Posted on 02/06/2014 7:15:35 PM PST by Chuckmorse
February 12 is “Darwin Day” as observed by the cult followers of the British naturalist Charles Darwin.
It’s been over a hundred years since the publication of Darwin's seminal book: On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life and there is still not a single shred of evidence that his racist theory of breeding is true.
What then, exactly, was Darwin’s creation theory?
Darwin’s theory holds that breeding by superior members of a given species with each other, or what Darwin called “random selection,” results in the evolution of a new and superior species. In this process the inferior or the “weaker” members of the given species either die off or are annihilated.
Darwin was a devout follower of Thomas Malthus who coined the idea of scarcity, a materialist theory which held that since the earth was a finite system its resources would run out unless the lesser members of the human species were either reduced or eliminated.
Darwin's theory was further developed by his cousin and collaborator Francis Galton who established the “science” of Eugenics which held that the process of natural selection should be replaced by planned selection in order to create a new and superior species.
Galton’s idea was embraced by Hitler and his practice of lebensraum which were collective communes of women chosen as superior specimens to breed with males who were members of the racially select SS. They were to give birth to more evolved offspring. This would stand to reason if one accepts Darwin’s crackpot idea as scientific fact.
Hitler’s biological experiments, profoundly influenced by Darwin, would indeed be moral if mankind, in order to effect the survival of the fittest, would have develop a stronger and smarter strain. The Darwinian moral imprimatur was applied by the Nazis to their social experiment of isolating and in certain cases annihilating those they deemed to be members of inferior species who they viewed as consuming the earth's limited resources, useless eaters, those who were threatening the biological progress of the human race.
As we observe Darwin Day we might also thank Darwin for influencing the social theories of his contemporary social scientist Karl Marx who wanted to dedicate his Magnum Opus “Das Kapital” to Darwin. Marx transplanted Darwin’s biological theory of evolving the species in order to advance the human race to a social construct that had society evolving in stages, first feudalism, then capitalism, then socialism and finally communism where the entire planet would become one gigantic world-wide ant colony.
Yes, indeed, Darwin and his theory of breeding toward the evolution of a superior human species, an Ubermench, or toward an evolved utopian society remains all the rage with the fashionable set to this day who long for "change." And dare, just dare, to try to publicly question the validity of Darwin's theory, the crown jewell of the change-agents. Watch out! You might be relegated to the status of an inferior species.
Hitler was scientifically proven wrong when his actions replaced 18 million Jews in Europe with 20 million Muslims. The degradation of European society continues.....
If it isn’t already stated on any store bought calendar, i do not recognize.
BTW, ask Siri what holiday today is. Not on a calendar either.
Devilution
Darwin’s Theory might not be able to explain the creation of new species, but it certainly and obviously explains the changes in a pre-existing species. Weak attributes that lead to non-reproduction... aren’t reproduced. How can there be any argument with that? It’s basically a simple observation of the law of the jungle.
New species creation vs. pre-existing species periodic adaptations are two entirely different subjects.
Are chimps still “evolving” into humans?...I haven’t seen any recently. Chimps still sling poo and don’t know how to hold jobs...OH!!!!! DEMOCRATS!!!!
If evolution were true the democrats would be evolving into conservatives.
When I first saw the title I thought it was a day set aside to do stupid, life-threatening things.
Ronald Reagan....
“Weak attributes that lead to non-reproduction... aren’t reproduced.”
How’d the weak attributes get there to not be reproduced?
Presumably they appeared due to reproduction.
How’d the weak attributes get there to not be reproduced? Presumably they appeared due to reproduction.
Well I can see two ways - the first is self-defined congenital abnormalities, such as birth defects that render weakness per se, and lead to early death.
The second is competitive weakness, that is variable based on life conditions. What was adequate or even strong could have innate weaknesses in other areas which social or environmental stresses expose and exploit once conditions are adequate. Or perhaps the strength of the community simply rises until different sets of genes prove more viable in whatever mating combat is taking place.
And this would be a good thing, a protective thing, because life constantly changes. So this would be a way a species wold be able to protect itself from those changes through adaptation within the species.
But that's a whole different thing from changing into another species.
For example, right now, in the human realm, young liberal women are picking metrosexual teen-males to mate with, and rejecting strong traditional men. So that creates a stress on the culture which shifts the value strategy for mating competition towards those who can accept living with political correctness, moral cowardice, brittle rage, indecisive terror and chronic hypocrisy.
But it also throws new stresses into the mix, such as a cultural shift towards total economic, political, technological, cultural, scientific meltdown, leading to catastrophic failure of the infrastructure, which results in intense competition for food, water and shelter at a much more primitive level.
So when that happens, traditional males will once again become the preferred choice for young fertile women.
But none of those stresses is going to make human beings sprout wings, extra legs or heads, antennae, exoskeletons, or scales.
Except, of course, the Leftists who are already like that.
They were not weak attributes at one time or another. Changing environments, predators, etc. are thought to favor some traits over others at different points in time. It’s popularly called a Red Queen hypothesis. If you don’t trust Wikipedia there’s bound to be a site you do trust in a google search.
Exactly.
Attributes that lead to reproductive success can vary over time due to changes in environment which can be either social or physical.
That’s the theory.
There was consensus.
The Darwin- Marx dedication offer was convincingly disproved in the 70’s.
Marx thought Darwin class bound; Darwin had no patience with anti-religious thought. He was a believer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.