retrieved 2 February 2017 . ^ "On the Origin of Species voted most influential academic book in history". Alison Flood. 10 November 2015 . Retrieved 2 February 2017 . Works cited [ edit ] Barlow, Nora, ed. (1963), "Darwin's Ornithological Notes", Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History) Historical Series, vol. 2, no. 7, pp. 201''278 , retrieved 10 June 2009 Bowler, Peter J. (1989), "The Mendelian Revolution: The Emergence of Hereditarian Concepts in Modern Science and Society", The Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine, Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 63 (4): 335, ISBN 0-485-11375-9, PMC 2589185 Bowler, Peter J (1996), Charles Darwin : the man and his influence, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0-521-56668-1 Bowler, Peter J. (2003), Evolution: The History of an Idea (3rd ed.), University of California Press, ISBN 0-520-23693-9 Bowler, Peter J. (2013), Darwin Deleted: Imagining a World without Darwin, The University of Chicago Press, ISBN 978-0-226-00984-1 Browne, E. Janet (1995), Charles Darwin: Vol. 1 Voyaging, London: Jonathan Cape, ISBN 1-84413-314-1 Browne, E. Janet (2002), Charles Darwin: Vol. 2 The Power of Place, London: Jonathan Cape, ISBN 0-7126-6837-3 Crawford, J. (1859), "(Review of) On the Origin of Species", Examiner: 722''723 . Published anonymously.Darwin, Charles (1845), Journal of Researches into the Natural History and Geology of the Countries Visited During the Voyage of HMS Beagle Round the World, Under the Command of Captain Fitz Roy, R.N. (2nd ed.), London: John Murray , retrieved 22 April 2009 Darwin, Charles (1859), On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (1st ed.), London: John Murray, p. 502 , retrieved 1 March 2011 Full image viewDarwin, Charles (1860), On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (2nd ed.), London: John Murray , retrieved 9 January 2009 Darwin, Charles (1861), On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (3rd ed.), London: John Murray , retrieved 9 January 2009 Darwin, Charles (1866), On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (4th ed.), London: John Murray , retrieved 22 February 2009 Darwin, Charles (1869), On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (5th ed.), London: John Murray , retrieved 22 February 2009 Darwin, Charles (1871), The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (1st ed.), London: John Murray , retrieved 29 April 2009 Darwin, Charles (1872), The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (6th ed.), London: John Murray , retrieved 9 January 2009 Darwin, Charles (1874), The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (2nd ed.), London: John Murray , retrieved 8 January 2017 Darwin, Charles (1958), Barlow, Nora (ed.), The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809''1882. With the Original Omissions Restored. Edited and with Appendix and Notes by his Granddaughter Nora Barlow, London: Collins , retrieved 9 January 2009 Darwin, Charles (2006), "Journal", in van Wyhe, John (ed.), Darwin's personal 'Journal' (1809''1881), Darwin Online, CUL-DAR158.1''76 , retrieved 7 September 2010 Darwin, Charles; Costa, James T. (2009), The Annotated Origin: A Facsimile of the First Edition of On the Origin of Species Annotated by James T. Costa, Cambridge, Massachusetts, and London, England: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, ISBN 978-0-674-03281-1 Desmond, Adrian (1989), The Politics of Evolution: Morphology, Medicine, and Reform in Radical London , Chicago: University of Chicago Press, ISBN 0-226-14374-0 Desmond, Adrian; Moore, James (1991), Darwin, London: Michael Joseph, Penguin Group, ISBN 0-7181-3430-3 Desmond, Adrian; Moore, James (2009), Darwin's sacred cause : race, slavery and the quest for human origins , London: Allen Lane, ISBN 978-1-84614-035-8 Dewey, John (1994), "The Influence of Darwinism on Philosophy", in Martin Gardner (ed.), Great Essays in Science, Prometheus Books, ISBN 0-87975-853-8 Eldredge, Niles (2006), "Confessions of a Darwinist", The Virginia Quarterly Review, no. Spring 2006, pp. 32''53 , retrieved 4 November 2008 Forster, Roger; Marston, Dr Paul (1999), "Genesis Through History", Reason Science and Faith (Ivy Cottage: E-Books ed.), Chester, England: Monarch Books, ISBN 1-85424-441-8 Freeman, Richard B. (1977), "On the Origin of Species", The Works of Charles Darwin: An Annotated Bibliographical Handlist (2nd ed.), Folkestone, England: Dawson, ISBN 0-7129-0740-8 Herbert, Sandra, ed. (1980), "The Red Notebook of Charles Darwin", Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History), Historical Series, 7: 1''164 Also available here [1]Hodge, Charles (1874), What is Darwinism?, Scribner Armstrong , retrieved 14 January 2007 Huxley, Julian; Kettlewell, H.B.D. (1965). Charles Darwin and His World. New York: the Viking Press. Huxley, Thomas Henry (1860), "Darwin on the Origin of Species", Westminster Review, 17 (April 1860): 541''570 . Published anonymously.Huxley, Thomas (1863), Six Lectures to Working Men "On Our Knowledge of the Causes of the Phenomena of Organic Nature" (Republished in Volume II of his Collected Essays, Darwiniana) , retrieved 15 December 2006 Keynes, Richard, ed. (2000), Charles Darwin's Zoology Notes & Specimen Lists from HMS Beagle, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0-521-67350-X Kreeft, Peter (2001), Catholic Christianity, San Francisco: Ignatius Press, ISBN 0-89870-798-6 Larson, Edward J. (2004), Evolution: The Remarkable History of a Scientific Theory, New York: Modern Library, ISBN 0-8129-6849-2 Leifchild (19 November 1859), "Review of 'Origin' ", Athenaeum, no. 1673 , retrieved 22 November 2008 Lucas, John R. (1979), "Wilberforce and Huxley: A Legendary Encounter", The Historical Journal, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 313''330, doi:10.1017/S0018246X00016848, PMID 11617072, S2CID 19198585 , retrieved 22 November 2008 Mayr, Ernst (1982), The Growth of Biological Thought, Harvard University Press, ISBN 0-674-36446-5 Miles, Sara Joan (2001), "Charles Darwin and Asa Gray Discuss Teleology and Design", Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, vol. 53, pp. 196''201 , retrieved 22 November 2008 Mivart, St. George Jackson (1871), On the Genesis of Species , New York: Appleton Moore, James (2006), Evolution and Wonder '' Understanding Charles Darwin, Speaking of Faith (Radio Program), American Public Media, archived from the original on 22 December 2008 , retrieved 22 November 2008 Phipps, William E. (1983), "Darwin, the Scientific Creationist", Christian Century (14''21 September 1983): 809''811, archived from the original on 8 January 2007 , retrieved 11 January 2007 Peckham, Morse, ed. (1959), The Origin of Species: a variorum text (2006 reprint ed.), Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press., ISBN 978-0-8122-1954-8 Quammen, David (2006), The Reluctant Mr. Darwin, New York: Atlas Books, ISBN 0-393-05981-2 Radick, Gregory (2013). "Darwin and Humans". In Ruse, Michael (ed.). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Darwin and Evolutionary Thought. Cambridge University Press. pp. 173''181. Rhodes, Frank H. T. (June 1987), "Darwinian Gradualism and Its Limits: The development of Darwin's Views on the Rate and Pattern of Evolutionary Change", Journal of the History of Biology, Humanities, Social Sciences and Law, Springer Netherlands (published 6 November 2004), vol. 20, no. 2, pp. 139''157, doi:10.1007/BF00138435, S2CID 84054280 Richards, Evelleen (2017), Darwin and the making of sexual selection, The University of Chicago Press, ISBN 978-0-226-43706-4, OCLC 956947766 Schopf, J. William (2000), "Solution to Darwin's dilemma: Discovery of the missing Precambrian record of life", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 97 (13): 6947''6953, Bibcode:2000PNAS...97.6947S, doi:10.1073/pnas.97.13.6947 , PMC 34368 , PMID 10860955 Secord, James A. (2000), Victorian Sensation: The Extraordinary Publication, Reception, and Secret Authorship of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, ISBN 0-226-74411-6 Sober, Elliott (2011), Did Darwin Write the Origin Backwards?: Philosophical Essays on Darwin's Theory, Amherst: Prometheus Books, ISBN 978-1-61614-278-0 Spencer, Herbert (1864), The Principles of Biology, Vol. 1, London: Williams and Norgate van Wyhe, John (2007), "Mind the gap: Did Darwin Avoid Publishing his Theory for Many Years?", Notes and Records of the Royal Society, 61 (2): 177''205, doi:10.1098/rsnr.2006.0171, S2CID 202574857 , retrieved 5 January 2009 van Wyhe, John (2008), Darwin: The Story of the Man and His Theories of Evolution, London: Andre Deutsch, ISBN 978-0-233-00251-4 van Wyhe, John (2009), Charles Darwin: Gentleman Naturalist: A Biographical Sketch, The Complete Works of Charles Darwin Online , retrieved 6 June 2009 Further reading [ edit ] Browne, Janet (2007), Darwin's Origin of Species: A Biography, Grove Press, ISBN 978-0-87113-953-5 Malthus, Thomas Robert (1826), An Essay on the Principle of Population: A View of its Past and Present Effects on Human Happiness; with an Inquiry into Our Prospects Respecting the Future Removal or Mitigation of the Evils which It Occasions, vol. 1 (6th ed.), London: John Murray , retrieved 13 November 2017 (Vol. 2)Reznick, David N. (2009), The Origin Then and Now: An Interpretive Guide to the Origin of Species, Princeton University Press, ISBN 978-0-691-12978-5 Schopf, J. William; Scheibel, Arnold B. (1997), The Origin and Evolution of Intelligence, Boston: Jones and Bartlett, ISBN 0-7637-0365-6 van Hoorn, Marijn (2009), Teyler, Winkler, Darwin (Lecture given at the Congress of the European Botanical and Horticultural Libraries Group, Prague, 23 April 2009) , Teyler Net (Weblog of the Teylers Museum, Haarlem), archived from the original on 2 December 2011 , retrieved 27 April 2010 Contemporary reviews [ edit ] Carpenter, William Benjamin (1859), "Darwin on the Origin of Species", National Review, vol. 10, no. December 1859, pp. 188''214 . Published anonymously.Gray, Asa (1860), "(Review of) The Origin of Species", Athenaeum (1710: 4 August 1860): 161 . Extract from Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 4 (1860): 411''415.Huxley, Thomas Henry (1859), "Time and Life: Mr Darwin's Origin of Species", Macmillan's Magazine, 1: 142''148 .Huxley, Thomas Henry (1859), "Darwin on the Origin of Species", The Times (26 December 1859): 8''9 . Published anonymously.Jenkin, Fleeming (1867), "(Review of) The Origin of Species", North British Review, 46 (June 1867): 277''318 . Published anonymously.Murray, Andrew (1860), "On Mr Darwin's Theory of the Origin of Species", Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 4: 274''291, doi:10.1017/S0370164600034246 .Owen, Richard (1860), "Review of Darwin's Origin of Species", Edinburgh Review, 3 (April 1860): 487''532 . Published anonymously.Wilberforce, Samuel (1860), "(Review of) On the Origin of Species, by means of Natural Selection; or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life", Quarterly Review, 108 (215: July 1860): 225''264 . Published anonymously.For further reviews, see Darwin Online: Reviews & Responses to Darwin, Darwin Online, 10 March 2009 , retrieved 18 June 2009 External links [ edit ] Wikisource has original text related to this article:
    • The Complete Works of Charles Darwin Online:Table of contents, bibliography of On the Origin of Species '' links to text and images of all six British editions of The Origin of Species, the 6th edition with additions and corrections (final text), the first American edition, and translations into Danish, Dutch, French, German, Polish, Russian and SpanishOnline Variorum, showing every change between the six British editionsOn the Origin of Species at Standard EbooksOn the Origin of Species eBook provided by Project Gutenberg On the Origin of Species public domain audiobook at LibriVoxOn the Origin of Species on In Our Time at the BBCOn the Origin of Species, full text with embedded audioA collection of Victorian Science TextsDarwin Correspondence Project Home Page, University Library, CambridgeView online at the Biodiversity Heritage Library On the Origin of Species 1860 American edition, D Appleton and Company, New York, with front insert by H. E. Barker, LincolnianaDarwin's notes on the creation of On the Origin of Species digitised in Cambridge Digital Library
  • Francis Galton - Wikipedia
    • Link to Article
    • Archived Version
    • Sat, 16 Jul 2022 20:10
    •  
    • English polymath (1822''1911)
    • Francis Galton
    • Born ( 1822-02-16 ) 16 February 1822Died17 January 1911 (1911-01-17) (aged 88)Resting placeClaverdon, Warwickshire, EnglandNationalityBritishAlma materKing's College, LondonTrinity College, CambridgeKnown forEugenicsBehavioural geneticsRegression toward the meanStandard deviationAnticycloneIsochrone mapWeather mapGalton boardGalton distributionGalton''Watson processGalton's problemGalton's whistle
    • Awards Royal Geographical Society's Founder's Medal (1853)Royal Medal (1886)Huxley Memorial Medal (1901)Darwin''Wallace Medal (Silver, 1908)Copley Medal (1910) Scientific careerFieldsAnthropology, Sociology, Psychology, StatisticsInstitutionsMeteorological CouncilRoyal Geographical SocietyAcademic advisorsWilliam HopkinsNotable studentsKarl PearsonAuthor abbrev. (zoology)F. Galton, GaltonSir Francis Galton, FRS FRAI (; 16 February 1822 '' 17 January 1911), was an English Victorian era polymath: a statistician, sociologist, psychologist,[1] anthropologist, tropical explorer, geographer, inventor, meteorologist, proto-geneticist, psychometrician and a proponent of social Darwinism, eugenics and scientific racism. He was knighted in 1909.
    • Galton produced over 340 papers and books. He also created the statistical concept of correlation and widely promoted regression toward the mean. He was the first to apply statistical methods to the study of human differences and inheritance of intelligence, and introduced the use of questionnaires and surveys for collecting data on human communities, which he needed for genealogical and biographical works and for his anthropometric studies. He was a pioneer of eugenics, coining the term itself in 1883, and also coined the phrase "nature versus nurture". His book Hereditary Genius (1869) was the first social scientific attempt to study genius and greatness.
    • As an investigator of the human mind, he founded psychometrics (the science of measuring mental faculties) and differential psychology, as well as the lexical hypothesis of personality. He devised a method for classifying fingerprints that proved useful in forensic science. He also conducted research on the power of prayer, concluding it had none due to its null effects on the longevity of those prayed for. His quest for the scientific principles of diverse phenomena extended even to the optimal method for making tea.
    • As the initiator of scientific meteorology, he devised the first weather map, proposed a theory of anticyclones, and was the first to establish a complete record of short-term climatic phenomena on a European scale.[6] He also invented the Galton Whistle for testing differential hearing ability. He was Charles Darwin's half-cousin.
    • Early life [ edit ] Galton was born at "The Larches", a large house in the Sparkbrook area of Birmingham, England, built on the site of "Fair Hill", the former home of Joseph Priestley, which the botanist William Withering had renamed. He was Charles Darwin's half-cousin, sharing the common grandparent Erasmus Darwin. His father was Samuel Tertius Galton, son of Samuel Galton, Jr. He was also a cousin of Douglas Strutt Galton. The Galtons were Quaker gun-manufacturers and bankers, while the Darwins were involved in medicine and science.
    • Both the Galton and Darwin families included Fellows of the Royal Society and members who loved to invent in their spare time. Both Erasmus Darwin and Samuel Galton were founding members of the Lunar Society of Birmingham, which included Matthew Boulton, James Watt, Josiah Wedgwood, Joseph Priestley and Richard Lovell Edgeworth. Both families were known for their literary talent. Erasmus Darwin composed lengthy technical treatises in verse. Galton's aunt Mary Anne Galton wrote on aesthetics and religion, and her autobiography detailed the environment of her childhood populated by Lunar Society members.
    • Galton was a child prodigy '' he was reading by the age of two; at age five he knew some Greek, Latin and long division, and by the age of six he had moved on to adult books, including Shakespeare for pleasure, and poetry, which he quoted at length. Galton attended King Edward's School, Birmingham, but chafed at the narrow classical curriculum and left at 16. His parents pressed him to enter the medical profession, and he studied for two years at Birmingham General Hospital and King's College London Medical School. He followed this up with mathematical studies at Trinity College, Cambridge, from 1840 to early 1844.[11]
    • According to the records of the United Grand Lodge of England, it was in February 1844 that Galton became a freemason at the Scientific lodge, held at the Red Lion Inn in Cambridge, progressing through the three masonic degrees: Apprentice, 5 February 1844; Fellow Craft, 11 March 1844; Master Mason, 13 May 1844. A note in the record states: "Francis Galton Trinity College student, gained his certificate 13 March 1845".[12] One of Galton's masonic certificates from Scientific lodge can be found among his papers at University College, London.[13]
    • A nervous breakdown prevented Galton's intent to try for honours. He elected instead to take a "poll" (pass) B.A. degree, like his half-cousin Charles Darwin. (Following the Cambridge custom, he was awarded an M.A. without further study, in 1847.) He briefly resumed his medical studies but the death of his father in 1844 left him emotionally destitute, though financially independent,[citation needed ] and he terminated his medical studies entirely, turning to foreign travel, sport and technical invention.
