Skip to comments.
Darwin reader: Darwin’s racism
UD ^
| February 14, 2009
| Denyse O'Leary
Posted on 02/24/2009 7:04:56 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-119 next last
To: Cedric
“No, laughter is good for the soul.”
Forgive me then, I thought you were bitter an humorless, like most who buy into the BCL.
To: GodGunsGuts
His book Origins didnt contain any data.
Really. If I were to pretend this is true, what say you about all of his other books?
It was just a long argument based on practically nothing, except a few minor variations between finches.
Which have thusly been verified and confirmed in the 150 years since. Rather amazing, actually.
He didnt even discover natural selection. That was discovered some 25 years ealier by a creationist.
Pssst. He was a creationist before examining the evidence. Which maybe someday you and your ilk will do as well. And btw, you (and others) like to pretend Darwin's impact is diminished by mentioning that his idea wasn't original. This is hardly a secret as he work word Wallace before publishing. In fact, Wallace gave Darwin his "blessing" to publish "Origin."
Furthermore, by bringing this up every 10 or so threads of yours, aren't you shining a bright light on the fact that the idea of Natural Selection as a means of evolution was A) independently arrived at by others and B) would have been published on at some point by someone else anyway? Where's your irrational hatred for Wallace?
To: conservative cat
Then why were Darwin’s books banned in Nazi Germany?
If Hitler was a “fan” and all....
Well? Why were Darwin’s books banned in Nazi Germany?
83
posted on
02/25/2009 7:30:14 AM PST
by
allmendream
("Wealth is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?")
To: wendy1946
The way the question is often phrased is should religion be put on an equal footing with evolution in public schools? and my reply is, only if the religion you choose is the RIGHT one; i.e. to have an apples to apples comparison youd a religion which operated on an intellectual basis similar to that of evoloserism and the only candidates would be Rastafari, Santeria, and Voodoo.
LOL. I'd be interested in your data backing up the claim that YOUR religion (not just your Christianity, but your particular brand of Christianity) is the only one "operating on an intellectual basis."
Heck, that wouldn't even fly here on FR, an overwhelmingly Christian site! Just try to post it in the religion forum and stand back from the Catholics, Mormons, and other types of Christians that you don't really believe are "true Christians."
Stand back and listen to the bagpipes. Then imagine the firestorm that you're idea would incur at the state and federal level. Gimme a break.
To: ToGodBeTheGlory
The man with no scientific training whatsoever is the scientist we are supposed to worship?
No. No one has asked you (or anyone) to "worship" a dead naturalist. Ever.
Sounds more like L Ron Hubbard than Isaac Newton. lol
The difference being that Hubbard's ideas can easily be shown to be pure hogwash and Newton's were empirically incorrect. Darwin's ideas have only gotten stronger over time.
To: wendy1946
Evolution is a brain-dead ideological doctrine which has brought about two world wars
Wow. Please explain further.
To: varmintman
You might want to watch Ben Steins movie. The interview with Dawkins definitively settles the question of whether there could be such a thing as an idiot with a 180 IQ.
Agreed. I used to think somewhat highly of Stein.
To: Cedric
” With apologies to Richie, Yo no soy marinero. “
See, you DO have a sense of humor.
To: varmintman
“You might want to watch Ben Steins movie. The interview with Dawkins definitively settles the question of whether there could be such a thing as an idiot with a 180 IQ.”
Are you accusing me of having a 180 IQ, or being an idiot?
I’m confused......
To: whattajoke
Look, Darwin’s book was all about a few finches, huge stretches of logic, and the rest was an attack on God and His Creation. 150 years later and now we know even the finches were a bust since they are all still finches. When they turn into a dog let us know, until then people of God will rightly laugh at the failure that was Darwin.
To: whattajoke
Savages are intermediate states between people and apes:
91
posted on
02/25/2009 7:53:20 AM PST
by
Cedric
To: whattajoke
“At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.”
92
posted on
02/25/2009 7:58:33 AM PST
by
Cedric
To: ToGodBeTheGlory
Pretty good. But if you’re going to keep up the ruse, you need to capitalize more, misspell about every third word, and salt your posts with more “evo-combinations.” You know, “evo-slime,” “evo-loser,” “evo-mythomaniac,” “evo-pseudologist,” “evo-menteur à triple étage,” that kind of thing.
93
posted on
02/25/2009 8:04:46 AM PST
by
atlaw
To: RFEngineer
Im confused......... If you had a 180 IQ you wouldn't be.
To: atlaw
“Pretty good.” is not a complete sentence.
95
posted on
02/25/2009 8:07:24 AM PST
by
Cedric
To: atlaw
about every third word Learn to use proper grammar, you evo-dunce.
96
posted on
02/25/2009 8:10:32 AM PST
by
Cedric
To: whattajoke
The Natural Selection discovered by creationists (before Darwin) was a force for conservation, not a blind information-adding nature-god. In short, natural selection means two different things to creationists and evos. One crucial difference being that there is actual evidence supporting the creationist version, whereas I can’t find any evidence backing up the information-adding evo version at all.
To: varmintman
“If you had a 180 IQ you wouldn’t be.”
The light comes on for another BCL advocate....
You do not appear to have a sense of humor.
To: Cedric
Pretty good. is not a complete sentence. Suffices. : )
99
posted on
02/25/2009 8:23:18 AM PST
by
atlaw
To: atlaw
100
posted on
02/25/2009 8:27:02 AM PST
by
Cedric
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-119 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson