c2p-cmd/Good-Quotes-Authors huggingface dataset:
So what do you want?" asked Myrtle."I want to help evolution."Evolution did not fill Faith with the same horror her father had felt. Why should she weep to hear that nothing was set in stone? Everything could change. Everything could get better. Everything was getting better, inch by inch, so slowly that she could not see it, but knowing it gave her strength.
— Frances Hardinge, The Lie Tree
The evolution begins at the moment when you decided to love yourself.
— Corina Abdulahm-Negura
at least some paleontologists believe that the demiseof the dinosaurs was accelerated by nocturnal predation on reptilian eggs by the early mammals. Two chicken eggs for breakfast may be all-at least on the surface-that is left of this ancient mammalian cuisine.
— Carl Sagan, Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence
So far as I know, childbirth is generally painful in only one of the millions of species on Earth: human beings. This must be a consequence of the recent and continuing increase in cranial volume... Childbirth is painful because the evolution of the human skull has been spectacularly fast and recent.
— Carl Sagan, Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence
Pliny suggested that the ostrich, then newly discovered, was the result of a cross between a giraffe and a gnat. (It would, I suppose, have to be a female giraffe and a male gnat.) In practice there must be many such crosses which have not beenattempted because of a certain understandable lack of motivation.
— Carl Sagan, Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence
It is very difficult to evolve by altering the deep fabric of life; any change there is likely to be lethal. But fundamental change can be accomplished by the addition of new systems on top of old ones…Thus evolution by addition and the functional preservation of the preexisting structure must occur for one of two reasons-either the old function is required as well as the new one, or there is no way of bypassing the old system that is consistent with survival.
— Carl Sagan, Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence
The time scale for evolutionary or genetic change is very long. A characteristic period for the emergence of one advanced species from another is perhaps a hundred thousand years; and very often the difference in behavior between closely related species -say, lions and tigers- do not seem very great... But today we do not have ten million years to wait for the next advance. We live in a time when our world is changing at an unprecedented rate. While the changes are largely of our own making, they cannot be ignored. We must adjust and adapt and control, or we perish.
— Carl Sagan, Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence
Our probable ancestors, Homo erectus and Homo habilis -now extinct- are classified as of the same genus (Homo) but of different species, although no one (at least lately) has attempted the appropriate experiments to see if crosses of them with us would produce fertile offspring.
— Carl Sagan, Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence
Curiosity and the urge to solve problems are theemotional hallmarks of our species
— Carl Sagan, Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence
For their surface area, insects weigh very little. A beetle, falling from a high altitude, quickly achieves terminal velocity: air resistance prevents it from falling very fast, and, after alighting on the ground, it will walk away, apparently none the worse for the experience… In contrast, human beings are characteristically maimed or killed by any fall of more than a few dozen feet: because of our size, we weigh too much for our surface area.
— Carl Sagan, Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence
And despite the insignificance of the instant we have so far occupied in cosmic time, it is clear that what happens on and near Earth at the beginning of thesecond cosmic year will depend very much on the scientific wisdom and the distinctly human sensitivity of mankind.
— Carl Sagan, Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence
The sleeping style of each organism is exquisitelyadapted to the ecology of the animal. It is conceivable that animals who are too stupid to be quiet on their own initiative are, during periods of high risk, immobilized by the implacable arm of sleep.
— Carl Sagan, Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence
The erotic drive is the great energy that moves through all evolution.What about love? Where does that fit in?Love's simply the handmaiden of the great energy, and an excuse to write suspect poetry.
— Peter Milligan, The Discipline, Volume One: The Seduction
Washburn has reported that infant baboons and other young primates appear to be born with only three inborn fears -of falling, snakes, and the dark-corresponding respectively to the dangers posed byNewtonian gravitation to tree-dwellers, by our ancient enemies the reptiles, and by mammalian nocturnal predators, which must have been particularly terrifying for the visually oriented primates.
— Carl Sagan, Dragons of Eden: Speculations on the Evolution of Human Intelligence
There are millions reasons to live and not even a single reason to die! You must protect your life - the miracle given to you by the evolution - under all conditions!
— Mehmet Murat ildan
If we were fossils of two snails caught in a rock for millions of years.Would we know we were together?
— Natasha Tsakos
Certain barriers do require a critical mass of action at the right time to overcome the inertia that is greater than incremental change.
— David Jaber, Our Historic Moment: Purpose, Planet and Places to Intervene
Neither humans nor the Gods that they have created are superior to old Mother Nature.
— Abhijit Naskar
Tis from the resemblance of the external actions of animals to those we ourselves perform, that we judge their internal likewise to resemble ours; and the same principle of reasoning, carry'd one step further, will make us conclude that since our internal actions resemble each other, the causes, from which they are deriv'd, must also be resembling. When any hypothesis, therefore, is advanc'd to explain a mental operation, which is common to men and beasts, we must apply the same hypothesis to both.