    • In his early years Galton was an enthusiastic traveller, and made a notable solo trip through Eastern Europe to Constantinople, before going up to Cambridge. In 1845 and 1846, he went to Egypt and travelled up the Nile to Khartoum in the Sudan, and from there to Beirut, Damascus and down to Jordan.
    • In 1850 he joined the Royal Geographical Society, and over the next two years mounted a long and difficult expedition into then little-known South West Africa (now Namibia). He wrote a book on his experience, "Narrative of an Explorer in Tropical South Africa". He was awarded the Royal Geographical Society's Founder's Gold Medal in 1853 and the Silver Medal of the French Geographical Society for his pioneering cartographic survey of the region. This established his reputation as a geographer and explorer. He proceeded to write the best-selling The Art of Travel, a handbook of practical advice for the Victorian on the move, which went through many editions and is still in print.
    • Middle years [ edit ] Galton was a polymath who made important contributions in many fields, including meteorology (the anticyclone and the first popular weather maps), statistics (regression and correlation), psychology (synaesthesia), biology (the nature and mechanism of heredity), and criminology (fingerprints). Much of this was influenced by his penchant for counting and measuring. Galton prepared the first weather map published in The Times (1 April 1875, showing the weather from the previous day, 31 March), now a standard feature in newspapers worldwide.[17]
    • He became very active in the British Association for the Advancement of Science, presenting many papers on a wide variety of topics at its meetings from 1858 to 1899. He was the general secretary from 1863 to 1867, president of the Geographical section in 1867 and 1872, and president of the Anthropological Section in 1877 and 1885. He was active on the council of the Royal Geographical Society for over forty years, in various committees of the Royal Society, and on the Meteorological Council.
    • James McKeen Cattell, a student of Wilhelm Wundt who had been reading Galton's articles, decided he wanted to study under him. He eventually built a professional relationship with Galton, measuring subjects and working together on research.
    • In 1888, Galton established a lab in the science galleries of the South Kensington Museum. In Galton's lab, participants could be measured to gain knowledge of their strengths and weaknesses. Galton also used these data for his own research. He would typically charge people a small fee for his services.
    • In 1873, Galton wrote a controversial letter to The Times titled 'Africa for the Chinese', where he argued that the Chinese, as a race capable of high civilization and only temporarily stunted by the recent failures of Chinese dynasties, should be encouraged to immigrate to Africa and displace the supposedly inferior aboriginal blacks.[21]
    • Heredity and eugenics [ edit ] Galton in his later years
    • The publication by his cousin Charles Darwin of The Origin of Species in 1859 was an event that changed Galton's life. He came to be gripped by the work, especially the first chapter on "Variation under Domestication", concerning animal breeding.
    • Galton devoted much of the rest of his life to exploring variation in human populations and its implications, at which Darwin had only hinted in The Origin of Species, although he returned to it in his 1871 book The Descent of Man, drawing on his cousin's work in the intervening period. Galton established a research program which embraced multiple aspects of human variation, from mental characteristics to height; from facial images to fingerprint patterns. This required inventing novel measures of traits, devising large-scale collection of data using those measures, and in the end, the discovery of new statistical techniques for describing and understanding the data.
    • Galton was interested at first in the question of whether human ability was hereditary, and proposed to count the number of the relatives of various degrees of eminent men. If the qualities were hereditary, he reasoned, there should be more eminent men among the relatives than among the general population. To test this, he invented the methods of historiometry. Galton obtained extensive data from a broad range of biographical sources which he tabulated and compared in various ways. This pioneering work was described in detail in his book Hereditary Genius in 1869. Here he showed, among other things, that the numbers of eminent relatives dropped off when going from the first degree to the second degree relatives, and from the second degree to the third. He took this as evidence of the inheritance of abilities.
    • Galton recognized the limitations of his methods in these two works, and believed the question could be better studied by comparisons of twins. His method envisaged testing to see if twins who were similar at birth diverged in dissimilar environments, and whether twins dissimilar at birth converged when reared in similar environments. He again used the method of questionnaires to gather various sorts of data, which were tabulated and described in a paper The history of twins in 1875. In so doing he anticipated the modern field of behaviour genetics, which relies heavily on twin studies. He concluded that the evidence favored nature rather than nurture. He also proposed adoption studies, including trans-racial adoption studies, to separate the effects of heredity and environment.
    • Galton recognized that cultural circumstances influenced the capability of a civilization's citizens, and their reproductive success. In Hereditary Genius, he envisaged a situation conducive to resilient and enduring civilization as follows:
    • The best form of civilization in respect to the improvement of the race, would be one in which society was not costly; where incomes were chiefly derived from professional sources, and not much through inheritance; where every lad had a chance of showing his abilities, and, if highly gifted, was enabled to achieve a first-class education and entrance into professional life, by the liberal help of the exhibitions and scholarships which he had gained in his early youth; where marriage was held in as high honor as in ancient Jewish times; where the pride of race was encouraged (of course I do not refer to the nonsensical sentiment of the present day, that goes under that name); where the weak could find a welcome and a refuge in celibate monasteries or sisterhoods, and lastly, where the better sort of emigrants and refugees from other lands were invited and welcomed, and their descendants naturalized.
    • Galton invented the term eugenics in 1883 and set down many of his observations and conclusions in a book, Inquiries into Human Faculty and Its Development. In the book's introduction, he wrote:
    • [This book's] intention is to touch on various topics more or less connected with that of the cultivation of race, or, as we might call it, with "eugenic"1 questions, and to present the results of several of my own separate investigations.1 This is, with questions bearing on what is termed in Greek, eugenes, namely, good in stock, hereditarily endowed with noble qualities. This, and the allied words, eugeneia, etc., are equally applicable to men, brutes, and plants. We greatly want a brief word to express the science of improving stock, which is by no means confined to questions of judicious mating, but which, especially in the case of man, takes cognizance of all influences that tend in however remote a degree to give the more suitable races or strains of blood a better chance of prevailing speedily over the less suitable than they otherwise would have had. The word eugenics would sufficiently express the idea; it is at least a neater word and a more generalized one than viriculture, which I once ventured to use.
    • He believed that a scheme of 'marks' for family merit should be defined, and early marriage between families of high rank be encouraged via provision of monetary incentives. He pointed out some of the tendencies in British society, such as the late marriages of eminent people, and the paucity of their children, which he thought were dysgenic. He advocated encouraging eugenic marriages by supplying able couples with incentives to have children. On 29 October 1901, Galton chose to address eugenic issues when he delivered the second Huxley lecture at the Royal Anthropological Institute.
    • The Eugenics Review, the journal of the Eugenics Education Society, commenced publication in 1909. Galton, the Honorary President of the society, wrote the foreword for the first volume. The First International Congress of Eugenics was held in July 1912. Winston Churchill and Carls Elliot were among the attendees.
    • According to the Encyclopedia of Genocide, Galton bordered on the justification of genocide when he stated: "There exists a sentiment, for the most part quite unreasonable, against the gradual extinction of an inferior race."[23]
    • In June 2020, UCL announced that it was renaming a lecture theatre which had been named after Galton because of his connection with eugenics.[24]
    • Model for population stability [ edit ] Sir Francis Galton, 1890s
    • Galton's formulation of regression and its link to the bivariate normal distribution can be traced to his attempts at developing a mathematical model for population stability. Although Galton's first attempt to study Darwinian questions, Hereditary Genius, generated little enthusiasm at the time, the text led to his further studies in the 1870s concerning the inheritance of physical traits. This text contains some crude notions of the concept of regression, described in a qualitative matter. For example, he wrote of dogs: "If a man breeds from strong, well-shaped dogs, but of mixed pedigree, the puppies will be sometimes, but rarely, the equals of their parents. They will commonly be of a mongrel, nondescript type, because ancestral peculiarities are apt to crop out in the offspring."
    • This notion created a problem for Galton, as he could not reconcile the tendency of a population to maintain a normal distribution of traits from generation to generation with the notion of inheritance. It seemed that a large number of factors operated independently on offspring, leading to the normal distribution of a trait in each generation. However, this provided no explanation as to how a parent can have a significant impact on his offspring, which was the basis of inheritance.
    • Galton's solution to this problem was presented in his Presidential Address at the September 1885 meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, as he was serving at the time as President of Section H: Anthropology.[28] The address was published in Nature, and Galton further developed the theory in "Regression toward mediocrity in hereditary stature" and "Hereditary Stature." An elaboration of this theory was published in 1889 in Natural Inheritance. There were three key developments that helped Galton develop this theory: the development of the law of error in 1874''1875, the formulation of an empirical law of reversion in 1877, and the development of a mathematical framework encompassing regression using human population data during 1885.
    • Galton's development of the law of regression to the mean, or reversion, was due to insights from the Galton board ('bean machine') and his studies of sweet peas. While Galton had previously invented the quincunx prior to February 1874, the 1877 version of the quincunx had a new feature that helped Galton demonstrate that a normal mixture of normal distributions is also normal. Galton demonstrated this using a new version of quincunx, adding chutes to the apparatus to represent reversion. When the pellets passed through the curved chutes (representing reversion) and then the pins (representing family variability), the result was a stable population. On Friday 19 February 1877 Galton gave a lecture entitled Typical Laws of Heredity at the Royal Institution in London. In this lecture, he posited that there must be a counteracting force to maintain population stability. However, this model required a much larger degree of intergenerational natural selection than was plausible.
    • In 1875, Galton started growing sweet peas, and addressed the Royal Institution on his findings on 9 February 1877. He found that each group of progeny seeds followed a normal curve, and the curves were equally disperse. Each group was not centered about the parent's weight, but rather at a weight closer to the population average. Galton called this reversion, as every progeny group was distributed at a value that was closer to the population average than the parent. The deviation from the population average was in the same direction, but the magnitude of the deviation was only one-third as large. In doing so, Galton demonstrated that there was variability among each of the families, yet the families combined to produce a stable, normally distributed population. When Galton addressed the British Association for the Advancement of Science in 1885, he said of his investigation of sweet peas, "I was then blind to what I now perceive to be the simple explanation of the phenomenon."[28]
    • Galton was able to further his notion of regression by collecting and analyzing data on human stature. Galton asked for help of mathematician J. Hamilton Dickson in investigating the geometric relationship of the data. He determined that the regression coefficient did not ensure population stability by chance, but rather that the regression coefficient, conditional variance, and population were interdependent quantities related by a simple equation. Thus Galton identified that the linearity of regression was not coincidental but rather was a necessary consequence of population stability.
    • The model for population stability resulted in Galton's formulation of the Law of Ancestral Heredity. This law, which was published in Natural Inheritance, states that the two parents of an offspring jointly contribute one half of an offspring's heritage, while the other, more-removed ancestors constitute a smaller proportion of the offspring's heritage. Galton viewed reversion as a spring, that when stretched, would return the distribution of traits back to the normal distribution. He concluded that evolution would have to occur via discontinuous steps, as reversion would neutralize any incremental steps. When Mendel's principles were rediscovered in 1900, this resulted in a fierce battle between the followers of Galton's Law of Ancestral Heredity, the biometricians, and those who advocated Mendel's principles.
    • Empirical test of pangenesis and Lamarckism [ edit ] Galton conducted wide-ranging inquiries into heredity which led him to challenge Charles Darwin's hypothesis of pangenesis. Darwin had proposed as part of this model that certain particles, which he called "gemmules" moved throughout the body and were also responsible for the inheritance of acquired characteristics. Galton, in consultation with Darwin, set out to see if they were transported in the blood. In a long series of experiments in 1869 to 1871, he transfused the blood between dissimilar breeds of rabbits, and examined the features of their offspring.[35] He found no evidence of characters transmitted in the transfused blood.
    • Darwin challenged the validity of Galton's experiment, giving his reasons in an article published in Nature where he wrote:
    • Now, in the chapter on Pangenesis in my Variation of Animals and Plants under Domestication I have not said one word about the blood, or about any fluid proper to any circulating system. It is, indeed, obvious that the presence of gemmules in the blood can form no necessary part of my hypothesis; for I refer in illustration of it to the lowest animals, such as the Protozoa, which do not possess blood or any vessels; and I refer to plants in which the fluid, when present in the vessels, cannot be considered as true blood. The fundamental laws of growth, reproduction, inheritance, &c., are so closely similar throughout the whole organic kingdom, that the means by which the gemmules (assuming for the moment their existence) are diffused through the body, would probably be the same in all beings; therefore the means can hardly be diffusion through the blood. Nevertheless, when I first heard of Mr. Galton's experiments, I did not sufficiently reflect on the subject, and saw not the difficulty of believing in the presence of gemmules in the blood.
    • Galton explicitly rejected the idea of the inheritance of acquired characteristics (Lamarckism), and was an early proponent of "hard heredity" through selection alone. He came close to rediscovering Mendel's particulate theory of inheritance, but was prevented from making the final breakthrough in this regard because of his focus on continuous, rather than discrete, traits (now regarded as polygenic traits). He went on to found the biometric approach to the study of heredity, distinguished by its use of statistical techniques to study continuous traits and population-scale aspects of heredity.
    • This approach was later taken up enthusiastically by Karl Pearson and W. F. R. Weldon; together, they founded the highly influential journal Biometrika in 1901. (R. A. Fisher would later show how the biometrical approach could be reconciled with the Mendelian approach.) The statistical techniques that Galton invented (correlation and regression'--see below) and phenomena he established (regression to the mean) formed the basis of the biometric approach and are now essential tools in all social sciences.
    • Anthropometric Laboratory at the 1884 International Health Exhibition [ edit ] In 1884, London hosted the International Health Exhibition. This exhibition placed much emphasis on highlighting Victorian developments in sanitation and public health, and allowed the nation to display its advanced public health outreach, compared to other countries at the time. Francis Galton took advantage of this opportunity to set up his anthropometric laboratory. He stated that the purpose of this laboratory was to "show the public the simplicity of the instruments and methods by which the chief physical characteristics of man may be measured and recorded." The laboratory was an interactive walk-through in which physical characteristics such as height, weight, and eyesight, would be measured for each subject after payment of an admission fee. Upon entering the laboratory, a subject would visit the following stations in order.
    • First, they would fill out a form with personal and family history (age, birthplace, marital status, residence, and occupation), then visit stations that recorded hair and eye color, followed by the keenness, color-sense, and depth perception of sight. Next, they would examine the keenness, or relative acuteness, of hearing and highest audible note of their hearing followed by an examination of their sense of touch. However, because the surrounding area was noisy, the apparatus intended to measure hearing was rendered ineffective by the noise and echoes in the building. Their breathing capacity would also be measured, as well as their ability to throw a punch. The next stations would examine strength of both pulling and squeezing with both hands. Lastly, subjects' heights in various positions (sitting, standing, etc.) as well as arm span and weight would be measured.
    • One excluded characteristic of interest was the size of the head. Galton notes in his analysis that this omission was mostly for practical reasons. For instance, it would not be very accurate and additionally it would require much time for women to disassemble and reassemble their hair and bonnets. The patrons would then be given a souvenir containing all their biological data, while Galton would also keep a copy for future statistical research.
    • Although the laboratory did not employ any revolutionary measurement techniques, it was unique because of the simple logistics of constructing such a demonstration within a limited space, and because of the speed and efficiency with which all the necessary data were gathered. The laboratory itself was a see-through (lattice-walled) fenced off gallery measuring 36 feet long by 6 feet long. To collect data efficiently, Galton had to make the process as simple as possible for people to understand. As a result, subjects were taken through the laboratory in pairs so that explanations could be given to two at a time, also in the hope that one of the two would confidently take the initiative to go through all the tests first, encouraging the other. With this design, the total time spent in the exhibit was fourteen minutes for each pair.
    • Galton states that the measurements of human characteristics are useful for two reasons. First, he states that measuring physical characteristics is useful in order to ensure, on a more domestic level, that children are developing properly. A useful example he gives for the practicality of these domestic measurements is regularly checking a child's eyesight, in order to correct any deficiencies early on. The second use for the data from his anthropometric laboratory is for statistical studies. He comments on the usefulness of the collected data to compare attributes across occupations, residences, races, etc. The exhibit at the health exhibition allowed Galton to collect a large amount of raw data from which to conduct further comparative studies. He had 9,337 respondents, each measured in 17 categories, creating a rather comprehensive statistical database.
    • After the conclusion of the International Health Exhibition, Galton used these data to confirm in humans his theory of linear regression, posed after studying sweet peas. The accumulation of this human data allowed him to observe the correlation between forearm length and height, head width and head breadth, and head length and height. With these observations he was able to write Co-relations and their Measurements, chiefly from Anthropometric Data. In this publication, Galton defined what co-relation as a phenomenon that occurs when "the variation of the one [variable] is accompanied on the average by more or less variation of the other, and in the same direction."
