...and you have...
There it is, proof!
Posted on 12/08/2004 6:14:39 AM PST by Pfesser
Funny, you'd think middle-school teachers would be the first to grasp the possibility that humans evolved from little apes
The Washington Post on Tuesday took on the topic of evolution in the classroom. It pointed out the dilemma faced by David Jackson, a professor of science education at the University of Georgia. Jackson has no problem with the concept of life on Earth developing from a common ancestry.
Here's the crux, according to the Post: "About half the students (Jackson) teaches to become middle school science instructors — and to teach evolution themselves — believe that God created the Earth 6,000 years ago, he said. Scientist friends tell him not to teach those students because anyone with those beliefs 'shouldn't teach.' But he tells them it is his job to make sure that his students understand evolution, not believe it."
Said Jackson: "Most of the scientists on my campus think I'm totally crazy."
(Excerpt) Read more at ajc.com ...
There it is, proof!
I hope you realize that once a crevo thread gets long enough some crignoramus who has been fed that canard by his $200 haircut cult leader says that.
The lie is exposed.
When the next crevo thread gets long enough someoine posts "I hope you realize that even Darwin started to doubt his ideas prior to his death."
And so it goes, world without end.
The only result is a few more people realize "Creationsts never learn"
Dr. W. R. Thompson referes to this fact in his introduction to The Origin of Species, in which he says that "the success of Darwinism was accompanied by a decline in scientific integrity." He gives as examples the case of the Piltdown skull, in which an ape's jawbone was substituted for the original human one, and the case of the Java Man, in which a battered skullcap of a gibbon was represented as belonging to a creature half-man, half-ape, in order to provide an argument for Darwin's theory that man was descended from an ape.
That God created mankind for the purpose of worshipping Him.In all honesty, that doesn't sound like much of a purpose. Why would the omniscient being desire me worshiping him?
"God is like Barbra Streisand. All powerful and very insecure"
Dr. W. R. Thompson referes to this fact in his introduction to The Origin of Species, in which he says that "the success of Darwinism was accompanied by a decline in scientific integrity." He gives as examples the case of the Piltdown skull, in which an ape's jawbone was substituted for the original human one, and the case of the Java Man, in which a battered skullcap of a gibbon was represented as belonging to a creature half-man, half-ape, in order to provide an argument for Darwin's theory that man was descended from an ape. Radioactive 12/08/2004 4:57:06 PM PSTDr. W. R. Thompson referes to this fact in his introduction to The Origin of Species, in which he says that "the success of Darwinism was accompanied by a decline in scientific integrity." He gives as examples the case of the Piltdown skull, in which an ape's jawbone was substituted for the original human one, and the case of the Java Man, in which a battered skullcap of a gibbon was represented as belonging to a creature half-man, half-ape, in order to provide an argument for Darwin's theory that man was descended from an ape. Science of Today and the Problems of Genesis Rev. Patrick O'Connell
Stealing from the notorious quote mine Patrick O'Connell, so impressive.
There is a direct correlation to Communism and Darwinism......
In order for Communism to survive, there must be a repudiation of GOD.
God is always under attack from the Communist left because in order for Communism to survive, there must be no higher authority than the government.
In order for Communism to rule, the higher power...GOD....must be discredited...as it has been in all communist nations.
Christianity comes under attack from the left.....because the left is Communist.....and Evolution is the way they discredit the Bible.
The hatred of God is what drives the Darwinists......and the Repudiation of Genesis is the goal in order to defeat Christianity.
Darwin was directly influenced by Carl Marx and vice versa.
Here's a quote from Trostky....Darwin destroyed the last of my ideological prejudices. ... The idea of evolution and determinism ... took possession of me completely. ... Darwin stood for me like a mighty doorkeeper at the entrance to the temple of the universe. ... I was the more astonished when I read in one of the books of Darwin, his autobiography, I think, that he had preserved his belief in God. I absolutely declined to understand how a theory of the origin of species by way of natural and sexual selection, and a belief in God, could find room in one and the same head.*
Here's more proof that what I'm saying is more true than you communists will admit....
