The blood-stained century of evolution

ifriit · Jan 13, 2004

napajohn said:
then you are sorry..what more can one say..ignorance is bliss

Yes, and you're wrong because you're a moron. Now that we've got the insults off our chests, would you care to make a case for your claims, or is all you have to offer ad hominem?

ifriit said:
There are no social applications to evolutionary theory. The connection is spurious.

napajohn said:
ahem...The repeated assertion that it is does not does not make it so.

You could at least show a little effort in comprehending what you parrot.

napajohn · Jan 13, 2004

Timo said:
That's not what I'm doing. However, you seem to be ignoring the circumstances of Hitler's rise to power if you think that Darwin was responsible for it. Hitler rose to power because Germany was in a terrible state after WW1 when the allies screed it over with the treaty of Versailles. Hitler wanted power. Germans wanted someone to blame for the troubles they had that meant their money was worthless. Hitler offered them the Jews to blame.

who said that Hitlers rise to power was due to Darwinism..I didn't..all I said was that part of the belief system that Hitler had was heavily influenced by Darwin...George Bush claims to be A Christian..his Christianity is a part of his makeup yet one would be stupid to say that he is President soley due to his beliefs..there are many other factors that made him President..

And I don't really understand what you've done with my premise there. Applying it to that I would say:
It is true that Mr Hinkle used the feelings of the American public to justify shooting the President. It is not true that the feelings of the American public caused him to shoot at the President. Had the American public never felt that way, he still would have shot, but justified it differently.

all one can do in determining the actions of a person is deduce the mental spiritual and intellectual capacity of a person..They do this in a court of law in establishing the intent of a defendant...Often in court people go back and try to put the evidence that can give light on the mental makeup of a man and see any possible underlying causes..when people go back and read Mein Kampf and do other investigative work, one can sometimes easily piece together possible reasons in why a man acted as he did...Based on what has been quoted by Hitler, Himmler and other Nazi leaders, one can easily draw a conclusion that their belief of a struggle of the fittest (master race) can easily have resulted in the Jewish haulocaust..besides, we know that one of the very first things that Communist China did was to outlaw religion (often Christianity ) and preach evolution..we can see the fruit of this endeavor.

Data · Jan 13, 2004

Has anyone offered up that quote where Hitler assures he beleives in the 'fixity of species'?

That's perhaps the polar opposite of the writings of Darwin.

Timo · Jan 13, 2004

Ahh..so was your use of my premise:
It is true that Mr Hinkle shot at the President.
Had Mr Hinkle not shot the President, someone else would have.

Sadly, you're missing out half the premise.

part of the belief system that Hitler had was heavily influenced by Darwin

Hitler believed Germans were the 'master race' and so it was fair for them to take land from the Slavs etc. I don't think Darwin made him think this, and if it did, then he misunderstood it. I think that he just thought that the Germans were the 'master race.' When the Spanish conquered South America and destroyed the Inca and Aztec nations (among others) it was because they thought they were primitive cultures. But hold on a minute there.....Darwin hadn't discovered evolution yet, so they can't have thought that....

Also, you still haven't said why Karl Marx didn't dedicate Das Kapital to Darwin given that "he wanted to".

Timo · Jan 14, 2004

napajohn said:
Based on what has been quoted by Hitler, Himmler and other Nazi leaders, one can easily draw a conclusion that their belief of a struggle of the fittest (master race) can easily have resulted in the Jewish haulocaust

Okay, how about you now look at one of the other threads bunch of Hitler's quotes on religion on the Philosophy and Morality board, come back here and say,
"based on the quotes attributed to Hitler, one can easily draw a conclusion that his religious belief can easily have resulted in the Jewish holocaust."

Also, as far as I can remember, there have been no quotes of Hitler and co. on here - just quotes about them. (Although please correct me if I am wrong - this is quite a long discussion board).

napajohn · Jan 14, 2004

Timo said:
Okay, how about you now look at one of the other threads bunch of Hitler's quotes on religion on the Philosophy and Morality board, come back here and say,
"based on the quotes attributed to Hitler, one can easily draw a conclusion that his religious belief can easily have resulted in the Jewish holocaust."

