Okay, I’m drawing from the depths of my memory here, from the various Intro to Physical Anthropology classes I took in college. I am not responsible for factual inaccuracies.
As I recall, The Origin of Species was based on sound scientific research that Darwin had conducted in the Galapagos, but the book itself drew from many other sources, no the least of which was his experience in breeding pheasant. But he was a devout man, and delayed the publication for a number of years because he was afraid that others would take it as an attack on religious doctrine, though he saw no inherent contradiction. He eventually forced himself to publish, mostly because he was about to be scooped by someone named Wallace, I think. His first edition was a purely scientific treatise, but the second edition (about a decade later?) was written in partial response to some of the criticism he received. In the second edition, he inserted much of the “man is superior, and Englishmen are the best” drivel in order to appease the vociferous zealots. Today’s evolutionary paradigm generally ignores Darwin’s second edition as he would have wanted it.
Evolutionary thought today does not rank species by any value system. Mosquitos are just as evolved as humans in that they fit their niche. If you want to look for a mechanism for change, then look no further than Mendelian genetics. Ultimate driving force beyond natural selection and random mutation? No one can answer that.
Change does happen, and new species have been documented during human history. Waverly is right, evolution is a fact. But that says nothing about if God exists or not.
BTW, there is no such thing as a “Missing Link”. We have Waverly!