Marxist philosophy, known as dialectical materialism, attempts to explain all of reality—including inorganic matter (the molecular, atomic, and subatomic), the organic world (life and, according to materialism, mind or consciousness), and social life (economics, politics, etc.). All of nature reflects, illuminates, and illustrates communist dialectical philosophy. Modern physics was even in travail, thought Lenin, "giving birth to dialectical materialism." Marxist philosophy insists that the material universe is infinite, that matter is eternal (negating, of course, the need for a beginning), uncreated (negating the need for a Creator), indestructible, and dialectical (the clash between opposites, for example, explains the self-motion of matter, which eliminates the need for a Mover outside of matter or nature). Marxism also perceives matter’s motion as upward and evolutionary. Matter is not static or at rest, but actively in process, progressive. Matter dialectically viewed explains its own nature and progress from its inorganic state through its development into life, onward to animal consciousness, and ultimately to human mind and consciousness and social institutions. Matter can move upward from the inorganic to the organic, from the organic to the human, and from the human to the social level because of its dialectical nature—a nature responding to certain laws including: (a) the unity and struggle of opposites, (b) the transformation of quantity into quality, and (c) the negation of the negation. The dialectical laws manifest a threefold rhythm of equilibrium (thesis), disturbance (antithesis) and re-establishment of equilibrium (synthesis). Because the dialectic is a progressive process, each synthesis becomes not merely a new thesis but a higher one. In reality, what Darwin’s theory of natural selection is to evolution, the dialectic is to matter. Marxist philosopher G. V. Plekhanov came to regard Marxism as "Darwinism in its application to social science."1 Marx and Engels acknowledge that Darwin’s theory of natural selection served them well as the basis for their theory of the class struggle. From Darwin’s point of view, in Gustav A. Wetter’s words, "insignificant quantitative changes in plants and animals eventually lead by accumulation and inheritance to the formation of new species,"2 i.e., changes in quantity lead ultimately to changes in quality. The present clash between socialism and capitalism, for the Marxist, is similar in kind to the clash among biological creatures "struggling for existence" and the clash between positive and negative charges in electricity. And the evolution of mankind from spontaneous generated life (the first speck of life from non-living matter) serves as an example of the progress of matter through many minute quantitative changes (due to natural selection) to great qualitative changes (new species). For better or worse, the Marxist’s philosophy of dialectical materialism is built primarily on the "science" of Darwinian evolution. ______________________________ 1Gustav A. Wetter, Dialectical Materialism (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1977), p. 107. Marxism for Plekhanov "is the application to social development of the Darwinian theory of the adaptation of biological species to the conditions of the environment." 2Ibid., p. 323. > Here's more.....
Your post is purest creationoid trash. Back up your claim that Darwin was "directly influenced by Carl Marx." After I refute your feeble attempt, if you make one, I'm sure you'll be back with the same slander in yet another thread.
While you're at it, how can you explain this:
Trofim Denisovich Lysenko. Stalin's biologist, definitely an anti-Darwinian.
Darwin's Influence on Ruthless Laissez Faire Capitalism. ICR links Darwin to good ol' capitalism.
Keep on trying...but your attempts to dissuade me will be as effective as my attempts to dissuade you....as it has been said...
a man mind changed against his will is of that mindset still
I assume -- because you didn't even try -- that you can't back up your false claim that Darwin was "directly influenced by Carl Marx." I didn't think you could. Classic creationist behavior.
Haters of God will be very adamant in their support of Darwin...Athiests are by nature very hatefull people who will believe they are superior to all who believe there is a God.
If you would like to get some information on the Darwin/Marx connection, then I would suggest YOU look into it.Don't be so lazy as to ask me to prove to you anything.
Obviously whatever I post here will come under your attacks as to be nonsense. Do your due dilligence and look into it yourself.
There will be a test on this next week.
I have, and I know what I'm talking about. All you've done is to mindlessly repeat something from some insane creationist website. You've got nothing to back you up, so you flail around and foolishly ask me to do your research for you. And you haven't bothered to address the material I linked about Stalin's persecution of Darwinian evolution, and the link between Darwin and capitalism -- posted at the Institution for Creation Research (a place you probably visit often). You have no response to anything.
Hey, you make the nutty claim that Darwin was "directly influenced by Carl Marx." You've got nothing to support it but your hatred of something you don't even understand. As I said, classic creationism.
Man, you gotta see these past few posts.
"God is like Barbra Streisand. All powerful and very insecure"
How ironic that you quote the worst parental character in the imaginable universe to quote something that most parents know after their kids get past the age of 10. We know that they can do a lot better in life if they benefit from our knowlege and love. But they want to reinvent the proverbial wheel and get all the wounds that go with it.
As one mother once told her teen ager, "Didnt I bear you for 9 months? Didnt I change all your dirty diapers and feed you and get up all night and hold you because you were crying? Did I do all that because I love you or hate you? Why do you think I would sudenly hate you now?"
