A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z

 

Previous Page

Arthur Keith  (1866 — 1955)  Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons  Web  Amazon  GBS  QMP

Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it only because the only alternative is special creation, and that is unthinkable.    Suspected Interpolation

No discovery of recent date has had such a wide reaching effect as that made by Mr Chrarles Dawson at Piltdown, Sussex. Hence the reader will find that a very considerable part of this book is devoted to the significance of that specimen of humanity which Dr Smith Woodward named Eoanthropus dawsoni.     The Antiquity of Man  (1915)  p.vii

Those of us who set out some thirty years ago to search for evidence which would throw light on the antiquity of man believed we had to deal with a  simple problem. We started under the conviction that there was only one kind of man -- man of the modern type. We were certain that he was, like all other living things, subject to the laws of evolution, and that as we traced him, by means of fossil remains, into the remote past, we should find him assuming a more and more primitive shape and structure.    The Antiquity of Man  (1915)  p.497

The Darwinist's Bible is the great Book of Nature. Creeds will come and go, but this is the book which will endure as long as life lasts.    The Religion of a Darwinist  (1925)  p.24

In all these journeyings into ancient times and to primitive peoples there is one adage, an article of the Darwinian faith, which we must ever bear in mind. Nature is jealous of her art of species building. Progress -- or what is the same thing, Evolution -- is her religion; the production of new species is her form of worship. She is up to every trick in this game she plays with living things. There is no artifice or device, however ingenious it may be, she will not resort to if her end can thus be gained. No mother ever nursed her baby more watchfully and fondly than she does her incipient species. Above all, she tries to isolate them to keep them from contamination, just as jealously as a breeder does his herds, flocks, and fowl runs. She even moulds the brain of man and bends his instincts to suit her species-building purposes. We have to keep her aim ever in view if we would interpret the manner in which our primitive forefathers led their lives. Our feelings, our instincts, our tendencies to act and react in a certain way, came into existence under such circumstances.    The Religion of a Darwinist  (1925)  p.42-3

The sons of science of the twentieth century are doing just what the wise men of Babylonia, Palestine, and Egypt sought to do 5,000 years ago. These wise men wished to explain to their fellows how man had come into existence, where he had come from, and where he was going to; how the earth, sun , moon, and stars had been made for him. The explanations given in olden times were accepted by the generations among whom they were promulgated. The followers of Charles Darwin are today seeking to answer the same questions for their generation. The ancient seekers after truth differ from their modern successors in only one respect. It was permitted to them to suppose that supernatural forces were at work in the world -- forces which could be perceived only by the eye of faith. The modern seeker refuses to accept any explanation which involves the action of a supernatural agent, even as a last resort.    The Religion of a Darwinist  (1925)  p.61-2

I am accused of doing grevious injury to thousands who have found safe anchorage in the history of Faith. What would we say to the mariner who, having found that a dangerous coast was wrongly charted, held his peace? Men like myself are engaged in charting the seas through which the ship of humanity sails; should we be silent when we find facts which run counter to cherished beliefs? Silence in such a case is cowardice.    Darwinism and What It Implies  (1928)  p. 56 

The revolution in outlook, effected by this book, was not confined to men who study the history of animals and of plants. Its conquest gradually spread until every department of knowledge was affected. No matter what a man's line of study might be - the stars, the earth, the elements, industry, economics, civilization, theology or man himself -- the inquirer soon began to realise that he must take the law of evolution as his guide. It was Darwin, through this book, who changed the outlook of all gatherers of knowledge and made them realise that behind the field of their immediate inquiry lay an immense evolutionary or historical background which had to be explored before further progress was possible. Nay, it was Darwin who made men see that evolution is now everywhere at work -- in all things material, moral and spiritual, and will continue in operation, so far as the human mind can anticipate, to the very end of time.     The Origin of Species  (1934)  p.xix 

The fossil remains found at Piltdown by Mr. Dawson set students of man’s evolution the most difficult task that has confronted them hitherto. In his characterization, Piltdown man was quite unlike any fossil type known to us. Sir Arthur Smith Woodward was impressed by his simian similarities; I, on the other hand, was impressed by those features which , as I thought then, were eminently human and modern. Hence arose those discrepancies between us – discrepancies of a quarter of a century ago. 

