What is Darwin's Theory?



Many scientists have different understandings and uses of



bioengineering. Darwin's Theory on natural selection has stirred up some



controversies on whether or not to remain studying and researching for



information on the theory. Jeremy Rifkin, a philosopher and environmental



activist, portrays in his article the world will be coming to an end if we remain



to use bioengineering the way that we have been. He feels it is a waste of



time and money to keep researching on Darwin's Theory. Where as Stephen



Jay Gould, biology and geology professor at Harvard University, feels that



bioengineering is a complex yet useful item in science. He believes if one can



understand the history behind the theory, then it would be a useful item for



future use. Both authors main view is to create a better environment for



humans to live in, but have different thoughts on how to reach the better side.



Gould believes "Rifkin does not understand science, therefore he misuses



science for political and social purposes- or scientific racism." (Gould, 1985,



pg 676)



Rifkins outlook on bioengineering is not being totally against it,



but as a method that is not useful. He feels that science may be misused and



pointless, therefore why have scientists work day and night over projects



which are pointless. He doesn't want society to spend so much money on a



cause that is what he thinks is worthless. In one case, he says that evolution



is a false science. The whole theory of Darwin is fake because it was



created due to scientists experimenting over and over again until they came



up with some conclusions. He believes scientists should not waste time on



tying to find an answer, when it isn't exact. He believes that no one knows



the truthful answers unless one has lived through the era. Gould along with



many other scientist disagree to that piece of information Rifkin gives. Gould



believes that Rifkin doesn't understand science to the full extent. He has no



knowledge or experience behind the field, therefore leading him to the wrong



answers about science. Most scientists agree because research and



experimentation is the way to learn about the past and future.



There was also a statement that Rifkin wrote in Algeny, a book



about alchemy of genes, that Gould found hilarious. Rifkin wrote about



what he had seen at the Galapagos islands: "vultures, condors, vampire



bats, jaguars, and snakes." Rifking also wrote, " it was a savage, primeval



bloodletting and ferocious, unremitted battle for survival. The air was dank



and foul and the thick stench of volcanoes ash veiled the islands with a kind



of goulash drape." (Gould, 1985, 682) He gave a very harsh, scary



description of the islands. Gould laughs and believes Rifkin has never set



foot on the islands. Gould says the total opposite of the environment and



physical description of the Galapogas. He says it is a beautiful and there are



no harmful animals at the location.



Rifkin doesn't totally disagree on science, but is making many



false accusations. Hr loves science, but critics believe some of view points



against evolution and Darwin's theory do not have enough understanding



behind them. Gould believes that Rifkin doesn't comprehend or have



enough facts and information on the subject to make a honest opinion. He



feels that Rifkin just looks straight and won't look to the side, where he could



find deeper information. Many scientists and critics do not appreciate



Rifkin's rambling on about science and saying things he doesn't know.



Rifkin feels he has a say in anything, and these are his opinions on the matter



at hand.