Today is the 150th anniversary of the publication of Charles Darwin's revolutionary work, On the Origin of Species. Darwin's book advanced the scientific theory of evolution, arguing that organisms adapt to their environment over time, a process known as natural selection. This idea shook the foundations of the world in the 19th century, as the popular and common view among even most scientists was the fixity of species - a belief that organisms do not change and were created just as we find them now. It challenged the assumptions of many religious believers, who saw no room for God in Darwin's theory. Even 150 years later, there are many who still cling to the fixity of species and criticize evolution for having what they perceive as an 'atheistic basis'.

Just in time, Christian apologists Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron have released their 150th anniversary edition of Origin of Species, with a 50-page introduction written by Mr. Comfort [1], laying out creationist arguments and attacking Darwin as a racist, sexist, fraud, and so forth. This special edition has been distributed to several universities across the country and although Comfort's own website claims that it contains Darwin's original and unedited work, Professor Eugenie C. Scott and others have pointed out that "four crucial chapters" have been omitted from it [2]. Comfort and his fellow creationists (or 'intelligent design advocates') have a clear agenda, and one of their more successful objectives is producing misleading information, which can even include the way they refer to evolution.

I. What is 'Darwinism'?

Darwinism is not evolution, despite what you may have heard. It is misleading terminology used frequently by anti-evolutionists to deride the scientific theory. The proper term for what Darwin and his colleagues proposed is the theory of evolution by natural selection. The 'Darwinism' label devalues the science involved with the theory and favors a more philosophical grounding. Like Christianity is a belief system based around the person of Jesus Christ, anti-evolutionists prefer the term Darwinism because it also implies that it is a belief system based around one person. Confused theists have even jumped at the use of the term 'theory' in connection with evolution, because they fail to understand that a theory in science (an explanation of facts that goes through the scientific method) is not a theory in the layman's sense (a simple guess).

Creationists prefer to think that Darwin was just a philosopher and not a scientist, because they believe science is on their side. Since science tells us how the universe works, those who trust that a creator brought the universe into existence typically think that the discoveries of science should reflect the existence and nature of their creator. Most of these creationists are Christians who consult the bible for information on the creator, and because the bible says God created man and woman, these individuals take issue with evolution, which states that humans have descended from other species. The main concern for creationists is whether or not something agrees with their religious worldview, not if it is actually scientific. Their only concern with science is in their desire to see it endorse the biblical creation story.

So evolution is renamed Darwinism to emphasize an imaginary war of ideologies. Creationists and intelligent design advocates have to do this though, because if a serious analysis is applied, it becomes very clear very fast what is science and what is not. Creationism is introduced through courtrooms and legal battles, while evolution is introduced through peer-reviewed research and papers published in scientific journals. Evolution has support in a wealth of discoveries like transitional fossils, DNA comparisons that demonstrate common ancestry, and vestigial structures that show the trial-and-error method of evolutionary mutations. Creationism has not even submitted any discoveries other than the argument from ignorance known as 'irreducible complexity', which has already been disproven by Biologists like Kenneth Miller.

II. A Long Legacy of Evolution

Darwinism is a misnomer, just as gravity cannot rightfully be called Newtonism and germ theory cannot be called Pasteurism. Evolution, gravity, and germ theory are all scientific explanations of the workings of our universe that are far more than simple philosophies of any single man. Darwin was certainly not the first person to imagine that species evolve. The concepts of common descent and the transmutation of species were suggested as early as the 6th century BC, by the Greek philosopher Anaximander [3], and were also proposed by Lucretius, Al-Jahiz, and Jean-Baptiste Lamarck in the centuries following. Ironically for creationists, Carl Linnaeus - the father of modern taxonomy and a devoutly religious man - was the first person to classify humans as a species related to apes [4].

When Darwin was developing his theory, he received word that a man named Alfred Russell Wallace was developing a very similar idea. Now at risk of losing credit for his years of hard work, this motivated Darwin to step up his efforts in order to be published first. With such a long legacy of thoughts and research contributed to the subject of evolution, before its popularization in Origin of Species, it is simply incorrect and insulting to label the theory as Darwinism. Darwin clearly knew that he owed several aspects of his theory to preceeding scientists and philosophers too, as even his own grandfather, Erasmus Darwin, wrote extensively about evolution in his medical text, Zoonomia.

Following the publication of On the Origin of Species, Gregor Mendel's work in genetics helped to solidify Darwin's theory. In additional years, further contributions would be made by Thomas Huxley, J.B.S. Haldane, Theodosius Dobzhansky, Ernst Mayr, and Julian Huxley, among countless others. All of this research has been collected to form what is known today as the modern evolutionary synthesis. Hundreds of years of work have gone into it, from many different sources, and the ideas of these biologists and geneticists have only been further supported by the discoveries of geology and cosmology, such as the age of the earth and the age of the universe. In short, the theory of evolution is no shallow philosophy of Darwin, it is an extremely well supported scientific explanation for the diversity of life.