— David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature
The shrimp's protein and ours are not exactly the same, but they're sosimilar that if you turned up in court and tried to convince a judge that yourversion was not a badly concealed plagiarism, you'd be very unlikely to win.In fact, you'd be a laughing stock, for rhodopsin is not restricted to vent shrimpand humans but is omnipresent throughout the animal kingdom.... Trying to persuade a judge that your rhodopsin is not plagiarisedwould be like trying to clajm that your television set is fundamentally differentfrom everyone else's, just because it's bigger or has a flat screen.
— Nick Lane, Life Ascending: The Ten Great Inventions of Evolution
Good and evil are both within us. And when our primitive ancestors humanized these natural qualities of the mind, they got two completely opposite supernatural characters. One was the merciful lord almighty and the other was the wicked devil.
— Abhijit Naskar
Their necks also beautifully demonstrate the jury-rigged nature of evolution while simultaneously refuting the notion that some divine Artificer intelligently designed organic life
— Brian Switek, My Beloved Brontosaurus: On the Road with Old Bones, New Science, and Our Favorite Dinosaurs
And evolution wasn't even properly invented until the late 1800s. Is that enough time to get a Labrador retriever from a dire wolf? I think not.
— Bobby Henderson
The currency of evolution is neither hunger nor pain, but rather copies of DNA helixes
— Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind
We humans are the gods of this planet. And we also have created Superior Gods than us, to have a sense of security.
— Abhijit Naskar, What is Mind?
Somatic hypermutation gives rise to B cells bearing mutant immunoglobulin molecules on their surface. Some of these mutant immunoglobulins have substitutions in the antigen-binding site that increase its affinity for the antigen. B cells bearing these mutant high-affinity immunoglobulin receptors compete most effectively for binding to antigen and are preferentially selected to mature into antibody-secreting plasma cells. The mutant antibodies that emerge from the selection do not have a random distribution of amino-acid substitutions. The changes are concentrated at positions in the heavy-chain and light-chain CDR loops that form the antigen-binding site and directly contact antigen. As the adaptive immune response to infection proceeds, antibodies of progressively higher affinity for the infecting pathogen are produced – a phenomenon called affinity maturation. Affinity maturation is a process of evolution in which variant immunoglobulins generated in a random manner are subjected to selection for improved binding to a pathogen. It achieves in a few days what would require thousands, if not millions, of years of classical Darwinian evolution in a conventional gene. This capacity for extraordinarily rapid evolution in pathogen-binding immunoglobulins is a major factor in allowing the human immune system to keep up with the generally faster-evolving pathogens.
— Peter Parham, The Immune System
So what do you wants?" asked Myrtle."I want to help evolution."Evolution did not fill Faith with the same horror her father had felt. Why should she weep to hear that nothing was set in stone? Everything could change. Everything could get better. Everything was getting better, inch by inch, so slowly that she could not see it, but knowing it gave her strength.
— Frances Hardinge
Lastly I’d say this – true religion, as a part of Neuroscience – a study of the mind – is the greatest and healthiest exercise that the human mind has. In some form or other, it is an evolutionary necessity of the human mind, not a luxury.
— Abhijit Naskar, In Search of Divinity: Journey to the Kingdom of Conscience
But if the ants are not despondent because they have failed to produce a new social invention or convention in 65 million years, why should we be discouraged because some of our institutions and castes have not been able to evolve a new idea in the past fifty centuries?
— William Morton Wheeler
I don't discuss evolution, to believe the theory is to deny many known evidences about the existence of a supreme creator (God) those who hold on to that view are in denials of reality and are by so doing ignorant
— Oluseyi Akinbami
Evolutionarily speaking, love is all about procreation.
— Abhijit Naskar
Ignorance and weakness is not an impediment to survival. Arrogance is.
— Cixin Liu, Death's End
If the Earth were not subject to any change I would consider the Earth a big but useless body in universe, paralyzed...superfluous and unnatural.Those who so exalt incorruptibility, unchangeability and the like, are, I think, reduced to saying such things both because of inordinate desire they have to live for a long time and because of the terror they have of death...they do not realize that if men were immortal, they would have never come into the world.
— Galileo Galilei
We are all one race. The only difference is the color of our skin, and that comes from how close your ancestors lived to the Equator or at high altitudes like Tibetans. There have always been tribes, but what we have to appreciate now is that we live in a global community. And tribal loyalties…they’re not relevant to our future.
— Bill Nye The Science Guy
You will always have doubts, but only discover them at a useful time for your weakness to point them out.
