See sources (really good):
But here is my list:
Anaximander (Greek)
Charles Lyell
James Hutton
Jean-Baptiste Lamarck
Erasmus Darwin (Charles' grandfather)
Alfred Wallace
Herbert Spencer
Thomas Huxley
Gregor Mendel
Barbara McClintock
Oswald Avery
Watson & Crick
Theodosius Dobzhansky
Grant Allen
George Romanes
Enrst Mayr
Stephen Jay Gould
Niles Eldridge
Incidentally, jowpers has a reasonable argument that Mendel might not have helped "come up" with the theory ... but I put Mendel in with people like Avery, Watson, and Crick who supplied key parts of genetics, which is an integral part of what we consider the modern theory of evolution (neo-Darwinism). In fact, for this reason I just added Barbara McClintock (as I've always liked her) :-).
P.S. Dr. Albert is either LYING when he says that Einstein and Hawking "discounted" evolution, or totally clueless. I will give him the benefit of the doubt and assume the latter. (If he can't spell Hawking correctly, it's unlikely he knows what Hawking actually says.)
It is one thing to dispute evolution yourself. It is another to put words in the mouths of famous scientists to give your position credibility, when those scientists said nothing of the sort. It's pretty low.
2007-02-28 13:13:41
·
answer #1
·
answered by secretsauce 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
The idea of evolution was around long before Darwin. Buffon pretty much had it right. Lamark was very close except that he had the mechanism wrong (some people have proposed that Darwin basically 'stole' the idea from Lamark). In any case, Darwin and Wallace presented their version in a coauthored paper in 1958. Their big contribution was natural selection, the mechanism which drives evolution. Since that time the theory has been modified to include population genetics, evolutionary developmental (evodevo) biology and several other fields of biology.
Secret sauce has supplied a great list of contributers, but keep in mind that many of these people only played a role in the development of NeoDarwinism and not the original theory (some, like Medel, were unfamiliar with evolution). I believe you were looking for the people "that came up with" the theory.
2007-02-28 13:39:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by jowpers 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Darwin
2007-02-28 13:01:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by Diana 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
SecretSauce provided a great answer. Very thorough as well!
This is not unusual for him.
He was also correct about that supposed "Dr."
One of the most dishonest, as well as obvious, subversive tactics that creationists use to discredit evolution is to try to make it appear as if prominent scientists doubt that evolution is true. They do this because for some odd reason, they think that if prominent scientists, including Darwin, have doubts about evolution, then it can't be true. Even if this were the case, it is a fallacy to think that anybody's opinion, even Darwin's, effects the truth of evolution. Evolution is accepted by 99% of the 400,000 or so scientists that have studied and researched it because of the evidence for it, not because of anyone's say-so. The name of this fallacy is Argument by Authority.
The dishonest tactic that they use is called quote mining. Almost always, the quoted scientist that supposedly doubts evolution is either taken out of context, misquoted, or never said such a thing in the first place. The ONLY exceptions to that are scientists who expressed their doubt during or shortly after Darwin presented his theory, when evolution was still in it's infancy. That creationists are still using quotes from people who died 50 to 100 years ago to spread doubt about science shows exactly just how dishonest and unscrupulous they are.
Creationists are supposedly christians. I understand that they may not accept what is obvious to someone without the religios bias because of their cognative dissonance, but quote mining is a clear violation of the honesty, respectability, and purity that christians are supposed to demonstrate. Those who engage in this tactic are clearly sinning, and are a disgrace to everybody, including me, who calls themselves christians.
'Nuff said!!!!
I can't answer this question as well as SecretSauce did, but what I can do is offer you some sources with which you can check the creationist misinformation that I see you are already being bombarded with.
Quote mines...
You should reference this site whenever someone tells you that "so-and-so" said "such-and-such."
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/project.html
AIG's "Arguments we think creationists should NOT use."
Answers in Genesis is a creationist organization who published this list due to the EXTREMELY psuedoscientific and/or dishonest nature of certain arguments that creationists typically vomit out without thinking. here, you will find several of the arguments used by "Dr." Carl Baugh and "Dr." Kent Hovind.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp
For miscellaneous arguments, visit the following two sites...
http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Main_Page (Also check out their list of creationist arguments.)
and
http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html (Homepage= http://talkorigins.org/)
Both of these are excellent, informative websites which help to clear the mud that creationists add to what should be crystal clear waters.
Don't let these creationist wackos convince you that you can't believe in both science and the bible.
2007-02-28 14:16:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by elchistoso69 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'd have to add Jean-Baptiste Lammark to your list! (not that he was right on all his ideas)
Don't remember if these were on your list:
Thomas Malthus (an econimost, he gave Darwin the "why" for evolution)
Charles Lyell ( a geologist, his book describing stratigraphy [geologic layers] and fossil finds started Dawin thinking)
2007-02-28 13:43:33
·
answer #5
·
answered by copperhead 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Alfred Russell Wallace
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Russel_Wallace
2007-02-28 13:09:41
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Saint Augustine
2007-02-28 13:04:50
·
answer #7
·
answered by Sean 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
MORE AND MORE SCIENTISTS ARE DISCOUNTING EVOLUTION, ALBERT EINSTEIN, STEPHEN HAWKIN, AND THE MANY OTHERS WOULD FILL AN ENCYCLOPERIA.
2007-02-28 13:08:03
·
answer #8
·
answered by Dr. Albert, DDS, (USA) 7
·
0⤊
4⤋