In the small town of Fayetteville in northern New York, you’ll find the local library in an old furniture factory dating from the turn of the 20th century. The refurbished building retains hints of its industrial past: wooden floors, exposed beams, walls lined with carefully labelled tools.
But instead of quietly perusing stacks of books, many of the patrons are crowded around a suite of 3D printers. One machine is midway through a pink mobile phone case; another is finishing up a toy sword.
This is Fayetteville’s maker lab – and it may very well be the future of libraries.
In 2011, Fayetteville became the first public library in the US to set up a maker lab. Besides 3D printers, the space features a laser cutter, electronics kits, workshop tools, Raspberry Pi computers and an array of sewing machines. It functions somewhere between a classroom and a start-up incubator – a place where people from all over the region can get involved with state-of-the-art technology. (1)
Soon enough we will stop reading.
Soon enough we will just be mimicking others.
Soon enough we will just build based on what we have learnt.
Soon enough we will just be just a species of apes.
Soon enough Darwin will be right…
William Paley is a 19th-century theologian best known today for his argument supporting intelligent design: Something as complex as a mechanical watch clearly would not exist without a creator. Thus we can infer that the intricacy of our bodies — and those of all creatures — is the work of God.
One might be surprised to find how close Paley came to anticipating Darwin. Here again is the passage from Paley’s “Natural Theology: or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity”: As he contemplated the miracle of life, Paley proposed and then rejected the possibility that living organisms “are only so many out of the possible varieties and combinations of being, which the lapse of infinite ages has brought into existence; that the present world is the relict of that variety: millions of other bodily forms and other species having perished, being by the defect of their constitution incapable of preservation, or of continuance by generation”.
Darwin, as a student at Cambridge, was required to read Paley and expressed his own admiration for the man’s clear thinking. It seems that Paley was the inspiration for Darwin’s ideas about evolution. (1)
All ideas are interconnected.
What you think as illogical, is what someone else finds logical.
What you think as foolish, is what someone else finds clever.
Never be too judgmental with the ideas of.
You never know how they will turn back on you and hit you.
Defend your logic by leaving it defenseless.
Nothing true needs a defense.
It simply… Is.
A new site with the collected works of Russel Wallace is online. However the problem is that this site is not so objective as one might think it is.
It describes Wallace as the “co-founder” of the Theory of Evolution while he was just THE founder. Although in Wallace’s biography it is stated that Wallace did send his manuscript to Darwin (for him to approve and publish! bad luck can be very ironic some times…), the site claims that “confusion” surrounds the dispute. Where one can find “confusion” in a case where one has a reported official manuscript while the other has nothing of a kind (the site speaks of “notes” and admits that “Darwin was two years away from completing and publishing his big book on species”), is a little bit hard to see…
The site also gives a short description of Wallace’s draw to spiritualism, with the totally unacceptable way: “Like mesmerism and phrenology before, Wallace thought he approached the subject with scepticism but soon became entirely convinced that the “phenomena” produced by mediums such as table rappings, spirit writings, apparitions in dark rooms and so forth must be genuine and never again doubted his conclusion”…
Well, that was it. In just one sentence we are given the very reasons of todays science being so cold and non-human. “Wallace thought he approached the subject with scepticism but…” the site claims. So we “KNOW” that spiritualism does not exist and poor Wallace was so stupid that he saw things being where they did not. This kind of a priori knowledge of the truth is what has destroyed todays science.
Later on the same Biography in this site, where physiologist G. J. Romanes is quoted to have written about Wallace’s book “Darwinism”: “It is in the concluding chapter of his book, much more than in any of the others, that we encounter the Wallace of spiritualism and astrology, the Wallace of vaccination and the land question, the Wallace of incapacity and absurdity” [refers to the last chaprter of the book Darwinism of Wallace, where he concludes that human spirit cannot be interpreted by Theory of Evolution], the ONLY thing the site has to say is: “The accusation of belief in astrology was incorrect”. (and of course nothing is said about the fact that Wallace died alone and in poverty due to such “accusations”)
Wow!
Let’s all thank God we are accused of “spiritualism”! 🙂
Modern biologists really CANNOT handle the fact that the founder of their beloved theory is a spiritualist. Hehehe…
Laughing at someone who sees a spirit in human (that is why Wallace never thought HIS theory could be 100% applicable to humans, something his materialistic opponents never forgave him) is one thing.