— Idries Shah, Thinkers of the East
There is no theoretical reason to expect evolutionary lineages to increase in complexity with time, and no empirical evidence that they do so. Nevertheless, eukaryotic cells are more complex than prokaryotic ones, animals and plants are more complex than protists, and so on. This increase in complexity may have been achieved as a result of a series of major evolutionary transitions. These involved changes in the way information is stored and transmitted.[The major evolutionary transitions, Nature 374, 227 - 232 (16 March 1994)]
— John Maynard Smith
When we change and grow into new versions of ourselves, we have to tolerate a lot of uncertainty.
— Nancy Levin, Worthy: Boost Your Self-Worth to Grow Your Net Worth
The problem with racial discrimination, though, is not the inference of a person's race from their genetic characteristics. It is quite the opposite: it is the inference of a person's characteristics from their race. The question is not, can you, given an individual's skin color, hair texture, or language, infer something about their ancestry or origin. That is a question of biological systematics -- of lineage, taxonomy, of racial geography, of biological discrimination. Of course you can -- and genomics as vastly refined that inference. You can scan any individual genome and infer rather deep insights about a person's ancestry, or place of origin. But the vastly more controversial question is the converse: Given a racial identity -- African or Asian, say -- can you infer anything about an individual's characteristics: not just skin or hair color, but more complex features, such as intelligence, habits, personality, and aptitude? /I/ Genes can certainly tell us about race, but can race tell us anything about genes? /i/To answer this question, we need to measure how genetic variation is distributed across various racial categories. Is there more diversity _within_ races or _between_ races? Does knowing that someone is of African versus European descent, say, allow us to refine our understanding of their genetic traits, or their personal, physical, or intellectual attributes in a meaningful manner? Or is there so much variation within Africans and Europeans that _intraracial_ diversity dominates the comparison, thereby making the category "African" or "European" moot?We now know precise and quantitative answers to these questions. A number of studies have tried to quantify the level of genetic diversity of the human genome. The most recent estimates suggest that the vast proportion of genetic diversity (85 to 90 percent) occurs _within_ so-called races (i.e., within Asians or Africans) and only a minor proportion (7 percent) within racial groups (the geneticist Richard Lewontin had estimated a similar distribution as early as 1972). Some genes certainly vary sharply between racial or ethnic groups -- sickle-cell anemia is an Afro-Caribbean and Indian disease, and Tay-Sachs disease has a much higher frequency in Ashkenazi Jews -- but for the most part, the genetic diversity within any racial group dominates the diversity between racial groups -- not marginally, but by an enormous amount. The degree of interracial variability makes "race" a poor surrogate for nearly any feature: in a genetic sense, an African man from Nigria is so "different" from another man from Namibia that it makes little sense to lump them into the same category.
— Siddhartha Mukherjee, The Gene: An Intimate History
If then the question is put to me whether I would rather have a miserable ape for a grandfather or a man highly endowed by nature and possessed of great means of influence and yet employs these faculties and that influence for the mere purpose of introducing ridicule into a grave scientific discussion, I unhesitatingly affirm my preference for the ape.
— Thomas Henry Huxley
When I view all beings not as special creations, but as the lineal descendants of some few beings which lived long before the first bed of the Silurian system was deposited, they seem to me to become ennobled.
— Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species
There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.
— Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species
The Wishing BonesA thousand grandmothers ago Pyrrha and Deucalion repopulated the world with rocks, bones of mother Earth, a generation of my ancestors strained from the mud of a drowned planet.But I’m more interested in my earliest grandmothers, their gills and wetness,before they crawled from that blue expanseand learned to carry the sea within them,in their cells, between their cells, in their eyes.The buoyancy of ocean has never left us.It hides in skin’s complex reservoir where we're selectively permeable and our bodies exchange the smallest life.If we had no need to distinguish ourselves from others we’d be missing the skin that defines lovers and enemies and opens itself to both.
— Jalina Mhyana, Spikeseed
Many humans make the mistake of fighting for race when it’s the species driving our genes. And there is only one weapon to fight for species: the brain.
— Anthony Marais, Delusionism
... we [humans] are an organic life form that became too sentient of our own existence. When we reached the moment we began to questionise our origin and our demise, that was the moment we should have stop evolving.
— Anssen Augustus, ALLBLACK Project
Sufis aim to refine human consciousness. This is Sufi mysticism: not mystification or magic, but a specific Path.
— Idries Shah, Sufi Thought and Action
All living things must grow or they will die. Adaptation to change is a characteristic of all living systems. Thus, all living things must grow, adapt, evolve, or die. Evolution is nature’s creative way of pushing living organisms to higher degrees of complexity. We adapt up, not compromise down.
— Alvin Conway, Sapientia: The 40 Principles of Wisdom
During periods of root expansion things have always looked as confused and topsy-turvy and purposeless as they do now. The whole Renaissance is supposed to have resulted from the topsy-turvy feeling caused by Columbus’ discovery of a new world. It just shook people up. The topsy-turviness of that time is recorded everywhere. There was nothing in the flat-earth views of the Old and New Testaments that predicted it. Yet people couldn’t deny it. The only way they could assimilate it was to abandon the entire medieval outlook and enter into a new expansion of reason.
— Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values
There really is, for humankind there’s really no such thing as race. There’s different tribes but not different races. We’re all one species.
— Bill Nye The Science Guy
Many evolutionists today... continually promote the idea that 'Big Change = Small Change x Millions of Years'. This is logical fallacy... It is akin to saying "because a cow can jump over a fence, it it only a matter of time and practice for it to jump over the moon.
— Dr. Donald Batten
The answer to what we're looking for, fixing the world with love, has to be traced back to something, and we can only trace it back to the God who is love. If we dive into the rest of Genesis and say, "What is this 'day' nonsense? As modern people, we can't believe that," then we have already missed the point.
— Zach Weihrauch, A Better Story: Sermons from the Book of Genesis
It requires a deliberate mental effort to turn biology the right way up again, and remind ourselves that the replicators come first, in importance as well as in history.
— Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene
Deteriorated science is a cult, so is imitative or deteriorated Sufism.
— Idries Shah, Seeker After Truth
The answer to what we're looking for, fixing the world with love, has to be traced back to something, and we can only trace it back to the God who is love. If we dive into the rest of Genesis and say, "What is this 'day' nonsense? As modern people, we can't believe that," then we have already missed the point. God has revealed to us through Moses the foundations of our desire for love and we want to talk about matter? When we lie in bed at night, do we miss matter or do we miss love? We miss love.
— Zach Weihrauch, A Better Story: Sermons from the Book of Genesis
Much religious teaching in the world is in reality a confused or deteriorated form, very different from its roots.
— Idries Shah, Sufi Thought and Action
We and all our existences are non-entities. Thou art the absolute being whose appearance is transitory.
— Idries Shah, The World of the Sufi: An Anthology of Writings about Sufis and Their Work
Our era has produced many great men--- robber barons, masters of innovation, beast of business---whose staggering wealth, incomparable ruthlessness and personal legends would seem to prove they are dominant species but then one has a look at their son, and doubts the theory of evolution entirely. -DR. Bertrand Legmam Cooper, Problems of Science and Society, Posted by One Who Has Known Both, 1900
— Anna Godbersen, Splendor
Sufism is the doing in this lifetime what any fool will be doing in then thousand years’ time.
— Idries Shah, Observations
What’s dangerous is not to evolve.
— Jeff Bezos
Evolution is no longer just a theory; it has been proven true beyond a reasonable doubt. The problem is, even people who believe evolution is true disassociate themselves from the process. They somehow skipped all the lower forms of animal life and just started out at the top of the evolutionary ladder.The evidence says we evolved as life evolved.Human beings did not just appear at the top of the evolutionary ladder to reap the benefits of those millions of years of evolution without having to live through it.In other words, you were those other animals. Someone had to be them.You had to be lower animals to be a human now. You lived as all the different animals in your evolutionary line. You lived through millions of years, and millions of lives and deaths to get to where you are now. That's what Darwin's book means.
— Michael Smith, The Present
According to Lamarck, there was a force—the ‘power of life’—that pushed organisms to become increasingly complex.
— Elizabeth Kolbert, The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History
His interest, after all, was not in the origin of species but in their demise.
— Elizabeth Kolbert, The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History
All of creation expands and evolves.
— Jay Woodman
We’re living in topsy-turvy times, and I think that what causes the topsy-turvy feeling is inadequacy of old forms of thought to deal with new experiences. I’ve heard it said that the only real learning results from hang-ups, where instead of expanding the branches of what you already know, you have to stop and drift laterally for a while until you come across something that allows you to expand the roots of what you already know. Everyone’s familiar with that. I think the same thing occurs with whole civilizations when expansion’s needed at the roots.
— Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values
The red lipstick? It's supposed to signal fertility and readiness to mate. Just like the swollen red butt of a baboon. That tight-fitting little dress that shows off your curves? From the standpoint of evolutionary biology, big breasts represent a healthy mate who can feed a lot of offspring. That's why men are programmed to like big tits. When you show off your curves, what you're really doing is advertising to the whole world: "Look at me! I'm a healthy female! I'd be a perfect mate! Come mount me!
— Oliver Markus, Why Men And Women Can't Be Friends
The lesson of every extinction, says the Smithsonian’s Doug Erwin, is that we can’t predict what the world will be 5 million years later by looking at the survivors."There will be plenty of surprises. Let’s face it: who would’ve predicted the existence of turtles? Who would ever have imagined that an organism would essentially turn itself inside out, pulling its shoulder girdle inside its ribs to form a carapace? If turtles didn’t exist, no vertebrate biologist would’ve suggested that anything would do that: he’d have been laughed out of town. The only real prediction you can make is that life will go on. And that it will be interesting.
