Get 15% off your first order - use 15OFF discount code now!
I can definitely recommend a website that really helped me with my essay. I found out it was due the day before I had to submit it. Went into full-on panic mode. Worst experience of my senior year by far. It’s called https://
See: Cunha, J. G. de Barros e (João Gualberto de Barros), -1882
Darwin ’s theory that natural selection drives evolution is incomplete without input from evolution’s anti-hero: Lamarck
On the geologically new Galápagos Islands , Darwin looked for evidence attaching wildlife to an older "centre of creation", and found mockingbirds allied to those in Chile but differing from island to island. He heard that slight variations in the shape of tortoise shells showed which island they came from, but failed to collect them, even after eating tortoises taken on board as food.   In Australia, the marsupial rat-kangaroo and the platypus seemed so unusual that Darwin thought it was almost as though two distinct Creators had been at work.  He found the Aborigines "good-humoured & pleasant", and noted their depletion by European settlement. 
Science depends on facts. It also depends on reason. But fact and reason alone cannot explain how science works. The examples chosen all had some compelling support and serious shortcomings. Part of the answer may lie in the sociology of groups. Another part lies in simple faith: faith that future scientists will address a theory's shortcomings. Darwin needed an explanation for the Cambrian Explosion and a mechanism for the preservation of traits (see Mendel and Darwin ) . Wegener needed a mechanism for Continental Drift. Galileo needed an explanation for the lack of stellar parallax and the poor performance of his model (see Galileo's Battle for the Heavens ) . It is not only the community that requires faith. The champions of these new theories require faith in their ideas, even when facts contradict their hypotheses. In each case above, there were facts which when combined with the current assumptions of the time clearly contradicted their hypotheses. None of these scientists let those facts get in the way. Paul Feyerabend, a modern philosopher of science, presents a similar view, where he argues that science is sometimes required to work "against the facts". His key example was how the heliocentric system made less sense than a geocentric system during Galileo's time. One irony missed by discussions of science and religion is how much both depend on faith.