• MeanEYE@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    3 months ago

    Even Darwin in his own book points out people who had these ideas before him. But that’s not enough, you can’t just go “ha here’s an idea” and leave it at that. You have to work to prove it, and that’s what Darwin did. The idea itself wasn’t so revolutionary but everyone else’s was just slightly wrong. Some for example believed evolution worked on all beings except humans, because we were work of god, and similar. Darwin came up with a correct one by using theirs as a base and then made his own, tested it and saw it worked. The amount of work Darwin invested in this theory alone was staggering. In fact the book itself “The Origin of Species” was something he was forced to write because people got afraid his work will go undocumented and he’ll die soon. So he wrote that book as a summary with more books to come later in expanded and detailed form, which never came.

  • kromem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Only a hundred years ahead and didn’t nail survival of the fittest? Pshh, amateur.

    Here’s Lucretius in 50 BCE:

    In the beginning, there were many freaks. Earth undertook Experiments - bizarrely put together, weird of look Hermaphrodites, partaking of both sexes, but neither; some Bereft of feet, or orphaned of their hands, and others dumb, Being devoid of mouth; and others yet, with no eyes, blind. Some had their limbs stuck to the body, tightly in a bind, And couldn’t do anything, or move, and so could not evade Harm, or forage for bare necessities. And the Earth made Other kinds of monsters too, but in vain, since with each, Nature frowned upon their growth; they were not able to reach The flowering of adulthood, nor find food on which to feed, Nor be joined in the act of Venus.

    For all creatures need Many different things, we realize, to multiply And to forge out the links of generations: a supply Of food, first, and a means for the engendering seed to flow Throughout the body and out of the lax limbs; and also so The female and the male can mate, a means they can employ In order to impart and to receive their mutual joy.

    Then, many kinds of creatures must have vanished with no trace Because they could not reproduce or hammer out their race. For any beast you look upon that drinks life-giving air, Has either wits, or bravery, or fleetness of foot to spare, Ensuring its survival from its genesis to now."

    • De Rerum Natura book 5 lines 837-859

    Bonus round, nearly nailed Mendelian trait inheritance too:

    Sometimes children take after their grandparents instead, Or great-grandparents, bringing back the features of the dead. This is since parents carry elemental seeds inside – Many and various, mingled many ways – their bodies hide Seeds that are handed, parent to child, all down the family tree. Venus draws features from these out of her shifting lottery – Bringing back an ancestor’s look or voice or hair. Indeed These characteristics are just as much the result of certain seed As are our faces, limbs and bodies. Females can arise From the paternal seed, just as the male offspring, likewise, Can be created from the mother’s flesh. For to comprise A child requires a doubled seed – from father and from mother. And if the child resembles one more closely than the other, That parent gave the greater share – which you can plainly see Whichever gender – male or female – that the child may be.

    • De Rerum Natura book 4 lines 1217-1232
    • samus12345@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      He was close with the “seeds” parents pass onto their children (not knowing what genes or DNA were, or course), but he should have been able to empirically figure out that this was incorrect:

      And if the child resembles one more closely than the other, That parent gave the greater share – which you can plainly see

      Because sometimes children can look like their grandparent more than a parent, meaning the “seeds” are there, just latent.

      • kromem@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        You mean like the first few lines of what I quoted where he talks about how traits from grandparents or great grandparents can come back?

        • samus12345@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Oh yeah, totally forgot that. In that case, it’s even more puzzling that he would claim the child inherited more “seed” from one parent than the other based on their apperance.

          • kromem@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            I think his idea includes things like “if the kid looks like the maternal grandfather, more contribution was from the mother’s seed than the father’s.”

            Not that it’s exclusively that the contributions are only dependent on how closely matching the appearance of the mother or father and only the mother or father.

            • samus12345@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              But sometimes a kid can look more like their mother, and that kid’s kid can look more like their paternal grandfather. How would he explain that?

              • kromem@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                That the kid’s kid got more of the dad’s seed in the “shifting lottery.”

                It’s not like he’s saying a kid that looks like the mother isn’t getting any contribution from the father.

                And while he’s technically wrong in the idea that there’s a disproportionate overall contribution from each parent, it is true that genes and traits responsible for physical appearance can be disproportionately passed on.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    3 months ago

    In Histoire Naturelle, a ­36-volume book Buffon worked on for 50 years, he also put forward the idea that animals were becoming extinct at a time when most natural historians believed that “God would never allow any species to ever disappear or arise over time”, according to Roberts. “The concept of species change and extinction was very controversial.”

    The amount of shit that people have got wrong because of god…

    Even without this key insight, Buffon postulated that new species must have come into existence and changed over time, while some species must have gone extinct. “That was a very, very radical idea at the time, and Buffon was censured for it by the Sorbonne: he had to write a statement publicly renouncing everything he had written,” said Roberts. Buffon was later formally accused of heresy for implying that Earth was older than the biblical record.

    The number of people that have been wrongly persecuted because of god…

    Religion is the most horrible invention in human history. It justifies mistreating others. It’s used to control people. It causes people to believe fiction over fact. It’s the one thing holding us back more than any other.

    • masquenox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      3 months ago

      The amount of shit that people have got wrong because of god…

      Lol at atheists who don’t believe in gods yet still wants to blame everything on them.

      • Demuniac@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        They are not blaming a god, they are blaming peoples reason for doing horrible things. There’s lots of them, but claiming it’s something god wants has historically been one of the more common ones.

        Their phrasing must have confused you, but as seen in all the downvotes you received it’s a commonly used way of saying this.

      • dezmd@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        This is an excellent example of how religious belief can cloud the human brain, impairing reason and thoughtfulness.

        Well done.