III. Slandering Darwin

In their quest to label evolution as an unscientific ideology, creationists have been known to concoct all kinds of falsehoods about Darwin and those who believe in his theory. As I mentioned before, Ray Comfort's introduction to his abomination edition of Origin argues that Darwin was a racist with Nazi connections, as well as a sexist. He is often considered an atheist by many critics of evolution too. Let's address these issues one by one.

First of all, there is no conclusive evidence that Darwin was a racist, but he was a product of the time and culture he lived in, and a feeling of white superiority was certainly common in the 19th century. Most claims of racism against Darwin are the result of misunderstandings though, such as his mention of "favored races". By favored races, Darwin only meant that some species have variations that give them a greater chance of survival and of passing on their genes - ethnicity is not a part of it. Darwin strongly opposed slavery too [5]. The film Expelled associates the Nazis with 'Darwinism', but failed to explain any clear correlation, not to mention causation. However, arguments for evolution leading to Nazism frequently ignore the fact that Adolf Hitler stated his belief that he was acting in accordance with the will of God [6].

In The Descent of Man, Darwin did make a comment or two hinting at the inferiority of women to men, but once again I have to point out that it's rare to find any sentiments of equality dating from the 19th century. Darwin was no different from anyone else, and I know of no person who holds him up as an example of ethical perfection. He is revered because of his scientific work, not because of any personal belief. Likewise, no smear campaign on an individual automatically discounts the ideas they hold or put forward. The theory of evolution is more than just Darwin's idea too, and it must be evaluated on its own merits, not on the character of the person who popularized it.

Last but not least is the accusation that Darwin was just an atheist or anti-Christian trying to tear down religion with his theory. In reality, Darwin was a devout Christian for the first several years of his life, and had even planned to become a minister [7]. As he began to develop his theory on evolution, Darwin struggled with faith and ultimately rejected the notion of the bible being the inerrant, literal word of God. After suffering through the deaths of two of his infant children and his beloved ten year old daughter Annie, Darwin turned from religion and labeled himself an agnostic as late as 1879 [8], three years before his death. Stories of a deathbed conversion have circulated, but they are considered false by Darwin's children and by historians.

Charles Darwin was not perfect, but he was a very devoted family man, as his own personal journals testify. He was not a racist, sexist, or an anti-Christian, and by the standards of his own time he was quite liberal, often treating everyone with compassion, regardless of their race, social status, or religious belief. Attacks on Darwin's character are usually perpetrated by people who mistakenly think that he founded an ideology or religion. By smearing the central figure, they believe they'll discredit his ideas. Of course, such tactics are fallacious, because it does not follow that prejudices invalidate all of a person's knowledge. Thus even if Darwin had been the most ardent racist and sexist in history, it would not make evolution de facto false.

IV. Raising Consciousness

This all may seem like nitpicking, but one of the ways that creationists try to get their unscientific religious views taught in public school classrooms is by pretending that evolution and creationism are on equal footing. Part of how they do this is by labeling evolution 'Darwinism', to seem more like a philosophy and less like science. In centuries past and still through much of Europe today, the term Darwinism has had none of these connotations, but due to the efforts of creationist groups in the United States, the newer anti-science usage is becoming more widespread. Because the difference between opinion and fact is so crucial to understanding science, I think we need to exercise caution in how we refer to evolutionary theory.

The biologist Richard Dawkins encourages non-believers to participate in consciousness raising in how we speak of the children of religious parents [9], not calling them a Christian child or a Muslim child, but correctly saying they are a child of Christian parents, Muslim parents, etc. I believe we also need to raise consciousness on evolution by ceasing to use the term 'Darwinism', opting instead for evolutionary theory, the theory of evolution, evolution by natural selection, and so on. As I have already illustrated, evolution is far more than the musings of one man, and it is not an ideology, it is a scientific theory - an explanation for the diversity we see in life. To portray it as anything else, even unintentionally, does a disservice to the hundreds of years of research and discovery by countless individuals that has culminated in our understanding of evolutionary biology today.

1. Way of the Master. Origin Into Schools. YouTube. Retrieved Nov. 24, 2009.
2. Gilgoff, D. (2009) How Creationist 'Origin' Distorts Darwin. Retrieved Nov. 24, 2009.
3. Censorinius. De Die Natali, IV, 7.
4. The Linnaean Correspondence. See note 7. Retrieved Nov. 24, 2009.
5. Darwin, C. (1913) Voyage Round the World of H.M.S. Beagle, 11th ed.XXI.
6. Hitler, A. (1925) Mein Kampf, Vol. 1, Ch. 2.
7. Darwin, C. (1887) The Autobiography of Charles Darwin. p.57-67.
8. Darwin, C. R. to Fordyce, John, 7 May 1879.
9. Dawkins, R. (2006) The God Delusion. p.337-340. Houghton Mifflin: New York.