    • Innovations in statistics and psychological theory [ edit ] Historiometry [ edit ] The method used in Hereditary Genius has been described as the first example of historiometry. To bolster these results, and to attempt to make a distinction between 'nature' and 'nurture' (he was the first to apply this phrase to the topic), he devised a questionnaire that he sent out to 190 Fellows of the Royal Society. He tabulated characteristics of their families, such as birth order and the occupation and race of their parents. He attempted to discover whether their interest in science was 'innate' or due to the encouragements of others. The studies were published as a book, English men of science: their nature and nurture, in 1874. In the end, it promoted the nature versus nurture question, though it did not settle it, and provided some fascinating data on the sociology of scientists of the time.[citation needed ]
    • The lexical hypothesis [ edit ] Sir Francis was the first scientist to recognise what is now known as the lexical hypothesis. This is the idea that the most salient and socially relevant personality differences in people's lives will eventually become encoded into language. The hypothesis further suggests that by sampling language, it is possible to derive a comprehensive taxonomy of human personality traits.
    • The questionnaire [ edit ] Galton's inquiries into the mind involved detailed recording of people's subjective accounts of whether and how their minds dealt with phenomena such as mental imagery. To better elicit this information, he pioneered the use of the questionnaire. In one study, he asked his fellow members of the Royal Society of London to describe mental images that they experienced. In another, he collected in-depth surveys from eminent scientists for a work examining the effects of nature and nurture on the propensity toward scientific thinking.
    • Variance and standard deviation [ edit ] Core to any statistical analysis is the concept that measurements vary: they have both a central tendency, or mean, and a spread around this central value, or variance. In the late 1860s, Galton conceived of a measure to quantify normal variation: the standard deviation.[45]
    • Galton was a keen observer. In 1906, visiting a livestock fair, he stumbled upon an intriguing contest. An ox was on display, and the villagers were invited to guess the animal's weight after it was slaughtered and dressed. Nearly 800 participated, and Galton was able to study their individual entries after the event. Galton stated that "the middlemost estimate expresses the vox populi, every other estimate being condemned as too low or too high by a majority of the voters", and reported this value (the median, in terminology he himself had introduced, but chose not to use on this occasion) as 1,207 pounds. To his surprise, this was within 0.8% of the weight measured by the judges. Soon afterwards, in response to an enquiry, he reported[47] the mean of the guesses as 1,197 pounds, but did not comment on its improved accuracy. Recent archival research has found some slips in transmitting Galton's calculations to the original article in Nature: the median was actually 1,208 pounds, and the dressed weight of the ox 1,197 pounds, so the mean estimate had zero error. James Surowiecki uses this weight-judging competition as his opening example: had he known the true result, his conclusion on the wisdom of the crowd would no doubt have been more strongly expressed.
    • The same year, Galton suggested in a letter to the journal Nature a better method of cutting a round cake by avoiding making radial incisions.
    • Experimental derivation of the normal distribution [ edit ] Studying variation, Galton invented the Galton board, a pachinko-like device also known as the bean machine, as a tool for demonstrating the law of error and the normal distribution.
    • Bivariate normal distribution [ edit ] He also discovered the properties of the bivariate normal distribution and its relationship to correlation and regression analysis.
    • Correlation and regression [ edit ] Galton's correlation diagram 1886
    • In 1846, the French physicist Auguste Bravais (1811''1863) first developed what would become the correlation coefficient. After examining forearm and height measurements, Galton independently rediscovered the concept of correlation in 1888 and demonstrated its application in the study of heredity, anthropology, and psychology. Galton's later statistical study of the probability of extinction of surnames led to the concept of Galton''Watson stochastic processes.
    • Galton invented the use of the regression line and for the choice of r (for reversion or regression) to represent the correlation coefficient.
    • In the 1870s and 1880s he was a pioneer in the use of normal theory to fit histograms and ogives to actual tabulated data, much of which he collected himself: for instance large samples of sibling and parental height. Consideration of the results from these empirical studies led to his further insights into evolution, natural selection, and regression to the mean.
    • Regression toward the mean [ edit ] Galton was the first to describe and explain the common phenomenon of regression toward the mean, which he first observed in his experiments on the size of the seeds of successive generations of sweet peas.
    • The conditions under which regression toward the mean occurs depend on the way the term is mathematically defined. Galton first observed the phenomenon in the context of simple linear regression of data points. Galton developed the following model: pellets fall through a quincunx or "bean machine" forming a normal distribution centered directly under their entrance point. These pellets could then be released down into a second gallery (corresponding to a second measurement occasion). Galton then asked the reverse question "from where did these pellets come?"
    • The answer was not "on average directly above". Rather it was "on average, more towards the middle", for the simple reason that there were more pellets above it towards the middle that could wander left than there were in the left extreme that could wander to the right, inwards.
    • Theories of perception [ edit ] Galton went beyond measurement and summary to attempt to explain the phenomena he observed. Among such developments, he proposed an early theory of ranges of sound and hearing, and collected large quantities of anthropometric data from the public through his popular and long-running Anthropometric Laboratory, which he established in 1884, and where he studied over 9,000 people. It was not until 1985 that these data were analysed in their entirety.
    • He made a beauty map of Britain, based on a secret grading of the local women on a scale from attractive to repulsive. The lowest point was in Aberdeen.[58]
    • Differential psychology [ edit ] Galton's study of human abilities ultimately led to the foundation of differential psychology and the formulation of the first mental tests. He was interested in measuring humans in every way possible. This included measuring their ability to make sensory discrimination which he assumed was linked to intellectual prowess. Galton suggested that individual differences in general ability are reflected in performance on relatively simple sensory capacities and in speed of reaction to a stimulus, variables that could be objectively measured by tests of sensory discrimination and reactiontime. He also measured how quickly people reacted which he later linked to internal wiring which ultimately limited intelligence ability. Throughout his research Galton assumed that people who reacted faster were more intelligent than others.
    • Composite photography [ edit ] Galton also devised a technique called "composite portraiture" (produced by superimposing multiple photographic portraits of individuals' faces registered on their eyes) to create an average face (see averageness). In the 1990s, a hundred years after his discovery, much psychological research has examined the attractiveness of these faces, an aspect that Galton had remarked on in his original lecture. Others, including Sigmund Freud in his work on dreams, picked up Galton's suggestion that these composites might represent a useful metaphor for an Ideal type or a concept of a "natural kind" (see Eleanor Rosch)'--such as Jewish men, criminals, patients with tuberculosis, etc.'--onto the same photographic plate, thereby yielding a blended whole, or "composite", that he hoped could generalise the facial appearance of his subject into an "average" or "central type". (See also entry Modern physiognomy under Physiognomy).
    • This work began in the 1880s while the Jewish scholar Joseph Jacobs studied anthropology and statistics with Francis Galton. Jacobs asked Galton to create a composite photograph of a Jewish type. One of Jacobs' first publications that used Galton's composite imagery was "The Jewish Type, and Galton's Composite Photographs," Photographic News, 29, (24 April 1885): 268''269.
    • Galton hoped his technique would aid medical diagnosis, and even criminology through the identification of typical criminal faces. However, his technique did not prove useful and fell into disuse, although after much work on it including by photographers Lewis Hine and John L. Lovell and Arthur Batut.
    • Fingerprints [ edit ] The method of identifying criminals by their fingerprints had been introduced in the 1860s by Sir William James Herschel in India, and their potential use in forensic work was first proposed by Dr Henry Faulds in 1880. Galton was introduced to the field by his half-cousin Charles Darwin, who was a friend of Faulds's, and he went on to create the first scientific footing for the study (which assisted its acceptance by the courts) although Galton did not ever give credit that the original idea was not his.[63]
    • In a Royal Institution paper in 1888 and three books (Finger Prints, 1892; Decipherment of Blurred Finger Prints, 1893; and Fingerprint Directories, 1895), Galton estimated the probability of two persons having the same fingerprint and studied the heritability and racial differences in fingerprints. He wrote about the technique (inadvertently sparking a controversy between Herschel and Faulds that was to last until 1917), identifying common pattern in fingerprints and devising a classification system that survives to this day. He described and classified them into eight broad categories: 1: plain arch, 2: tented arch, 3: simple loop, 4: central pocket loop, 5: double loop, 6: lateral pocket loop, 7: plain whorl, and 8: accidental.
    • Final years [ edit ] Francis Galton (right), aged 87, on the stoep at Fox Holm, Cobham, with the statistician
    • Karl Pearson.
    • In an effort to reach a wider audience, Galton worked on a novel entitled Kantsaywhere from May until December 1910. The novel described a utopia organized by a eugenic religion, designed to breed fitter and smarter humans. His unpublished notebooks show that this was an expansion of material he had been composing since at least 1901. He offered it to Methuen for publication, but they showed little enthusiasm. Galton wrote to his niece that it should be either "smothered or superseded". His niece appears to have burnt most of the novel, offended by the love scenes, but large fragments survived, and it was published online by University College, London.
    • Galton is buried in the family tomb in the churchyard of St Michael and All Angels, in the village of Claverdon, Warwickshire.[68]
    • Personal life and character [ edit ] In January 1853, Galton met Louisa Jane Butler (1822''1897) at his neighbour's home and they were married on 1 August 1853. The union of 43 years proved childless.[70]
    • It has been written of Galton that "On his own estimation he was a supremely intelligent man." Later in life, Galton proposed a connection between genius and insanity based on his own experience:
    • Men who leave their mark on the world are very often those who, being gifted and full of nervous power, are at the same time haunted and driven by a dominant idea, and are therefore within a measurable distance of insanity.
    • Awards and influence [ edit ] Over the course of his career Galton received many awards, including the Copley Medal of the Royal Society (1910). He received in 1853 the Founder's Medal, the highest award of the Royal Geographical Society, for his explorations and map-making of southwest Africa. He was elected a member of the Athenaeum Club in 1855 and made a Fellow of the Royal Society in 1860. His autobiography also lists:
    • Silver Medal, French Geographical Society (1854)Gold Medal of the Royal Society (1886)Officier de l'Instruction Publique, France (1891)D.C.L. Oxford (1894)Sc.D. (Honorary), Cambridge (1895)Huxley Medal, Anthropological Institute (1901)Elected Hon. Fellow Trinity College, Cambridge (1902)Darwin Medal, Royal Society (1902)Linnean Society of London's Darwin''Wallace Medal (1908)Galton was knighted in 1909. His statistical heir Karl Pearson, first holder of the Galton Chair of Eugenics at University College, London (now Galton Chair of Genetics), wrote a three-volume biography of Galton, in four parts, after his death.
    • The flowering plant genus Galtonia was named after Galton.
    • University College London has in the twenty-first century been involved in a historical inquiry into its role as the institutional birthplace of eugenics. Galton established a laboratory at UCL in 1904. Some students and staff have called on the university to rename its Galton lecture theatre. "Galton's seductive promise was of a bold new world filled only with beautiful, intelligent, productive people. The scientists in its thrall claimed this could be achieved by controlling reproduction, policing borders to prevent certain types of immigrants, and locking away "undesirables", including disabled people."
    • Published works [ edit ] The art of travel, or, Shifts and contrivances available in wild countries. London: John Murray. 1855. Narrative of an Explorer in Tropical South Africa. London. 1853. Hereditary Genius. London: Macmillan. 1869. "Statistical Inquiries into the Efficacy of Prayer". Fortnightly Review. 12: 125''35. 1872. "On men of science, their nature and their nurture". Proceedings of the Royal Institution of Great Britain. 7: 227''236. 1874. "Typical laws of heredity". Nature. 15 (388): 492''495, 512''514, 532''533. 1877. Bibcode:1877Natur..15..492.. doi:10.1038/015492a0 . "Composite portraits" (PDF) . Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 8: 132''142. 1878. doi:10.2307/2841021. JSTOR 2841021. Inquiries Into Human Faculty and Its Development. Macmillan. 1883. p. 24. "Anthropometric Laboratory", Science, London: William Clowes, 5 (114): 294''295, 1884, Bibcode:1885Sci.....5..294., doi:10.1126/science.ns-5.114.294, PMID 17831706 "On the Anthropometric Laboratory at the Late International Health Exhibition". The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 14: 205''221. 1 January 1885a. doi:10.2307/2841978. JSTOR 2841978. Zenodo: 1449574. "Regression Towards Mediocrity in Hereditary Stature". The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland. 15: 246''263. 1886. doi:10.2307/2841583. JSTOR 2841583. Zenodo: 1449548. "Hereditary stature". Nature. 33 (848): 295''298. 1886b. Bibcode:1886Natur..33..295.. doi:10.1038/033295c0 . "Co-Relations and Their Measurement, Chiefly from Anthropometric Data". Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. 45 (273''279): 135''145. 1 January 1888. Bibcode:1888RSPS...45..135G. doi:10.1098/rspl.1888.0082. JSTOR 114860. S2CID 13851067. Natural Inheritance (PDF) . London: Macmillan. 1889. "Cutting a Round Cake on Scientific Principles (Letters to the Editor)" (PDF) . Nature. 75 (1938): 173. 20 December 1906. Bibcode:1906Natur..75..173G. doi:10.1038/075173c0. S2CID 3980060. "Vox Populi" (PDF) . Nature. 75 (1949): 450''451. 7 March 1907. Bibcode:1907Natur..75..450G. doi:10.1038/075450a0 . S2CID 4013898. Memories of My Life. New York: E. P. Dutton and Company. 1909. p. 331. Hereditary Genius: An Inquiry Into Its Laws and Consequences. Macmillan. 1914. "The Eugenic College of Kantsaywhere". Utopian Studies. 12 (2): 191''209. 2001. ISSN 1045-991X. JSTOR 20718325. OCLC 5542769084. See also [ edit ] A Large Attendance in the Antechamber, a play about GaltonDarwin''Wedgwood familyEfficacy of prayerEugenics in the United StatesHistoriometryRacial hygieneBritish peopleReferences [ edit ] Citations [ edit ] ^ "Francis Galton - Biography, Books and Theories". famouspsychologists.org . Retrieved 9 January 2017 . ^ Barile, Margherita; Weisstein, Eric W. "Francis Galton (1822-1911)". Eric Weisstein's World of Scientific Biography . Retrieved 9 January 2017 . ^ "Galton, Francis (GLTN839F)". A Cambridge Alumni Database. University of Cambridge. ^ 'Scientific Lodge No. 105 Cambridge' in Membership Records: Foreign and Country Lodges, Nos. 17''145, 1837''1862. London: Library and Museum of Freemasonry (manuscript) ^ M. Merrington and J. Golden (1976) A List of the Papers and Correspondence of Sir Francis Galton (1822''1911) held in The Manuscripts Room, The Library, University College London. The Galton Laboratory, University College London (typescript), at Section 88 on p. 10 ^ "Francis Galton: Meteorologist". Galton.org . Retrieved 22 April 2013 . ^ Galton, Francis (5 June 1873). "Africa For The Chinese:To The Editor Of The Times". The Times '' via galton.org. ^ Charny, Israel W.; Adalian, Rouben Paul; Jacobs, Steven L.; Markusen, Eric; Sherman, Marc I. (1999). Encyclopedia of Genocide: A-H. ABC-CLIO. p. 218. ISBN 978-0-87436-928-1. ^ "UCL renames three facilities that honoured prominent eugenicists". The Guardian. 19 June 2020 . Retrieved 20 June 2020 . ^ a b Galton, Francis (1885b). "Opening address as President of the Anthropology Section of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, September 10th, 1885, at Aberdeen". Nature. 32: 507''510. ^ "Sir Francis Galton". Science Show. 25 November 2000. Archived from the original on 14 January 2008 . Retrieved 8 September 2007 . ^ Chad Denby. "Science Timeline". Science Timeline . Retrieved 22 April 2013 . ^ "The Ballot Box", Nature, 28 March 1907 ^ "Francis Galton: The man who drew up the 'ugly map' of Britain". BBC. 16 June 2011 . Retrieved 24 June 2020 . ^ "Tribute to fingerprinting pioneer". BBC News. 12 November 2004 . Retrieved 1 June 2019 . ^ Challis, Debbie. "The Grave of Francis Galton". UCL Museums & Collections Blog . Retrieved 27 January 2019 . ^ "Sir Francis Galton FRS FRGS '' I7570". Archived from the original on 20 November 2012 . Retrieved 28 June 2010 . Sources [ edit ] Bravais, A (1846). "Analyse math(C)matique sur les probabilit(C)s des erreurs de situation d'un point" [Mathematical analysis of the probabilities of errors in a point's location]. M(C)moires Presents Par Divers Savants l'Acad(C)mie des Sciences de l'Institut de France. Sciences Math(C)matiques et Physiques. 9: 255''332. Bulmer, Michael (1998). "Galton's law of ancestral heredity". Heredity. 81 (5): 579''585. doi:10.1038/sj.hdy.6884180. Bulmer, Michael (2003). Francis Galton: Pioneer of Heredity and Biometry. Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 978-0-8018-7403-1. Caprara, G. V.; Cervone, D. (2000). Personality: Determinants, Dynamics, and Potentials. New York: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-58310-7. Clauser, Brian E. (2007). "The Life and Labors of Francis Galton: A Review of Four Recent Books About the Father of Behavioral Statistics". Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. 32 (4): 440''444. doi:10.3102/1076998607307449. S2CID 121124511. Conklin, Barbara Gardner; Gardner, Robert; Shortelle, Dennis (2002). Encyclopedia of Forensic Science: A Compendium of Detective Fact and Fiction . Oryx Press. ISBN 978-1-57356-170-9. Cowan, Ruth S. (22 September 2005). "Galton, Sir Francis, (1822''1911)". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/33315. (Subscription or UK public library membership required.) Darwin, C. R. (27 April 1871). "Pangenesis". Nature. 3 (78): 502''503. Bibcode:1871Natur...3..502D. doi:10.1038/003502a0 . Darwin, Francis (1887). The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin. Vol. 1. New York: Appleton and Co. Forrest, D.W. (1974). Francis Galton: The Life and Work of a Victorian Genius. Taplinger. ISBN 978-0-8008-2682-6. Gillham, Nicholas Wright (2001a). A Life of Sir Francis Galton: From African Exploration to the Birth of Eugenics. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-534943-6. Gillham, Nicholas (2001b). "Evolution by Jumps: Francis Galton and William Bateson and the Mechanism of Evolutionary Change". Genetics. 159 (4): 1383''1392. doi:10.1093/genetics/159.4.1383. PMC 1461897 . PMID 11779782. Gillham, Nicholas W. (2001c). "Sir Francis Galton and the Birth of Eugenics". Annual Review of Genetics. 35: 83''102. doi:10.1146/annurev.genet.35.102401.090055. PMID 11700278. Gillham, Nicholas (9 August 2013). "The Battle Between the Biometricians and the Mendelians: How Sir Francis Galton's Work Caused his Disciples to Reach Conflicting Conclusions About the Hereditary Mechanism". Science & Education. 24 (1''2): 61''75. Bibcode:2015Sc&Ed..24...61G. doi:10.1007/s11191-013-9642-1. S2CID 144727928. Hergenhahn, B. R.; Henley, Tracy (2013). An Introduction to the History of Psychology. Cengage Learning. ISBN 978-1-133-95809-3. Innes, Brian (2005). Body in Question: Exploring the Cutting Edge in Forensic Science . Barnes & Noble. ISBN 978-0-7607-7560-8. Jensen, Arthur R. (April 2002). "Galton's Legacy to Research on Intelligence". Journal of Biosocial Science. 34 (2): 145''172. doi:10.1017/s0021932002001451. PMID 11926452. S2CID 20153127. Novak, Daniel A. (May 2008). Realism, Photography and Nineteenth-Century Fiction. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-88525-6. Pearson, Karl (1914a). The Life, Letters and Labours of Francis Galton. Vol. 1. Cambridge: University Press. Pearson, Karl (1914b). The Life, Letters and Labours of Francis Galton. Vol. 2. Cambridge: University Press. Pearson, Karl (1930a). The Life, Letters and Labours of Francis Galton. Vol. 3A. Cambridge: University Press. Pearson, Karl (1930b). The Life, Letters and Labours of Francis Galton. Vol. 3B. Cambridge: University Press. Pearson, Karl. "The life, letters and labours of Francis Galton (3 vols. 1914, 1924, 1930)". Saini, Angela (3 October 2019). "In the twisted story of eugenics, the bad guy is all of us". The Guardian. Stigler, Stephen M. (1986). The History of Statistics: The Measurement of Uncertainty Before 1900 . Harvard University Press. ISBN 978-0-674-40341-3. Stigler, Stephen M. (1 July 2010). "Darwin, Galton and the Statistical Enlightenment". Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A. 173 (3): 469''482. doi:10.1111/j.1467-985X.2010.00643.x. ISSN 1467-985X. S2CID 53333238. Surowiecki, James (2004). The Wisdom of Crowds. New York: Random House. Wallis, Kenneth F (2014). "Revisiting Francis Galton's forecasting competition". Statistical Science. 29 (3): 420''424. arXiv:1410.3989 . Bibcode:2014arXiv1410.3989W. doi:10.1214/14-STS468. S2CID 53642221. Winston, Robert (23 February 2020). "Robert Winston: eugenics has evil in its DNA". The Times. Further reading [ edit ] Brookes, Martin (2004). Extreme Measures: The Dark Visions and Bright Ideas of Francis Galton. Bloomsbury. Cowan, Ruth Schwartz (1969). Sir Francis Galton and the Study of Heredity in the Nineteenth Century (PhD). Georgetown University. hdl:10822/548629. Ewen, Stuart; Ewen, Elizabeth (2006), "Nordic Nightmares", Typecasting: On the Arts and Sciences of Human Inequality, Seven Stories Press, pp. 257''325, ISBN 978-1-58322-735-0 Quinche, Nicolas (2006). Crime, Science et Identit(C). Anthologie des textes fondateurs de la criminalistique europ(C)enne (1860''1930) [Crime, Science and Identity: An Anthology of Foundational Texts in European Criminology] (in French). Gen¨ve: Slatkine. p. 368. External links [ edit ] Galton's Complete Works at Galton.org (including all his published books, all his published scientific papers, and popular periodical and newspaper writing, as well as other previously unpublished work and biographical material).Francis Galton at Find a GraveWorks by Francis Galton at Project GutenbergWorks by or about Francis Galton at Internet ArchiveWorks by Francis Galton at LibriVox (public domain audiobooks) The Galton Machine or Board demonstrating the normal distribution on YouTubePortraits of Francis Galton at the National Portrait Gallery, London O'Connor, John J.; Robertson, Edmund F., "Francis Galton", MacTutor History of Mathematics archive, University of St Andrews Biography and bibliography in the Virtual Laboratory of the Max Planck Institute for the History of ScienceHistory and MathematicsHuman Memory '' University of Amsterdam website with test based on the work of Galton An 8-foot-tall (2.4 m) Probability Machine (named Sir Francis Galton) comparing stock market returns to the randomness of the beans dropping through the quincunx pattern. on YouTube from Index Funds Advisors IFA.comCatalogue of the Galton papers held at UCL ArchivesGalton's novel KantsaywhereFrancis Galton, ''Management of Savages,'' The Art of Travel, 1861 at the Wayback Machine (archived 2 January 2017) The Scientific Way to Cut a Cake on YouTube, demonstrated by Alex Bellos"Biography of Francis Galton".
  • William Shockley - Wikipedia
    • Link to Article
    • Archived Version
    • Sat, 16 Jul 2022 19:59
    •  
    • American physicist and inventor
    • William Bradford Shockley Jr. (February 13, 1910 '' August 12, 1989) was an American physicist and inventor. He was the manager of a research group at Bell Labs that included John Bardeen and Walter Brattain. The three scientists were jointly awarded the 1956 Nobel Prize in Physics for "their researches on semiconductors and their discovery of the transistor effect".[1]
    • Partly as a result of Shockley's attempts to commercialize a new transistor design in the 1950s and 1960s, California's Silicon Valley became a hotbed of electronics innovation.
    • In his later life, while a professor of electrical engineering at Stanford University and afterward, Shockley became widely known for his extreme views on race and his advocacy of eugenics.[2][3][4][5]
    • Early life and education [ edit ] Shockley was born to American parents in London on February 13, 1910, and was raised in his family's hometown of Palo Alto, California, from the age of three.[6] His father, William Hillman Shockley, was a mining engineer who speculated in mines for a living and spoke eight languages. His mother, May (n(C)e Bradford), grew up in the American West, graduated from Stanford University and became the first female U.S. Deputy mining surveyor.[7] Shockley was homeschooled up to the age of eight, due to his parents' dislike of public schools as well as Shockley's habit of violent tantrums.[8] He spent two years at Palo Alto Military Academy, then briefly enrolled in the Los Angeles Coaching School to study physics and later graduated from Hollywood High School in 1927.[9][10]
    • Shockley earned his Bachelor of Science degree from Caltech in 1932 and a PhD from MIT in 1936. The title of his doctoral thesis was Electronic Bands in Sodium Chloride, a topic suggested by his thesis advisor, John C. Slater.[11]
    • Career [ edit ] Shockley was one of the first recruits to Bell Labs by Mervin Kelly, who became director of research at the company in 1936 and focused on hiring solid-state physicists.[12] Shockley joined a group headed by Clinton Davisson in Murray Hill, New Jersey.[13] Executives at Bell Labs had theorized that semiconductors may offer solid-state alternatives to the vacuum tubes used throughout Bell's nationwide telephone system. Shockley conceived a number of designs based on copper-oxide semiconductor materials, and with Walter Brattain unsuccessfully attempted to create a prototype in 1939.[12]
    • Shockley published a number of fundamental papers on solid state physics in Physical Review. In 1938, he received his first patent, "Electron Discharge Device", on electron multipliers.[14]
    • When World War II broke out, Shockley's prior research was interrupted and he became involved in radar research in Manhattan (New York City). In May 1942, he took leave from Bell Labs to become a research director at Columbia University's Anti-Submarine Warfare Operations Group.[15] This involved devising methods for countering the tactics of submarines with improved convoying techniques, optimizing depth charge patterns, and so on. Shockley traveled frequently to the Pentagon and Washington to meet high-ranking officers and government officials.[16]
    • In 1944, he organized a training program for B-29 bomber pilots to use new radar bomb sights. In late 1944 he took a three-month tour to bases around the world to assess the results. For this project, Secretary of War Robert Patterson awarded Shockley the Medal for Merit on October 17, 1946.[17]
    • In July 1945, the War Department asked Shockley to prepare a report on the question of probable casualties from an invasion of the Japanese mainland. Shockley concluded:
    • If the study shows that the behavior of nations in all historical cases comparable to Japan's has in fact been invariably consistent with the behavior of the troops in battle, then it means that the Japanese dead and ineffectives at the time of the defeat will exceed the corresponding number for the Germans. In other words, we shall probably have to kill at least 5 to 10 million Japanese. This might cost us between 1.7 and 4 million casualties including 400,000 to 800,000 killed.[18]
    • This report influenced the decision of the United States to drop atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which preceded the surrender of Japan.[19]
    • Shockley was the first physicist to propose a log-normal distribution to model the creation process for scientific research papers.[20]
    • Development of the transistor [ edit ] Shortly after the war ended in 1945, Bell Labs formed a solid-state physics group, led by Shockley and chemist Stanley Morgan, which included John Bardeen, Walter Brattain, physicist Gerald Pearson, chemist Robert Gibney, electronics expert Hilbert Moore, and several technicians. Their assignment was to seek a solid-state alternative to fragile glass vacuum tube amplifiers. Its first attempts were based on Shockley's ideas about using an external electrical field on a semiconductor to affect its conductivity. These experiments failed every time in all sorts of configurations and materials. The group was at a standstill until Bardeen suggested a theory that invoked surface states that prevented the field from penetrating the semiconductor. The group changed its focus to study these surface states and they met almost daily to discuss the work. The rapport of the group was excellent, and ideas were freely exchanged.[21]
    • By the winter of 1946 they had enough results that Bardeen submitted a paper on the surface states to Physical Review. Brattain started experiments to study the surface states through observations made while shining a bright light on the semiconductor's surface. This led to several more papers (one of them co-authored with Shockley), which estimated the density of the surface states to be more than enough to account for their failed experiments. The pace of the work picked up significantly when they started to surround point contacts between the semiconductor and the conducting wires with electrolytes. Moore built a circuit that allowed them to vary the frequency of the input signal easily. Finally they began to get some evidence of power amplification when Pearson, acting on a suggestion by Shockley, put a voltage on a droplet of glycol borate placed across a P''n junction.[22]
    • John Bardeen(l), William Shockley and Walter Brattain(r) at
    • Bell Labs, 1948
    • Bell Labs' attorneys soon discovered Shockley's field effect principle had been anticipated and devices based on it patented in 1930 by Julius Lilienfeld, who filed his MESFET-like patent in Canada on October 22, 1925.[23][24] Although the patent appeared "breakable" (it could not work) the patent attorneys based one of its four patent applications only on the Bardeen-Brattain point contact design. Three others (submitted first) covered the electrolyte-based transistors with Bardeen, Gibney and Brattain as the inventors.[citation needed ]
    • Shockley's name was not on any of these patent applications. This angered Shockley, who thought his name should also be on the patents because the work was based on his field effect idea. He even made efforts to have the patent written only in his name, and told Bardeen and Brattain of his intentions.[25]
    • Shockley, angered by not being included on the patent applications, secretly continued his own work to build a different sort of transistor based on junctions instead of point contacts; he expected this kind of design would be more likely to be commercially viable. The point contact transistor, he believed, would prove to be fragile and difficult to manufacture. Shockley was also dissatisfied with certain parts of the explanation for how the point contact transistor worked and conceived of the possibility of minority carrier injection.
    • On February 13, 1948, another team member, John N. Shive, built a point contact transistor with bronze contacts on the front and back of thin wedge of germanium, proving that holes could diffuse through bulk germanium and not just along the surface as previously thought.[26]:'Š153'Š [27]:'Š145'Š Shive's invention sparked[28] Shockley's invention of the junction transistor.[26]:'Š143'Š A few months later he invented an entirely new, considerably more robust, type of transistor with a layer or 'sandwich' structure. This structure went on to be used for the vast majority of all transistors into the 1960s, and evolved into the bipolar junction transistor. Shockley later described the workings of the team as a "mixture of cooperation and competition". He also said that he kept some of his own work secret until his "hand was forced" by Shive's 1948 advance.[29] Shockley worked out a rather complete description of what he called the "sandwich" transistor, and a first proof of principle was obtained on April 7, 1949.
    • Meanwhile, Shockley worked on his magnum opus, Electrons and Holes in Semiconductors which was published as a 558-page treatise in 1950. The tome included Shockley's critical ideas of drift and diffusion and the differential equations that govern the flow of electrons in solid state crystals. Shockley's diode equation is also described. This seminal work became the reference text for other scientists working to develop and improve new variants of the transistor and other devices based on semiconductors.[30]
    • This resulted in his invention of the bipolar "junction transistor", which was announced at a press conference on July 4, 1951.[31]
    • In 1951, he was elected to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS). He was forty-one years old; this was rather young for such an election. Two years later, he was chosen as the recipient of the prestigious Comstock Prize[32] for Physics by the NAS, and was the recipient of many other awards and honors.
    • The ensuing publicity generated by the "invention of the transistor" often thrust Shockley to the fore, much to the chagrin of Bardeen and Brattain. Bell Labs management, however, consistently presented all three inventors as a team. Though Shockley would correct the record where reporters gave him sole credit for the invention,[33] he eventually infuriated and alienated Bardeen and Brattain, and he essentially blocked the two from working on the junction transistor. Bardeen began pursuing a theory for superconductivity and left Bell Labs in 1951. Brattain refused to work with Shockley further and was assigned to another group. Neither Bardeen nor Brattain had much to do with the development of the transistor beyond the first year after its invention.[34]
    • Shockley left Bell Labs around 1953 and took a job at Caltech.[35]
    • Shockley Semiconductor [ edit ] In 1956, Shockley started Shockley Semiconductor Laboratory in Mountain View, California, which was close to his elderly mother in Palo Alto, California.[36][37] The company, a division of Beckman Instruments, Inc., was the first establishment working on silicon semiconductor devices in what came to be known as Silicon Valley.
    • After he received the Nobel Prize in 1956 his demeanor changed, as evidenced in his increasingly autocratic, erratic and hard-to-please management style.[38] Shockley became increasingly domineering and paranoid. In one well-known incident, he demanded lie detector tests to find the "culprit" after a company secretary suffered a minor cut.[39] In late 1957, eight of Shockley's best researchers, who would come to be known as the "traitorous eight", resigned after Shockley decided not to continue research into silicon-based semiconductors.[40][35] They went on to form Fairchild Semiconductor, a loss from which Shockley Semiconductor never recovered and which led to its purchase by another company three years later. Over the course of the next 20 years, more than 65 new enterprises would end up having employee connections back to Fairchild.[41]
    • A group of about thirty colleagues met on and off since 1956 to reminisce about their time with Shockley as, the group's organizer said in 2002, "the man who brought silicon to Silicon Valley".[42]
    • Views on race and eugenics [ edit ] After Shockley left his role as director of Shockley Semiconductor, he joined Stanford University, where he was appointed the Alexander M. Poniatoff Professor of Engineering and Applied Science in 1963, a position which he held until he retired as a professor emeritus in 1975.[43]
    • In the last two decades of his life, Shockley, who had no degree in genetics, became widely known for his extreme views on race and human intelligence, and his advocacy of eugenics.[2][5] As described by his Los Angeles Times obituary, "He went from being a physicist with impeccable academic credentials to amateur geneticist, becoming a lightning rod whose views sparked campus demonstrations and a cascade of calumny." He thought his work was important to the future of humanity and he also described it as the most important aspect of his career. He argued that a higher rate of reproduction among purportedly less intelligent people was having a dysgenic effect, and argued that a drop in average intelligence would lead to a decline in civilization. He also claimed that black people were genetically and intellectually inferior to white people.[2] (Shockley's biographer Joel Shurkin notes that for much of Shockley's life in the racially segregated America of the time, he had almost no contact with black people.) In a debate with psychiatrist Frances Cress Welsing M.D. and on Firing Line with William F. Buckley Jr., Shockley argued, "My research leads me inescapably to the opinion that the major cause of the American Negro's intellectual and social deficits is hereditary and racially genetic in origin and, thus, not remediable to a major degree by practical improvements in the environment."[45]
    • Shockley was one of the race theorists who received money from the Pioneer Fund, and at least one donation to him came from its founder, the eugenicist Wickliffe Draper.[46] Shockley's writings and lectures were partly based on the writings of psychologist Cyril Burt.[citation needed ] Shockley proposed that individuals with IQs below 100 should be paid to undergo voluntary sterilization.[2] Anthropologist Roger Pearson defended Shockley in a self-published book co-authored with Shockley.[48] In 1973, University of Wisconsin''Milwaukee professor Edgar G. Epps argued that "William Shockley's position lends itself to racist interpretations".[49] The Southern Poverty Law Center describes Shockley as a white nationalist who failed to produce evidence for his eugenic theories amidst "near-universal acknowledgement that his work was that of a racist crank".[50] The science writer Angela Saini describes Shockley as having been "a notorious racist".[46]
    • Shockley's advocacy of eugenics triggered protests. In one incident, the science society Sigma Xi, fearing violence, canceled a 1968 convocation in Brooklyn where Shockley was scheduled to speak.
    • In Atlanta in 1981, Shockley filed a libel suit against the Atlanta Constitution after a science writer, Roger Witherspoon, compared Shockley's advocacy of a voluntary sterilization program to Nazi human experimentation. The suit took three years to go to trial. Shockley won the suit but he only received one dollar in damages[52] and he did not receive any punitive damages. Shockley's biographer Joel Shurkin, a science writer on the staff of Stanford University during those years, sums this statement up by saying that it was defamatory, but Shockley's reputation was not worth much by the time the trial reached a verdict.[53] Shockley taped his telephone conversations with reporters, transcribed them, and sent the transcripts to the reporters by registered mail. At one point, he toyed with the idea of making the reporters take a simple quiz on his work before he would discuss the subject matter of it with them. His habit of saving all of his papers (including laundry lists) provides abundant documentation on his life for researchers.[54]
    • Shockley was a candidate for the Republican nomination in the 1982 United States Senate election in California. He ran on a single-issue platform of opposing the "dysgenic threat" that he alleged African-Americans and other groups posed.[55][50][56] He came in eighth place in the primary, receiving 8,308 votes and 0.37% of the vote.[57] According to Shurkin, by this time, "His racism destroyed his credibility. Almost no one wanted to be associated with him, and many of those who were willing did him more harm than good."
    • A 2019 study in the journal Intelligence found him to be the second-most controversial (behind Arthur Jensen) intelligence researcher among 55 persons covered.[59]
    • Personal life [ edit ] At age 23 and while still a student, Shockley married Jean Bailey in August 1933. The couple had two sons and a daughter.[60] Shockley separated with her in 1953.[35] He married Emily Lanning, a psychiatric nurse, in 1955; she helped him with some of his theories.[35][61] Although one of his sons earned a PhD at Stanford University and his daughter graduated from Radcliffe College, Shockley believed his children "represent a very significant regression ... my first wife '' their mother '' had not as high an academic-achievement standing as I had."[2]
    • Shockley was an accomplished rock climber, going often to the Shawangunks in the Hudson River Valley. His route across an overhang, known as "Shockley's Ceiling", is one of the classic climbing routes in the area.[22][62] Several[verification needed ] climbing guidebooks changed the route's name to "The Ceiling" in 2020 due to Shockley's eugenics controversies.[63] He was popular as a speaker, lecturer, and amateur magician. He once "magically" produced a bouquet of roses at the end of his address before the American Physical Society. He was also known in his early years for elaborate practical jokes.[64] He had a longtime hobby of raising ant colonies.[9]
    • Shockley donated sperm to the Repository for Germinal Choice, a sperm bank founded by Robert Klark Graham in hopes of spreading humanity's best genes. The bank, called by the media the "Nobel Prize sperm bank", claimed to have three Nobel Prize-winning donors,[citation needed ] though Shockley was the only one to publicly acknowledge his involvement. However, Shockley's controversial views brought the Repository for Germinal Choice a degree of notoriety and may have discouraged other Nobel Prize winners from donating sperm.[65]
    • According to PBS, Shockley was cruel towards his children and unhappy in his life. He reportedly tried playing Russian roulette as part of an attempted suicide.[35]
    • Death [ edit ] Shockley died of prostate cancer in 1989 at the age of 79.[66] At the time of his death, he was estranged from most of his friends and family, except his second wife, the former Emmy Lanning (1913''2007). His children reportedly learned of his death by reading his obituary in the newspaper.[67] Shockley is interred at Alta Mesa Memorial Park in Palo Alto, California.
    • Honors [ edit ] National Medal of Merit, for his war work in 1946.[17]Comstock Prize in Physics of the National Academy of Sciences in 1953.[68]First recipient of the Oliver E. Buckley Solid State Physics Prize of the American Physical Society in 1953.Co-recipient of the Nobel Prize in physics in 1956, along with John Bardeen and Walter Brattain. In his Nobel lecture, he gave full credit to Brattain and Bardeen as the inventors of the point-contact transistor.Holley Medal of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers in 1963.Wilhelm Exner Medal in 1963.[69]Honorary science doctorates from the University of Pennsylvania, Rutgers University in New Jersey, and Gustavus Adolphus Colleges in Minnesota.IEEE Medal of Honor from the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) in 1980.Named by Time magazine as one of the 100 most influential people of the 20th century.Listed at No.'¯3 on the Boston Globe's 2011 MIT150 list of the top 150 innovators and ideas in the 150-year history of MIT.Patents [ edit ] Shockley was granted over ninety US patents.[70] Some notable ones are:
    • US 2502488 Semiconductor Amplifier. April 4, 1950; his first granted patent involving transistors. US 2569347 Circuit element utilizing semiconductive material. September 25, 1951; His earliest applied for (June 26, 1948) patent involving transistors. US 2655609 Bistable Circuits. October 13, 1953; Used in computers. US 2787564 Forming Semiconductive Devices by Ionic Bombardment. April 2, 1957; The diffusion process for implantation of impurities. US 3031275 Process for Growing Single Crystals. April 24, 1962; Improvements on process for production of basic materials. US 3053635 Method of Growing Silicon Carbide Crystals. September 11, 1962; Exploring other semiconductors.Bibliography [ edit ] Prewar scientific articles by Shockley [ edit ] Johnson, R. P.; Shockley, W. (March 15, 1936). "An Electron Microscope for Filaments: Emission and Adsorption by Tungsten Single Crystals". Physical Review. American Physical Society (APS). 49 (6): 436''440. Bibcode:1936PhRv...49..436J. doi:10.1103/physrev.49.436. ISSN 0031-899X. Slater, J. C.; Shockley, W. (October 15, 1936). "Optical Absorption by the Alkali Halides". Physical Review. American Physical Society (APS). 50 (8): 705''719. Bibcode:1936PhRv...50..705S. doi:10.1103/physrev.50.705. ISSN 0031-899X. Shockley, William (October 15, 1936). "Electronic Energy Bands in Sodium Chloride". Physical Review. American Physical Society (APS). 50 (8): 754''759. Bibcode:1936PhRv...50..754S. doi:10.1103/physrev.50.754. ISSN 0031-899X. Shockley, W. (October 15, 1937). "The Empty Lattice Test of the Cellular Method in Solids". Physical Review. American Physical Society (APS). 52 (8): 866''872. Bibcode:1937PhRv...52..866S. doi:10.1103/physrev.52.866. ISSN 0031-899X. Shockley, William (August 15, 1939). "On the Surface States Associated with a Periodic Potential". Physical Review. American Physical Society (APS). 56 (4): 317''323. Bibcode:1939PhRv...56..317S. doi:10.1103/physrev.56.317. ISSN 0031-899X. Steigman, J.; Shockley, W.; Nix, F. C. (July 1, 1939). "The Self-Diffusion of Copper". Physical Review. American Physical Society (APS). 56 (1): 13''21. Bibcode:1939PhRv...56...13S. doi:10.1103/physrev.56.13. ISSN 0031-899X. Postwar articles by Shockley [ edit ] Shockley, W. (1949). "The Theory of p-n Junctions in Semiconductors and p-n Junction Transistors". Bell System Technical Journal. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). 28 (3): 435''489. doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1949.tb03645.x. ISSN 0005-8580. Shockley, W.; Pearson, G. L.; Haynes, J. R. (1949). "Hole Injection in Germanium-Quantitative Studies and Filamentary Transistors". Bell System Technical Journal. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). 28 (3): 344''366. doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1949.tb03641.x. ISSN 0005-8580. Shockley, W. (1951). "Hot Electrons in Germanium and Ohm's Law". Bell System Technical Journal. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). 30 (4): 990''1034. doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1951.tb03692.x. ISSN 0005-8580. Shockley, W. (1954). "Negative Resistance Arising from Transit Time in Semiconductor Diodes". Bell System Technical Journal. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). 33 (4): 799''826. doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1954.tb03742.x. ISSN 0005-8580. Sze, S. M.; Shockley, W. (May 6, 1967). "Unit-Cube Expression for Space-Charge Resistance". Bell System Technical Journal. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE). 46 (5): 837''842. doi:10.1002/j.1538-7305.1967.tb01716.x. ISSN 0005-8580. "On the Statistics of Individual Variations of Productivity in Research Laboratories", Shockley 1957On heredity, dysgenics and social issues:Shockley 1965, "Is Quality of US Population Declining." U.S. News & World Report, November 22, pp. 68''71Shockley 1966, "Possible Transfer of Metallurgical and Astronomical Approaches to Problem of Environment versus Ethnic Heredity" (on an early form of admixture analysis)Shockley 1966, "Population Control or Eugenics." In J. D. Roslansky (ed.), Genetics and the Future of Man (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts)Shockley 1967, "The Entrenched Dogmatism of Inverted Liberals", manuscript by Shockley from which major portions were read in lecturesShockley 1968, "Proposed Research to Reduce Racial Aspects of the Environment-Heredity Uncertainty", proposal read by Shockley before the National Academy of Science on April 24, 1968Shockley 1968, "Ten Point Position Statement on Human Quality Problems", revised by Shockley from a talk which he presented on "Human Quality Problems and Research Taboos"Shockley 1969, "An Analysis Leading to a Recommendation Concerning Inquiry into Eugenic Legislation", press release by Shockley, Stanford University, April 28, 1969Shockley 1970, "A 'Try Simplest Cases' Approach to the Heredity-Poverty-Crime Problem." In V. L. Allen (ed.), Psychological Factors in Poverty (Chicago: Markham)Shockley 1979, "Proposed NAS Resolution, drafted October 17, 1970", proposed by Shockley before the National Academy of SciencesShockley 1970, "New Methodology to Reduce the Environment-Heredity Uncertainty About Dysgenics"Shockley 1971, "Hardy-Weinberg Law Generalized to Estimate Hybrid Variance for Negro Populations and Reduce Racial Aspects of the Environment-Heredity Uncertainty"Shockley 1971, "Dysgenics '' A Social Problem Evaded by the Illusion of Infinite Plasticity of Human Intelligence?", manuscript planned for reading at the American Psychological Association Symposium entitled: "Social Problems: Illusion, Delusion or Reality.""Models, Mathematics, and the Moral Obligation to Diagnose the Origin of Negro IQ Deficits", W. Shockley, (1971) [71]"Negro IQ Deficit: Failure of a 'Malicious Coincidence' Model Warrants New Research Proposals", Shockley 1971[72]"Dysgenics, Geneticity, Raceology: A Challenge to the Intellectual Responsibility of Educators", Shockley 1972a[73]"A Debate Challenge: Geneticity Is 80% for White Identical Twins' I.Q.'s", Shockley 1972b[74]Shockley 1972, "Proposed Resolution Regarding the 80% Geneticity Estimate for Caucasian IQ", advance press release concerning a paper presented by ShockleyShockley 1973, "Deviations from Hardy-Weinberg Frequencies Caused by Assortative Mating in Hybrid Populations"[75]Shockley 1974, "Eugenic, or Anti-Dysgenic, Thinking Exercises", press release by Shockley dated 1974 May 3Shockley 1974, "Society Has a Moral Obligation to Diagnose Tragic Racial IQ Deficits", prepared statement by Shockley to be read during his debate against Roy InnisShockley 1978, "Has Intellectual Humanitarianism Gone Berserk?", introductory statement read by Shockley prior to a lecture given by him at UT DallasShockley 1979, "Anthropological Taboos About Determinations of Racial Mixes", press release by Shockley on October 16, 1979Shockley 1980, "Sperm Banks and Dark-Ages Dogmatism", position paper presented by Shockley in a lecture to the Rotary Club of Chico, California, April 16, 1980Shockley 1981, "Intelligence in Trouble", article by Shockley published in Leaders magazine, issue dated 1981 Jun 15Books by Shockley [ edit ] Shockley, William '' Electrons and holes in semiconductors, with applications to transistor electronics, Krieger (1956) ISBN 0-88275-382-7Shockley, William and Gong, Walter A '' Mechanics Charles E. Merrill, Inc. (1966)Shockley, William and Pearson, Roger '' Shockley on Eugenics and Race: The Application of Science to the Solution of Human Problems, Scott-Townsend (1992) ISBN 1-878465-03-1Interviews [ edit ] Interview of William Shockley by Lillian Hoddeson on 1974 Sep. 10, Niels Bohr Library & Archives, American Institute of Physics, College Park, MD USAPlayboy 1980, William Shockley interview with PlayboyNotes [ edit ] ^ Borrell, Jerry (2001). "They would be gods". Upside. 13 (10): 53 '' via ABI/INFORM Global. ^ a b c d e Boyer, Edward J. (August 14, 1989). "Controversial Nobel Laureate Shockley Dies". Los Angeles Times . Retrieved May 11, 2015 . ^ Saxon 1989 ^ Sparks, Hogan & Linville 1991, pp. 130''132 ^ a b "Inventors of the transistor followed diverse paths after 1947 discovery". Bangor Daily News. Associated Press. December 26, 1987 . Retrieved July 13, 2022 . Although he has received less publicity in recent years, his views have become, if anything, more extreme. He suggested in an interview the possibility of bonus payments to black people for undergoing voluntary sterilization. ^ "Contributors to Proceedings of the I.R.E". Proceedings of the IRE. 40 (11): 1605''1612. 1952. doi:10.1109/JRPROC.1952.274003. ^ Shurkin 2006, p. 5 ^ "Palo Alto History". www.paloaltohistory.org . Retrieved December 14, 2020 . In Palo Alto, William's temper improved little at first. But ignoring psychiatric recommendations for more socialization, his parents decided to home school William until age eight. Finally, feeling they were unable to keep him out of a school setting any longer, they sent him to the Homer Avenue School for two years, where his behavior improved dramatically --- he even earned an "A" in comportment in his first year. ^ a b Hiltzik, Michael A. (December 2, 2001). "The Twisted Legacy of William Shockley". Los Angeles Times. ^ Moll, John L. (1995). A Biographical Memoir of William Bradford Shockley (PDF) . Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press. ^ Shurkin 2006, pp. 38''39 ^ a b Transistor '' Innovation at Bell Labs Encyclopedia Britannica ^ Cooper, David Y. (2000). Shockley, William Bradford (13 February 1910''12 August 1989), physicist. American National Biography Online. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/anb/9780198606697.article.1302153. ^ Shurkin 2006, p. 48 ^ Broken Genius p. 65''67 ^ Dean Barrett, David (2020). 140 days to Hiroshima : the story of Japan's last chance to avert Armageddon. New York. ISBN 978-1-63576-580-9. OCLC 1149147965. ^ a b Shurkin 2006, p. 85 ^ Giangreco 1997, p. 568 ^ Newman, Robert P. (1998). "Hiroshima and the Trashing of Henry Stimson". The New England Quarterly. 71 (1): 27. doi:10.2307/366722. JSTOR 366722. ^ The Artful Universe by John D. Barrow, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1995, p. 239 ^ Brattain quoted in Crystal Fire p. 127 ^ a b Crystal Fire p.132 ^ CA 272437 "Electric current control mechanism", first filed in Canada on October 22, 1925 ^ Lilienfeld Archived October 2, 2006, at the Wayback Machine ^ "William Shockley". IEEE Global History Network. IEEE . Retrieved July 18, 2011 . ^ a b Michael Riordan & Lillian Hoddeson (1998). Crystal fire: the invention of the transistor and the birth of the information age. ISBN 978-0-393-31851-7. ^ Hoddeson, Lillian; Daitch, Vicki (2002). True genius: the life and science of John Bardeen : the only winner of two Nobel prizes in physics . Joseph Henry Press. ISBN 978-0-309-08408-6 . Retrieved December 30, 2014 . Diana Buchwald (March''April 2003). "John Who?". American Scientist. Vol. 91, no. 2. Archived from the original on January 2, 2015. ^ Brittain 1984, p. 1695 "an observation that William Shockley interpreted as confirmation of his concept of that junction transistor" ^ "Inventors of the transistor followed diverse paths after 1947 discovery". Associated press '' Bangor Daily news. December 25, 1987 . Retrieved May 6, 2012 . 