Number of entries: 16 Number of pages: 2
1 2
|
Next >
|
Last >>
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: Brian Coope CEng MIMMM From: Metallurgist, London E-mail: Contact |
I thoroughly enjoyed reading the “The Darwin Conspiracy” and consider it presents a very well-researched and well-argued case that Alfred Russel Wallace provided the crucial elements that allowed Darwin to complete “On the Origin of Species”. The accepted view is that of a “race” between two men developing the same idea in parallel – a race won by Darwin. The truth is that both men were aware of each other’s work and were corresponding. The detail of this book uncovers a sequence of events involving correspondence, publication of articles, mail shipping schedules, etc. to provide a convincing case that at the very least Darwin used Wallace’s ideas without the required degree of acknowledgement but further argues that a major deception was also involved. To give Wallace the credit he deserves requires the acceptance of a major flaw in a national hero – which is clearly difficult to accept for an academic world about to celebrate the 150th anniversary of the publication of Darwin’s “On the Origins of Species”. The question of why Wallace himself did not make more fuss about his lack of recognition at the time is also tackled. He accepted Darwin’s word that he had reached similar conclusions independently -- and Darwin was already accepted as a great man and a gentleman too – in an age when society was made up of “gentlemen and players”. It also appears that the world knew it as the Darwin-Wallace Theory of Evolution until Wallace’s death in 1913, after which it somehow became more convenient to talk about Darwinism. Thus academia has participated in the process of diminishing the role of Wallace in the greater process. From its title some might think that this book provides material that could be used by creationists to discredit not only Darwin but also the whole theory of evolution. However, this author follows the thought processes of both Darwin and Wallace and other scientists of the period too in way that makes the Darwin-Wallace theory even more understandable and believable.
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: Giles Oakley |
I was so impressed by Roy Davies’ book I sent the following letter to the Observer in response to a recent 2-page feature on Darwin by Robin McKie. The article didn’t mention Roy’s book but essentially exonerated Darwin regarding past accusations relating to Wallace.The Observer didn’t publish my letter, but I certainly wouldn’t claim that was part of some sinister cover-up. This is the letter; Few people could come from a background more steeped in Darwinism and a reverence for Charles Darwin than me. There were close family ties of respect and affection between my parents and descendants of Darwin, connections which were always a great source of pride.As a child I was lucky enough to be able to learn about theories of evolution from searching for fossils in Chess Valley chalklands and slatey cliffs in Dorset with my father, Dr KP Oakley, a palaeontologist from the Natural History Museum, who was most famous for his role in exposing the Piltdown Skull Hoax over 50 years ago.I mention this background only to show how painful it is for me to say that I cannot share Robin McKie’s confidence that Darwin was not guilty of the accusations made by some that he lifted the ideas of Alfred Russel Wallace (How Darwin won the evolution race, Review 22 June).I don’t claim any specialist knowledge of all the arguments but the allegations against Darwin certainly don’t only rely on revelations in 20 year-old books.Many others have entered the field over the last few years and the most convincing statement of the case against Darwin comes in a book only recently published but largely ignored, The Darwin Conspiracy, by Roy Davies (Golden Square Books), a distinguished former editor of the BBC2 history series Timewatch. He is a man of integrity as I know from our days when we were both at the BBC.He presents a detailed forensic case against Darwin which needs to be properly addressed before one can safely exonerate the naturalist.This needs to be done by someone open minded enough to actually read the book and not dismiss it out of hand as if in thrall to an a priori assumption that the Great Man couldn’t possibly be guilty. Giles Oakley
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: Anna Thomas |
I think the book’s excellent. I read it start to finish. At each twist, I was thinking, ’But surely someone must have found this out before? Surely, after all this time, this can’t be NEW territory?’ In fact, it is. More than a decade has been spent delivering something new, interesting and - quite frankly - paradigm-shifting. It’s highly believable and very straight. In an age of ’headline snacks’, I think that’s rare. I’m impressed by the way fragments of information have been hunted down and pinned to the board. I love the way the science becomes drama. Between orangutans and shipping records, there is the truth. Visible. Obvious. And everyone missed it. Because they were looking where the light was shining... I think the light’s moved now. I think there has to be an official response to these facts. Darwin stole his place in history. (His guilt even made him seek a pension for Wallace in his dotage!) Academics, scientists, authors, researchers, Linnean society et al, I think the floor is open...