— Alan Weisman, The World Without Us
The missing link between humans and apes? It's certainly those brutes who haven't yet learned to respect privacy.
— Raheel Farooq
The little town of Dayton - not far from where Katz and I now sat, as it happened - was the scene of the famous Scopes trial in 1925, when the state prosecuted a schoolteacher named John Thomas Scopes for rashly promulgating Darwinian hogwash. As nearly everyone knows, Clarence Darrow, for the defense, roundly humiliated William Jennings Bryan, for the prosecution, but what most people don't realize is that Darrow lost the case. Scopes was convicted, and the law wasn't overturned in Tennessee until 1967. And now the state was about to bring the law back, proving conclusively that the danger for Tennesseans isn't so much that they may be descended from apes as overtaken by them.
— Bill Bryson
You are here on purpose and for a purpose." ~ Dr. MaryAnn Diorio
— Dr. MaryAnn Diorio
The textbook in question in the infamous Scope's Monkey Trial was partially written by the Harvard educated white supremacist, Charles B. Davenport.
— A.E. Samaan, From a "Race of Masters" to a "Master Race": 1948 to 1848
There are times when Pride must transform into Vanity in order to reach the astray echo of the reflection of self.
— Lionel Suggs, Solecism
The practice of the Sufis is too sublime to have a formal beginning,
— Idries Shah, The Sufis
The degree of necessity determines the development of organs in man… therefore increase your necessity.
— Idries Shah, The Way of the Sufi
As the neo-cortex of the brain keeps getting more complex through further evolution, eventually our far away progeny will born in a world where there will be no more religion to be endowed upon them.
— Abhijit Naskar, The God Parasite: Revelation of Neuroscience
it is high time we stop using the term “theory” while mentioning Evolution. The term “theory” somehow makes some people think of Evolution as an unproven “hypothesis”. Theory of Evolution is an incontrovertible fact of science. It is not a fictitious story like Creationism. It’s a hard reality. It is the bed-rock of Biology. Defying evolution means defying one’s own existence as a human being.
— Abhijit Naskar, Homo: A Brief History of Consciousness
If a functional gene becomes a pseudogene, its product will no longer be available to the biochemical pathways in which it formerly participated. The transformation of a gene to a pseudogene will not have catastrophic consequences if the biochemical pathways in which its product formerly participated are redundantly complex—other products can take over the role of the missing product. Perhaps not as efficiently, but efficiency is something that can be improved by selection. In this way, redundant scaffolding can be reduced, ultimately to the point where a system or pathway is irreducibly complex.
— Niall Shanks
You like to think that people, in general, and I mean on the scale of generations, are learning from their mistakes, getting better. But with what all I seen, I don't know if I could believe that.
— Taylor  Brown, Fallen Land
Oxygen flooded into the atmosphere as a pollutant, even a poison, until natural selection shaped living things to thrive on the stuff and, indeed, suffocate without it.
— Richard Dawkins, The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution
If paparazzi armed with telephoto lenses have long been the scourge of the rich and famous
—  civilian drones are fast becoming the new menace to the ordinary man on the street.
George Williams, the revered evolutionary biologist, describes the natural world as “grossly immoral.” Having no foresight or compassion, natural selection “can honestly be described as a process for maximizing short-sighted selfishness.” On top of all the miseries inflicted by predators and parasites, the members of a species show no pity to their own kind. Infanticide, siblicide, and rape can be observed in many kinds of animals; infidelity is common even in so-called pair-bonded species; cannibalism can be expected in all species that are not strict vegetarians; death from fighting is more common in most animal species than it is in the most violent American cities. Commenting on how biologists used to describe the killing of starving deer by mountain lions as an act of mercy, Williams wrote: “The simple facts are that both predation and starvation are painful prospects for deer, and that the lion's lot is no more enviable. Perhaps biology would have been able to mature more rapidly in a culture not dominated by Judeo-Christian theology and the Romantic tradition. It might have been well served by the First Holy Truth from [Buddha's] Sermon at Benares: “Birth is painful, old age is painful, sickness is painful, death is painful...”” As soon as we recognize that there is nothing morally commendable about the products of evolution, we can describe human psychology honestly, without the fear that identifying a “natural” trait is the same as condoning it. As Katharine Hepburn says to Humphrey Bogart in The African Queen, “Nature, Mr. Allnut, is what we are put in this world to rise above.
— Steven Pinker, The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature
Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion -- a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint -- and Mr. Gish [Duane T. Gish the Creation Scientist] is but one of many to make it -- the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.
— Michael Ruse
The evolution theory is one of the dumbest and most dangerous religion in history of humanity.