'mixture of cooperation and competition' and 'Shockley, eager to make his own contribution, said he kept some of his own work secret until "my hand was forced" in early 1948 by an advance reported by John Shive, another Bell Laboratories researcher' ^ Broken Genius, p 121-122 ^ "1951 '' First grown-junction transistors fabricated". Computer History Museum. 2007 . Retrieved July 3, 2013 . ^ "Comstock Prize". ^ ScienCentral, ScienCentral. "Bill Shockley, Part 3 of 3". www.pbs.org. ^ Crystal Fire p. 278 ^ a b c d e "Transistorized! William Shockley". www.pbs.org. 1999 . Retrieved July 10, 2022 . ^ "Holding On". The New York Times. April 6, 2008 . Retrieved December 7, 2014 . In 1955, the physicist William Shockley set up a semiconductor laboratory in Mountain View, partly to be near his mother in Palo Alto. ... ^ "Two Views of Innovation, Colliding in Washington". The New York Times. January 13, 2008 . Retrieved December 7, 2014 . The co-inventor of the transistor and the founder of the valley's first chip company, William Shockley, moved to Palo Alto, Calif., because his mother lived there. ... ^ "Silicon Valley | American Experience | PBS". www.pbs.org. 2013 . Retrieved July 10, 2022 . ^ Crystal Fire p. 247 ^ Goodheart 2006 "Fed up with their boss, eight lab workers walked off the job on this day in Mountain View, Calif. Their employer, William Shockley, had decided not to continue research into silicon-based semiconductors; frustrated, they decided to undertake the work on their own. The researchers '-- who would become known as 'the traitorous eight' '-- went on to invent the microprocessor (and to found Intel, among other companies). ^ Gregory Gromov. "A legal bridge spanning 100 years: from the gold mines of El Dorado to the "golden" startups of Silicon Valley". ^ Dawn Levy (October 22, 2002). "William Shockley: still controversial, after all these years" (Press release). Stanford University. Archived from the original on April 4, 2005 . Retrieved June 14, 2005 . ^ Crystal Fire p. 277 ^ "Firing Line with William F. Buckley Jr.: Shockley's Thesis (Episode S0145, Recorded on June 10, 1974)". YouTube. Archived from the original on November 17, 2021 . Retrieved September 17, 2017 . ^ a b Saini, Angela (2019). Superior : the return of race science. Boston. ISBN 978-0-8070-7694-1. OCLC 1091236746. ^ Pearson, Roger (1992). Shockley on Eugenics and Race, pg. 15''49. Scott-Townsend Publishers. ISBN 1-878465-03-1 ^ Epps, Edgar G (February 1973). "Racism, Science, and the I.Q." Integrated Education. 11 (1): 35''44. doi:10.1080/0020486730110105. ^ a b "William Shockley". Southern Poverty Law Center. ^ Kessler, Ronald. "Absent at the Creation; How one scientist made off with the biggest invention since the light bulb". Archived from the original on February 24, 2015. ^ Shurkin 2006, pp. 259''260 "Essentially, the jury agreed that Witherspoon's column met the standards of defamation, but that by then, Shockley's reputation wasn't worth very much." ^ Shurkin 2006, p. 286 ^ Moll, John L. (1995). "William Bradford Shockley 1910'--1989" (PDF) . National Academy of Sciences. ^ "Shockley, Nobel Winner, Files for Senate Race in California". The New York Times. February 12, 1982. ^ "CA US Senate '' D Primary". OurCampaigns . Retrieved November 12, 2019 . ^ Carl, N.; Woodley of Menie, M. A. (November 1, 2019). "A scientometric analysis of controversies in the field of intelligence research". Intelligence. 77: 101397. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2019.101397. ISSN 0160-2896. S2CID 209513578. ^ A Science Odyssey: People and Discoveries: William Shockley PBS ^ Hoddeson, Lillian (2002). True genius : the life and science of John Bardeen : the only winner of two Nobel Prizes in physics. Vicki Daitch. Washington, District of Columbia. ISBN 0-309-16954-2. OCLC 1162253791. ^ "Shockley's Ceiling". Mountain Project . Retrieved December 12, 2018 . ^ "Rock Climb The Ceiling, The Gunks". Mountain Project . Retrieved September 16, 2020 . ^ Crystal Fire p. 45 ^ Polly Morrice (July 3, 2005). "The Genius Factory: Test-Tube Superbabies". The New York Times . Retrieved February 12, 2008 . ^ "William B. Shockley, 79, Creator of Transistor and Theory on Race". The New York Times. August 14, 1989. Archived from the original on October 15, 2009 . Retrieved July 21, 2007 . He drew further scorn when he proposed financial rewards for the genetically disadvantaged if they volunteered for sterilization. ^ "William Shockley (Part 3 of 3): Confusion over Credit". PBS. 1999 . Retrieved January 1, 2015 . ^ "Comstock Prize in Physics". National Academy of Sciences. Archived from the original on December 29, 2010 . Retrieved February 13, 2011 . ^ Editor, –GV. (2015). Wilhelm Exner Medal. Austrian Trade Association. –GV. Austria. ^ "Google Patents assignee:(Shockley William)". patents.google.com . Retrieved December 12, 2020 . ^ Shockley, William (1971). "Models, Mathematics, and the Moral Obligation to Diagnose the Origin of Negro IQ Deficits". Review of Educational Research. 41 (4): 369''377. doi:10.2307/1169443. ISSN 0034-6543. JSTOR 1169443. ^ Shockley, William (1971). "Negro IQ Deficit: Failure of a "Malicious Coincidence" Model Warrants New Research Proposals". Review of Educational Research. 41 (3): 227''248. doi:10.2307/1169529. ISSN 0034-6543. JSTOR 1169529. ^ Shockley, Wiliam; Shockley, William (1972). "Dysgenics, Geneticity, Raceology: A Chalenge to the Intelectual Responsibility of Educators". The Phi Delta Kappan. 53 (5): 297''307. ISSN 0031-7217. JSTOR 20373194. ^ Shockley, William (1972). "A Debate Challenge: Geneticity Is 80% for White Identical Twins' I.Q.'s". The Phi Delta Kappan. 53 (7): 415''419. ISSN 0031-7217. JSTOR 20373251. ^ Shockley, William (1973). "Deviations from Hardy-Weinberg Frequencies Caused by Assortative Mating in Hybrid Populations". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 70 (3): 732''736. Bibcode:1973PNAS...70..732S. doi:10.1073/pnas.70.3.732 . ISSN 0027-8424. JSTOR 62346. PMC 433346 . PMID 4514986. Other notes [ edit ] Park, Lubinski & Benbow 2010, "There were two young boys, Luis Alvarez and William Shockley, who were among the many who took Terman's tests but missed the cutoff score. Despite their exclusion from a study of young 'geniuses,' both went on to study physics, earn PhDs, and win the Nobel prize."Leslie 2000, "We also know that two children who were tested but didn't make the cut '' William Shockley and Luis Alvarez '' went on to win the Nobel Prize in Physics. According to Hastorf, none of the Terman kids ever won a Nobel or Pulitzer."Shurkin 2006, p. 13 (See also "The Truth About the 'Termites'" Kaufman, S. B. 2009)Simonton 1999, p. 4 "When Terman first used the IQ test to select a sample of child geniuses, he unknowingly excluded a special child whose IQ did not make the grade. Yet a few decades later that talent received the Nobel Prize in physics: William Shockley, the cocreator of the transistor. Ironically, not one of the more than 1,500 children who qualified according to his IQ criterion received so high an honor as adults."Eysenck 1998, pp. 127''128 "Terman, who originated those 'Genetic Studies of Genius', as he called them, selected ... children on the basis of their high IQs, the mean was 151 for both sexes. Seventy''seven who were tested with the newly translated and standardized Binet test had IQs of 170 or higher''well at or above the level of Cox's geniuses. What happened to these potential geniuses''did they revolutionize society? ... The answer in brief is that they did very well in terms of achievement, but none reached the Nobel Prize level, let alone that of genius. ... It seems clear that these data powerfully confirm the suspicion that intelligence is not a sufficient trait for truly creative achievement of the highest grade."References [ edit ] Brittain, J.E. (1984). "Becker and Shive on the transistor". Proceedings of the IEEE. 72 (12): 1695. doi:10.1109/PROC.1984.13075. ISSN 0018-9219. S2CID 1616808. an observation that William Shockley interpreted as confirmation of his concept of that junction transistor Eysenck, Hans (1998). Intelligence: A New Look. New Brunswick (NJ): Transaction Publishers. ISBN 978-0-7658-0707-6. Giangreco, D. M. (1997). "Casualty Projections for the U.S. Invasions of Japan, 1945-1946: Planning and Policy Implications". Journal of Military History. 61 (3): 521''581. doi:10.2307/2954035. ISSN 0899-3718. JSTOR 2954035. S2CID 159870872. Goodheart, Adam (July 2, 2006). "10 Days That Changed History". The New York Times . Retrieved January 2, 2015 . Leslie, Mitchell (July''August 2000). "The Vexing Legacy of Lewis Terman". Stanford Magazine . Retrieved June 5, 2013 . Park, Gregory; Lubinski, David; Benbow, Camilla P. (November 2, 2010). "Recognizing Spatial Intelligence". Scientific American . Retrieved June 5, 2013 . Shurkin, Joel (2006). Broken Genius: The Rise and Fall of William Shockley, Creator of the Electronic Age. London: Macmillan. ISBN 978-1-4039-8815-7. Brian Clegg (June 2, 2013). "Review - Broken Genius - Joel Shurkin". Popular Science. Archived from the original on March 3, 2016 . Retrieved November 13, 2010 . Simonton, Dean Keith (1999). Origins of genius: Darwinian perspectives on creativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-512879-6. JSTOR 3080746. Riordan, Michael; Hoddeson, Lillian (1997). Crystal Fire: The Invention of the Transistor and the Birth of the Information Age. Sloan Technology Series. New York: Norton. ISBN 978-0-393-04124-8. Arthur P. Molella (July 2000). "Crystal Fire: The Birth of the Information Age (review)". Technology and Culture. 41 (3): 623''625. doi:10.1353/tech.2000.0121. Saxon, Wolfgang (August 14, 1989). "William B. Shockley, 79, Creator of Transistor and Theory on Race". The New York Times . Retrieved January 2, 2015 . He drew further scorn when he proposed financial rewards for the genetically disadvantaged if they volunteered for sterilization. "Contributors to Proceedings of the I.R.E." Proceedings of the I.R.E. November 1952. p. 1611. Archived from the original on November 26, 2012. Sparks, Morgan; Hogan, Lester; Linville, John (1991). "[Obituary:] William Shockley". Physics Today. 44 (6): 130''132. Bibcode:1991PhT....44f.130S. doi:10.1063/1.2810155. ISSN 0031-9228. Tucker, William H. (2007) [first published 2002]. The funding of scientific racism: Wickliffe Draper and the Pioneer Fund. University of Illinois Press. ISBN 978-0-252-07463-9. Andrew S. Winston (July 2003). "The Funding of Scientific Racism: Wickliffe Draper and the Pioneer Fund (review)". Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences. 58 (3): 391''392. doi:10.1093/jhmas/jrg016. External links [ edit ] National Academy of Sciences biographyWilliam Shockley on Nobelprize.org including his Nobel Lecture, December 11, 1956 Transistor Technology Evokes New PhysicsPBS biographyGordon Moore. Biography of William Shockley Time MagazineInterview with Shockley biographer Joel ShurkinOral history interview transcript for William Shockley on 10 September 1974, American Institute of Physics, Niels Bohr Library & Archives - interview conducted by Lillian Hoddeson in Murray Hill, New JerseyHistory of the transistorWilliam Shockley (IEEE Global History Network)Shockley and Bardeen-Brattain patent disputesWilliam Shockley vs. Francis Cress-Welsing (Tony Brown Show, 1974)Works by or about William Shockley in libraries (WorldCat catalog)Guide to the William Shockley Papers SC0222
  • The Population Bomb - Wikipedia
    • Link to Article
    • Archived Version
    • Sat, 16 Jul 2022 18:47
    •  
    • 1968 book predicting worldwide famine
    • The Population Bomb is a 1968 book written by Stanford University Professor Paul R. Ehrlich and his wife, Anne Ehrlich.[1][2] It predicted worldwide famine in the 1970s and 1980s due to overpopulation, as well as other major societal upheavals, and advocated immediate action to limit population growth. Fears of a "population explosion" existed in the 1950s and 1960s, but the book and its author brought the idea to an even wider audience.[3][4][5]
    • The book has been criticized since its publication for its alarmist tone, and in recent decades for its inaccurate predictions. The Ehrlichs stand by the book despite its flaws, stating in 2009 that "perhaps the most serious flaw in The Bomb was that it was much too optimistic about the future" and believe that it achieved their goals because "it alerted people to the importance of environmental issues and brought human numbers into the debate on the human future."[2]
    • General description of the book [ edit ] Graph of
    • human population from 10,000 BC to 2017 AD. It shows the extremely rapid growth in the world population since the eighteenth century.
    • The Population Bomb was written at the suggestion of David Brower, the executive director of the environmentalist Sierra Club, and Ian Ballantine of Ballantine Books following various public appearances Ehrlich had made regarding population issues and their relation to the environment. Although the Ehrlichs collaborated on the book, the publisher insisted that a single author be credited, and also asked to change their preferred title: Population, Resources, and Environment.[2] The title Population Bomb was taken (with permission) from General William H. Draper, founder of the Population Crisis Committee and a pamphlet issued in 1954 by the Hugh Moore Fund. The Ehrlichs regret the choice of title, which they admit was a perfect choice from a marketing perspective, but think that "it led Paul to be miscategorized as solely focused on human numbers, despite our interest in all the factors affecting the human trajectory."[2]
    • Early editions of The Population Bomb began with the statement:
    • The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate...[6]
    • Much of the book is spent describing the state of the environment and the food security situation, which is described as increasingly dire. Ehrlich argues that as the existing population was not being fed adequately, and as it was growing rapidly, it was unreasonable to expect sufficient improvements in food production to feed everyone. He further argued that the growing population placed escalating strains on all aspects of the natural world. "What needs to be done?" he wrote, "We must rapidly bring the world population under control, reducing the growth rate to zero or making it negative. Conscious regulation of human numbers must be achieved. Simultaneously we must, at least temporarily, greatly increase our food production." Ehrlich described a number of "ideas on how these goals might be reached."[7] He believed that the United States should take a leading role in population control, both because it was already consuming much more than the rest of the world, and therefore had a moral duty to reduce its impact, and because the US would have to lead international efforts due to its prominence in the world. In order to avoid charges of hypocrisy or racism it would have to take the lead in population reduction efforts.[8] Ehrlich floats the idea of adding "temporary sterilants" to the water supply or staple foods. However, he rejects the idea as unpractical due to "criminal inadequacy of biomedical research in this area."[9] He suggests a tax scheme in which additional children would add to a family's tax burden at increasing rates for more children, as well as luxury taxes on childcare goods. He suggests incentives for men who agree to permanent sterilization before they have two children, as well as a variety of other monetary incentives. He proposes a powerful Department of Population and Environment which "should be set up with the power to take whatever steps are necessary to establish a reasonable population size in the United States and to put an end to the steady deterioration of our environment."[10] The department should support research into population control, such as better contraceptives, mass sterilizing agents, and prenatal sex discernment (because families often continue to have children until a male is born. Ehrlich suggested that if they could choose a male child this would reduce the birthrate). Legislation should be enacted guaranteeing the right to an abortion, and sex education should be expanded.
