The Creation Wiki is made available by the NW Creation Network
Watch monthly live webcast - Like us on Facebook - Subscribe on YouTube

Edward Blyth

From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science
Jump to: navigation, search
Edward Blyth

Edward Blyth (Born::December 23, 1810Died::December 27, 1873) was born in London, England and became a well-known zoologist and chemist which brought him wide consideration as one of the founders of Indian zoology and subsequently he became one of the leading zoologist of India. He first arrived in Calcutta, India around 1841 and became curator of the, Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal museum.

Blyth and Darwin

It is assumed by the modern science class of today that Charles Darwin himself was the first to put such an observation of species changing over time to paper and truly allow the study of its development as a theory. However Edward Blyth's paper dealt with observed instances of small change within organisms affected by natural selection as well, albeit in slightly different terms. In 1835, twenty-four years before Charles Darwin published his masterpiece, The Origin of Species, Edward Blyth published his for, The Magazine of Natural History. According to his paper it was clear that Blyth held the view that animals could be modified over time and that, "the stronger must always prevail over the weaker," as he put it. Establishing the fundamental tenet that Darwin mirrored years later.

Darwin himself credited Blyth in the first chapter of The Origin of Species by writing;

Mr Blyth, whose opinion, from his large and varied stores of knowledge, I should value more than that of almost any one.[1]

According to Blyth's work organisms and their change in nature is something which;

There has been, strangely enough, a difference of opinion among naturalists, as to whether these seasonal changes of colour were intended by Providence as an adaptation to change of temperature10, or as a means of preserving the various species from the observation of their foes, by adapting their hues to the colour of the surface; against which latter opinion it has been plausibly enough argued, that "nature provides for the preyer as well as for the prey." The fact is, they answer both purposes; and they are among those striking instances of design, which so clearly and forcibly attest the existence of an omniscient great First Cause. Experiment demonstrates the soundness of the first opinion; and sufficient proof can be adduced to show that the other is also sound.[2]

Darwinian evolution cannot be relied upon if the observed examples of change consistently align with the biological diversification process of speciation. It is not scientifically sustained by extrapolating observed events of speciation into the ultimate evolutionary conclusion that at one point enough change accumulated to produce molecules-to-man evolution millions of years in the past by random, blind natural processes. You can quickly tell that it wasn't Darwin's observational science that made evolution so appealing. There were still only small changes in organisms being scientifically observed by Darwin, and by Blyth who had already published such gleanings of nature years earlier. It was more so the strict adherence to an opposing philosophical outlook on the origin of life that attracted people as society grew more secular.

Other Publishings

  • Catalogue of the Birds of the Asiatic Society in 1849.


External Links