Publishing a supposedly “objective” site about that someone, is another. The truth is not something one can make his own and manipulate it in order to pass his personal agenda. Wallace was the founder of Theory of Evolution and believed that humans are something more than blood and bones. This is the opinion of many other scientists today.
A site which interprets Wallace’s life in the way that fits the way mainstream scientists think today will not change the fact that humans DO have something more than blood and bones in them…
PS. Perhaps the most extraordinary piece of information in this site is where it mentions that when Wallace set sail to return to Britain from a 9 months expedition to the Amazon, the ship sank and he lost all the specimens he had collected along will almost all his notes. The comment for that disaster that could make anyone die of despair, is “Fortunately the collection was insured by Wallace’s London agent Samuel Stevens for £200“… WTF?!?
You suddenly see this structure in from of you. What makes you seek its “designer”?
Evolution is most of the times believed to “exist” everywhere and to be applied to everything just on the basis of authority. But everyone should question more what he is asked to “believe” and “know”. Everyone should ask the “scientists” to explain what they say and one should never be afraid to ask only because “he is a scientist, he must be right”.
Evolution as a mechanism does exist (see the Evolution and Intelligent Design article for more on that). But evolution cannot explain everything! And this is where common sense should be a major player. Modern biochemistry has shown that the body’s biochemistry is so complex that it is just plainly stupid to think that it “evolved through natural selection”.
From a point onwards, complexity starts shouting “degisn”…
Most of the biochemical mechanisms in humans require dozens or hundreds of components (enzymes, proteins, other molecules) and are so complex as mechanisms (nothing like the A -> B -> C that most biologists like Dawkins refer to when they try to defend evolution in public) that “design” actually shouts itself! From cilium to blood-clotting mechanism, from protein transportation mechanism inside a cell to the ways of the immune system and the mechanism of the creation of AMP, modern biochemistry is all but stunned in the face of “how that mechanism came into existence” questions.
As Michael J. Behe in his book “Darwin’s Black Box” (which remains black mainly due to our fear of asking the right questions to people who fake authority) points out, most of the articles on scientific journals related to biochemistry today (e.g. in Journal of Molecular Evolution) are related to sequence comparisons, sequence analysis and mathematical models. NONE of them has addressed the questions of “how”, as true “evolutionary” journals should do…
AMP creation mechanism. Not just A->B->C…
Biologists like Dawkins may have vivid imagination that helps them imagine of possible mechanisms that lead – through evolution – to the mechanisms which rule the human life. But imagination cannot replace experiments, which SHOULD be the basis for science. Evolutionary biology is nothing “special” to bypass this. And surely imagining things is not explaining the “how” the abovementioned mechanisms came into place. The devil is always hidden in the details. For example Dawkins may refer to the “light sensitive spot” and the “little cup” that slowly led to the eye, but he does not refer to 11-cis-retinal and rhodopsin (which are just two of the factors required for the light-sensitive spot to work) or to the fact that a “cup” cannot be created by molecules unless a complex mechanism of molecular supports helps the molecules obtain a different-than-sphere shape. In the same way many evolution-lover may have got enthusiastic for the experiment of Miller, but no one had ever considered the “little” detail that the materials used by Miller are NOT used by cells… (check here for a more detailed analysis of the faults in the experiment)
When someone tells you that “evolution has explained how this mechanism came into place”, ask for the details, for the related published papers and for a brief description of that “how”. You will be surprised to see how many “I imagine this came into existence” arguments are there. Pay attention to the details.
Do not trust anyone in philosophical or scientific matters (or any other matter to be honest). Science is NOT the new religion you must follow! Think on your own! Scientists are not “gods” and you are not “stupid”! When someone tells you “I discovered Higgs Boson and found out how particles have mass”, just ask “how does Higgs Boson have mass?” and wait patiently for an answer…
The purpose of this article is to tell the truth about some of the biggest misconceptions in science history. Knowing the true story behind great theories is very important in order to understand their meaning correctly and avoid misunderstandings.
Throughout human history, many misconceptions arise. Some of these are minor and not worth mentioning, while others are so important that not knowing them could lead to false impression over very significant aspects of human knowledge. One can find below one of the greatest [deliberate or not] misconceptions concerning the theory of evolution. Only by knowing them you can get a better grasp of its meaning.
I do not mention many books as bibliography because such is not really needed – one can simply search for the writings of the people I mention here and verify the facts on his/her own. The truth is the most easy thing to find, if you know what are you really looking for…
Evolution Theory Misconceptions
Most of us think Charles Darwin is the founder of the Theory of Evolution. This misunderstanding is so deeply founded in the minds of people that the Theory of Evolution is often called “Darwinism”. That is simply not true.
To begin with, It must be noted that the theory that species evolve over time has been said in the philosophers’ circles since the time of the ancient Greeks. Many old Hindu scriptures also mention it. The theory was even postulated by Darwin’s grandfather, Erasmus Darwin.
Alfred Russel Wallace picture and autograph
The most important person to mention however is Alfred Russel Wallace. He was the first to formulate a complete theory of species’ evolution and publish it – one year before Darwin did his own. In his autobiography, Darwin mentioned that Wallace theory even helped the acceptance of his own ‘Origin of Species’ from the scientific community! In the years to come the theory went cold. When it was re-discovered after World War II, the scientists did not know their history well and through that Darwin was the one who first established the theory of evolution. Thus, they named it after Darwin alone.
Wallace was elected head of the anthropology section of the British Association in 1866, president of the Entomological Society of London in 1870 and head of the biology section of the British Association in 1876.
Wallace in isolation
Wallace sent his first manuscript with his theory of evolution to Darwin for review (!) [1], without knowing that this act would result in his undoing… Darwin grasped the chance and by using his acquaintances in the scientific community managed to present a draft paper of his own together with the Wallace paper. Darwin said in his autobiography that he had the idea of the theory of evolution for 20 years before that moment. However Wallace also had been thinking of his theory for many years before [2].
(actually Darwin acknowledged that Wallace was first in a latter of his to Wallace where Darwin wrote: P. S. You cannot tell how I admire your spirit, in the manner in which you have taken all that was done about publishing all our papers. I had actually written a letter to you, stating that I would not publish anything before you had published. I had not sent that letter to the post when I received one from Lyell and Hooker, urging me to send some MS. to them, and allow them to act as they thought fair and honestly to both of us; and I did so.source)
Because we can never get into the mind of other people and know what they were thinking, a true researcher of the scientific history should rely on the papers one has the courage to publish. And the puplications history cry out in favour of Wallace. It is well documented that Darwin was NOT the first to get it all together. Wallace had a complete paper published one year before Darwin. He was just unfortunate to have it sent to Darwin himself to review it. That gave Darwin the opportunity to publish in the same convention some notes (I repeat: “notes” and not something complete) where he said the same things that Wallace said.
The one who claims to have formed a theory must prove it. So if Darwin claims that he has “thought” of evolution before Wallace, he must provide evidence to support that. Wallace has evidence: the paper he sent to Darwin for publication! If Darwin had thought of evolution so many years before, then he should have more things at hand instead of some “notes” (that he claims – but of course cannot prove – he made before Wallace sent him his paper) he sent to publish with the paper of Wallace. One cannot of course believe the guy who just claims “I have thought of it!” and not the guy who had a full paper published first!
Wallace, despite of his spectacular scientific contributions, was actually expelled from the scientific community of his time and died in poverty. Darwin was mentioned more and more as the ‘evolution by natural selection’ theory founder and Wallace less and less. It is characteristic that other naturalists didn’t even want to grant him a pension when he faced great economic problems, because of his ‘spirituallity’ problems. It was only after Darwin’s strong requests that they finally granted that pension.
Nowadays, many people attempt to distort the truth about Wallace and build the image of a person who was ‘second’ after Darwin in the theory of evolution field. The reasons behind that are explained in the next chapter.
Nowadays many people try to claim that Wallace was one of the greatest supporters of Darwin. That is true, but because Darwin was actually a follower of Wallace’s theory and not the other way around! In a continuous effort to distort the truth, sites that are devoted to Wallace (it is easy to find out which by just searching Internet for Wallace) mention that Wallace was not an advocate of the Intelligent Design theory, even if Wallace himself has written in favour of the existence of a divine creator / designer (see the Important Works of Wallace below).
