Play Book Tag discussion

I read this book because throughout my life, I've heard many different versions of what Darwin was really trying to say. I am glad I read this even though it is very dry.

I liked learning about different animals and plant life and the observations that Darwin and others made. Its hard to believe that some of the observations and conclusions Darwin makes in the book were revolutionary at the time.

A large part of the book focuses on adaptations to surroundings and natural selection with the inference that species can change so much over time so as to become other species.

I found this in my research afterwards.

Darwin's theory of evolution is based on key facts and the inferences drawn from them, which biologist Ernst Mayr summarised as follows:[6]

Every species is fertile enough that if all offspring survived to reproduce, the population would grow (fact).
Despite periodic fluctuations, populations remain roughly the same size (fact).
Resources such as food are limited and are relatively stable over time (fact).
A struggle for survival ensues (inference).
Individuals in a population vary significantly from one another (fact).
Much of this variation is heritable (fact).
Individuals less suited to the environment are less likely to survive and less likely to reproduce; individuals more suited to the environment are more likely to survive and more likely to reproduce and leave their heritable traits to future generations, which produces the process of natural selection (fact).
This slowly effected process results in populations changing to adapt to their environments, and ultimately, these variations accumulate over time to form new species (inference).


One topic that Darwin does cover is the difference of variations vs species. He admits that there is not clear and agreed upon criteria to differentiate between variations and species and to Darwin, there is not significant difference. Though not covered in The Origin of Species, Darwin believed and championed the idea that evolution also applies to humans.

Though I do believe in adaptation to surroundings and natural selection and even animal adapting into new species, I do still believe in creation and clear distinction between kinds and is something I want to study further scientifically.

You might be interested in The Selfish Gene. It expands on Darwin's original theories of evolution, but rather than the emphasis being on the vessel (human) it is at a gene level. Richard Dawkins is a well-known and vocal athiest, but this book is focused on the biology, so if I remember correctly no real anti-religious commentary.

Fascinating read and highly recommend if you are into evolutionary biology.

Meli wrote: "You might be interested in The Selfish Gene. It expands on Darwin's original theories of evolution, but rather than the emphasis being on the vessel (human) it is at a gene level. Rich..."

Thank-you Meli for this suggestion. I may check it out. I wouldn't say I'm into evolutionary biology or biology at all. When it comes to science, I like the more abstract and theoretical side (touches on the beginning of evolution) and not so much the concrete. For biology, I tend to listen to podcasts.

I will add this to my list.

Jason wrote: "Meli wrote: "You might be interested in The Selfish Gene. It expands on Darwin's original theories of evolution, but rather than the emphasis being on the vessel (human) it is at a gen..."

Jason, be warned. Dawkins is very scathing to anyone of any faith whatsover. He also wrote The God Delusion and has no respect for any belief outside of his regarding this.

I am going to PM you a list of books I think you might find interesting.

Karin wrote: "Jason wrote: "Meli wrote: "You might be interested in The Selfish Gene. It expands on Darwin's original theories of evolution, but rather than the emphasis being on the vessel (human) ..."

Thank-you Karin. Yes, I am not interested in any book that puts down or insults people who believe differently. Meli says this particular book doesn't have any anti-religious commentary. I will see.

Jason wrote: "Karin wrote: "Jason wrote: "Meli wrote: "You might be interested in The Selfish Gene. It expands on Darwin's original theories of evolution, but rather than the emphasis being on the v..."

This one might not--I read it so long ago that I don't remember. It was that other one that did so now I associate Dawkins with this attitude. That said, it will help you understand the DNA aspect of evolution, although not everyone agrees with all of what he says even in the secular biological realm.

The Blind Watchmaker and The God Delusion were both specifically platforms for his athiest commentary, but The Selfish Gene and the followup The Extended Phenotype are both science books.

It has been a while since I read it, and it is based on his core theory about "the selfish gene," but I am not 100% sure a snark or two doesn't get through.

Proceed with caution, I guess 😬

I get a snark comment. Neil deGrasse Tyson has a couple snark comments in Astrophysics for People in a Hurry. But it's short, he says his peace. He's not overly degrading and he moves on.

From Bacteria to Bach and Back on the other hand. I quit reading.

Jason wrote: "I get a snark comment. Neil deGrasse Tyson has a couple snark comments in Astrophysics for People in a Hurry. But it's short, he says his peace. He's not overly degrading and he moves on.

From Ba..."

I hadn't heard of that one, sounds interesting.
But if you quit reading it, yikes.

I haven't read any science related books probably since Dawkins.

I started Carl Sagan's Cosmos, but I wasn't in the right headspace for it. I'd like to get to that sometime. I think the foreward or intro is Neil deGrasse Tyson.

I stopped reading Cosmos too. I love physics.


the bacteria to each book had two problems. his attack on people who believe in creation and he spent about 100 pages telling me he was going to tell me something great. got tired with it.

Jason wrote: "I stopped reading Cosmos too. I love physics.


the bacteria to each book had two problems. his attack on people who believe in creation and he spent about 100 pages telling me he was going to tel..."

I don't remember that. But, when I give it another try I guess I'll see.