Bishop's biology

June 30, 1995

Professor Ingold appears to have missed the logic of his argument that Darwin was not a "Darwinist" and in consequence repeats the error that Bishop Wilberforce put forward a case based solely on religion. The facts were spelt out by Clifford Longley in The Times some two years ago. Bishop Wilberforce was a respected biologist and in an article in the Quarterly Review (Vol 108 London July 1860 pp225-264) pointed out the biological problems in Darwin's theory. It was Huxley who got it wrong, not Darwin or Wilberforce.

S. D. Mason

Belfield Park Avenue, Weymouth

Please login or register to read this article

Register to continue

Get a month's unlimited access to THE content online. Just register and complete your career summary.

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments