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.