The truth is that Wallace and Darwins had many disputes over their carrer time. The most often cited texts in Darwin’s ‘Descent of Man’ are Wallace’s papers. And most of the times it was Darwin who called Wallace for help and not the other way around…
The ‘official’ reason behind the above-mentioned anti-Wallace war is that at the later stages of his career, Wallace begun to be an advocate of Spiritualism. He even participated in seances and really thought that some of the things he witnessed in these seances were real. That was condemned by his fellow scientists.
Reasons for Wallace defamation
The true reason behind the isolation of Wallace from the scientific community is his beliefs concerning the application of the evolution theory to humans. In his work ‘The Limits of Natural Selection as Applied to Man’ (S165: 1869/1870) [3], he argues that the theory of evolution cannot explain ‘higher’ human properties. He proposed the existence of a ‘Higher Intelligence’ being to explain such things as the passing of inorganic matter to living matter or the existence of consiousness. That belief was annoyingly opposed to the more ‘agnostic’ (or ‘atheistic’ according to many) darwinian belief of a world without a designer, which was becoming more and more popular among the biology scientists cast (modern molecular biologists like Francis Collins have ‘returned’ to the intelligent designer beliefs – see intelligent design). The fact that Wallace was at some point in time Head of the anthropology section of the British Association made things even more embarassing for the atheist-darwinists. So, with the excuse of Wallace’s spiritualism beliefs, the heads of the scientific society buried his work. Some medals and honours on his name certainly cannot explain why Wallace is ‘forgotten’ by todays academies of science. One must bear in mind that the some science academies are full with people who believe more in science than in human. These academies represent an elite cast of people who believe more in scientism than in the noble superior traits of humankind. Having someone in their ranks who did not believe in the non-existence of God and the superiority of science over everything else, could not be tolerated easily. However one must also bear in mind that science academies do not necessarily represent the views of all scientists in their field. They are invite-only closed groups and you cannot easily get an invitation if you do not agree with them first on such matters.
However sometimes people of higher intelligence and extreme scientific abilities conquer the castle of scientific dogma and just tell the truth. We must honour them and study their works.
Encyclopedia Britannica on Russel Wallace being the first to postulate the Theory of Evolution
An example of how facts are distorted
On December 2008, National Geographic posted an article about Russel Wallace (see National Geographic December 2008 Issue about Russel Wallace). The article presented Wallace as an intelligent naturalist who just happened to sent a paper to Darwin for publication that contained the theory Darwin himself thought of for the past 10 years. The fact of Wallace being the first to publish a paper on the Theory of Evolution via Natual Selection was recorded as a small amusing coincidence. As simple as that. No analysis of the historical context. No need to explain why we consider Darwin who had “thought” of it as “first” and not the one who “published a paper” on it…The article in a ridiculous attempt to overcome the annoying truth, labeled the paper of Wallace a “product of two nights’ hasty scribbling, which followed a moment’s epiphany during a fever”, but without changing the essence of the situation: Wallace had a paper to be published (and in fact it was published), while Darwin had not published anything. According to the article Darwin “had developed [the Theory of Evolution] but hadn’t yet published” – now how one can develop something but not publish it is another question which the article did not attempt to answer [4].
I personally wrote a letter to the National Geographic Magazine (Greek version) in an attempt to restore the truth. The letter was accepted and published one year later. I did not get any reply from the authors of the article. However high ranking people in the magazine told me that they agreed with my position. Anyone who wants a copy of that letter can contact me directly.
Conclusion
The noble roots of Darwin and his good personal relations with other known scientists during his days, helped him outrun Wallace in the race for recognition. The man honored as the founder of the theory of evolution, could not be a believer of anything connected to spirituality in humans. That is why Darwin was “selected” as the most appropriate founder of the theory of evolution. The history is recorded. Each one who knows it can draw his conclusions. Those ones who do not know it, should read it first…
Important Works of Wallace
1. ‘The Origin of Human Races and the Antiquity of Man Deduced From the Theory ofNatural Selection’, Alfred Russel Wallace (S93: 1864).
2. ‘Notes Added to the Second Edition of Contributions to the Theory of Natural Selection’, Alfred Russel Wallace (S716: 1871).
3. ‘The Limits of Natural Selection as Applied to Man’, Alfred Russel Wallace (S165: 1869/1870).
