The lies of Lynchburg: How U.S. evolutionists taught the Nazis.

Answers In Genesis ^ | September 1997 | Carl Wieland

[Fichori]

First published:
Creation 19(4):22–23
September 1997

by Carl Wieland

The chilling revelations of a recent television documentary¹ expose the disturbing consequences of evolutionary ways of thinking. Beginning in the 1920s, many thousands of people in the United States were sterilised against their will and without their consent, to prevent ‘undesirable breeding’. Over 8,000 of these procedures took place at a major centre to which such ‘undesirables’ were sent, in Lynchburg, Virginia.

[Fichori]

“His silence is interesting and illustrative.” [excerpt]

I imagine there will be a similar silence in regard to the questions that cpforlife.org asked him in 69

Cowardice at its finest.

You never know though.

[CottShop]

[[Its becoming increasingly clear that creationists have no science to back up their positions, and have to resort to character assassination in their fruitless battle against the theory of evolution.]]

The more I read through this thread- the funnier and funnier it gets- Just keep ignoring the gaping holes in Macroevolution while concentrating on the small divits in ID and don’t forget to keep telling yourself that your hypothesis isn’t dying- that shoudl confort ya at night.

[Mr. Silverback]

Yep!

[Mr. Silverback]

I suspect he thinks that if he answers my question honestly he will be booted from FR. I’m not sure that’s true and that’s not my aim. I’d just like to hear the truth.

[cpforlife.org]

“it's been about 23 months since I asked Coyoteman if he supports or opposes the idea that a main goal of scientists should be to eliminate religion. He has not answered the question”

Answer the question, or quit posting your fertilizer, you troll.

Answer my questions in 69, or quit posting.

Lastly I'm wondering Coyoteman; are you pro-choice on killing unborn babies? I suspect you are.

Does anyone know if this troll is a pro-abort.

[Fichori]

“Does anyone know if this troll is a pro-abort.” [excerpt]

I have never seen him voice his opinion on abortion.

Not to say that he hasn't.

The only ways to know for sure would be to either go through his posts or have him just say.

That said, there is no reason to be coy on FR if you're pro-life.

But there is if you're not.

[CottShop]

[[What this article does is show that the creationists’ claim that no new genes arise (”no new information”) is false]]

No Coyote- what that shows is that no new NON SPECIES Specific informaiton arises which alters the major systems of a species the way that MACROEvolution is supposed to have happened. There is no biological evidence to show that a simple retrovirus could produce NON SPECIES Specific information that could give rise to such major structural changes, or even the precursors to major structural changes- As Well- We’ve been over the retroviruses in the past- Extensively, and it was found NOT to be a case for common ancestry AND that species specific informaiton can ONLY be ALTERED within species specific parameters, As You well know, but are loathe to admit- there may be functions hidden in species that were begun and hten ‘lost’, and which are coded for to handle invasions liek parasites and viruses.

The fact that ERV’s exhibit insertion bias strongly indicates that species are coded to handle those particular viruses, and as such unexpressed info that lie fully within species specific info can and often is ‘turned on’ again by these virus insertions. We’ve been over htis in detail in other threads- but I see you insist on bringing it up again at later dates- perhaps hoping peopel will have forgotten that ERV’s are poor markers for the case of common descent or ‘New ifnromation’?

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

America’s evolutionists: Hitler’s inspiration?

Alfred Ploetz was one of the prime movers of eugenics in germany prior to the rise of Hitler. Ploetz was a personal friend of Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton. Ploetz was also vice-president of the british Eugenics Society, alongside Poulton and other famous Darwinians. This was during the time when Leonard Darwin (Darwin's son) was president of the british Eugenics Society. The british Eugenics Society organized international eugenics conferences. The purpose of which was to found eugenical societies in other countries. The second international eugenic congress resolved to create the American Eugenic Society. So clearly it was the British evolutionists who were the inspiration.

British eugenics suffered a blow when WWI started. And then later during WWII. The british eugenists were mostly socialists. While they started and supported eugenics in germany, they gradually turned against germany because of nazi opposition to communists. But american eugenists, like Campbell, Popenoe, and others, remained pro-nazi.