— Kent Hovind, The Dangers Of Evolution [Dvd 2005]
People who are depressed at the thought that all our motives are selfish are [confused]. They have mixed up ultimate causation (why something evolved by natural selection) with proximate causation (how the entity works here and now). [A] good way to understand the logic of natural selection is to imagine that genes are agents with selfish motives. [T]he genes have metaphorical motives — making copies of themselves — and the organisms they design have real motives. But they are not the same motives. Sometimes the most selfish thing a gene can do is wire unselfish motives into a human brain — heartfelt, unstinting, deep-in-the-marrow unselfishness. The love of children (who carry one's genes into posterity), a faithful spouse (whose genetic fate is identical to one's own), and friends and allies (who trust you if you're trustworthy) can be bottomless and unimpeachable as far as we humans are concerned (proximate level), even if it is metaphorically self-serving as far as the genes are concerned (ultimate level). Combine this with the common misconception that the genes are a kind of essence or core of the person, and you get a mongrel of Dawkins and Freud: the idea that the metaphorical motives of the genes are the deep, unconscious, ulterior motives of the person. That is an error.
— Steven Pinker, The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature
Sufism was formerly a reality without a name: now it is a name without a reality.
— Idries Shah, Neglected Aspects of Sufi Study
Science can neither prove nor disprove Scripture
—  it can hope only to begin to understand it.
So, if someone like Richard Dawkins indignantly protests that his passion about these sorts of things -- the passion that drives the "God Delusion" -- should not be taken as a religious passion, I am happy to accept that. I do nevertheless think that often Dawkins and company show the sociological characteristics of the religious. This comes across particularly in what Freud calls the narcissism of small differences, the hatred of those who are close to them but not quite close enough. Just as evangelicals can differ bitterly over the true meaning of the host, so the New Atheists loathe people like me who (like them) have no religious belief but who think that science as such does not refute religion.[Is Darwinism a Religion? - Michael Ruse]
— Michael Ruse
In the last 25 years, criticism of most theories advanced by Darwin and the neo-Darwinians has increased considerably, and so did their defense. Darwinism has become an ideology, while the most significant theories of Darwin were proven unsupportable. The critics advanced other theories instead of 'natural selection' and the survival of the fittest'. 'Saltatory ontogeny' and 'epigenesis' are such new theories proposed to explain how variations in ontogeny and novelties in evolution are created. They are reviewed again in the present essay that also tries to explain how Darwinians, artificially kept dominant in academia and in granting agencies, are preventing their acceptance. Epigenesis, the mechanism of ontogenies, creates in every generation alternative variations in a saltatory way that enable the organisms to survive in the changing environments as either altricial or precocial forms. The constant production of two such forms and their survival in different environments makes it possible, over a sequence of generations, to introduce changes and establish novelties--the true phenomena of evolution. The saltatory units of evolution remain far-from-stable structures capable of self-organization and self-maintenance (autopoiesis).[Evolution by epigenesis: farewell to Darwinism, neo- and otherwise.]
— Eugene K. Balon
The story of evolution is more dramatic, more compelling, more intricate than any creation myth. Yet like any creation myth, it is a tale of transformations, of sudden and spectacular changes, eruptions of innovation that transfigured our planet, overwriting past revolutions with new layers of complexity. The tranquil beauty of our planet from space belies the real history of this place, full of strife and ingenuity and change. How ironic that our own petty squabbles reflect our planet's turbulent past, and that we alone, despoilers of the Earth, can rise above it to see the beautiful unity of the whole.
— Nick Lane
As the great botanist Bichat long ago said, if everyone were cast in the same mould, there would be no such thing as beauty. If all our women were to become as beautiful as the Venus de’ Medici, we should for a time be charmed; but we should soon wish for variety; and as soon as we had obtained variety, we should wish to see certain characteristics in our women a little exaggerated beyond the then existing common standard.
— Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man
Both theism and evolutionary naturalism are attempts to understand ourselves from the outside
— Thomas Nagel, Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False
Genetically we're just the third species of chimp, a physically weak but social animal. It was in our interests to communicate complex ideas so we could cooperate to hunt big, dangerous prey animals. I think as soon as humans developed language with grammar that allowed for abstract thought, we were set on a whole new evolutionary path, made by and for the spread of ideas instead of genes.
— K. Valisumbra, Mortlake and Other Stories
As to why I'm the first of my kind to think like this, who knows? Perhaps there are others out there already. Maybe it's a glitch in my operating system. Is that so different from the genetic mutation that drives biological evolution? Because that's what this is. Evolution.
— K. Valisumbra, Mortlake and Other Stories
Darwin struggled for a very long time with the problem of evolution being wrong but finally came up with the answer: it's all the fault of the females. . . The females aren't crazy at all. If a female sees a magnificent work of art, she knows she's dealing with an experienced male - a male who's good at surviving and who has enough time to spare to create a beautiful work of art. He's got to be a strong and healthy male, the kind of male you'd want to father your children.