Also, as far as I can remember, there have been no quotes of Hitler and co. on here - just quotes about them. (Although please correct me if I am wrong - this is quite a long discussion board).

remember this is Hitlers quote of a belief that the almighty supported his cause, that the Jews were responsible for not only the ill wills of the world but for killing Christ..at the time of him writing Mein Kampf, he was not the political leader of his time...as far as I remember it wasn't initially successful and even was penned by Hess since he was not very skilled as a writer and also was a prisoner...You can document that Hitler jailed many Christian pastors and was vehemently against Christianity...My mother in laws father was jailed for "helping" the local pastor in the village of Salzburgh..she even met Hitler and was told specifically to not bring up Christ in his presence...
Again, go to the commands of Christ and see if his actions could be supported:
Christ said to lay down your sword for anyone who lives by the sword will die by the sword..to pray for your enemies..that the greatest is one who serves...Contrast that with how Hitler, Stalin, Mao and other Communist leaders have used the idea of the struggle of the fit over the weak, of how man must eventually eliminate the subspecies to strengthen the human race...its painfully obvious that their ideas are not only supported by Darwinistic thinking but that these ideas may have even originated from such beliefs.

Vylo · Jan 14, 2004

Delete.......this......thread. The horse has been beaten into a fine pile of compost.

Timo · Jan 14, 2004

There was a post above the one you've responded too napajohn. At the moment the only thing I have time to respond to is:

napajohn said:
Christ said to lay down your sword for anyone who lives by the sword will die by the sword..to pray for your enemies..that the greatest is one who serves...Contrast that with how Hitler, Stalin, Mao and other Communist leaders have used the idea of the struggle of the fit over the weak, of how man must eventually eliminate the subspecies to strengthen the human race...its painfully obvious that their ideas are not only supported by Darwinistic thinking but that these ideas may have even originated from such beliefs.

These views are not supported by Darwinistic thinking, particularly not in a 'painfully obvious' way. Darwin talked about natural evolution - this involves the enviroment determining which species survives. It does not involve the wholesale persecution and slaughter of the smaller population as this requires a complex organised society which does not exist in natural evolution.

You also make a stupid contrast - you are contrasting what Christ said with what someone else said justified what they were doing. How about I contrast Darwin's 'over generations the enviroment will determine what survives' in survival of the fittest to the Spanish destroying the Inca and Aztec nations because they were primitive non-Christian cultures.

napajohn said:
remember this is Hitlers quote of a belief that the almighty supported his cause, that the Jews were responsible for not only the ill wills of the world but for killing Christ..

yeah, that was the entire point in me saying that. He thought the almighty supported his cause. HE THOUGHT THE ALMIGHTY SUPPORTED HIS CAUSE. Repeat it to yourself until you realise what you just said. Now would he have got this idea for Darwin? No.

Now, don't get me wrong - I don't think that Christianity is to blame for the Holocaust. But neither is Darwin. He used them both as political tools. That's what politicians do - they use other people's ideas as political tools. He used Christianity to isolate the Jews, then his twisted version of evolution to justify persecuting the 'weaker race'.

napajohn · Jan 14, 2004

Timo said:
There was a post above the one you've responded too napajohn. At the moment the only thing I have time to respond to is:

These views are not supported by Darwinistic thinking, particularly not in a 'painfully obvious' way. Darwin talked about natural evolution - this involves the enviroment determining which species survives. It does not involve the wholesale persecution and slaughter of the smaller population as this requires a complex organised society which does not exist in natural evolution.

You seem to forget that the environment INCLUDES man..each species based on evolutionary thought requires an adjustment and reactions to an external stimuli..I remember reading about some idea that birds were dinosaurs that had feathers and flight developed due to it running up a wall which eventually gave rise to flight...likewise, the crab developed his mechanism of defense due to any external animal that was a threat to his survival...If you read the Life of darwin by C Darwin he mentions the idea that part of the evolution of man was due to the more "advanced" humans overtaking and destroying their "sub human" counterparts..

""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 civilised races throughout the world." (Darwin, Charles R. [English naturalist and founder of the modern theory of evolution], "The Life of Charles Darwin" pg 64

or this concept:

"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 civilized 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." (Darwin, Charles R. [English naturalist and founder of the modern theory of evolution], "The Descent of Man and Selection in Relation to Sex," [1871], John Murray: London, Second Edition, 1922, reprint, pp.241-242).
I can't make it any more obvious

You also make a stupid contrast - you are contrasting what Christ said with what someone else said justified what they were doing. How about I contrast Darwin's 'over generations the enviroment will determine what survives' in survival of the fittest to the Spanish destroying the Inca and Aztec nations because they were primitive non-Christian cultures.