God loves us and knows what is best for us. You may think that it suggests that He is insecure, but really He just loves us and wants us to live the way He designed us to live.
What tragedy has come about simply because we continue to refuse His love!
"Man, you gotta see these past few posts."
LOL, calling for reinforcements?
:P
Darwin once wrote:
"What my own views may be is a question of no consequence to any one but myself. But, as you ask, I may state that my judgment often fluctuates . . . In my most extreme fluctuations I have never been an Atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. I think that generally (and more and more as I grow older), but not always, that an Agnostic would be the more correct description of my state of mind."
----------
I personally feel that the bible has been treated as a living document which has been interrupted and translated many times. I don’t know what to make of the fossil records. Once a religious leader told me to read the days it took God to create the world and interrupt the word “DAY” as one would say in my father’s day. Were “DAY” means a period of time.
Holtz
JeffersonRepublic.com
As I have posted previously.....you do not want to learn anything except to accept the mindless divel that you spout.
You accuse me of just posting things I have read...but you base your insane ideas on things you have read.
Sound like you and I have a failure to Communicate....to borrow a frase from Cool Hand Luke.
Here is more for you to chastize as being inane and foolish.
Darwinism: The Source of Communist Savagery by Harun Yahya
The ideology which brought the greatest harm to mankind in the violence and savagery-filled century we have just left behind, and the most widespread in the world, was without doubt Communism. Communism, which reached its historical peak with the two German philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels in the 19th century, spilt so much blood in the world that it left even the Nazis and the imperialists behind. It led to the deaths of innocent people and spread violence, fear, and hopelessness among mankind. No matter how much Communism is thought of as having been torn down in 1991, the debris it left behind it still exists. No matter how "liberalised" one part of the "unrepentant" Communists and Marxists may be, materialist philosophy, the dark side of Communism and Marxism and which turned people away from religion and morality, still continues to influence these people. This ideology which spread terror to every corner of the world actually represented an idea which goes back to ancient times. Dialectics was a belief that all development in the universe arose as the result of conflict. Based on this belief Marx and Engels set about analysing the history of the world. Marx claimed that the history of man was one of conflict, that the current conflict was one between workers and capitalists, and that the workers would soon rise up and build a Communist revolution. The most striking feature of the two founders of Communism was that, like all materialists, they nurtured a great hatred of religion. Marx and Engels were both confirmed atheists and saw the doing away with religious beliefs as essential from the point of view of Communism. But Marx and Engels lacked one important thing: in order to attract a wider public they needed to give their ideology a scientific appearance. And the dangerous alliance which gave rise to the pain, chaos, mass murders, turning of brother against brother, and separatism of the 20th century emerged at this point. Darwin proposed his theory of evolution in his book The Origin of Species. And how interesting it is that the basic claims he put forward were just the explanations Marx and Engels were looking for. Darwin claimed that living things emerged as a result of the "struggle for survival" or "dialectical conflict." Furthermore he denied creation and rejected religious beliefs. For Marx and Engels this was an opportunity not to be missed. In a letter Marx wrote to Lassalle, a socialist friend of his, on January 16, 1861, he said: "Darwin's book is very important and serves me as a basis in natural science for the class struggle in history." [1] thus revealing the importance of the theory of evolution for Communism. In one of his works, Engels stressed the importance of Darwin's having developed a theory opposed to religion: He (Darwin) dealt the metaphysical conception of nature the heaviest blow by his proof that the organic world of today ? plants, animals, and consequently man too ? is the product of a process of evolution going on through millions of years. [2] The American researcher Conway Zirckle explains why the founders of Communism immediately accepted Darwin's theory" Marx and Engels accepted evolution almost immediately after Darwin published The Origin of Species. Evolution, of course, was just what the founders of communism needed to explain how mankind could have come into being without the intervention of any supernatural force, and consequently it could be used to bolster the foundations of their materialistic philosophy. In addition, Darwin's interpretation of evolution?that evolution had come about through the operation of natural selection?gave them an alternative hypothesis to the prevailing teleological explanation of the observed fact that all forms of life are adapted to their conditions. [3] As we have seen, Marx and Engels were delighted to believe that Darwin's concept of evolution formed a scientific support for their own atheist world view. But this delight proved to be premature. The theory of evolution saw wide acceptance because it was proposed in a primitive 19th century