Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
As the article itself explains, the opinions attributed to Darwin simply show that he was a man of his time.
History disagrees with you on that.
For one thing, we know that pale skin among our species came about over 10,000 years after the last Neanderthal and Denisovan died.
Thus, hybridizing with them is not how our species attained all its color variations. Additionally, we continue to experience mutations in various aspects of our physiology, and genetic drift varies heavily from country to country.
I wasn't claiming that he was racist, only commenting that it would be neither shocking nor significant if he was, given the time period he lived in.Way off the mark. As I noted in my prior post: "Darwin's family for at least three generations and Darwin himself were significant players in abolotionist movement. Describing Darwin as a racist is the logical equivalent of describing Hitler as a humanitarian!"
For a comprehensive dismissal of the notion he was racist I recommend a reading of Darwin's Sacred Cause by Adrian Desmond and James Moore. This deeply researched work is thoroughly convincing.
-_- pale skin originated in Europe, dude. Heck, the first humans to arrive in Europe were pretty dark skinned, as we can tell from corpses, and light skin first shows up in the Northernmost parts of Europe. Nowhere near Lake Van.Not so since History shows that ALL traits of modern Humans first appeared just SW of Lake Van, Turkey, where the Ark arrived bringing Human intelligence to this planet of the descendants of the common ancestor of Apes. Map: Fertile Cresent, 9000 to 4500 BCE
Source for your claim that he thought that?Was Darwin correct in thinking that whites/pale skin were more intelligent than other groups?
That's not an official term, and kinds is so ambiguous I've heard it be as broad as the order level of classification and as specific as subspecies.It's called descent with modification within His (Jesus) kinds no matter how many godless evolutionists tell you that it's evolution. Amen?
That's not an official term, and kinds is so ambiguous I've heard it be as broad as the order level of classification and as specific as subspecies.
No - whatever Darwin's opinions were (and I suspect your sources are biased), his theory of evolution is testable, has been tested in many different ways, has not been falsified, and has been developed into a theory of enormous scope and explanatory power. We are indeed evolved apes, regardless of your god beliefs.Could be, but when one's faith in evolution was first preached by Darwin and since he tried to show that whites were the most intelligent, you should beware his evol theology. All he did was change God's descent with modification into the filthy word "evolution". Since then, his followers have begun teaching our children, that they are nothing but evolved Apes, instead of God's children.
I see little moral difference between genocide as a result of dehumanizing the out-group, and genocide as a result of stereotyping them as not being 'God's children'. Religious or secular, it's equally abhorrent and inexcusable.It makes it easier for people like Hitler to murder them since they are little more than dogs, unless they are part of some personal ethnic elite group.
No - whatever Darwin's opinions were (and I suspect your sources are biased), his theory of evolution is testable, has been tested in many different ways, has not been falsified, and has been developed into a theory of enormous scope and explanatory power. We are indeed evolved apes, regardless of your god beliefs.
Evolution is just a word; it has nothing to do with God beliefs.False, since evolutionists changed descent with modification into the filthy word "evolution" in an attempt to eliminate God from His creation.
Oooh, scary!
Evolution is just a word; it has nothing to do with God beliefs.
Evolution is certainly godless, but the theory is an explanation of the empirical observations; it has no agenda to promote anything, let alone Humanism (really, Humanism?), and - being godless - makes no reference to GodEvolution is a godless word designed to promote Humanism above God's Holy Word. Those who wish to post the truth don't call God a Liar and reject the untrue, incomplete, unsupportable Lies of those who have Faith in godless evolution.
You're hearing your own hyperbolic rhetoric. It's not out there in the real world, you're making it up.Reminds me of Trump.
Evolution is certainly godless,
but the theory is an explanation of the empirical observations; it has no agenda to promote anything, let alone Humanism (really, Humanism?), and - being godless - makes no reference to God
Nope; it ignores all but empirical evidence.Amen, like other scientific theories, it rejects God's Truth in Genesis.
The ToE says nothing about the origin of life - it deals only with explaining the diversity of, and relationships between, living things. There is, as yet, no theory on the origin of life.The entire theory is incomplete since its premise, falsely assumes that life began on planet Earth.
The ToE says nothing about the origin of life - it deals only with explaining the diversity of, and relationships between, living things.
There is, as yet, no theory on the origin of life.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?