Since then, much has happened. Discoveries are being made which help to throw Piltdown man into his proper place in the crowded throng of evolving human forms. We now know that when the Piltdown type was being evolved in England -- or at the western end of the Old World -- a totally different type had come into being in the Eastern lands of the Old World…

So long as man is interested in his long past history, in the vicissitudes which our early forerunners passed through, and the varying fate which overtook them, the name of Charles Dawson is certain of remembrance.    Nature  July 30, 1938  p.197 

The leader of Germany is an evolutionist not only in theory, but, as millions know to their cost, in the rigor of its practice.     Evolution and Ethics  (1947)  p.10 

Meantime let me say that the conclusion I have come to is this: the law of Christ is incompatible with the law of evolution as far as the law of evolution has worked hitherto. Nay, the two laws are at war with each other; the law of Christ can never prevail until the law of evolution is destroyed.     Evolution and Ethics  (1947)  p.15

To see evolutionary measures and tribal morality being applied rigorously to the affairs of a great modern nation we must turn again to Germany of 1942. We see Hitler devoutly convinced that evolution provides the only real basis for a national policy.     Evolution and Ethics  (1947)   p. 27

Christianity makes no distinction of race or of color; it seeks to break down all racial barriers. In this respect the hand of Christianity is against that of Nature, for are not the races of mankind the evolutionary harvest which Nature has toiled through long ages to produce? May we not say, then, that Christianity is anti-evolutionary in its aim?     Evolution and Ethics  (1947)  p.72 

The German Fuhrer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.     Evolution and Ethics  (1947)  p.230 

Smith Woodward was keenly alive to the fact that the discovery at Piltdown in the Weald of Sussex was, and would remain, a major event in the unfolding of Man's remote past, and that every incident relating to the discovery would retain an abiding historical value for unborn generations of mankind. Hence in the evening of his life he resolved to set down in simple words a straightforward account of the events which led up to the discovery and to explain how his mind reacted to the new facts which poured in upon him as he proceeded, and to trace, step by step, the completed picture that finally arose in his mind of Piltdown Man as a living reality.     The Earliest Englishman  (1948)  p.ix-x

Here, then, is a record of fact which will continue to be read as long as Englishmen love the land of their birth; for many a century to come experts, seeking to unravel the complicated problem of human origins, will find inspiration in its pages.     The Earliest Englishman  (1948)  p.x

I am firmly convinced that no theory of human evolution can be regarded as satisfactory unless the revelations of Piltdown are taken into account.     The Earliest Englishman  (1948)  p.xii

I spent eleven months exploring all aspects of the Piltdown-Swanscombe problem, the results of which were published in the Journal of Anatomy. In this publication there were thirty-two drawings and 15,000 words of text. Seeing that I was dealing with the earliest known representatives of man in Western Europe, I did not regard my time as mis-spent. These early inhabitants of England had brains of medium size – about 1350 c.c.    An Autobiography (1950) p.645

In the early days of the Piltdown discovery, Smith Woodward and I had been open antagonists – enemies, I might almost say. As years went by we were gradually, drawn together by two circumstances: he and I never differed as to the genuineness and importance of the discovery made at Piltdown; and we had both the same love and respect for Charles Dawson, the lawyer-antiquarian, the man who discovered the site on Barkham Manor which yielded the fossil remains of Piltdown man.    Autobiography  (1950)  p.654

St Paul's advice to the Corinthians, "Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers," fell on deaf ears so far as Emma Darwin was concerned. A mutual respect and tolerance maintained an unbroken partnership to the end. And yet Emma was never easy in her mind, for (as we have seen) when the Descent was about to be published she told her daughter Henrietta,"I think it will be very interesting, but I shall dislike it very much as putting Got further off." We can thus understand the reason for Darwin's reticence in giving to the public a free expression of his religious beliefs.     Darwin Revalued  (1955)  p.237

 

Johannes Kepler  (1571 – 1630)  Professor of Mathematics at the University of Graz  Web  GBS

Here we are concerned with the book of nature, so greatly celebrated in sacred writings. It is in this that Paul proposes to the Gentiles that they should contemplate God like the Sun in water or in a mirror. Why then as Christians should we take any less delight in its contemplation, since it is for us with true worship to honor God, to venerate him, to wonder at him? The more rightly we understand the nature and scope of what our God has founded, the more devoted the spirit in which that is done.    The Secret of the Universe

Since we astronomers are priests of the highest God in regard to the book of nature, it befits us to be thoughtful, not of the glory of our minds, but rather, above else, of the glory of God.