scientific environment and was full of errors lacking any sort of scientific proof. Science, which developed in the second half of the 20th century, revealed the invalidity of the theory of evolution. This meant the collapse of Communist and materialist thinking as much as it did of Darwinism. (For further details see The Evolution Deceit by Harun Yahya). Marx and Engels' followers, who brought about the deaths of millions of people accepted the theory of evolution with great joy and interest. It was Lenin who made Marx's project of Communist revolution come true. Lenin, aimed to bring down the Tsarist regime in Russia by force of arms. The chaos after World War I gave the Bolsheviks the opportunity they had been seeking. With Lenin at their head, the Communists seized power by the use of arms in October 1917. After the revolution Russia was the scene of a bloody three-year civil war between Communists and supporters of the tsar. Like the other Communist leaders, Lenin often stressed that Darwin's theory was the fundamental basis of dialectical materialist philosophy. Darwin put an end to the belief that the animal and vegetable species bear no relation to one another, except by chance, and that they were created by God, and hence immutable. [4] Trotsky, counted the most important architect of the Bolshevik revolution after Lenin, again attached great importance to Darwinism. He declared his admiration for Darwin in the following way, Darwin's discovery is the highest triumph of the dialectic in the whole field of organic matter. [5] Following Lenin's death in 1924, Stalin, widely regarded as the bloodiest dictator in the history of the world. Stalin's first important move was to take over the fields of the peasants in the name of this policy of collectivization which was intended to do away with private property. All the Russian villagers' crops were collected by armed officials. As a result these was a terrible famine. Millions of women, children, and the elderly who could find nothing to eat ended their lives writhing in hunger. The death toll in the Caucasus alone was 1 million. Stalin sent hundreds of thousands of people who tried to resist this policy to Siberia's dreadful labor camps. On the other hand tens of thousands of people were executed by Stalin's secret police. Millions of people were forced to migrate to the furthest corners of Russia. By these bloody policies Stalin killed some 20 million people. Historians have revealed that this savagery gave him enormous personal pleasure. Apart from his personal psychological state, the main influence which lead him to become such a ruthless killer was the materialist philosophy he believed in. In Stalin's period the Soviet Union had turned into an environment of chaos where for millions of people life was permanently under threat, and where they could be taken away, though innocent of any crime, at any moment, to suffer unimagined torments. Not just Communism, but the history of Fascism, too, is full of such attitudes. Some commentators on history fall into the error, when evaluating these events, of trying to show that the basic cause of all this savagery and mercilessness was that as people, Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Hitler, and Mussolini had unbalanced and psychopathic natures. What kind of coincidence is it, that the whole world should have fallen into the hands of psychologically unbalanced people at the same time? It is an obvious and definite truth that these people and ideologies all drank from the same well and that they were all portrayed as justified and the only way by the same source. In short there was another guilty party behind these people. The cause of these inhuman and unbalanced leaders dragging millions along behind them, and which allowed them to commit crimes, was the apparent scientific force and support given to them by materialist philosophy and Darwinism. (For further information on the subject, see "Disasters Darwinism Brought to Humanity" by Harun Yahya) Notes: [1] Conway Zirkle, "Evolution, Marxian Biology and the Social Scene", Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1959, pp.85-87 [2] Friedrich Engels, "Socialism: Utopian and Scientific", Foreign Languages Press, Peking 1975, p. 67 [3] Conway Zirkle, "Evolution, Marxian Biology and the Social Scene", (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1959), pp.85-86 [4] Marshall Hall, Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, Mao et al: The Role of Darwinian Evolutionism in Their Lives, http://www.fixedearth.com/hlsm.html [5] Alan Woods and Ted Grant, "Reason in Revolt: Marxism and Modern Science", London:1993
I never said this was my quote....I just did not put the copy on the rest of the article....but it does show what the hell is going on with Darwinistic drivel by Marxist Communists.
"Carl Marx"??? -- what a stunning display of intellectual prowess.
How Clintonian of you. Fact is, you concealed the author, which could lead readers to accepting Patrick O'Connell's ignorant babbling for your own.
the Java Man, in which a battered skullcap of a gibbon was represented as belonging to a creature half-man, half-ape, in order to provide an argument for Darwin's theory that man was descended from an ape.
again the talking points: "battered skullcap of a gibbon"
But because we have the full skeleton of the Turkana Boy, the "gibbon" won't fly, so he's considered fully human and Java man is "just because the overlay matches perfectly, that doesn't prove it's Word 2000. It could still have been typed on an unknown species of 1970s gibbon."
Yeah, ol Carl was best buds with "Nicky Lenin".
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.