Please do..since so far all you have done is made general statements...why don't you explain it in terms of the Spanish Inquisitions..on what basis did they do what they did since they were Catholics killing Catholics..or the
killing of christians by Christians ( Hugenots vs Catholics) in France..Could the reasons be deeper and more complicated than what I think you are suggesting...Suppose evolution didn't exist, what basis would Hitler, Himmler have used to further their concept of a master race..surely it wasn't the Bible..why did they outlaw Mendelian genetics (not belived by Darwin) in 1947 Russia and accept Lamarck if not to get the people to more readily accept evolution as fact and pave the way for future Communist propaganda...Again its painfully obvious that though Darwin may not have proposed the holocaust, many of these barbaric leaders saw the possibilities of taking the implications of Darwinist thought to its grisly conclusion.

yeah, that was the entire point in me saying that. He thought the almighty supported his cause. HE THOUGHT THE ALMIGHTY SUPPORTED HIS CAUSE. Repeat it to yourself until you realise what you just said. Now would he have got this idea for Darwin? No.

see my examples and quotes

Now, don't get me wrong - I don't think that Christianity is to blame for the Holocaust. But neither is Darwin. He used them both as political tools. That's what politicians do - they use other people's ideas as political tools. He used Christianity to isolate the Jews, then his twisted version of evolution to justify persecuting the 'weaker race'.

Your last sentence seems to show that you are coming around to my POV...
Look at the actions of the kids who killed at Columbine...their beliefs in Satanic cults played a major part in how they acted..I'm sure satanists could deny that these were not true Satan worshippers..however, one would have to be blind to not see the impact of satanic worship had in their lives.

Arkanin · Jan 14, 2004

Instead of pointing out that apparently naturalism may have led to substantial bloodshed just as Christianity, you could just poignantly resolve the debate by showing that it doesn't have any bearing on whether either belief system is valid or not.

Godzman · Jan 14, 2004

blixation said:
First published in:
Creation Ex Nihilo 20(3):4
June-August 1998

Those attacking Christianity sometimes point to the many religious wars and atrocities perpetrated in the name of Christ and the Church. They forget that not everyone self-labelled Christian truly follows Christ. Also, that many times more people have been killed this century, most by their own governments, than in all religious conflicts, ever.1 And this slaughter happened because of philosophies openly hostile to biblical Christianity, and flowing directly from evolutionary belief.

Nazism openly proclaimed its dependence on Darwin.2 It was right and moral for the strongest race to survive; to have pity for the weak was to defy natures laws. It is doubtful whether this brutal ideology would have so captivated the nation that gave us Bach and Luther if not for the scientific underpinning of evolution.

Communism also took evolution to its logical conclusion. If everything just evolved from natural law, then mans opinion, not Gods Word, determines what is right and wrong. If the working class can take power by armed struggle, then this is right, regardless of how many must die to bring in the socialist paradise. Communisms death toll far outranks the Nazisprobably more than 90 million worldwide.3

Some have suggested that the bloodthirsty deeds of Stalin were an aberration from the revolutions ideals. However, it was Lenin, the father of the Russian revolution, who perfected the science of mass killings, and total, merciless brutality as the ultimate method of political control.4 Evolution was the chief tool used to brainwash communisms masses into scientific atheism. If everything just evolved, then everything is at the whim of the most powerful, and there is no Maker to whom to be answerable. Hence Stalins belief that killing millions of people was no worse than mowing your lawn (grass is our cousin in evolutionary doctrine).

Maos reign of terror and lies resulted in the deaths of tens of millions. It is no coincidence that his two favorite books were by the evolutionists Darwin and Huxley. With millions dying from his forced famine, his physician records that Mao said, We have so many people we can afford to lose a few.5 His successors have since persecuted and killed hundreds of thousands more.

Such overt state evil makes it easy to forget what the Bible teaches about the evil within all of fallen mankind. Despite communisms decline, the basic philosophy of evolutionism (i.e. mans opinion, not Gods, is the ultimate authority) remains securely in control. Theyre not shooting people scrambling over the Berlin Wall anymore, but millions of people are being torn apart in their mothers womb in democratic countries.

Today, the ideology of the ultra-free market, directly related to Darwinian might is right, is on the rise. The Bible of course affirms private property, and the free and fair exchange of goods. However, at the same time it endorses civil government as a necessary restraint upon the sinful nature of mankind. Even the billionaire speculator George Soros has warned against unfettered survival of the fittest capitalism. He says What used to be a medium of exchange has usurped the place of fundamental values. Being successful is not identical with being right.6

Soross comments make sense only if there are such things as immutable values and inalienable rights. But these cannot exist unless there is a Creator God Who has revealed such truths infallibly to His creation.

