He did a LOT more than just come up with the theory of evolution.He collected an incredible amount of information on various flora and fauna,risking life and limb traveling to far-flung places by boat,working tirelessly.He theorized on everything from coral formation,geology,genetics and a host of subjects related to natural science.All of this in spite of the fact that he was a sickly man.His contribution to science is of great magnitude.

Cheers to you Mr. Darwin. Evolution seems like it has had a large impact on science and the decline of religious based faith. Good work.

Definately an influential person. Real sincere in his beliefs and fastidious in his research. Was quite good at his job, did the best he could with the knowledge to be found at the time. However, Science is now pointing AWAY from his theories. As Larry Hatfield stated in Science Digest:
"Scientists who utterly reject evolution may be one of our fastest growing controversial minorities…however, many of the scientists supporting this position hold impressive credentials in science. "
The Miller -Urey experiment has been redone under correct circumstances this time, and proven false. Using correct atmospheric components; recreating the Miller-urey experiment creates formaldehyde. Not life.
Darwins tree of life has been proven wrong by fossil records. Ironically, the very fossils that Darwin thought would redeem him. The Cambrian explosion has generated extensive scientific debate. The seemingly rapid appearance of fossils in the “Primordial Strata” was noted as early as the mid 19th century, and Charles Darwin saw it as one of the main objections that could be made against his theory of evolution by natural selection.Interpretation is difficult due to a
limited supply of evidence, based mainly on an incomplete fossil record and chemical
signatures left in Cambrian rocks.
Homology -homology is simply taken as prima facie evidence of descent, and design is excluded out of hand. Asserting that something is objectively true implies that it is based on empirical evidence, not merely assumed a priori on philosophical grounds. A methodological exclusion of
design-based explanations constitutes a limitation on one's science, not a description of
objective reality. If evolutionary biologists want to show that the actual mechanism of
evolution does not involve intelligent design, they cannot merely exclude the possibility a
priori, but must take the more difficult approach of proposing and corroborating a
naturalistic alternative.

I'm neither arguing for or against Religious implications for life on earth. I am merely trying to state as briefly as possible (and I apologize for rambling on for so long) That its SCIENCE that is going to put the final nail in the coffin of evolution.

Darwin has been incredibly influential in the past century and on into this one,but as time marches on and science leaves evolution behind, I'm afraid that Darwin will have been forgotten. A footnote in history and biology texts. And that makes me feel bad for the man.

Stunningly ignorant reviews.

The best research has observations along with solid theories that go against original intent. Darwin wanted science to prove his theological leaning. Didn't happen kids- truth's a bitch.

His discourse on the eye is fascinating. . . actually, his work was revolutionary because it seemed to foreshadow some of the wonderful scientific advances of the 20th century. Darwin also freely admits the gaps that exist in his work (he didn't have the benefit of late 20th or early 21st century technology.) But at present, his hypothesis is supported by evidence, hated by the religious, and admired for its fearlessness. This is an easy five because it affected (and continues to affect) Western Civilization.

He was born of the same day as Abraham Lincoln. . .but anyone with three brain cells in his or her head knows who the real emancipator of freedom and discourse from dogma was. . .

To think that people still believe the tale of his 'deathbed repentance' against evolution (debunked by his family and research) only shows the fearful state and unbelief of his theological enemies.

I dunno, for all the fuss and bother about his theories, I don't think that in the ever changing landscape of science that you can nail down any hard facts. He had some fair ideas too, but his work has been used in a manner that I think he'd find distasteful and whack atheists and fundies alike are guilty. Both parties might note that he died a Christian, too.

one of the worst man ever to walk the earth.denied God and came made came up with the idea of evolution which is a herecy.

IJR said it best. Whether we eventually prove him right or wrong isn't the point. The point is; he offered us a theory and years later we're still debating over the ideas that he had. He's shaped a way of thinking, he's helped shape aspects of science etc.

Nice LadyShark, sniffing crack, i've never done drugs but i've only heard of smoking crack due to it's consistency. Darwin was a great mind and used it (unlike most people who aren't even given the first part). His science...is science. Fact...is fact. Faith...is just faith. Get logical.

Deserves 5 stars for his impact, although evolution as a biological theory dates back to the Greeks, particularly the Ionian folk.

Evolution is a fact. The theory is about how it happened. Only give Darwin 4 stars because it is a misconception that evolution started with him.

Great scientist, but had wacko theories.

One of the most brilliant scientific minds. And no beancook, his theorys will never pass, they will be improved upon.

Evolution just is. What makes more sense? That animals adapt to changing climatological conditions over millions of years, or that some guy with a white beard waives a magic wand and poof! it's all just here, like it was some kind of kit he bought at Wal-Mart (some assembly required). Get a grip.

Very influential, but science is finally proving that evolution hasn't a leg to stand on. I can't wait for the theory to be thrown out. Sorry Charlie.

Very influential, but for the wrong reasons. In my opinion, he is way off!

An excuse for people who hate organized religion? Someone has been sniffing too much crack....... If you like to read about science, You will be interested to hear what Darwin has to say.

He's an excuse for people who hate organized religion. Can't argue with the theory, it's the best we have.

I mean from what I hear about him, he isn't an all around bad guy. It is just this evolution thing........ I don't believe it..... and no offence to anyone who does believe it....... but I think it is crap and don't know how anyone else could believe in it. The only reason he got a 2 was because I hear he was an okay guy.

Only a theory and this will eventually pass.