Darwin Day 2025 is on Wednesday, February 12, 2025: Who's pumped for Darwin Day?

Wednesday, February 12, 2025 is Darwin Day 2025. Darwin Day is a celebration to commemorate the anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin on 12 February 1809. The day is used to highlight Darwin's contribution to science and to promote science in general.

Darwin Day is a celebration to commemorate the anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin on 12 February 1809. The day is used to highlight Darwin's contribution to science and to promote science in general.

Darwin Day remembers the anniversary from the birth from the famous transformative researcher Charles Darwin.

DARWIN'S THE MAN!!! Happy Birthday, D-man! Darwin Day should be a national holiday.

Any evidence for Creationism on Darwin Day?

Hi college_girl_2012,

I'm sorry your god demands you speak untruths to defend him.

"Evolution is not observed at all today."

You can say that, but you're wrong.

Evolution = replication + variation + selection

We see it all the time. We see species change, and if we just extrapolate those changes over millions of years, we see a pattern that matches the fossil record quite well.

You don't have to live 400 years to prove an oak tree can grow to maturity from an acorn. You can prove it in a day if you have enough examples of oak trees at different ages, and if you can measure one day's worth of growth. Well, that's how we know evolution is true. And that doesn't even include the overwhelming genetic evidence of common descent.

"Fossil data does not show any transitional forms."

That is an outright lie.

Not only have we found literally THOUSANDS of transitional species, but we can even point to a gap in the fossil record and determine when and where to find a fossil of the transitional creature to fill the gap:

"God's character absolutely forbids evolutionary methods."

That's too bad. Evolution is an incredibly powerful yet deceptively simple mechanism that has generated diverse, resilient life on Earth. It has allowed to life to bounce back from unimaginable cosmic hammer blows. The simple evolutionary mechanism has created life that can survive in volcanic heat, in the darkest caves, on the coldest mountains and can even survive the vacuum of space.

I'm sorry your God isn't powerful or subtle enough to create such an elegant mechanism. That's really sad.

But please remember this. Human hands created NONE of the evidence for evolution. Human hands created ALL of the evidence for Biblical Creation.

So make sure you're not guilty of accepting the words of men and denying God's real glory.

wut was Darwin's religion?

Darwin was a Christian

It's a cheat for our schools to reject Intelligent Design Theory (just as it is for them to reject evolution) based on it being unscientific only to swallow Darwin's Theory of Evolution as if this is science that is somehow neutral to religion. Darwin's own Origin of Species fires the first shot by Means of Natural Selection. "Hey Darwin, is the origin of the human species from the hand of God?" Darwin claims, "No, it can be explained solely by means of natural selection."

Darwin was a gentle man, uncomfortable with what his theory implied to the religious, but he stood by what he believed the evidence displayed. The modern day talking heads of Darwinism are not so gracious. They claim that Intelligent Design is just "Creationism by another name". Funny, because most of us who believe Intelligent Design Theory has weight have rejected Young-Earth Creationism. Our opponents feel much more comfortable beating a straw man than addressing the actual arguments of Intelligent Design.

Darwin's love of religion was only topped by his love of science and what he calls; "the strongest desire to understand and explain". But it's Darwin himself who addresses the weakness of his own theory in Chapter 6 under the sub-heading, "Absence or rarity of transitional varieties". Intelligent Design Theorists like Micheal Behe drive their proverbial truck through the holes in this chapter that have only gotten wider in 170 years of scientific discovery.

Darwin's entire theory (as well as much of what we 'know') rests on inference. Inference works like this: There are primitive species buried in old strata of rock, and more complex developed species buried in successive shallow chunks of rock...implying that over time, simple species develop into more complex ones.

Intelligent Design is also a science that is primarily built upon arguments of inductive inference; Rules of intertia and chaos prevent things from growing in information and generating order...implying that order comes from an unnatural (or supernatural) source.

Both arguments make statements about God. Both arguments are based on inference. Neither conclusion is proven empirically in the laboratory. Both are theories that enjoy broad support by scientists around the world. Only one theory is forbidden to be discussed in our public schools.

In 1925 the Scopes Monkey Trial documents the Creationist Theory silencing the Materialist theory of Evolution from our public schools. Today, the tables have turned. The Evolutionists have learned from Darwin that the theory that wins will be the one that demonstrates genetic superiority by out-surviving its opponent.

But why not allow strong voices of opposition be presented in the classroom? Lee Stobel says that he's not against evolution being taught in schools. He wants MORE evolution taught in schools... all of it, including the weakness of Darwin's theory presented by Intelligent Design Theory.

The Origin of Species has enjoyed modification through descent and dissent. What doesn't kill it only makes it stronger, and if it can be killed then I suppose it's just being naturally selected out of the debate.

To the Darwinist who claims that religion should be silent about science and that science should be silent on religion: Is science capable of detecting a Supernatural Creator? Darwin said, "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."