| Final-Fan said: I suppose that can be argued, but on the other hand I thought Darwin was a better scientist who'd spent years and years observing and refining his theory and text, while Wallace was just going to publish a paper on an idea he'd just thought up. Since they had roughly the same idea, I'm sure Wallace's theory would have prevailed -- eventually, but it might well have taken a lot longer to get accepted, like what happened to Chandrasekhar and black holes. |
What? No. Alfred Russel Wallace did a LOT of fieldwork. His fieldwork was really important at the time.
He just gets a bad rap by some people because he had some nonconventional ideas among evolutionary scientists. He was a big fan of Human Consiousness not having a physical concept and instead being immatieral. Believed in souls... stuff like that.
I'd argue Wallace may be more important then Darwin, because if it wasn't for Wallace... there is no gurantee Darwin would of even released his findings.
It almost seemed as if he was willing to die with his research before Wallace sent him his thesis. Which is actually something i'm guessing this movie is going to talk about.
