1. Carol Anelli (Dept. of Entomology)

Although I was not physically at this presentation, I was able to receive notes from a fellow classmate. Dr. Anelli’s presentation was based on the life of Charles Darwin’s and his influences and the paradigms of the time before him.  One of the concepts that interested me was the work of John Ray ( 1627-1705). During his time, species were thought to be fixed and constant from creation. This school of thought was supported by the idea that organisms are perfectly adapted to their environment. I find this interesting because I can understand thinking behind it. “If an organism is to survive in an environment, then they should be adapted to their environment.” At the bare bones level, this makes sense, however it makes me think about the process of migration. Many organisms migrate; fish, birds, and even some crustaceans migrate for breeding purposes. Some humans migrate also (during the Lunar New year, China has the worlds largest human migration). Although the former is more of a necessity as opposed to the cultural implications of the latter, I believe that migration is a relatively common phenomenon.

If migration occurs, could this disprove the perfect environmental adaptation proposed by Ray? I would personally argue that if an organism was perfectly adapted to a single environment, then there would be little need for migration. If birds like the American Blue Jay can stay year round in Ohio, then by that logic, wouldn’t the Ruby-throated hummingbird be able to stay here year round and not just during the summer?

Or even if you look at things from an agricultural standpoint. It could have been observed in Ray’s time that the grains from the fertile crescent are not the exact same grains that would have been used in England at the time. Being in the 21st century looking back, it seems relatively obvious to me that evolution is a phenomenon. I suppose I can attribute this common sense to the work of Darwin and his groundbreaking work at the time.

Dr. Anelli used the time in class to further discuss Darwin and his influences. The discussion went into further depth of the era while Darwin was creating his theories and research. It was interesting to hear more about the background of the era before and during Darwin which we did not see recreated in the movie. The only glimpses of the ideology at the time, portrayed in the movie, is when Darwin discussed God with his wife and colleagues. When discussing the time pre- and post-beagle, it was very engaging again because the movie did not cover this part of Darwin’s life. After discussing Darwin’s “On the Origin of Species” in many classes, I enjoyed that this class looked at Darwin’s personal life more. I also appreciated how Dr. Anelli tied in the past ideas to present topics. The topic of religion vs science is always a hot topic, and I liked how it was not phrased in an either-or-situation or pinning the two beliefs against another.

I really enjoyed Dr. Anelli’s presentation about the life of Darwin. You could really see the enthusiasm and admiration of Darwin’s life and his contribution to science that she had in her presentation. I also really enjoyed how she filled in many gaps that were left out from the movie. One of the things that Dr. Anelli did that I also appreciated was when she explained some of the inspirations from which Darwin began to postulate his theory; Including his research on the Beagle and the scientific findings of other scientists such as Lyell, Lamarck, etc. I appreciated this because it brought the view on how Darwin was inspired, which is something that we tend to overlook when learning about scientists and their findings. I also liked how Dr. Anelli had us work on a questionnaire on Darwin’s life, which taught me things about Darwin that my previous biology classes or the movie had not shown us before. I also like how Dr. Anelli finished her presentation with the statement that it is very much possible to have both faith and believe in science at the same time. It just goes to show that while religion is important, it is also hard to deny the tangible evidence that explains why Darwin’s theory remains accepted to this day.

Overall, I believe the ideas that Dr. Anelli presented strengthened the themes that the movie presented. His family and work all played into making him the person and scientist that he was. I like how Dr. Anelli connected history as being something that makes it possible to review all of these things to discuss the roots of all of the ideas that Darwin presented. His ideas were influenced by a range of people with different backgrounds of study. I enjoyed listening to the connection between the French Revolution and polituand Darwin’s time. I will enjoy looking into this connection further and keep historical ideas connected to the science that I study.

