Posted on 08/09/2009 8:10:48 PM PDT by Gordon Greene
On that note, read this interesting article: Darwin and the Fuegians. Concerning this, David Stove writes in Darwinian Fairytales:
When Darwin first encountered the Yahgan Indians in their homeland of Tierra del Fuego, he was thunderstruck. 'I could not have believed how wide was the difference between savage and civilised man: it is greater than between a wild and [a] domesticated animal, inasmuch as in man there is a greater power of improvement.' But in fact Darwin was mistaken about the Yahgans: indeed, just about as completely mistaken as it would have been possible to be. We know this from the testimony of a man who was born and spent most of his life among them. This was Lucas Bridges, whose parents were Christian missionaries to die Yahgans, and the first white settlers in Tierra del Fuego, only a few decades after the Beagle's visit.
OB: Yeah. That's far too few.
The evos are slacking, that's for sure.
Hey, “noob”. Welcome to FR.
It’s generally considered good form to read the article before blowing it off, especially when you’re a “noob” and just jump into a crevo debate with both feet like that.
Not an auspicious start to crevo debates.
Only if you think that the Bible isn’t really true or God lied when He told us....
Gen 2:7 Then the LORD God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.
Gen 2:19 Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called a living creature, that was its name.
What? Are you starting this sectarian division nonsense too?
Every thread by the crevos says that if you believe evolution to be a scientific fact, then you are an atheist. Well, the Catholic Church is OK with evolution. Therefore, according to the crevo thinking, the Catholic Church must be athiest.
Please answer yes or no, is the Roman Catholic Church a christian religion or not?
Every thread the crevos put out related to religion,not science.
I did read the article. Pure twaddle as I stated up thread. If you knew any science at all you would have to agree.
Here is some advice - and it’s free:
Buy any basic (mainstream university) biology 101 text book and read it with an open mind.
Do you really think the thousands (millions actually) of scientists, naturalists, ecologists, researchers, professors, and teachers et al are all being hoodwinked? The thousands upon thousands of papers be presented yearly are fraudulent? We have learned much since Darwin’s’ day.
-Shakes head sadly-
Thanks for the welcome - I think..
Not an auspicious start to crevo debates.
Actually I did not sign up here to debate evolution in general. And I did not jump in with both feet. Like any other thread, I am adding to the conversation. Such as when a poster was wrong about nuclear devices:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2306884/posts?page=43#43
“An atomic bomb is a nuclear device. It is a pure fission weapon (splitting of heavy nucleotides such as Uranium or Plutonium releasing energy) as opposed to a fusion weapon which fuses lighter nucleotides together releasing energy (thermonuclear device). Note: thermonuclear devices use a fission trigger (atomic bomb you might say) to overcome the curve of binding energy to enable fusion.
OTOH, they may be referring to a simple dirty bomb which just spreads radioactive debris. However, that is not a very effective device (i.e., bang for the buck - pun intended)”
I don’t think it’s divisive at all. In fact, the discussion is necessary. Christians have no problem at all with evolution. Do you, MM?
“If you love The Origin of the Species, embrace it! Call Australian Aborigines, Blacks and Indians what your father called them… SAVAGES!”
—I’d rather speaketh 21rst century American English than mid 19th century British English, but thanketh thou anyway.
“Somebody tell me the difference, please?”
—Sure. First I’ll mention where most Darwinists, Hitler, and most Creationists are in agreement: They agree that diseases, maladies, and harmful mutations are spread via genes. They also agree that the spread of many such genes can be checked via selective breeding. The difference is - what do we do with this information?
Darwin, like most Darwinists and Creationists believed that “if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil” and that “Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature.”
Hitler, OTOH, believed otherwise. But not because of Darwinism. In fact, Hitler believed in intelligent design and that speciation was impossible. He believed that change could occur, but only within kinds through selective breeding, just as modern Creationists argue.
(For more details see my post here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2259552/posts?page=43#43)
"He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions."
“just fed up with egomaniacs trying to drive traffic to their crappy sites.”
Hey, Stormer... Something I forgot to note.
Did you notice that this was posted in the “Bloggers/Personal” section? Do you think JR might have added that for a reason?
If you don’t like the forum, save us all some trouble and
don’t read it. And thank you for your comments!
By the way, send me the link to your crappy site. I might need a laugh.
“Or do you consider the Catholic Church and the Pope as not christian?”
Why in the world do you folks come out of the woodwork with your Catholic stuff when I post these... I’m not Catholic!
Truth is truth, I don’t care what religion you claim to be. Those of us outside the Catholic church do not consider him holy above any other man or his word more true than the scriptures. Scripture supports Creation not Evolution. Period.
“Congratulations. In 26 posts, you’ve managed to attract 3 spitwads (generalized criticism with no specifics and no support), 3 personal attacks, and 1 diversion attempt.”
I aim to please... nothing gets the natives riled like puttin’ the facts out there.
“If you don’t know what you’re talking about, it’s always best to remain silent.”
Like with evolution? What you know of evolution you got from a jar of old bones with a little eye of newt thrown in for good measure. Witchdoctors playing the professorial role.
“The Declaration of Independence calls Native Americans “merciless Indian savages.”’
With one major, notable difference, slime. Most of the founders (if not all) understood it as a cultural thing not a state of being. And some of them were savage in nature. It may also be noted that the early immigrants to America did not consider all of them savages. By contrast, Darwin pointed to their savagery as a state of being and something that would eventually be conquered by the more civilized.
But who’s counting facts?
Details, details. Don’t let the facts interfere with your agenda.
On the contrary, the whole issue is very divisive and everyone knows it and every one can see what you're up to.
The *Christianity* of the individual of any member of any particular denomination is not relevant to the topic of the ToE nor the topic of this thread, no matter how you paint it nor how many contortions you and your cohorts put yourselves through to try to justify it.
In the end, the only purpose that asking a question like that can and does serve, is to pit one person against another by getting them into an argument about what a *real* Christian is while evos sit back and laugh at the debacle.
All you evos who are hopping on this bandwagon are not fooling anyone.
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.