when did Darwin come up with the theory of evolution?

Question

in what year?

Answer 1

1838.

Answer 2

He didn't but his research and conclusions on the idea of natural selection are pivotal to the theory of evolution. He through research produced compelling evidence that implied the species advanced through an evolutionary process with only the strongest most ingenuous creatures advancing. His findings were published after five plus years of research in 1849 The Origin of the Species. His conclusions were debated in the Scopes trial of 1924 and took on speed from 1940's to the 1960's. The science of natural selection supported the theory of evolution much like the apple falling to the ground supported Newton's theory of gravity. It wasn't Darwin who built a massive debate around the issue that was the same people who locked Galileo up for implying the world was round.

Answer 3

In 1838, Darwin made the book Origin of a Species, that most people interpreted as meaning the origin of human life. The debate has been on ever since. He was speaking of plant life. Not something so intricate as man with a soul.
Intelligent people now know that this could be nothing but one man's theory, because the most common human blood type is O. The most common ape blood type is B, and the most common chimp blood type is A.
If we evolved from either of them, we would have the same most common blood type.

Answer 4

Ah, why do some people answer questions when they have NO IDEA what they're talking about.

For example, classyjazzcreations, it's hard to see anything you got right about Darwin's book 'The Origin of Species' ... you got the year wrong, the title wrong, the topic wrong, and resulting interpretation wrong. ... Who told you he was only "speaking of plant life"? Please try different sources ... or better yet, read it for yourself if you really want to criticize it with some authority.

And where did you get that stuff about human and ape blood types? (Incidentally, chimps *are* apes ... as are humans, but why quibble?)

First, you (or the source you're citing) are missing a *glaring* point ... the fact that humans, chimps, and other apes even *have* the same A, B, and O antigens that let us define the same ABO blood types in the first place, is strong evidence of genetic kinship and common ancestry! This is further strengthened by genetics which only finds the same genes for these antigens ... but they are on the same *locations* in the chromosomes. Other animals do not have these blood types at all ... not mammals (e.g. dogs or horses), not even other primates (monkeys), although other primates are closer than other mammals, which in turn are closer than birds or reptiles, etc. That is a *much* more glaring piece of evidence than the relative "commonality" of these blood types in the individual species. (See source #1.)

Second, you (or the source you are citing) are listing an average of "most common blood type" for the *entire human species*. Please see source #2, and you can see that the variability between *races* and *ethnic groups* of humans varies far more than that between humans and chimps. E.g., while Type O is more common in humans *overall*, among Germans, type A is slightly more common (43% type A vs. 41% for type O). Among Blackfoot Native Americans the difference is huge (82% Type A vs. 17% Type O). And among Hungarian gypsies, type B is more common (35% Type B vs. 29% Type O). (See Source #2.)

Now, I'm sorry to pick on you ... I think you're just a victim of some of the really *bad* creationist web sites out there with information on "How to argue with evolutionists." They present really *bad* science information that just makes you look foolish.

Please try some other sources! I do not look to evolution books and sites to teach me about God (I have other sources) ... do not look to creationist sources to teach you about evolution, when their purpose is specifically to undermine it.

If I am wrong about your sources, and these really are your ideas, then I apologize ... but I still recommend that you learn a bit more about Darwin, and about evolution (and blood types), before you answer questions on a science forum.

Answer 5

His famous voyage in HMS Beagle extended from 1831 until 1836. He says that the basic idea occurred to him after his return home, in 1837. In the following years he corresponded with most of the leading naturalists all over the world as he continued his methodical study. Five years later he organized his notes, then wrote out a sketch of his ideas in 1844. At that time, however, his correspondence was still largely confined to the scientific community.

In 1858, the naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace, studying plants and animals in Malaya, sent a memoir to Darwin, asking him to forward it for publication. Wallace had independently come up with the same idea. That prompted Darwin and Wallace to jointly present their abstract to the Linnaen Society in London.

Darwin had been hesitant to publish for wide distribution (reminds me of Isaac Newton, who sat on his work for twenty years), but encouraged by Wallace and the noted geologist Sir Charles Lyell, Darwin published the first edition of "The Origin of Species" in 1859. The entire printing sold out on the first day of publication.

He didn't call it the Theory of Evolution; instead, he called it Natural Selection. Herbert Spencer publicized the phrase "survival of the fittest".

Darwin seems to be a very cautious, conservative observer who draws conclusions carefully. I'm reading his book now -- I wanted to see what the fuss was all about -- and my impression is that the book can put you to sleep. It's very slow reading, but I'm making my way through it, a few pages per night.

In "The Origin of Species", he does not connect humans and apes. I don't think he was ready for that yet. All he said was "light would be thrown on the origin of man and his history." But my Modern Library edition has two books back-to-back. In 1871, Darwin published "The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex". Chapters One and Two of that book (I haven't read it yet) are titled "The Evidence of the Descent [and on the Manner of Development] of Man from Some Lower Form", so that's probably where the apes come in.

By the way, what I just wrote is probably incorrect. It's probably not right to say that man descended from apes; rather, that man and apes both descended from some common ancestor, neither man nor ape. The ancestor common to both species is long since extinct. That's how natural selection works.

Answer 6

he went on a voyage to the pacific on a boat called "the Beagle." with him he took a Bible, and a book someone else had written with their theories about evolution. While on his voyage, he found that finches on the tropical islands he visited, though different species, had many similar characteristics. they also had unique adaptations based on their environment and needs. From this he formulated the theory of a common ancestor, and that every living thing had evolved over millions of years into the different life forms we see today....he published his book in 1859 (the origin of species). So, thats when and in what year... you could have went to Wikipedia and found out yourself while saving 5 points and time, but thanks for the points anyway! now do some of your own research...:-)

Answer 7

Darwin published his thoughts around 1858, but the idea of Evolution has been around since ancient times, observed and commented upon by folks such as the Greek philosophers Anaximander and Epicurus, and Indian philosophers such as Patañjali.

Those who deny it simply aren't paying attention to what is in front of them.

Answer 8

Way back in the day.