Replies

Evolution is racist and you cannot deny it , that is why you call it an insult.

Race-based slavery was practiced for centuries prior to the theory of evolution, and it was Biblically-based. Does "child of Ham" ring a bell?

You spout easily refuted irrelevancies; it is as if the very core of your existence depends upon your being right. Is your psyche that fragile?

Race-based slavery was practiced for centuries prior to the theory of evolution, and it was Biblically-based. Does "child of Ham" ring a bell?

This is a brilliant refutation. I am ashamed that I did not use it myself. Well done...

Evolution is racist and you cannot deny it , that is why you call it an insult.-me- Race-based slavery was practiced for centuries prior to the theory of evolution

Which is totally irrelevant to my statement. Evolution is racist and Darwin supported the extermination of 'inferior' races as the following shows:

"I could show fight on natural selection having done and doing more for the progress of civilization than you seem inclined to admit. Remember what risk the nations of Europe ran, not so many centuries ago of being overwhelmed by the Turks, and how ridiculous such an idea now is! The more civilized so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence. Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout the world."
Darwin to Graham, July 3, 1881.

>>"You spout easily refuted irrelevancies...."<<

I believe this should be "...easily refutable irrelevancies..."; or "...irrelevancies that are easily refuted...."

Also, I may have missed it, but does gore3000 say somewhere on this thread that racism started with Darwin? He doesn't do so in #1369. If not, why the reference to Ham -- I just don't get the connection...??