Certainly.
not macro as in the theory of evolution
Wrong. Macroevolution has been observed directly (observed speciation) and in the fossil record.
There are so many holes in the theory
I aggree with the idea that Hitler was encouraged by the theory
as it was designed to oppose a moral and self-restrictive conscience.
Evolution is a scientific theory, not a philosophical viewpoint.
When you falsely teach that we came from monkeys
Humans and modern apes share common ancestors; besides, humans are classified as apes.
it tends to activate the darker desires that we all have.
Not really since evolution is a scientific topic, not a philosophical one.
It's really sad that kids are not allowed to be taught the creation theory in public schools
and its many fascinating points under the delusion that it is not science.
Possibly the only deluded ones here are the creationists.
it seems that some people like to use any stick to thrash Darwin. Now they have turned (once again) to attempting to blame the Holocaust on poor old Charles's insight and theories.
It is, to them, an irrelevant trifle that facts and history do not support their assertions.
From what I can tell, the "link" (as such) as it exists is as follows:
1. Darwin published OotS and DoM
2. Spencer et alia came up with somewhat different models of evolution, and came up with "social evolution". Spencer also coined a phrase and concept ubiquitously misattributed to Darwin - "the survival of the fittest"
3. Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche, sociopolitical philosopher and writer, formulated the notion of the "ubermensch" and the proper role of his society as one of preparing the field for the emergence of such superior humans. ("Thus Spake Zarathustra")
4. Various "eugenics" movements, weakly derived from misunderstandings of the ToE and enormously derived from extant notions of racial superiority, came into vigorous existence in many western societies (including white Protestant America)
5. Hitler perverted these secondary and tertiary perversions of Darwin's work, mixed in Germanic folklore and extant Germanic Christian antisemitism (see: Martin Luther et omnia generis alia), and came up with Nazi Aryanism as a justification for his statism.
that's a pretty weak stick with which to cudgel the theory of an observant old man. The link to Luther is much more linear, much more pure.
you can point to dubious fossils and say that evolution has been observed but those fossils are not clearly transitional. For toe to be true there would have to be many thousands of fossils showing the transition of one life form into another. But that simply is not the case. The fossils that you guys point to are simply completed life forms. It's just wishful conjecture to say they are transitional. If that were not the case this debate would be so clearly over without many scientists exposing the holes in toe.
The fact that ID and creationism theories are denied a place in public schools shows that toe is more than a scientific theory. It simply doesn't want to be competed against lest it fall of it's own falseness. Thank God for the internet and other sources where kids can look at both sides honestly.