Evolution quote 6 Aug 2010 As all sciences are based upon facts, known, or to be known from experience, so are they, in their early state of developement [sic], matters of pure observation. It is only when we have acquired the power of generalising these facts, when such generalisations agree among themselves and with every thing we see or know of nature, that the theory of a science becomes either absolutely demonstrative, or approaches so near to certainty, by the force of analogical reasoning, that it is not contradicted by anything known. The case of natural history, then, is precisely this; in its early stages it is a science of observation; in its latter, it is one of demonstration. [William Swainson. 1834. Preliminary discourse on the study of natural history. London: Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, Green and Longman, page 105.] Swainson is one of the infamous “Quinarians”, but his discussion on natural classification is influential. It is clear that Darwin had read him and his history of classification in the preceding chapter. History Natural Classification Quotes Science Systematics History
Evolution Homology 16 Jun 2010 In a recent Nature, R. John Ellis, author of How Science Works, takes exception to Eugenie Scott’s review and says this about her use of “homology”: The word was invented in 1843 by anatomist Richard Owen to mean “the same organ in different animals under every variety of form and… Read More
Evolution I am a paleontologist 3 Sep 2009 By “They Might be Giants”: [youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJ8rblUtEXA&hl=en&fs=1&] Read More
If: 1). Science zeros in on certainly about what is 2). An ought cannot be derived from what is. 3). An ought can change what is. then …can science ever approach any ultimate truth about what is? (may also have relevance to a previous topic)