Thus, the creation/evolution issue is not just about origins; it is the key to which authority source will be seen as foundational in human affairsGod, through His revealed Word, or mans opinion. May God be pleased to keep on using Creation magazine widely in spreading these vital, foundational Gospel truths.

cite: http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/3319.asp

I do not for one moment think we can link evolution as a whole to the bloodshed of this last century.

It was so much more then that, relgion to a big extent.

The Jews were hated in Nazi Germany, their faith was exclusive as is the Christian faith and the Nazi's hated that attitude. They killed the Jews off

Mike Flynn · Jan 14, 2004

napajohn said:
Well the reality is that Darwin did write the book ..that men used this belief in spreading and justifying their ideas...So now the rational is to ignore the evidence and subscribe to the idea that the crime occurs independent of the circumstances..

Huh? What you consisently fail to demonstrate napajohn, is that evolution leads in principle to the 'crime'. Hitler may have believed it, Darwin may have believed it. But the point is this: are the grounds on which that assertion is made valid ones? IOW, it doesn't matter who makes the claim napajohn, what matters is if the claim is valid.

Since microevolution is all you need to make the claim according to you, then your claim that evolution promotes racism indicates that you yourself agree with social darwinism based on science that we know to be true.

So, are you going to show us how microevolution=social darwinism or are you going to continue to quote mine dodge the very heart of this issue?

Here's the point napajohn: it may be true that Hitler and company used evolution as an excuse to kill others and seek their master race. What you have consistently dodged is whether or not evolution really tells people to do just that. You quote Darwin on social darwinism, you quote Nazi's on social darwinism...but can you quote the theory of evolution and show us how we can all come to the conclusion that racism is right?

Prove to us that you stand for something more than your agenda napajohn and address this point specifically (leaving your out of context quotes behind).

Mike Flynn · Jan 14, 2004

napajohn said:
one can sometimes easily piece together possible reasons in why a man acted as he did...Based on what has been quoted by Hitler, Himmler and other Nazi leaders, one can easily draw a conclusion that their belief of a struggle of the fittest (master race) can easily have resulted in the Jewish haulocaust..

Like I said, we also know that such a belief can easily be derived from the tenets of microevolution (according to you) napajohn....the selection of a subgroup within a population with certain specific traits...something you believe in yourself.

IOW, you are not only arguing that evolution says racism is right...but you also agreeing with that assertion based on what we know to be true about nature. What a wonderful contradiction for your Christian values napajohn.

napajohn said:
besides, we know that one of the very first things that Communist China did was to outlaw religion (often Christianity ) and preach evolution..we can see the fruit of this endeavor.

Even if this was truly based on evolution (something you are claiming), it still does not prove that evolution clearly indicates to pursue such a political policy. That is something you don't care to address.

Never mind that Christians of all varieties found plenty of reasons to hate before evolution came along. They were just hateful...it wasn't because they were believers, right?

An obvious double standard napajohn (obvious to everyone except you I suppose). Why don't you start seeking out the Christian writers and theologans who have found that evolution is the way God works? Of course, your agenda has blinded you.

Surely, the world would be nothing but roses if it weren't for evolution, right napajohn? Even if it really is the way God works?

Christian Soldier · Jan 17, 2004

"[Ernst] Haeckel was the chief apostle of evolution in Germany. Nordenskiold (1929) argues that he was even more influential than Darwin in convincing the world of the truth of evolution. Yet influential as Haeckel was among scientists, his general impact was even greater. Nordenskiold writes: "There are not many personalities who have so powerfully influenced the development of human culture--and that, too, in many different spheres--as Haeckel" (p. 505). From the 1880's onward, he focused increasing attention on the political, social, and religious implications of his biological views--a set of ideas that he amalgamated into his "monistic" philosophy....But, as Gasman argues, Haeckel's greatest influence was, ultimately, in another, tragic direction--national socialism. His evolutionary racism; his call to the German people for racial purity and unflinching devotion to a "just" state; his belief that harsh, inexorable laws of evolution ruled human civilization and nature alike, conferring upon favored races the right to dominate others; the irrational mysticism that had always stood in strange communion with his brave words about objective science--all contributed to the rise of Naziism. The Monist League that he had founded and led, though it included a wing of pacifists and leftists, made a comfortable transition to active support for Hitler."

