RationalWiki's 2020 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2021.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $2120Goal: $3500

The Dark Side of Charles Darwin: A Critical Analysis of an Icon of Science

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
The divine comedy
Icon creationism.svg
Running gags
Jokes aside
Blooper reel

The Dark Side of Charles Darwin: A Critical Analysis of an Icon of Science is an anti-evolution book written in 2011 by Jerry Bergman, a Christian young earth creationist.


In the book Bergman writes that the majority of the public have been brainwashed into thinking Charles Darwin was a nice man when in reality he was a sexist and emotionally unstable husband, sadistic killer of animals, supporter of eugenics and racism and was mentally ill. Bergman also claims Darwin was evil and satanic.[1][2][3]


Most scientists have ignored the book as it contains no evidence against evolution. Sara Joan Miles, a Historian of Science, reviewed the book and wrote:

Ad hominem arguments, which are the essence of this book, provide irrelevant and insufficient grounds for evaluating scientific theories. Just as scientific hagiographies distort the scientist and his or her work by portraying an idealized person, books such as Bergman’s distort the individual and his or her accomplishments by demonizing the person. Neither is good scholarship and both should be eschewed.[4]

Even if all the claims in the book were true about Darwin's character and personal life it would not change the validity of the theory, since scientific theories are grounded on the evidence behind them, not the personal character of those who create them.

See also[edit]