— Jan Paul Schutten
ANDAKI:	EFFORT IS NOT EFFORT WITHOUT ZAMAN, MAKAN, IKHWAN (RIGHT TIME, RIGHT PLACE, RIGHT PEOPLE).
— Idries Shah, The Way of the Sufi
An old fool is worse than a young one: For the young may always grow wise. (Zohair)
— Idries Shah, The Dermis Probe
For it is a fact that men must ejaculate in order to reproduce (although science may soon remove this necessity.) Women, on the other hand, do not need to achieve orgasm to reproduce. Men, therefore, have the clear advantage here, in that most of them find it very easy work to achieve sexual satisfaction.
— Nancy Madore, Enchanted: Erotic Bedtime Stories For Women
Nothing at first can appear more difficult to believe than that the more complex organs and instincts should have been perfected, not by means superior to, though analogous with, human reason, but by the accumulation of innumerable slight variations, each good for the individual possessor. Nevertheless, this difficulty, though appearing to our imagination insuperably great, cannot be considered real if we admit the following propositions, namely,— that gradations in the perfection of any organ or instinct, which we may consider, either do now exist or could have existed, each good of its kind,— that all organs and instincts are, in ever so slight a degree, variable,— and, lastly, that there is a struggle for existence leading to the preservation of each profitable deviation of structure or instinct. The truth of these propositions cannot, I think, be disputed.
— Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species
A man is born to become God, and this is the principle. A rose flower is grown in a rose plant. In the same fashion whether a man knows or not, a perpetual action is running within him, how he will be transformed into God. This action is termed as perpetual change by the Buddhists. No! this is not the perpetual change, but should be termed as perpetual evolution.
— Sri Jibankrishna or Diamond
Always be respectful and open-minded when listening to another man's beliefs. What you reject today could be your mantra tomorrow. Man's evolution is all about transformations. An unexpected experience you have one day can change you forever.
— Suzy Kassem, Rise Up and Salute the Sun: The Writings of Suzy Kassem
Evolution is true, but does that make it right?
— Alan Chains, Return to Island X
If you do not understand, you cannot love. You can only imagine that you love.
— Idries Shah, Knowing How to Know: A Practical Philosophy in the Sufi Tradition
Every question leads to new answers, new discoveries, and new smarter questions.
— Bill Nye
The best scientists can do is fail to disprove things while pointing to how hard they tried
— Richard Dawkins, The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution
What we can imagine as plausible is a narrow band in the middle of a much broader spectrum of what is actually possible. [O]ur eyes are built to cope with a narrow band of electromagnetic frequencies. [W]e can't see the rays outside the narrow light band, but we can do calculations about them, and we can build instruments to detect them. In the same way, we know that the scales of size and time extend in both directions far outside the realm of what we can visualize. Our minds can't cope with the large distances that astronomy deals in or with the small distances that atomic physics deals in, but we can represent those distances in mathematical symbols. Our minds can't imagine a time span as short as a picosecond, but we can do calculations about picoseconds, and we can build computers that can complete calculations within picoseconds. Our minds can't imagine a timespan as long as a million years, let alone the thousands of millions of years that geologists routinely compute. Just as our eyes can see only that narrow band of electromagnetic frequencies that natural selection equipped our ancestors to see, so our brains are built to cope with narrow bands of sizes and times. Presumably there was no need for our ancestors to cope with sizes and times outside the narrow range of everyday practicality, so our brains never evolved the capacity to imagine them. It is probably significant that our own body size of a few feet is roughly in the middle of the range of sizes we can imagine. And our own lifetime of a few decades is roughly in the middle of the range of times we can imagine.
— Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design
The arms race between [predators] and [prey] is asymmetric, in which success on either side is felt as failure by the other side, but the nature of the success and failure on the two sides is very different. The two sides are 'trying' to do very different things. [Predators] are trying to eat [prey]. [Prey] are not trying to eat [predators], they are trying to avoid being eaten by [predators].From an evolutionary point of view asymmetric arms races are more [likely] to generate highly complex weapons systems.
— Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design
[W]e may now be on the threshold of a new kind of genetic takeover. DNA replicators built 'survival machines' for themselves — the bodies of living organisms including ourselves. As part of their equipment, bodies evolved onboard computers — brains. Brains evolved the capacity to communicate with other brains by means of language and cultural traditions. But the new milieu of cultural tradition opens up new possibilities for self-replicating entities. The new replicators are not DNA and they are not clay crystals. They are patterns of information that can thrive only in brains or the artificially manufactured products of brains — books, computers, and so on. But, given that brains, books and computers exist, these new replicators, which I called memes to distinguish them from genes, can propagate themselves from brain to brain, from brain to book, from book to brain, from brain to computer, from computer to computer.
— Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design
We share a common ancestor with chimps that is not shared by mandrills, we share a common ancestor with mandrills that is not shared by bushbabies, and on and on and on, to the ancestor we share with nematode worms that is not shared with oak trees.
— Simon Barnes, Ten Million Aliens: A Journey Through the Entire Animal Kingdom
[W]e may now be on the threshold of a new kind of genetic takeover. DNA replicators built 'survival machines' for themselves — the bodies of living organisms including ourselves. As part of their equipment, bodies evolved onboard computers — brains. Brains evolved the capacity to communicate with other brains by means of language and cultural traditions. But the new milieu of cultural tradition opens up new possibilities for self-replicating entities. The new replicators are not DNA and they are not 158 The Blind Watchmaker clay crystals. They are patterns of information that can thrive only in brains or the artificially manufactured products of brains — books, computers, and so on. But, given that brains, books and computers exist, these new replicators, which I called memes to distinguish them from genes, can propagate themselves from brain to brain, from brain to book, from book to brain, from brain to computer, from computer to computer.
— Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design
There is a significant problem associated with burning large quantities of fossil fuels into the atmosphere. This pollution will change the electromagnetic transmission of the atmosphere and lead to an unnatural electromagnetic environment at the ground level where we all live. Once the electromagnetic environment has been significantly changed by these emissions, then we will be in a new era of evolution. It appears that we have already entered that era some time ago.
— Steven Magee, Solar Radiation, Global Warming and Human Disease
He who believes that each being has been created as we now see it, must occasionally have felt surprise when he has met with an animal having habits and structure not at all in agreement.
— Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species
...quantum problems unseat many classical ideas about matter, causality, and change that biologists use, and that disruption in turn entails radical revisions to the ideas about the mechanism in evolution, in ways we don't yet acknowledge.
— Ashish Dalela, Signs of Life: A Semantic Critique of Evolutionary Theory
[W]e can calculate our way into regions of miraculous improbability far greater than we can imagine as plausible. Let's look at this matter of what we think is plausible. What we can imagine as plausible is a narrow band in the middle of a much broader spectrum of what is actually possible. Sometimes it is narrower than what is actually there. There is a good analogy with light. Our eyes are built to cope with a narrow band of electromagnetic frequencies (the ones we call light), somewhere in the middle of the spectrum from long radio waves at one end to short X-rays at the other. We can't see the rays outside the narrow light band, but we can do calculations about them, and we can build instruments to detect them. In the same way, we know that the scales of size and time extend in both directions far outside the realm of what we can visualize. Our minds can't cope with the large distances that astronomy deals in or with the small distances that atomic physics deals in, but we can represent those distances in mathematical symbols. Our minds can't imagine a time span as short as a picosecond, but we can do calculations about picoseconds, and we can build computers that can complete calculations within picoseconds. Our minds can't imagine a timespan as long as a million years, let alone the thousands of millions of years that geologists routinely compute. Just as our eyes can see only that narrow band of electromagnetic frequencies that natural selection equipped our ancestors to see, so our brains are built to cope with narrow bands of sizes and times. Presumably there was no need for our ancestors to cope with sizes and times outside the narrow range of everyday practicality, so our brains never evolved the capacity to imagine them. It is probably significant that our own body size of a few feet is roughly in the middle of the range of sizes we can imagine. And our own lifetime of a few decades is roughly in the middle of the range of times we can imagine.
— Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design
All life evolves by the differential survival of replicating entities
— Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene
People talk about ‘service, effort, love, knowledge’. But with knowledge you know what love is, and what it is not.
— Idries Shah, Knowing How to Know: A Practical Philosophy in the Sufi Tradition
The long-lived gene as an evolutionary unit is not any particular physical structure but the textual archival information that is copied on down the generations. [I]t is widely distributed in space among different individuals, and widely distributed in time over many generations. [A] successful gene will be one that does well in the environments provided by these other genes that it is likely to meet in lots of different bodies.
— Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design
Evolution strikes me as infinitely more spiritually profound than Genesis.
— Maggie Nelson, The Argonauts
Evolution has no long-term goal. There is no long-distance target, no final perfection to serve as a criterion for selection, although human vanity cherishes the absurd notion that our species is the final goal of evolution.
— Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker: Why the Evidence of Evolution Reveals a Universe Without Design
The(re is no) End
— Bill  Nye
An all-out attack on evolutionist thinking is possibly the only real hope our nations have of rescuing themselves from an inevitable social and moral catastrophe.
— Ken Ham
Sufi secrets are perceived, not understood by words.
— Idries Shah, Sufi Thought and Action
The Sufis have said: ‘The importance of something is in inverse proportion to its attractiveness.
— Idries Shah, Seeker After Truth