Stephen Jay Gould, Ontogeny and Phylogeny, Belknap Press of Harvard University, Pages 77-78

Well-read individuals know that Haeckel was one of the most prominent evolutionists in history, and still the best-known and most influential biologist in German history. His influence on Hitler and the Nazis was enormous, as Gould readily admits.

Christian Soldier · Jan 18, 2004

lucaspa said:
BTW, CS, did Hitler make any moves to destroy Christianity in all the years of Nazi rule? Were ministers and priests sent to the camps? Were churches closed? Was membership in a church made a crime, like being a Jew was a crime? Not much destroying going on, was there?

"I must dwell, Your Honors, on one more category of crimes committed by the Hitlerites--the spoliation and destruction of churches, convents, and other places of religious worship.

By destroying monasteries, churches, mosques and synagogues and robbing their property, the German invaders sadistically mocked the religious feelings of the people. These blasphemous crimes assumed a general appearance in all the territories which were under German rule....You can find this extract in your document book on the back of Page 321. I quote:

"The Hitlerite invaders do not spare the religious sentiments of the believing section of the Soviet population either. They have burned, looted, blown up, and desecrated hundreds of churches on Soviet territory, including several irreplaceable monuments of ancient church architecture."...In retreating from Mozhaisk, the Germans blew up the Church of the Ascension, the Church of the Holy Trinity, and the Cathedral of Nicholas, the miracle worker. As a rule, before retreating, the Germans would drive part of the population of the villages destroyed by fire into the churches, lock them up, and then set fire to these churches.""

Counsellor Raginsky, Soviet Prosecutor, Nuremberg War Crimes Trial, February 1946
Source: Official Transcript of the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial

http://www.dmsnetworks.com/truth/34-a.htm

Nathan Poe · Jan 18, 2004

Christian Soldier said:
"[Ernst] Haeckel was the chief apostle of evolution in Germany. Nordenskiold (1929) argues that he was even more influential than Darwin in convincing the world of the truth of evolution. Yet influential as Haeckel was among scientists, his general impact was even greater. Nordenskiold writes: "There are not many personalities who have so powerfully influenced the development of human culture--and that, too, in many different spheres--as Haeckel" (p. 505). From the 1880's onward, he focused increasing attention on the political, social, and religious implications of his biological views--a set of ideas that he amalgamated into his "monistic" philosophy....But, as Gasman argues, Haeckel's greatest influence was, ultimately, in another, tragic direction--national socialism. His evolutionary racism; his call to the German people for racial purity and unflinching devotion to a "just" state; his belief that harsh, inexorable laws of evolution ruled human civilization and nature alike, conferring upon favored races the right to dominate others; the irrational mysticism that had always stood in strange communion with his brave words about objective science--all contributed to the rise of Naziism. The Monist League that he had founded and led, though it included a wing of pacifists and leftists, made a comfortable transition to active support for Hitler."

Stephen Jay Gould, Ontogeny and Phylogeny, Belknap Press of Harvard University, Pages 77-78

Well-read individuals know that Haeckel was one of the most prominent evolutionists in history, and still the best-known and most influential biologist in German history. His influence on Hitler and the Nazis was enormous, as Gould readily admits.

That would put the responsibility/blame on Haeckel, not on evolutionary theory, now wouldn't it?

Christian Soldier · Jan 18, 2004

lucaspa said:
BTW, CS, did Hitler make any moves to destroy Christianity in all the years of Nazi rule? Were ministers and priests sent to the camps? Were churches closed? Was membership in a church made a crime, like being a Jew was a crime? Not much destroying going on, was there?

"I now come to the acts of suppression in Czechoslovakia, where, the Court will recollect, the Defendant Von Neurath was Reich Protector for Bohemia and Moravia from 1939 to 1943 and was succeeded by the Defendant Frick. These acts have been summarized in an official Czech Government report. I refer to Document 998-PS, Exhibit Number USA-91, already in evidence....It describes the maltreatment of Catholic priests-487 of whom were sent to concentration camps as hostages-dissolution of religious orders, suppression of religious instruction in Czech schools, suppression of Catholic weeklies and monthlies, dissolution of the Catholic gymnastic organization of 800,000 members, and seizure of Catholic Church property. It describes the entire prohibition of the Czechoslovak National Church and confiscation of all its property in Slovakia and its crippling in Bohemia.