Julian Huxley was president of the british Eugenics Society for a long time, extending into the post-war era. He blamed Nazi eugenics on God and Christianity. It had nothing to do with him or his Eugenics Society, of course.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

Under the topic “Eugenics” there are sometimes references to Darwinists...

Leonard Darwin was president of the Eugenics Society. Poulton was vice-president. Punnet was a member. So was Julian Huxley and J.B.S. Haldane. R.A. Fisher and Karl Pearson were eugenists. Darwin's cousin invented the word "eugenics". Have a look at my FR page.

[Natufian]

Let me get this straight.. I just want to find out exactly how far out on the fringe, just how much of a minority, you are....

You’re saying that there is no evidence for the ToE, that it is all faith and ideology?

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

You’re saying that there is no evidence for the ToE, that it is all faith and ideology?

The theory of evolution says that monkeys become cathedral-builders and mathematicians by an accruement of accidents. Since there's no evidence for that, and the concept is repugnant to reason in the first place, people are fully justified in rejecting it as idiotic.

[Natufian]

Of course there is evidence (anatomical, genetic, paleological etc., etc.). Just because you’ve decided that the logical conclusion of the massed evidence is repugnant to your ‘reason’ (better to say ‘faith’ here but let’s go with your definition for the time being) doesn’t mean that the evidence isn’t there.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

Of course there is evidence...

What is the evidence that monkeys changed into cathedral-builders by the accruement of accidents?

[netmilsmom]

I trust you, my FRiend.

What is the difference between “evolutionists”, “creationists” and ID people?

I suspect I fall into the third and that is what I am teaching my children. We use a Christian curriculum. It teaches bible creation exclusively. I don't want that and I don't want exclusively evolution.

Where do I fall in this group? My family watched Expelled together. I looked for websites that refuted it and found only one (the blog upthread is new to me) where when my husband rented Fahrenheit 911 there were many, many sites that went scene to scene and disputed it. It's hard not to believe the movie when very few people say it is wrong.

[Natufian]

Evidence....

“Here we present a draft genome sequence of the common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). Through comparison with the human genome, we have generated a largely complete catalogue of the genetic differences that have accumulated since the human and chimpanzee species diverged from our common ancestor, constituting approximately thirty-five million single-nucleotide changes, five million insertion/deletion events, and various chromosomal rearrangements. We use this catalogue to explore the magnitude and regional variation of mutational forces shaping these two genomes, and the strength of positive and negative selection acting on their genes. In particular, we find that the patterns of evolution in human and chimpanzee protein-coding genes are highly correlated and dominated by the fixation of neutral and slightly deleterious alleles. We also use the chimpanzee genome as an outgroup to investigate human population genetics and identify signatures of selective sweeps in recent human evolution.”

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v437/n7055/abs/nature04072.html

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

Are the authors of this article claiming to provide evidence that monkeys changed into people by the accruement of random accidents? There’s nothing in the abstract about that.

[Godsgirl]

Saw it. Very interesting ,more like a documentary, my husband and I enjoyed it. Good to see these things exposed and made available to the public on a large scale. Have you heard of Dr. Dino (Kent Hovind)? He evangelizes by teaching the truth about creation using the Bible and exposing the lies of evolution. He is incredibly smart and quite entertaining to watch. I have 4 boys, ages 12- 9- 6- 3, and they all enjoy watching him.

[ZULU]

Excuse me.

I thought you people understood analogies. But then I forgot for a moment where you all were “coming from”.

[Ethan Clive Osgoode]

I thought you people understood analogies.

Why would you make such a dumb analogy? The evidence connecting darwinians to eugenics is extensive. And, since you bring up Mengele, it is ironic that both Otmar Verschuer (Mengele's mentor) and Charles Galton Darwin (Eugenics Society president) wrote articles for a eugenics magazine called Mankind Quarterly.

[allmendream]

Prove?

Many thousands of experiments have shown the validity of predictions based upon the theory of evolution through natural selection of genetic variation.

Here is a good one. One among many thousands.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14094-bacteria-make-major-evolutionary-shift-in-the-lab.html

There are any number of ways the theory could be falsified. Another mechanism of genetic change could be discovered that was somehow not subject to natural selection. A genomic analysis that didn't conform to the nested hierarchies of phylogenetic analysis previously discovered would also falsify common descent.