That day is impending when people will admit the pure truth both in the book of Nature as well as in the Holy Bible and rejoice at the harmony between these two revelations.

 

Marc Kirschner  (1945)  Chair of the Department of Systems Biology at Harvard Medical School  Web  Amazon  GBS  AV 

In fact, over the last 100 years, almost all of biology has proceeded independent of evolution, except evolutionary biology itself. Molecular biology, biochemistry, physiology, have not taken evolution into account at all.    Missing Links  The Boston Globe  October 23, 2005

 

Andrew Knoll  (b.1951)  The Fisher Professor of Natural History at Harvard University  Web  Amazon  GBS

The evolutionary process really began with the origin of life, perhaps 4 billion years ago, and then continued with organisms whose size and shape and complexity was similar to what we would recognize as bacteria today. Over long periods of time, more complex cells arose. They then formed multicellular consortia that ultimately became functioning animals with tissues. We, along with everything else that's alive today, are the product of this 4 billion years of evolutionary history.    Digging into the 'deep history' of life  August 12 2001

Textbooks may portray science as a codification of facts, but it is really a disciplined way of asking about the unknown.    Life on a Young Planet  (2003)  p.3

One might suppose that Darwin, like his modern intellectual descendants, saw in the fossil record a confirmation of his theory -- the literal documentation of life's evolution from the Cambrian to the present day. In fact, the two chapters devoted to geology in The Origin of Species are anything but celebratory. On the contrary, they constitute a carefully worded apology in which Darwin argues that evolution by natural selection is correct despite an evident lack of support from fossils.    Life on a Young Planet  (2003)  p.11

The modern world provides substantial tests for faith  and theology -- the Holocaust, crib death, and Alzheimer's disease come readily to mind. In contrast, the reconciliation of traditional truths and science is almost trivially simple, requiring only that God, if present, be great enough to mix immanence into the nascent universe, enabling it to unfold over the eons, obedient to the laws of special relativity, nuclear chemistry, and population genetics. Science's creation story accounts for process and history, not intent. Accepting its ancient counterparts as parables, then, eliminates conflict.    Life on a Young Planet  (2003)  p.245

Indeed the biblical literalist, passing Permian brachiopods, Cambrian trilobites, and 1.7-billion-year-old schist as she hikes down the Grand Canyon, can only conclude that the appearance of age and order in stratigraphic successions is an elaborate ruse, part of a great cosmic charade set up to trap the unfaithful. What sort of God would do that? One who can be petty and vengeful, who may love His creation but doesn't trust it.    Life on a Young Planet  (2003)  p.245

Copernicus and Darwin profoundly altered the human sense of self. We do not live at the center of the universe, and we cannot claim the privileges of special creation.    Life on a Young Planet  (2003)  p.246

It's pretty clear that all the organisms living today, even the simplest ones, are removed from some initial life form by four billion years or so, so one has to imagine that the first forms of life would have been much, much simpler than anything that we see around us. But they must have had that fundamental property of being able to grow and reproduce and be subject to Darwinian evolution.    How Did Life Begin?  May 3 2004

The short answer is we don't really know how life originated on this planet. There have been a variety of experiments that tell us some possible roads, but we remain in substantial ignorance.    How Did Life Begin?  May 3 2004 

If we try to summarize by just saying what, at the end of the day, do we know about the deep history of life on Earth, about its origin, about its formative stages that gave rise to the biology we see around us today, I think we have to admit that we're looking through a glass darkly here.    How Did Life Begin?  May 3 2004 

There are still some great mysteries. People sometimes think that science really takes away mystery, but I think there are great scientific mysteries and causes for wonder... I imagine my grandchildren will still be sitting around saying that it's a great mystery    How Did Life Begin?  May 3 2004 

 

Next Page

A  B  C  D  E  F  G  H  I  J  K  L  M  N  O  P  Q  R  S  T  U  V  W  X  Y  Z

 

Home  Evolution  Stephen Jones