    • After explaining the domestic policies the US should pursue, he discusses foreign policy. He advocates a system of "triage," such as that suggested by William and Paul Paddock in Famine 1975!. Under this system countries would be divided into categories based on their abilities to feed themselves going forward. Countries with sufficient programmes in place to limit population growth, and the ability to become self-sufficient in the future would continue to receive food aid. Countries, for example India, which were "so far behind in the population-food game that there is no hope that our food aid will see them through to self-sufficiency" would have their food aid eliminated. Ehrlich argued that this was the only realistic strategy in the long-term. Ehrlich applauds the Paddocks' "courage and foresight" in proposing such a solution.[11] Ehrlich further discusses the need to set up public education programs and agricultural development schemes in developing countries. He argues that the scheme would likely have to be implemented outside the framework of the United Nations due to the necessity selecting the targeted regions and countries, and suggests that within countries certain regions should be prioritized to the extent that cooperative separatist movements should be encouraged if they are an improvement over the existing authority. He mentions his support for government mandated sterilization of Indian males with three or more children.[12]
    • In the rest of the book Ehrlich discusses things which readers can do to help. This is focused primarily on changing public opinion to create pressure on politicians to enact the policies he suggests, which he believed were not politically possible in 1968. At the end of the book he discusses the possibility that his forecasts may be wrong, which he felt he must acknowledge as a scientist. However, he believes that regardless of coming catastrophes, his prescriptions would only benefit humanity, and would be the right course of action in any case.[13]
    • The book sold over two million copies, raised the general awareness of population and environmental issues, and influenced 1960s and 1970s public policy.[2] For the 14 years prior the book's appearance, the world population had been growing at accelerating rates, but immediately after the book's publication, the world population growth rate coincidentally began a continuing downward trend, from its 1968 peak of 2.09% to 1.09% in 2018.[14]
    • Context [ edit ] In 1948, two widely read books were published that would inspire a "neo-Malthusian" debate on population and the environment: Fairfield Osborn's Our Plundered Planet and William Vogt's Road to Survival. These inspired works such as the original Population Bomb pamphlet by Hugh Everett Moore in 1954, as well as some of the original societies concerned with population and environmental matters.[3] D.B. Luten has said that although the book is often seen as a seminal work in the field, The Population Bomb is actually best understood as "climaxing and in a sense terminating the debate of the 1950s and 1960s.''[15] Ehrlich has said that he traced his own Malthusian beliefs to a lecture he heard Vogt give when he was attending university in the early 1950s. For Ehrlich, these writers provided ''a global framework for things he had observed as a young naturalist."[3]
    • Criticisms [ edit ] Restatement of Malthusian theory [ edit ] The Population Bomb has been characterized by critics as primarily a repetition of the Malthusian catastrophe argument that population growth will outpace agricultural growth unless controlled. Ehrlich observed that since about 1930 the population of the world had doubled within a single generation, from 2 billion to nearly 4 billion, and was on track to do so again. He assumed that available resources on the other hand, and in particular food, were nearly at their limits. Some critics compare Ehrlich unfavorably to Malthus, saying that although Thomas Malthus did not make a firm prediction of imminent catastrophe, Ehrlich warned of a potential massive disaster within the next decade or two. In addition, critics state that unlike Malthus, Ehrlich did not see any means of avoiding the disaster entirely (although some mitigation was possible), and proposed solutions that were much more radical than those discussed by Malthus, such as starving whole countries that refused to implement population control measures.[16]
    • Ehrlich was certainly not unique in his neo-Malthusian predictions, and there was a widespread belief in the 1960s and 70s that increasingly catastrophic famines were on their way.[17]
    • Predictions [ edit ] The Ehrlichs made a number of specific predictions that did not come to pass, for which they have received criticism. They have acknowledged that some predictions were incorrect. However, they maintain that their general argument remains intact, that their predictions were merely illustrative, that their and others' warnings caused preventive action, or that many of their predictions may yet come true (see Ehrlich's response below) . Still other commentators have criticized the Ehrlichs' perceived inability to acknowledge mistakes, evasiveness, and refusal to alter their arguments in the face of contrary evidence.[18] In 2015 Ehrlich told Retro Report, "I do not think my language was too apocalyptic in The Population Bomb. My language would be even more apocalyptic today."[19]
    • In The Population Bomb ' s opening lines the authors state that nothing can prevent famines in which hundreds of millions of people will die during the 1970s (amended to 1970s and 1980s in later editions), and that there would be "a substantial increase in the world death rate." Although many lives could be saved through dramatic action, it was already too late to prevent a substantial increase in the global death rate. However, in reality the global death rate has continued to decline substantially since then, from 13/1000 in 1965''74 to 10/1000 from 1985''1990. Meanwhile, the population of the world has more than doubled, while calories consumed/person have increased 24%. The UN does not keep official death-by-hunger statistics so it is hard to measure whether the "hundreds of millions of deaths" number is correct. Ehrlich himself suggested in 2009 that between 200-300 million had died of hunger since 1968. However, that is measured over 40 years rather than the ten to twenty foreseen in the book, so it can be seen as significantly fewer than predicted.[20]
    • Famine has not been eliminated, but its root cause has been political instability, not global food shortage.[21] The Indian economist and Nobel Prize winner, Amartya Sen, has argued that nations with democracy and a free press have virtually never suffered from extended famines.[22] And while a 2010 UN report stated that 925 million of the world's population of nearly seven billion people were in a constant state of hunger,[23] it also notes that the percentage of the world's population who qualify as "undernourished" has fallen by more than half, from 33 percent to about 16 percent, since Ehrlich published The Population Bomb.[24]
    • Ehrlich writes: "I don't see how India could possibly feed two hundred million more people by 1980."[6] This view was widely held at the time, as another statement of his, later in the book: "I have yet to meet anyone familiar with the situation who thinks that India will be self-sufficient in food by 1971." In the book's 1971 edition, the latter prediction was removed, as the food situation in India suddenly improved (see Green Revolution in India).
    • As of 2010, India had almost 1.2 billion people, having nearly tripled its population from around 400 million in 1960, with a total fertility rate in 2008 of 2.6.[25] While the absolute numbers of malnourished children in India is high,[26] the rates of malnutrition and poverty in India have declined from approximately 90% at the time of India's independence (1947), to less than 40% in 2010 (see Malnutrition in India) . Ehrlich's prediction about famines did not come to pass, although food security is still an issue in India. However, most epidemiologists, public health physicians and demographers identify corruption as the chief cause of malnutrition, not "overpopulation".[27] As Nobel Prize''winning economist Amartya Sen noted, India frequently had famines during British colonial rule. However, since India became a democracy, there have been no recorded famines.[28]
    • Journalist Dan Gardner has criticized Ehrlich both for his overconfident predictions and his refusal to acknowledge his errors. "In two lengthy interviews, Ehrlich admitted making not a single major error in the popular works he published in the late 1960s and early 1970s '... the only flat-out mistake Ehrlich acknowledges is missing the destruction of the rain forests, which happens to be a point that supports and strengthens his world view'--and is therefore, in cognitive dissonance terms, not a mistake at all. Beyond that, he was by his account, off a little here and there, but only because the information he got from others was wrong. Basically, he was right across the board."[29]
    • Jonathan Last called it "one of the most spectacularly foolish books ever published".[30]
    • Persistence of trends [ edit ] Economist Julian Simon and medical statistician Hans Rosling pointed out that the failed prediction of 70s famines were based exclusively on the assumption that exponential population growth will continue indefinitely and no technological or social progress will be made.[31][32] In The Ultimate Resource Simon argued that resources, such as metals, which Ehrlichs extensively discuss in their books as examples of non-sustainable resources, are valued exclusively for the function they provide, and technological progress frequently replaces these: for example, copper was largely replaced by fiber optic in communications, and carbon fiber replaced a wide range of alloys and steel in construction (see Simon-Ehrlich wager and The Ultimate Resource) .[33] Simon also argued that technological progress tends to happen in large steps rather than linear growth, as happened with the Green revolution.[34]Hans Rosling in Factfulness demonstrated that fertility rate has significantly decreased worldwide and, more importantly, high fertility is a natural response to high mortality in low-income countries and once they enter higher income group, fertility drops quickly (see Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World '' and Why Things Are Better Than You Think) . According to environmentalist Stewart Brand, himself a student and friend of Ehrlich, the assumption made by the latter and by authors of The Limits to Growth has been "proven wrong since 1963" when the demographic trends worldwide have visibly changed.[35]
    • Showmanship [ edit ] One frequent criticism of The Population Bomb is that it focused on spectacle and exaggeration at the expense of accuracy. Pierre Desrochers and Christine Hoffbauer remark that "at the time of writing The Population Bomb, Paul and Anne Ehrlich should have been more cautious and revised their tone and rhetoric, in light of the undeniable and already apparent errors and shortcomings of Osborn and Vogt's analyses."[3] Charles Rubin has written that it was precisely because Ehrlich was largely unoriginal and wrote in a clear emotionally gripping style that it became so popular. He quotes a review from Natural History noting that Ehrlich does not try to "convince intellectually by mind dulling statistics," but rather roars "like an Old Testament Prophet."[36] Gardner says, "as much as the events and culture of the era, Paul Ehrlich's style explain the enormous audience he attracted." Indeed, an appearance on The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson helped to propel the success of the book, as well as Ehrlich's celebrity.[37] Desrochers and Hoffbauer go on to conclude that it seems hard to deny that using an alarmist tone and emotional appeal were the main lessons that the present generation of environmentalists learned from Ehrlich's success.
    • Social and political coercion [ edit ] On the political left the book received criticism that it was focusing on "the wrong problem", and that the real issue was one of distribution of resources rather than of overpopulation.[2] Marxists worried that Ehrlich's work could be used to justify genocide and imperial control, as well as oppression of minorities and disadvantaged groups or even a return to eugenics.[38]
    • Eco-socialist Barry Commoner argued that the Ehrlichs were too focused on overpopulation as the source of environmental problems, and that their proposed solutions were politically unacceptable because of the coercion that they implied, and because the cost would fall disproportionately on the poor. He argued that technological, and above all social development would lead to a natural decrease in both population growth and environmental damage.[39][40] Commoner engaged in a fierce debate with Ehrlich at an environmental United Nations convention in Stockholm:
    • A feud about how to deal with overpopulation surfaced in Stockholm, between Ehrlich and his nemesis, Barry Commoner, whose popular book, The Closing Circle (1971), directly criticized Ehrlich's population-bomb thesis. Both were on panels in Stockholm, with Commoner slyly planting invidious questions aimed at Ehrlich among various Third World participants in the conference, and Ehrlich yelling back. Commoner's argument was that population policies weren't needed, because what was called ''the demographic transition'' would take care of everything'--all you had to do was help poor people get less poor, and they would have fewer children. Ehrlich insisted that the situation was way too serious for that approach, and it wouldn't work anyway: You needed harsh government programs to drive down the birthrate. The alternative was overwhelming famines and massive damage to the environment.
    • Ehrlich's response [ edit ] In a 2004 Grist Magazine interview,[41] Ehrlich acknowledged some specific predictions he had made, in the years around the time The Population Bomb was published, that had not come to pass. However, as to a number of his fundamental ideas and assertions he maintained that facts and science proved them correct.
    • In answer to the question: "Were your predictions in The Population Bomb right?", Ehrlich responded:
    • Anne and I have always followed UN population projections as modified by the Population Reference Bureau -- so we never made "predictions," even though idiots think we have. When I wrote The Population Bomb in 1968, there were 3.5 billion people. Since then we've added another 2.8 billion -- many more than the total population (2 billion) when I was born in 1932. If that's not a population explosion, what is? My basic claims (and those of the many scientific colleagues who reviewed my work) were that population growth was a major problem. Fifty-eight academies of science said that same thing in 1994, as did the world scientists' warning to humanity in the same year. My view has become depressingly mainline!
    • In another retrospective article published in 2009, Ehrlich said, in response to criticism that many of his predictions had not come to pass:[2]
    • the biggest tactical error in The Bomb was the use of scenarios, stories designed to help one think about the future. Although we clearly stated that they were not predictions and that ''we can be sure that none of them will come true as stated,' (p. 72)'--their failure to occur is often cited as a failure of prediction. In honesty, the scenarios were way off, especially in their timing (we underestimated the resilience of the world system). But they did deal with future issues that people in 1968 should have been thinking about '' famines, plagues, water shortages, armed international interventions by the United States, and nuclear winter (e.g., Ehrlich et al. 1983, Toon et al. 2007)'--all events that have occurred or now still threaten
    • In a 2018 interview with The Guardian, Ehrlich, while still proud of The Population Bomb for starting a worldwide debate on the issues of population, acknowledged weaknesses of the book including not placing enough emphasis on overconsumption and inequality, and countering accusations of racism. He argues "too many rich people in the world is a major threat to the human future, and cultural and genetic diversity are great human resources." He advocated for an "unprecedented redistribution of wealth" in order to mitigate the problem of overconsumption of resources by the world's wealthy, but said "the rich who now run the global system '-- that hold the annual 'world destroyer' meetings in Davos '-- are unlikely to let it happen."[42]
    • See also [ edit ] Club of RomeSimon''Ehrlich wagerThe BlipZ.P.G.References [ edit ] ^ "Paul R. Ehrlich - Center for Conservation Biology". Stanford University. ^ a b c d e f g Paul R. Ehrlich; Anne H. Ehrlich (2009). "The Population Bomb Revisited" (PDF) . Electronic Journal of Sustainable Development. 1 (3): 63''71 . Retrieved 2010-02-01 . ^ a b c d Pierre Desrochers; Christine Hoffbauer (2009). "The Post War Intellectual Roots of the Population Bomb" (PDF) . The Electronic Journal of Sustainable Development. 1 (3): 73''97 . Retrieved 2010-02-01 . ^ The phrase "population bomb", was already in use. For example, see this article. Quality Analysis and Quality Control, Canadian Medical Association Journal, June 9, 1962, vol. 86, p. 1074 ^ Ehrlich, Paul. "The population bomb" (PDF) . project avalon.net. ^ a b Ehrlich, Paul R. (1968). The Population Bomb . Ballantine Books. ^ Ehrlich, Paul R. (1968). The Population Bomb . Ballantine Books. p. 131. ^ Ehrlich, Paul R. (1968). The Population Bomb . Ballantine Books. p. 135. ^ Ehrlich, Paul R. (1968). The Population Bomb . Ballantine Books. p. 136. Those of you who are appalled at such a suggestion can rest easy. The option isn't even open to us, thanks to the criminal inadequacy of biomedical research in this area. If the choice now is either such additives or catastrophe, we shall have catastrophe. It might be possible to develop such population control tools, although the task would not be simple.... Technical problems aside, I suspect you'll agree with me that society would probably dissolve before sterilants were added to the water supply by the government. Just consider the fluoridation controversy. Some other way will have to be found. ^ Ehrlich, Paul R. (1968). The Population Bomb . Ballantine Books. p. 138. ^ Ehrlich, Paul R. (1968). The Population Bomb . Ballantine Books. p. 161. ^ Ehrlich, Paul R. (1968). The Population Bomb . Ballantine Books. pp. 165''66. When he [Indian Minister Sripati Chandrasekhar] suggested sterilizing all Indian males with three or more children, we should have applied pressure on the Indian government to go ahead with the plan. We should have volunteered logistic support in the form of helicopters, vehicles, and surgical instruments. We should have sent doctors to aid in the program by setting up centers for training para-medical personnel to do vasectomies. Coercion? Perhaps, but coercion in a good cause. I am sometimes astounded at the attitudes of Americans who are horrified at the prospect of our government insisting on population control as the price of food aid. All too often the very same people are fully in support of applying military force against those who disagree with our form of government or our foreign policy. We must be relentless in pushing for population control around the world. ^ Ehrlich, Paul R. (1968). The Population Bomb . Ballantine Books. p. 198. ^ "World Population by Year". Worldometers . Retrieved 27 December 2018 . ^ Luten, DB 1986."The Limits-to-Growth Controversy" InTR Vale (ed.). Progress against Growth. Daniel B. Lutenon the American Landscape. New York: The Guilford Press, pp. 293''314. [Originally published in K. A. Hammond, G. Macinko and W. Fairchild (eds.) (1978). Sourcebook on the Environment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 163''180. ^ Dan Gardner (2010). Future Babble: Why Expert Predictions Fail '' and Why We Believe Them Anyway. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. pp. 247''48. William and Paul Paddock, authors of Famine 1975!, advocated a policy they called "triage": Rich nations should send all their food aid to those poor countries that still had some hope of one day feeding themselves; hopeless countries like India and Egypt should be cut off immediately.... The Paddocks knew countries that lost the aid would plunge into famine... In The Population Bomb, Paul Ehrlich lavishly praised Famine 1975! ... and declared that "there is no rational choice except to adopt some form of the Paddocks' strategy as far as food distribution is concerned." Even in 1968 it should have been clear that this was glib nonsense. ^ Dan Gardner (2010). Future Babble: Why Expert Predictions Fail '' and Why We Believe Them Anyway. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. pp. 130''31. In 1974, at a World Food Congress in Rome, delegates listened somberly to dire forecasts by the likes of Philip Handler, a nutritionist and president of the United States National Academy of Sciences, who concluded that the worst pessimists - the Paddocks and Paul Ehrlich = had been on the mark. ^ Dan Gardner (2010). Future Babble: Why Expert Predictions Fail '' and Why We Believe Them Anyway. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. ^ "The Population Bomb?". Retro Report. 1 June 2015 . Retrieved 15 July 2015 . ^ Dan Gardner (2010). Future Babble: Why Expert Predictions Fail '' and Why We Believe Them Anyway. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. pp. 7''8, 229''31. ^ "Food Security and Nutrition in the Last 50 Years", FAO Corporate Document Repository, publication date unavailable. ^ Massing, Michael (1 March 2003). "Does Democracy Avert Famine?". The New York Times . Retrieved 28 December 2010 . ^ "Hunger Stats" . Retrieved 28 December 2010 . ^ "Proportion of undernourished people in developing countries, 1969''71 to 2010" (PDF) . Retrieved 5 March 2011 . ^ "Total Fertility Rate in India on decline". 10 December 2010. ^ Sengupta, Somini (13 March 2009). "As Indian Growth Soars, Child Hunger Persists". The New York Times. ^ Sengupta, Somini (13 March 2009). "As Indian Growth Soars, Child Hunger Persists". The New York Times. ^ Sachs, Jeffrey (26 October 1998). "The Real Causes of Famine". Time. Archived from the original on February 16, 2007. ^ Dan Gardner (2010). Future Babble: Why Expert Predictions Fail '' and Why We Believe Them Anyway. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. p. 230. ^ Last JV (2013) What to expect when no one's expecting, Encounter Books, New York, pp 7. ^ "Famine 1995? Or 2025? Or 1975?". ^ "Do Humans Breed Like Flies? Or Like Norwegian Rats?". ^ "The Amazing Theory of Raw-Material Scarcity". ^ "The Ultimate Resource II: People, Materials, and Environment". www.juliansimon.com . Retrieved 2020-05-17 . ^ Brand, Stewart (2010). Whole Earth Discipline. ISBN 978-1843548164. The theory's Malthusian premise has been proven wrong since 1963, when the rate of population growth reached a frightening 2 percent a year but then began dropping. The 1963 inflection point showed that the imagined soaring J-curve of human increase was instead a normal S-curve. The growth rate was leveling off. No one thought the growth rate might go negative and the population start shrinking in this century without an overshoot and crash, but that is what is happening. ^ Charles T. Rubin (1994). The green crusade:rethinking the roots of environmentalism. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield. p. 79. ISBN 9780847688173. ^ Dan Gardner (2010). Future Babble: Why Expert Predictions Fail '' and Why We Believe Them Anyway. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. p. 164. ^ See for example: Ronald L. Meek, ed. (1973). Marx and Engels on the Population Bomb. The Ramparts Press. Archived from the original on 2000-05-21. ^ Barry Commoner (May 1972). "A Bulletin Dialogue: on "The Closing Circle" - Response". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists: 17''56. Population control (as distinct from voluntary, self-initiated control of fertility), no matter how disguised, involves some measure of political repression, and would burden the poor nations with the social cost of a situation'--overpopulation'--which is the current outcome of their previous exploitation, as colonies, by the wealthy nations. ^ Brand, Stewart (2010). Whole Earth Discipline. ISBN 978-1843548164. I was for Ehrlich and against the ecosocialist Commoner. But Ehrlich's predicted famines never came, thanks largely to the green revolution in agriculture, nor did the need for harsh government programs. Instead, Commoner's thesis of demographic transition turned out to be mostly right. ^ Paul Ehrlich, famed ecologist, answers readers' questions, August 13, 2004, Grist ^ Carrington, Damian (March 22, 2018). "Paul Ehrlich: 'Collapse of civilisation is a near certainty within decades' ". The Guardian . Retrieved April 4, 2018 . Further reading [ edit ] Robertson, Thomas (2012). The Malthusian Moment: Global Population Growth and the Birth of American Environmentalism. Rutgers University Press. ISBN 978-0-8135-5272-9External links [ edit ] Dr. Albert Bartlett, 2004 lecture, "Arithmetic, Population and Energy""The Global Food Crisis", June 2009 article, National Geographic MagazineThe Population Bomb (working title), Documentary Film
  • Tweets Lead To Daniel J. Lewis' Exit From Podcast Academy Board
    • Link to Article
    • Archived Version
    • Sat, 16 Jul 2022 18:47
    •  
    • May 9, 2022 at 1:20 AM (PT) Lewis
    • "THE AUDACITY TO PODCAST" host and INTERNATIONAL PODCAST DAY co-founder DANIEL J. LEWIS has departed the Board of Directors of THE PODCAST ACADEMY after he tweeted comments supporting the leaked SUPREME COURT opinion on abortion. LEWIS, in a since-deleted tweet responding to a tweet by POD.DRALAND's ALEXANDRA COHL criticizing Justice SAMUEL ALITO's opinion, wrote, "Stopping the mass murder of blacks and women, along with all the other babies, will be wonderful for the USA. How anyone could be so barbaric to endorse the murder of nearly 1 million babies every year is unbelievable." LEWIS' comments and previous tweets on other topics drew a backlash from several podcasters on social media and led to his departure from the board, to which he was recently elected.
    • A statement from the organization read, "The value of inclusivity is always at the forefront at THE PODCAST ACADEMY. We take matters seriously when a leader within our organization creates an environment where the community questions their commitment to that value. After thoughtful discussion -- that included the newly elected governor in question -- effective immediately DANIEL J. LEWIS no longer serves on the Board of Governors."
    • see more Net News
  • Archbishop Naumann says he is 'sad' over Pope's handling of Biden, Pelosi on abortion | Catholic News Agency
    • Link to Article
    • Archived Version
    • Sat, 16 Jul 2022 18:34
    •  
    • Washington, D.C. Newsroom, Jul 14, 2022 / 10:26 am
    • Archbishop Joseph Naumann of Kansas City in Kansas has said he is ''sad'' over the way Pope Francis has handled the controversy surrounding the pro-abortion actions of President Joe Biden and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, whose positions on the issue are at sharp odds with the teaching of their Catholic faith on the sanctity of human life.
    • Naumann's comment was one of several pointed statements he made on the controversy in an interview with the German newspaper Die Tagespost published Wednesday.
    • ''I think the pope doesn't understand the U.S., just as he doesn't understand the Church in the U.S.,'' the archbishop told the newspaper, according to CNA Deutsch, CNA's German-language news partner.
    • "His advisers and the people surrounding him have completely misinformed him on this," Naumann added.
    • In an interview with CNA on Thursday, Naumann stood by his comments to the newspaper, saying, ''I said what I said.''
    • However, Naumann clarified that he spoke to the German news outlet prior to becoming aware of Pope Francis' most recent comments regarding Biden, in which the pope referred to the U.S. president's pro-abortion position as an ''incoherence'' in respect to his Catholic faith.
    • In the interview with Univisi"n and Televisa broadcast July 12, the pope said he leaves the matter to Biden's ''conscience,'' but he also suggested that Biden discuss the conflict with his pastor.
    • ''I wasn't aware of that statement by the Holy Father and I do think that's helpful,'' Naumann told CNA. ''It's very helpful because I think that's exactly true, that his position is incoherent with Catholic teaching. So I'm grateful for that clarification by the Holy Father.''
    • In his comments to Tagespost, Naumann said, ''Of course we have to be pastoral'' when dealing with such matters.
    • "However, it is not pastoral to tell someone they are a good Catholic and can receive Communion as a matter of course, when that person has committed a grave evil,'' he continued. ''The fact that the pope received Pelosi was politically exploited. In doing so, Francis is doing exactly what he warns others not to do."
    • Though a Catholic, Biden has repeatedly supported abortion rights despite the Church's teaching that human life must be respected and protected from the moment of conception. After meeting with Pope Francis in October, Biden said the pope told him to "keep receiving Communion." The Vatican has not confirmed Biden's account.
    • Biden, the archbishop told the newspaper, "knows what is right in this regard. There is no excuse. He should not keep presenting himself as a devout Catholic."
    • Through his behavior, Naumann said, the president was showing the public, "I support legal abortions and I'm a devout Catholic at the same time, so you can, too." Naumann said it crosses the line when politicians "flaunt their Catholic faith and advocate such evil."
    • "President Biden claims to be a devout Catholic, but it's not really clear from his actions," Naumann continued.
    • "In my view, he is using the rosary and his Mass attendance to portray himself as a faithful Catholic. If you look at Joe Biden's career, you see that he followed the Democratic line, not the teachings of the Church."
    • Last week Biden signed an executive order aimed at protecting abortion access in response to the Supreme Court's decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion throughout the U.S. Responding to Biden's action, Archbishop William Lori of Baltimore, the chair of the U.S. bishops' pro-life committee, called the move ''deeply disturbing and tragic.''
    • In recent years the U.S. bishops have discussed and commented on the issue of ''Eucharistic coherence'' at length, especially in regard to Biden and other American Catholic politicians.
    • Those discussions led to the publication in November of a new document on the Eucharist, ''The Mystery of the Eucharist in the Life of the Church,'' and the launch of a three-year Eucharistic revival initiative, culminating with a national Eucharistic Congress in Indianapolis in July 2024.
    • While the Eucharist document does not mention Biden or any Catholic politicians by name, it does reiterate the bishops' prior guidance that Catholics who are not in communion with the Church's teaching should not present themselves for Communion.
    • AC Wimmer is Editor-in-Chief of CNA Deutsch, CNA's German-language news partner.
  • Texas obscenity statute - Wikipedia
    • Link to Article
    • Archived Version
    • Sat, 16 Jul 2022 17:13
    •  
    • Unconstitutional Texas law banning the sale of sex toys
    • The Texas obscenity statute is statute prohibiting the sale of sex toys in Texas. The law was introduced in 1973, and was last updated in 2003. While the law was never formally repealed, in 2008 a U.S. District Judge released a report declaring it to be "facially unconstitutional and unenforceable".
    • History [ edit ] In 1973, the Texas Legislature passed Section 43.21 of the Texas Penal Code, which, in part, prohibited the sale or promotion of "obscene devices". The statute defines "obscene device" as "a device including a dildo or artificial vagina, designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs". The legislation was last updated in 2003, and Section 43.23 currently states, "A person commits an offense if, knowing its content and character, he wholesale promotes or possesses with intent to wholesale promote any obscene material or obscene device".[1] Section (h) of the law also criminalizes the possession of six or more devices (or "multiple identical or similar" devices) as "presumed to possess them with intent to promote".[1]
    • Prosecuted cases [ edit ] Prosecution under the statute is rare but has occasionally occurred. In 2001, attorneys Mary and Ted Roberts used the obscenity statute in an elaborate extortion scheme against a number of men who had engaged in extramarital relations with Mary Roberts.[2] In Burleson in 2004, Joanne Webb faced up to one year in prison for selling a vibrator to two undercover police officers posing as a married couple at a private party.[3] She was later acquitted, and the undercover officers were issued reprimands. In 2007, a lingerie shop in Lubbock was raided, and items "deemed to be illegal by the Texas Penal Code" were confiscated. The clerk on duty at the time was arrested, but charges were later dropped.[4][5]
    • Appeals [ edit ] Reliable Consultants, Inc., who operate four retail stores in Texas that carry a stock of sexual devices, and PHE, Inc., which is also engaged in the retail distribution of sexual devices through their website and catalogs, both filed lawsuits against the legislation,[when? ] claiming that the statute is unconstitutional. In an appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, a three-judge panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit overturned the statute on February 12, 2008, by a vote of 2''1, holding that "the statute has provisions that violate the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution".[6] The State of Texas filed a petition on February 22, 2008, for the Circuit Court to rehear the argument en banc.[7]
    • On July 3, 2008, Texas's 13th Court of Appeals in Corpus Christi[8] in the case of Villareal vs. State,[9] addressed the ruling of the federal Court of Appeals. The 13th Court of Appeals ruled that until the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals rules that Section 43.23 is unconstitutional, the promotion of obscene devices remains illegal.[10] Therefore, despite the actions of the federal courts and the Texas Attorney General described elsewhere in this article, Section 43.23 remains in effect in the twenty-county area of Texas within the jurisdiction of the 13th Court of Appeals.[11]
    • On August 1, 2008, the Fifth Circuit denied Texas's request to re-hear the case en banc.[12] The refusal created a split between federal circuits: the 5th Circuit overturned the Texas law and the 11th Circuit upheld the nearly identical Anti-Obscenity Enforcement Act in Alabama. The presence of a "circuit split" is one of the factors that increases the likelihood of the Supreme Court of the United States granting a writ of certiorari and ruling in order to clear up the disagreement between the two Courts of Appeals.[13]
    • On November 4, 2008, U.S. District Judge Lee Yeakel released a two-page document dated October 29, 2008, in which he stated that the Texas Attorney General's Office notified him that they would not file a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court. The next month, on November 13, Yeakel filed a "joint status report" that noted the parties had come to an agreement. "Texas Penal Code §§ 43.23, to the extent that it applies to'obscene devices' as defined in Texas Penal Code § 43.21(a)(7), is declared to be facially unconstitutional and unenforceable throughout the State of Texas".[14]
    • See also [ edit ] Anti-Obscenity Enforcement Act (Alabama statute)References [ edit ] ^ a b "Penal Code Chapter 43. Public Idecency". Statutes.legis.state.tx.us. Archived from the original on September 18, 2012 . Retrieved July 15, 2017 . ^ "There's something about Mary1 '...". Texas District & County Attorneys Association. Archived from the original on September 18, 2012 . Retrieved July 15, 2017 . ^ "Texas mom faces trial for selling sex toys". CNN. February 11, 2004. Archived from the original on January 10, 2013 . Retrieved July 15, 2017 . ^ "Police Raid Lingerie Shop". klbk13.tv. May 21, 2007. Archived from the original on May 25, 2007 . Retrieved May 21, 2007 . ^ "Lubbock District Attorney Drops Charges Against Lingerie Store". July 16, 2007. Archived from the original on December 10, 2021 . Retrieved July 15, 2022 . ^ "PHE v. State of Texas, Intervenor-Defendant-Appellee". FindLaw. Archived from the original on July 15, 2017 . Retrieved July 15, 2017 . ^ Reliable Consultants, Inc v. Ronnie Earle, 06-51067 & 06-51104 (5th Cir. February 22, 2008). ^ Texas Office of Court Administration. "Welcome to the official site of the Thirteenth Court of Appeals of Texas". 13thcoa.courts.state.tx.us . Retrieved 2013-09-01 . ^ "Texas Judiciary Online - HTML Opinion". 13thcoa.courts.state.tx.us . Retrieved 2013-09-01 . ^ Guest, Robert (October 6, 2008). "Are Dildos Illegal in Texas (again)?". Dallas Criminal Defense Lawyer Blog. Archived from the original on July 30, 2012 . Retrieved July 15, 2017 . ^ "Dildos & Sexually Obscene "Toys" Illegal in Texas '... for now | Austin Attorney Dax Garvin". Dax Legal. January 31, 2012. Archived from the original on July 16, 2012 . Retrieved July 15, 2017 . ^ "United States Court of Appeals" (PDF) . Ca5.uscourts.gov . Retrieved 2013-09-01 . ^ Brayton, Ed (August 11, 2008). "Dildos at the Supreme Court?". ScienceBlogs. Archived from the original on October 18, 2008 . Retrieved August 11, 2008 . ^ "2008-11-13 Texas Western Court Order Obscenity Law | PDF | Attorney's Fee | Judgment (Law)". External links [ edit ] Austin Chronicle articlePDF Version of Circuit Court Opinion (Rev Mar 10, 2008)

• Clips
  • 38. Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race War Against the Weak (2003) 2.mp3
  • 39. Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race War Against the Weak (2003) 2.mp3
  • 02. Joy Reid A Giant Step Backwards For Women As Free People In America 1.mp3
  • 03. Joy Reid A Giant Step Backwards For Women As Free People In America 2.mp3
  • 04. Justice Thomas Leaked Roe V. Wade Draft Opinion ‘Changed The Court’ 1.mp3
  • 05. Liberal outrage focuses on Clarence Thomas On Balance with Leland Vittert 1.mp3
  • 06. Liberal outrage focuses on Clarence Thomas On Balance with Leland Vittert 2.mp3
  • 07. Woman freaks out over RBG's death.mp3
  • 08. Chris Hayes And Rachel Maddow React To The Death Of Ruth Bader Ginsburg All In MSNBC 1.mp3
  • 09. Justice Ginsburg Says She Was Not 100% Supportive of Roe v. Wade Ruling 1.mp3
  • 10. Justice Ginsburg Says She Was Not 100% Supportive of Roe v. Wade Ruling 2.mp3
  • 11. Liberal outrage focuses on Clarence Thomas On Balance with Leland Vittert 3.mp3
  • 12. TBC40 - Malcolm X White Liberals and Conservatives 1.mp3
  • 13. Suspect Charged With Attempted Murder Of Justice Brett Kavanaugh 1.mp3
  • 14. Suspect Charged With Attempted Murder Of Justice Brett Kavanaugh 2.mp3
  • 15. 911 audio California man told dispatcher he needed 'psychiatric help,' wanted to kill Kavanaugh 1.mp3
  • 16. First Female Muslim US Judge Found Dead Bottom Line CNBC 1.mp3
  • 17. NY Judge's Death, Originally Deemed Suicide, Now Considered Suspicious 1.mp3
  • 18. NY Judge's Death, Originally Deemed Suicide, Now Considered Suspicious 2.mp3
  • 20. World reacts to U.S. overturning Roe v. Wade 1.mp3
  • 21. Justices Thomas, Ginsburg trade barbs in Supreme Court abortion opinions 1.mp3
  • 22. Population Bomb The Overpopulation Theory That Fell Flat Retro Report on PBS 1.mp3
  • 23. Population Bomb The Overpopulation Theory That Fell Flat Retro Report on PBS 2.mp3
  • 24. TBC47 - Bill Gates on Africa's population boom and the risk of the US turning inwards 1.mp3
  • 25. TBC61 - Does saving more lives lead to overpopulation 1.mp3
  • 26. TBC61 - Does saving more lives lead to overpopulation 2.mp3
  • 27. Population Bomb The Overpopulation Theory That Fell Flat Retro Report on PBS 3.mp3
  • 28. Population Bomb The Overpopulation Theory That Fell Flat Retro Report on PBS 4.mp3
  • 29. Population Bomb The Overpopulation Theory That Fell Flat Retro Report on PBS 4.mp3
  • 31. Dr Frances Welsing debate william shockley 1974 1.mp3
  • 32. Dr Frances Welsing debate william shockley 1974 2.mp3
  • 33. Dr Frances Welsing debate william shockley 1974 3.mp3
  • 34. Dr Frances Welsing debate william shockley 1974 4.mp3
  • 35. Dr Frances Welsing debate william shockley 1974 5.mp3
  • 36. Dr Frances Welsing debate william shockley 1974 6.mp3
  • 37. Eugenics and America's Campaign to Create a Master Race War Against the Weak (2003) 1.mp3

• Music in this Episode
  • Intro: Kanye West - Family Business - 16 Seconds
  • Outro: John Legend - Ordinary People - 21 Seconds

• ShowNotes Archive

• Donate to the show at moefundme.com

• Search for us in your podcast directory or use this link to subscribe to the feed

• Podcast Feed

• For more information: MoeFactz.com