What book made Charles Darwins theory of evolution famous?

Question

In science, we were given extra credit if we could find out the name of the book that made Charles Darwin's theory of evolution famous. So can any body help?

Answer 1

On the Origin of the Species.

Answer 2

I believe it was "The Descent of Man"... No, "Origin of Species"! yes. That one.

Answer 3

It is indeed Origin of Species.

----

As I have done many times before, I have to correct the mountain of misinformation provided by Creationist, jim761076.  Dishonesty and misinformation cannot be allowed to go unchallenged in a forum dedicated to Biology questions and answers.

It is particularly ironic that he starts:

"Anyone who reads this book will see ...."

... when *CLEARLY* jim has never read this book!

E.g.:  "What I mean by this for example is, Charlie went to the Galapagos Islands and observed a variety of finches. The variations was most notably in the size and function of the beak. He then concluded that the birds and the bananas are related. That is some stretch."

Indeed it is a stretch because the word "banana" does not appear ONCE in Origin of Species!

But it is even more amazing because jim is providing an absolutely ABSURD understanding of Darwin.  

Yes, Darwin concluded from the beaks that there is a relationship between birds and fruit ... but it is that the features of birds are due to the fact that the BIRDS *EAT* FRUIT!   Not that BIRDS *DESCENDED* FROM FRUIT or that BIRDS ARE *RELATED* TO FRUIT!    

And he does not develop from the beaks alone that the birds and fruit are "related" by common ancestry.   That it a ridiculous misunderstanding of the entire book.

The complete quote, jim, is this:

"It is a truly wonderful fact--the wonder of which we are apt to overlook from familiarity--that all animals and all plants throughout all time and space should be related to each other in groups, subordinate to groups, in the manner which we everywhere behold--namely, varieties of the same species most closely related, species of the same genus less closely and unequally related, forming sections and sub-genera, species of distinct genera much less closely related, and genera related in different degrees, forming sub-families, families, orders, sub-classes, and classes."

Darwin is talking about the fact that all living organisms are related to each other *IN GROUPS*.   It is the *GROUPINGS* that he is talking about here.  That all of life shows a hierarchical, branching, set of relationships.

*THIS* is what provides a massive pointer to the idea of common ancestry.   To say that it was nothing but Darwin making a leap from beak lengths to ancestral relationship between finches and bananas is flat-out *DECEIT*.

Just how badly do you have to mangle Darwin in order to be able to "refute" him, before people realize that Creationists like jim761076  are either completely, utterly, collosally CLUELESS, or without an honest bone in their bodies.

Answer 4

"On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life" Published 24th November 1859. Publisher John Murray. ISBN 0-486-45006-6.

Darwin's book was the culmination of evidence he had accumulated on the voyage of the Beagle in the 1830s and expanded through continuing investigations and experiments after his return.

Answer 5

Darwin's book, published in 1859, was called "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life" The 6th edition of 1872 was titled just "The Origin of Species."

Anyone who reads this book will see it is basically a commentary of some observations that Darwin made followed by wild conjecture about the observation's implications in nature. What I mean by this  for example is, Charlie went to the Galapagos Islands and observed a variety of finches. The variations was most notably in the size and function of the beak. He then concluded that the birds and the bananas are related. That is some stretch. From memory I will try to quote him from his book . "It is a truely wonderful FACT that all animals and all plants throughout all time and space should be related." Do you see how far eager minds can go? He saw a variety of finches and then called it a fact that the birds and the bananas are related.

This idea of evolution is not foundational. It is secondary to the foundational religion of naturalism. Because men have turned away from God, the only other solution to the question of the origin of life is that it was an accident. This of course is rediculous, but it is a nessesary evil for the naturalist. To believe that given enough time and enviromental pressures a lilly pad can turn into a peacock is foolish.

There is no hard evidence for this type of belief. I would recommend studying the works of creation scientists. You will then have an accurate picture of our natural world.

For example buy the book "In the Beginning" by Walt Brown. This will teach you all about geology.

If you want to learn about government sponcered fairy tales keep studying evolution. You will learn all about how a dinosaur turned into a humming bird. With out any evidence of course. You will learn about how all of the super complex biosphere came to be all by being fed some subjective conjecture. Most of which has either been proven false 50 years ago or has been exposed as a fraud.

Answer 6

Origin Of Species  

Answer 7

Origin of Species