Does knowing Charles Darwin married his first cousin change your opinion of his theories on evolution?

We were all from incest at one point since there were only a few humans at first. (not adam and eve). All humans originated from Africa. I believe in evolution. Nat Geo says africans travelled to other places in search of food. Since the seas in the past are shallow (most were still ice caps), they were able to waddle past the seas. Then they settled down in different places. People in colder countries like canada, usa have fairer skin and people in southeast Asia and Africa were darker because of the hot sun, dark skin has natural pigment. Their noses and features also changes due to something ( I forgot). That's evolution. Evolution is real

Learning more about an author can change my opinion of his/her work. Might be a positive or negative change. Knowing more means better being able to evaluate the work against the rest of the field of knowledge.

Knowing about Darwin's wife didn't change my opinions much. Learning she was his first cousin twice over (thru two different lines of descent, so even closer genetically than a first cousin) made me raise my eyebrows. But further reading revealed that CD was very aware of the dangers of cousin marriages. This informed and helped reinforce the energy he devoted to his studies of inheritance.

Have to disagree/severely qualify the statement "if it is in a book then it must be true". A lot of lightweight authors manage to get crappy theories and ideas into print. Acceptance comes thru the societal workings of expert opinions, debate, consensus. Yes, consensus can be wrong at some points in the process, but over the long run the truest, most accurate ideas win out.

Darwin's ideas gained acceptance from the majority of naturalists in Britain in just a few years because his theory was so carefully worked out, and explained so much. (About geographic distribution of species, similarities of species from different eras, relatedness of species, etc.) It has been examined, challenged, and re-examined for 150 years, gaining many additions and improvements. Genetics and DNA have been great advancements.

Yes, the academic world contains agendas and biases - but the reason science is admired by many is that it is ultimately self-correcting. The theory of continental drift was considered to be fringe for quite a while, but is now proved and accepted.

As a Big Idea, Darwin's theory was and is right.

"Does knowing Charles Darwin married his first cousin change your opinion of his theories on evolution?" No, not really. I don't believe thosse theories, anyway. Marrying his cousin, though, is not big deal to me. It has happened many times in history. But to me, evolution has never been proven (if it has been, where were the headlines?). Evolutionary scientists have expressed their doubts about the theory in evolutionary journals--course these are kept quiet. "nothing that you could say about God that would change his mind about the contents of the Bible. I'm wondering if the same is true for evolutionist." It is true that many believers in Christianity or in evolution seem to be "locked in" to their beliefs. But that is not true of all of them, on either side of the issues. "One thing both have in common is reverence for the printed word; that is, if it is in a book then it must be true!" No, you are generalizing about people--that's the basis for ethinic prejudice--not everyone mindlessly accepts as true anything printed. "It is established fact that History is written by the victors and their agendas are always glorified as being righteous." I really don't get your point in that statement. Are you seeking to imply that the Bible is proven by certain victories? If so, which? Why not fulfilled prophecies like Jesus predicting before His death that Jerusalem would be overrun (by the Romans), which occurred about 40 years (+ or -) later? And MANY more. I believe a lot of books, including some science books--again, not all--have agendas in them and biases. Some Christian publications do too. People pushing their causes often bend and misrepresent the truth.

If Charles Manson said two plus two is four, would that change your opinion of math?

Science isn't subject to agendas. Any experiment can be repeated by others and if the results differ for everyone else, then the one who proposed it was simply wrong. The only thing that matters is results, not the beliefs or habits of the person getting them.

My opinions on evolution would not change if he murdered and raped 500 kids. The fact is his theory has been validated by thousands of scientists independently. And yes, some textbooks carry bias, but you'll probably find most of those in textbooks. If you want pure unadulterated knowledge, go to academic papers published in reputable journals. The articles have been refereed by many peers, some with opposing viewpoints. So, no, it doesn't change my opinion on evolution.

No.

Jerry Lee Lewis married his first cousin, and that didn't make his music sound one bit different whether you loved it or hated it, did it?

BTW, evolution was not an original idea from Darwin. He simply described the mechanism for it. That mechanism was Natural Selection. Evolution was already beginning to be described by others a hundred years before he published. Look up "Lamarckism" for one example of ideas about evolution that predate Darwin.

Darwin created the theory of Natural Selection, there are numerous components that converge to create evolution, many of which Darwin was not aware of. His personal life does not change the reality of evolution occurring in life.

Moses was the product of incest

And atheism has nothing to do with evolution.

No, why would it? Cain had to bonk someone and that someone had to be Eve or some unknown sister. God is guilty of all sorts of crimes against humanity, to the point where he makes Satan look like a dear friend. Does that change your opinion of God?

Whatever Darwin could have done, it pales in comparison to what God has done.

Either way, the observations don't change.

The theory of evolution does not depend on Darwin. Other scientists were about to publish the discovery at the same time as Darwin. Evolution is as real as gravity, electricity, and atomic theory. It's discovery was inevitable because it is real.

No. Most of the world performed first cousin marriages in Darwin's day and still does. The US is one of the only countries it's illegal in. Scientifically, it doesn't produce any more deformities on average.