Strolling with a skeptical biochemist
That picture is not going to enhance your reputation as a curmudgeon. Did you have too much Tim Hortons'that morning? ;-)
Re: "Darwin himself had to be nudged into writing the book, fearing the controversy it would unleash."I like to imagine Darwin's reaction 150 years ago if one of his friends had said:"Don't worry, 150 years from now, your book will be a best seller, people will celebrate your 200th birthday and there will be Darwin stuffed toys!"
Larry in Toronto Star:I say, without hesitation, that (Charles) Darwin was the greatest scientist who ever lived, and I'm happy to debate that with any (Isaac) Newton supportersOK, Darwin was great, no doubt. But in comparison to Newton he was a one trick pony. The sheer breadth of Newton's work is amazing. Darwin can only be compared to Newton if he'd managed to come up with non-Euclidean geometry or, say, Gibbs free energy, or Mendelian inheritance.
Whoa! Edward Larson did not win a Nobel Prize as proclaimed in the article; he won a Pulitzer PrizeP.S. Newton was the greatest...
He's DAMN good looking. So who is he? :-D
The law of gravitation applies to every single entity in the universe without exception, including life. That's the simple reason why I think Newton was the "greatest". Darwin explained all of life as we know it, and something like natural selection may have played a role in the evolution of the universe, but we don't know that yet. In any case, this is silly...
Fascinating. My bias is for Einstein, but I think I would put Darwin ahead of Newton as well.Great article and great picture!
He's obviously an intelligent, curious, witty and sensible individual. I can't speak for the guy on the left, though.
I'm sorry, but I just can't leave this one alone. I think that picture is quite horrible. You know that saying that people often look like their dogs? The resemblance of you to that toy is getting a little uncanny! Something about those beady eyes. Your daughter will be so pleased that you used her gift as a prop:) Congrats on being published, you're much cuter in person.
How come Archimedes never gets mentioned for best scientist? Is it because he was an engineer?
I have GOT to get me one of those! (Darwin dolls, not smiling Larry Morans. Um, no offense.)
"He was the first to not only argue that things evolve, but to say how it happens – through natural selection," Moran says.Moran is a selectionist?
the University of Toronto's atheist Centre for Inquiry.I don't think the CFI is explicitly atheist, is it? More like pro-rationalist, or humanist.
DK says,OK, Darwin was great, no doubt. But in comparison to Newton he was a one trick pony. The sheer breadth of Newton's work is amazing. Darwin can only be compared to Newton if he'd managed to come up with non-Euclidean geometry or, say, Gibbs free energy, or Mendelian inheritance.It's too bad the Newton just published a bunch of laws and never came up with a theory of gravity. I'm astonished that there are so many people who don't appreciate the breadth of Darwin's work so I posted a list of Books by Charles Darwin.
why is Darwin frowning? WHAT DID YOU DO TO CHARLIE???1
Darwin was undoubtedly the greatest scientist of all time. But not necessarily the greatest mind.I'd give that one to Newton or Euclid, if you want to include mathematicians. The Elements is pure magic.