I enjoyed how the lecture was set up to show the scientists that came before Darwin and how they had influenced him and the advance of science. When Hutton had realized that the Earth was much older than what the bible depicted, he had struggled and then failed to publish his findings for the public to see from a fear of persecution. This was interesting to see how the same situation had almost repeated itself, especially as depicted in the movie Creation. Creation had delved into the more emotional aspects of Darwin’s theories, more specifically the fear of isolation from society. In the time period where religion had played such a major role in society, it was understandably fear inducing to try to go against such a status quo. As shown in the movie, Darwin had struggled with the idea of publishing his results. It impacted him so much that he was failing to sleep and was having nightmares. Yet, the difference was that in the end he had found the courage to make peace with the decision of publishing his book as oppose to Hutton.  It was also fascinating to learn more about Darwin’s upbringing, as through the lecture I had learned how Darwin came from a rich family and had grown up strongly influenced by religion. Having to go against such fundamental values is quite a stressful undertaking psychologically and providers a better perspective to the effort it took to reveal such a polarizing discovery. Additionally because he had money, Darwin was able to further his education and get the opportunity to study science in his life. Without having the bravery to publish his results, the theory of evolution would have perhaps taken additional decades for a person to be in the right situation to create the theory and present it to the world.

While Charles Darwin is remembered for his imposing theory of evolution, Darwin’s methodology of hypothetico-deductive reasoning has greatly influenced the evolution of science itself. Dr. Anelli also noted that his studies are not solely limited to the field of evolutionary biology; Darwinian theory is interdisciplinary and has led to Nobel Prizes in fields such as Physiology and Medicine as recent as 2017.

The film Creation helped contextualize Darwin’s life, and Dr. Anelli emphasized this. Life was very different in Victorian England. This presented a range of obstacles that scientists today usually need not consider. Before his work was published, he was quoted that writing about natural selection and descent with modification was like, “confessing a murder.” This stuck for me for two reasons: Darwin knew that he was on the brink of something revolutionary, and it made me consider what scientific discovery today could imitate the culpability of murder, as Darwin felt. His ideas were threatening towards the existing hierarchy and typological thinking of the times. Additionally, Creation helped me understand the internal conflict Darwin felt as he grappled with religion and the external conflict within his marriage to first cousin, Emma, and the death of his oldest daughter, Annie. I found that delving into Darwin’s personal life was refreshing because in science, it is easy to focus on one’s achievements without recognition of overcoming personal struggles.

Dr. Anelli’s explanation of the Paradigm of Natural Theology stood out to me as what could have been most difficult for Darwin to overcome. Reverend William Paley, a man Darwin admired, used the analogy of a watch to relate to creation. All pieces of the watch serve a purpose; nothing is accidental or imperfect. Likewise, Paley believed all species are fixed and constant, perfectly adapted as is. Darwin’s notion that species evolve for better survival had serious implications against the church that God’s creatures could be considered imperfect.

Overall, Creation and Dr. Anelli’s presentation helped create a well-rounded image of Charles Darwin at the intersection of science and history. I enjoyed Dr. Anelli’s point that a good scientist is always asking the why behind the way things are. Darwin exemplified this and how skepticism and patience paired with years of observances can lead to lasting paradigm shifts.

Dr. Anelli gave an interesting talk about Darwin and his various influences leading up to his publishing of, “On the Origin of Species.” Going into the lecture, I had very little knowledge about Darwin other than his influence on the theory of evolution which was held at face value. Anelli’s lecture, however, gave me insight to what the current theories about species were in Darwin’s time and what previous works influenced him. Before the lecture, I thought of Darwin as being very much a true scientist as is thought about today. Someone who is above the “silly” thoughts of religion and believes in facts and evidence. Although this is obviously not true of every scientist, it is a common thread and misconception in society, especially surrounding theories that shake the very pillars of beliefs that many religions hold. In Darwin’s case, those specifically about the ideology of a perfect creator. Nonetheless, after watching “Creation” and Anelli’s lecture, I found that not to be true.

It is not exactly clear where Darwin’s religious beliefs landed. According to Anelli, there are many speculations about Darwin’s belief in a higher power. After discussion, it was clear that Darwin struggled with publishing his book for quite some time because of the very real consequences that could entail. Darwin’s theory was believed to destroy the naturalist’s ideology that everything was created in its perfect form by the creator and that the little variations held no bearing. Darwin’s theory said quite the opposite. To Darwin, every single variation added up over generations and in fact did matter. Also, Darwin’s book being published risked his relationship with his wife, Emma, and their children.

Darwin was very much a family man and was hesitant about how his words could change his relationship with his wife and inevitability, their children. Darwin’s wife was stronger in her faith and had objections about the ethereal consequences of Darwin’s theory, as was evident in the movie and lecture. Emma believed that Darwin may be eternally damned and would not be able to spend forever in heaven with her. Given the time period, religion was a very important part of life and considered of utmost importance for an individual’s soul. Clearly there was some inner turmoil for Darwin surrounding his theory and publishing of his book.

Dr. Anelli’s lecture, along with the movie, “Creation,” have helped me correct some of my misconceptions about Darwin, as well as fill in gaps about my knowledge about him. I am glad I was able to attend and see what exactly Darwin was about and some of the struggles he faced about his theory that some still struggle to accept today for the exact same reasons. Learning about the historical context surrounding Darwin is invaluable and should not be taken lightly as it helps frame the situation and gives a more human approach to Darwin.

Dr. Carol Anelli discussed Darwin’s background, his biggest influences, and major breakthroughs in science in the 17^th, 18^th, and 19^th centuries. Not only did the Darwinian theory make a huge influence on biology and medicine at its origin, but also on science and phenomena to this day. His theory sustained time, and the technological advances throughout the centuries only served to further strengthen his theory.

I find it interesting to see how conflicting ideas are addressed in a classroom setting, especially the clash between science and religion. One quote that resonated with me from the lecture was “you want to eliminate faith as much as possible when using scientific procedures”. While faith can be a heavy influence on an outcome, no one would ever want an unexperienced person performing life-threatening surgical procedures on someone, relying solely on faith. There will always be an unclear line between faith for a religion and science, and it was interesting to hear about how everyone draws this line differently.

Dr. Anelli helped paint the picture of Darwin’s life story beyond the movie Creation. I did not know he came from a religious background, and that he had to have been religious to attend Cambridge. From the movie, I expected him to be nonreligious mainly due to his silence when attending church and his contradicting theory about evolution. However, it now makes sense that his faith may have faded as he learned more about science and after his daughter Annie passed away.

Darwin’s research is still vital to scientific breakthroughs being made today, and his theories are now just being refined. His research was influential in shifting opinions on where life comes from. Before, it was believed that every organism was “perfect” and created from God, but through various scientific studies from multiple biologists, geologists, and other scientists, opinions slowly swayed against some teachings of Christianity and towards the results shown from the scientific studies (the world being very, very old and every organism not being “perfect”).

It is believed that Darwin was raised within a religious family due to the fact that it was the most common at the time, and he attended Cambridge. His family was very wealthy, so he didn’t have it very difficult growing up. As an adult, he seemed to be a family man that cared deeply for his wife and all of his children. Although his wife, Emma, was his first-cousin, they had a fantastic relationship and did not want to hurt the other. The largest reason for disagreement between them was religious differences, but they were able to push through.

Darwin’s biggest contribution to the scientific community was his theory of evolution. He started to formulate his theory around 1838, and was not able to officially publish it for about another 20 years due to it going against the popular ideology of the time, and also so he could verify he was 100% correct. He went on to publish 25 total books, along with many scientific papers.

There have been various improvements to Darwin’s theory of evolution since the day it got published, and the contents of it are still widely used today in the scientific community. It is still being continuously researched and improved upon today.

I thought Dr. Anelli gave a great presentation and covered pretty much everything that needed to be covered. It was interesting to learn so much about the personal side of Darwin as opposed to the scientific side that is always presented. I’m also glad she covered some other, lesser known scientists that led up to Darwin. Overall, I was very impressed and enjoyed the presentation.

My favorite part of her presentation was the mention of Paley’s famous paradigm of Natural Theology regarding a clock. This merely states that the parts that combine to make a watch can only create a watch. The point being that everything created has a purpose for its creation. The fact being, a design is desired by a designer, and therefore, obtains a purpose. I liked this theory best because it connects with the theological belief that everything happens for a reason because god has a plan for us all. Although separate sides of a still ongoing war, I believe the two complement each other’s theories. All life forms were created for a purpose from god as a creator, which fits religious and scientific categories. Anelli also stated how evolution is not always idealistic because species evolve to survive current situations but not as practically as they could. For instance, sleep apnea, hiccups, and the design of eyes are all poorly constructed to be more harmful than helpful. Yes, all were created for a reason –because god intended it to be so and because more species would have become extinct if they did not adapt to their surroundings in anyway they could, impractical but still works. I would also like to point out the saying “if it isn’t broke, don’t fix it.” This saying implies that however structurally unsound certain features are, they do the job they were intended to do. Theology and scientific research are battling one another, but both follow the same theories and casualties regarding change and reasoning.