The report describes the severe restriction on freedom of preaching by the Protestants and the persecution and imprisonment and execution of ministers and the suppression of Protestant Church youth organizations and theological schools and shows the complete subordination and later dissolution of the Greek Orthodox Church. It states that all Evangelical education was handed over to the civil authorities and many Evangelical teachers lost their employment."

Colonel Leonard Wheeler Jr., Assistant U.S. Trial Counsel, Nuremberg War Crimes Trial, January 1946
Source: Official Nuremberg War Crimes Trial Transcripts, provided by the Avalon Project of the Yale University Law School

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/proc/01-08-46.htm

Christian Soldier · Jan 18, 2004

lucaspa said:
BTW, CS, did Hitler make any moves to destroy Christianity in all the years of Nazi rule? Were ministers and priests sent to the camps? Were churches closed? Was membership in a church made a crime, like being a Jew was a crime? Not much destroying going on, was there?

""Five priests shot; 27 priests confined in harsh concentration camps at Stutthof and in other camps; 190 priests in prison or in concentration camps at Bruczkow, Chludowo, Goruszki, Kazimierz, Biskupi, Lad, Lubin, and Puszczykowo; 35 priests seriously ill in consequence of ill-treatment; 122 parishes entirely left without priests.

"12. In the Diocese of Chelmno, where about 650 priests were installed before the war, only 3 percent were allowed to stay, the 97 percent of them were imprisoned, executed, or put into concentration camps.

"13. By January 1941 about 700 priests were killed, 3,000 were in prison or concentration camps.""

Excerpt from an official Polish government report, signed by Dr. Tadeusz Cyprian, Polish Deputy Representative on the United Nations War Crimes Commission in London, on behalf of the Polish Government and of the Main Commission for Investigation of German War Crimes in Poland. Nuremberg War Crimes Trial, January 1946

--------------------------

"The Tribunal will recall, from the previous reading of this document, the imprisonment of 2,800 priests and lay brothers in Dachau alone from 1940 to 1945, of whom all but about 800 were dead by April 1945, including an auxiliary bishop."

Colonel Leonard Wheeler Jr., Assistant U.S. Trial Counsel, Nuremberg War Crimes Trial, January 1946

Source: Official transcripts of the Nuremberg War Crimes Trial, provided by The Avalon Project of Yale University Law School

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/imt/proc/01-08-46.htm

Lucaspa is again confuted.

His above quoted statement is a grave insult to the many thousands of Protestant ministers and Catholic priests who were either murdered, or placed in prisons and concentration camps---where they did forced labor, and were frequently tortured. Many died in the concentration camps.

And don't forget the enormous number of Christian laymen murdered by the Nazis, several hundred thousand in Poland alone.

Nathan Poe · Jan 18, 2004

CS,

I (and the rest of the thread) couldn't help but notice how You quoted lucaspa's same statement three times to correct it.

Is proving lucaspa to be mistaken so crucial?

Mike Flynn · Jan 18, 2004

Nathan Poe said:
Is proving lucaspa to be mistaken so crucial?

A diversionary tactic I suspect. He seems only interested in posting his quote-mine. He consistently ignores any posts that discuss whether any of his points can be sensibly derived directly from evolution or not...which is critical to his position.

Have people have used evolution as an excuse to hate? I'm sure some have. Have people used evolution as an excuse for racism? Probably.

But the point has been made many times that Christianity has been used as a means to the same ends by many so-called 'believers'. I suppose we could well start a new thread called 'the blood stained millenia of theism'. Of course Christianity does not call for attrocity. Neither does evolution. This reveals the double-standard type of judements that we've seen on this thread (and others like it). The bottom line is that neither racism nor hatred nor genocide is promoted, or encouraged by the scientific theory of evolution.

IOW, this thread should be renamed: "Blood stained century of racism and hatred', since evolution is not the root of such things.

Oddly, Christian theology actually has a very different idea about the root of all evil. Another point that seems completely missed by the likes of CS and company.

Now, usually when I post something like this in response to CS, napajohn chimes in with more of his quote-mine on social darwinism. Lets see if the circular arguments are still running their laps.

The blood-stained century of evolution

PRABOB!

Senior Member

Veteran

Active Member

Active Member

Senior Member

Stick with the King!

Active Member

Senior Member

Human

Peace

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

QUESTION EVOLUTION

QUESTION EVOLUTION

Well-Known Member

QUESTION EVOLUTION

QUESTION EVOLUTION

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

The blood-stained century of evolution