Creationists, when did you first read Darwin's "On the Origin of Species"?

Question

Had you made up your mind on evolution before reading it or was it only after reading it ?

I am of course presuming you have read it.

I only made up my mind on christianity after fully studying the bible from cover to cover.

Answer 1

I first read it in high school and thought it was a bunch of bilge even back then. My dad taught chemistry and math, and we talked about the book. He said that it was "highly speculative" and the 'evidence' was shaky at best. This is coming from a guy who wasn't a Christian and had no reason to steer me in either direction.

I re-read it about ten years ago, and it appears that my first impression was right.

Edit:

"Bunch of bilge" is my term, not my dad's. And I can't say that I'm particularly objective about any theory that has more holes in it than Swiss cheese.

I don't accept Creationism at face value, either, for that matter.

Answer 2

I have never read Darwin. I have studied quite a bit about modern revised evolutionary science. But I believe Darwin's writing are outdated and of little value now other than as historical documents. Why would someone want to read Darwin for evolutionary science? That's your problem with the Bible you studied a 2000 year old outdated piece of drivel. It should heaved been revised along the way and brought up to modern knowledge.

Answer 3

I think Darwin is underrated as far as the scientific greats go. If you look at Newton, Galileo, Copernicus and Einstein, they all had something at their disposal taht Darwin did not. That something is math. All of them were able to work through their ideas mathematically and work toward proper conclusions by simply following the numbers.

When Darwin was alive biology was a very disorganized field of study. Not only that, there was a clear cultural indoctriation that had argued for direct creation by a God. And while similar theories had been advanced, darwin was able to tie together the notions of ecological survival and heredity into a cohesive theory of how species came to be.

What is truly impressive in my view, is that he did this at time when there was no real knowledge about how heredity works. One-hundred and ten years of study in the field of genetics has provided proof that the mechanisms of heredity are completely consistent with the predictions of evolutionary theory.

Yes, his book was speculative (as another has pointed out), but that speculation has been substantiated by a century of research in all biological disciplines (and a few other fields of study as well).

His theory serves today as the cohesive foundation of all modern bioliogy. The relationship between structure and function is central to our understanding of biological systems.

Answer 4

2001

Answer 5

Fact: All books throughout history were written by humans.
Fact: Humans are not a perfect species therefore subject to error...
Fact: All humans have weaknesses, gullibility being a prime weakness.
Fact: There are still limitless questions to be answered regarding the existence of human beings and other such wondrous life forms, thus to draw any conclusions is not logical...

Answer 6

I first read Darwin 30yrs ago and I was almost sucked into the theory because it was so well presented, but having mused about it for quite a long time it left me cold and didn`t really explain anything in concrete terms for me, and it still fails to do so.

Answer 7

People dont need to read darwin's theory because its common sense that evolution is what happened.

Sorry u wasted time reading a worthless book.

Answer 8

They seem to have very strong views on it. Darwin is either right or wrong- it strikes me as strange that anyone who was objective and unbiased would use a term like "bunch of bilge".

Answer 9

I feel very sorry for you, fireball2.

I first read origin back in 98 but I'm no creationist. I've read lots on evolutionary biology.

Answer 10

Can't wait to see the answers you get. Peace