[CarolinaGuitarman]

"While quick to point out (vehemently) that Marx’s Manifesto was published well before Darwin’s Origins, Evolutionists are entirely silent on the subject of Das Kapital, Marx’s most signal work, which was published some several years after Origins."

There is nothing in Kapital that is even remotely Darwinian. We are not *silent* on this, as you suggest. We just correctly pint out that there is no connection between what Marx and Engel's wrote in their books and what Darwin wrote in his. No creationist has been able to show how Marx is alleged to have adopted the ideas of natural selection or descent with modification into his political ideology. Vague talk about shared *materialism* won't cut it. Darwin's ideas are much more compatible with those of capitalists, not communists. That's why Stalin had those who taught natural selection killed.

[PatrickHenry]

Challenge to all anti-evolution people

Das Kapital is the only work of Marx to appear after Darwin published Origin of Species, and thus it's the only work of Marx that could show his intellectual borrowings from Darwin. All of Marx's earlier writings on communism were done before the world had heard of Darwin and his theory of evolution. Clear on that?

Now then, this well-known chronological fact has been mentioned several times in this pathetic thread, yet no creationist has been honest enough to abandon the idiotic notion of a Marx-Darwin connection, nor has any creationist been able to show anything in Marx's work that reveals his reliance on Darwin.

It's time to put up or shut up. Here's an online version of Das Kapital. Search it. Show us where Marx used Darwin's ideas.

[YHAOS]

Perhaps we need to consult a Moderator on the ethics involved in your communication. On 6 December, last, you broke off communications with me, with instructions not to contact you again.

(see Intelligent Design Might Be Meeting Its Maker, posted by Carolina Guitarman to YHAOS, Smoky Backroom, on 12/06/2005 2:14:37 PM PST, msg #920 of 1,060, excerpt: “Now go away and don't post to me again.”)

What are the ethics of a poster enjoining a fellow poster not to contact him again; then turning around a few weeks later and posting to that very same person? Is the one consigned forever to silence, while the other is free to post as he pleases? That does not seem to be the proper thing to do.

Oh, wait . . . this dilemma can be resolved easily. Go away and don’t post to me again.