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: Roy Davies |
Brackman and Brooks, as you so rightly say, dealt with much of the material which appears in The Darwin Conspiracy. However, neither author really compared the time-lines for Darwin and Wallace to show who knew what and when and what they did with that information. After Wallace’s first letter to Darwin sent in October 1856, which arrived at Southampton on January 11, 1857, Darwin used Wallace’s ideas in his own writings and then attempted to convince Wallace that he was within a couple of years of publishing his own theory which he had been working on for nearly 20 years. From that moment on, Wallace was convinced that Darwin already had the answers to what was then called The Species Question. When he heard from Hooker that the Linnean Meeting had declared them both discoverers of the theory of evolution, the innocent Wallace was delighted to have his name conjoined with that of the great Charles Darwin. He returned home four years later and was feted as Darwin’s equal and had no reason to believe that Darwin had cheated him out of his inheritance since that first letter was addressed to Darwin from the Malay Archipelago and which Darwin had in his possession for four months before replying with Wallace’s ideas newly entered into the written record via his manuscript and a letter to Hooker. Simple fact is that Wallace, unsuspicious, never guessed what had happened to his original ideas between 1856 and 1858. Remarkable, but true.
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: Samuel Butler |
Although this material has been the subject of at least two previous studies (A Delicate Arrangement; The Strange Case of Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace by Arnold C Brackman, and Just before the origin; Alfred Russel Wallace’s theory of evolution by John Landon Brooks), they didn’t explain Wallace’s strange silence in the face of the alleged deception. Strange, given his outspokenness on many issues. Does The Darwin Conspiracy go further?
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: Golden Square Books E-mail: Contact |
Some visitors to this site have said "The Darwin Conspiracy - Origins of a Scientific Crime" is not stocked by Amazon.com. The book is currently stocked by its UK-counterpart Amazon.co.uk and sometimes they say it is temporarily out of stock. This refers only to the copies they hold. When Amazon receives an order, they pass it on to us at Golden Square Books and we usually send it out the same day. These books then enter a long but reliable distribution system. If you do not want to place an order with Amazon, we can supply the book to you directly. We will match Amazon’s terms and pay first-class postage within the UK. We can accept UK cheques only, made out to Golden Square Books. If you have any questions, contact paul@darwin-conspiracy.co.uk
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: Mike Cassell |
Poor old Wallace, writing to the wrong man! The rest,as they say, is history. It’s hard to imagine that such a slant on Darwin’s story has escaped the attention of so many for so long but Roy Davies’ case is compelling...and makes fascinating reading. But is it too inconvenient a truth for the scientific world to give him his full credit?
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: T.mcGrath |
Forensic investigation of mail boat shipping routes was no doubt tedious for the investigator, but the result is a page turner for the reader. Having finished the book I am persuaded; - Wallace deserves at least equal billing with Darwin concerning the theory of evolution - Darwin’s human heart overcame his scientific head in his desire for pre-eminence - The academic establishment has a case to answer - A Young Earth Creationist could enjoy such a well written and well presented book
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: Roy Davies |
Sadly the budget went on producing and publishing the book. Photographs, sadly, were out of the question. Still, there are photographs of both Wallace and Darwin on this website which is meant to supplement the book rather than simply advertise it. RD
|
| Submitted by | Comments: | ||
| Name: David Evans |
Thoroughly researched, closely argued and extremely well written. I’m totally convinced. Hopefully Wallace will now have the recognition he so deserves.
|
Powered by PHP guestbook 1.6 from PHPJunkyard - Free PHP scripts
