0
   

Genetic Death: What the Nazis Saw in Darwinism

 
 
Reply Sun 25 Nov, 2007 10:53 pm
Huge events like world wars have many causes; not the least amongst the causes of WW-II in particular and of the ideologies which it was fought over, was the idea of viewing ones neighbor as a meat byproduct of random events rather than as a fellow child of God, which had previously been the case.

Nonetheless for all the noise we hear about evolution, the way that "natural selection" is actually supposed to work remains a mystery to most people. A clear understanding of this idea of "genetic death" goes a certain way towards explaining some of the nazi-era thinking about racial policies. The idea is found mainly in treatises on population genetics, particularly in the works of J.B.S. Haldane and the question of the "Haldane Dilemma".

There are two things conspicuously missing in the evolutionites' picture.

One is the missing intermediate fossils; two is the missing intermediate "people".

In other words, aside from the fact that Darwinism demands that the vast bulk of ALL fossils be intermediate types and none have ever been found, there is the question of why, if apes or "ape-like creatures(TM)" evolved into humans, we do not see creatures of every stage of such a process walking around today.

The basic answer, according to evolutionite dogma, is that natural selection kills off the old stock at every stage of such a process as one "beneficial mutation" after another after another is substituted into the herd.

You can picture this as a pipeline or tunnel of sorts, with apes walking in at one end and humans walking out the other, and picture the pipeline made in ten-foot segments, with some sort of a meat-grinder at the junction of each pair of segments. The old stock does not get past the meat grinder at any one stage of the process.

The thing has to work this way because the vast bulk of all mutations are harmful or fatal, and that means you'd be being exceedingly generous to admit that one mutation in every 10,000 or so might be "beneficial". In fact the normal English term for 'mutation' is "birth defect" and you might have noticed that the women going door to door for the Mothers' March of Dimes are ALWAYS collecting for research to PREVENT mutations and not to CAUSE them...

Nonetheless the claim which evolutionites make is that evolution is driven by a combination of chance mutations and "natural selection". Now, this also means that you cannot have multiple mutations spreading through the herd at one time in the process; the bulk of the mutations spreading around would be harmful/fatal and wipe out the herd.

That means that the only way this process can work at all is for one new trait (beneficial mutation) to get passed entirely through the herd, and then the next, and the next, and the next; thus the idea of a pipeline in ten foot segments, which does not allow the old stock past the gate at any one segment.

According to the theory, "genetic death" is the agency of all this. A "genetic death" occurs when somebody dies without heirs, i.e. takes himself out of the gene pool. The theory of evolution requires that there be a "cost" of substituting a genetic change into the herd and that this cost be in terms of genetic death. J.B.S. Haldane came up with a figure of 30 genetic deaths per substitution which was as favorable to evolution as he could get, and that means that for either you or me to get the good "beneficial mutation" AND THE WHOLE PIPELINE SCHEME WORK, 30 people have to die without heirs.

This dying out without heirs is supposedly CAUSED by the supposed advantage and selection pressure of the "beneficial mutation" involved at each step; this is the thing which weeds out all those not having the beneficial mutation at each step. In other words, the introduction of each new "beneficial mutation" causes all of those not having it to die out from jealousy and/or the inability to compete with those having it.

If that sounds stupid, it's probably because it IS stupid; nonetheless that's the way the theory supposedly works.

Haldane also figured that historically, when you include every sort of gentic death which the human birth rate has to compensate for, our species has had an excess birth rate capacity of something like ten percent, meaning that it would take 300 generations on average for each 30 turnovers of the population involved in substituting a single genetic change through the whole ape===>human evolving population.

Nobody had ever tried to quantify the whole thing before. The basic result indicates that it would take quadrillions of years to evolve from ape to man. That is the so-called "Haldane Dilemma".

This basic pipeline/genetic-death scheme is also the thing which Hitler and the other nazis were seeing in evolutionism. They were simply taking Charles Darwin at his word and, granted they were a bunch of assholes and were guilty of a whole lot of ****, they were NOT guilty of any sort of a breakdown in basic logic. They were assuming that if the rise of a new and supposedly better racial stock GUARANTEED the extinction of the old stock, then they were not doing the members of the old stock any favors by prolonging the agony. Similarly, when asked about the firebombing raids over Japan, Curtis LeMay replied that you're not doing a dog with a cancerous tail any favors by cutting the tail off in slices.

Hitler and others were assuming that Jews and gypsies and what not are not going to make the cut one way or another for this pass through the evolution meatgrinder, and that they were not doing them any favors leaving them around to a slow and unpleasant group demise.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 1,664 • Replies: 35
No top replies

 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 12:26 am
Hitler and the Nazis didn't mention Darwin at all in any of the writings but followed Ernst Haeckel's "theory", the ...
Quote:
"recapitulation theory" claiming that an individual organism's biological development, or ontogeny, parallels and summarizes its species' entire evolutionary development, or phylogeny: "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny"


Especially they used
Quote:
Haeckel's broader philosophy of "Monism," which they used as justification for racism, nationalism and social Darwinism.
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 12:49 am
Gunga, You got Darwin mixed up with Nietzsche.

The thread should be; Genetic Death: What the Nazis Saw in Nietzsche.

The Ubermensch. The will to power. Mans victory over morality. Kill because you can and because you can doing is your reward.

Like the christians the Nazis were nihilist.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 01:06 am
The Nazis only 'borrowed' the term 'Übermensch' from Nietzsche's writings.

Amigo wrote:
Like the christians the Nazis were nihilist.


You seem to use terms without understanding them.
0 Replies
 
Amigo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 01:23 am
You don't think the Nazis used or subscribed to Nietzsches philosophies against morality, altruism and the belief system of the Jews and the christians as a tool of oppression over the Germans (nazis).

I have been reading Nietzsche and it seems very clear to me where Nazi ideology came from even if they did misunderstand Nietzsche.

It seems like they felt they were being inslaved by the morality of a foreign god and that they were justified by nature and their own will to control there own destiny.

Why would you volunteer to be a slave when you could overpower your master?

Search "Nietzsche Nazis" on google. I just did.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 07:27 am
Darwin is easily quoted and incorrectly applied to all sorts of movements that merely wish to cover their own aversion to fact.

Weve gone over all this with gunga so many times that we could just quote post numbers. Its apparent that he hasnt learned anything new in 3 or more years. Im certain that he, like Real Life, wait to bring out these tired old passages every 6 months or so whenever there are new members on the board.
0 Replies
 
OGIONIK
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 08:24 am
Re: Genetic Death: What the Nazis Saw in Darwinism
gungasnake wrote:
Huge events like world wars have many causes; not the least amongst the causes of WW-II in particular and of the ideologies which it was fought over, was the idea of viewing ones neighbor as a meat byproduct of random events rather than as a fellow child of God, which had previously been the case.

Nonetheless for all the noise we hear about evolution, the way that "natural selection" is actually supposed to work remains a mystery to most people. A clear understanding of this idea of "genetic death" goes a certain way towards explaining some of the nazi-era thinking about racial policies. The idea is found mainly in treatises on population genetics, particularly in the works of J.B.S. Haldane and the question of the "Haldane Dilemma".

There are two things conspicuously missing in the evolutionites' picture.

One is the missing intermediate fossils; two is the missing intermediate "people".

In other words, aside from the fact that Darwinism demands that the vast bulk of ALL fossils be intermediate types and none have ever been found, there is the question of why, if apes or "ape-like creatures(TM)" evolved into humans, we do not see creatures of every stage of such a process walking around today.

The basic answer, according to evolutionite dogma, is that natural selection kills off the old stock at every stage of such a process as one "beneficial mutation" after another after another is substituted into the herd.

You can picture this as a pipeline or tunnel of sorts, with apes walking in at one end and humans walking out the other, and picture the pipeline made in ten-foot segments, with some sort of a meat-grinder at the junction of each pair of segments. The old stock does not get past the meat grinder at any one stage of the process.

The thing has to work this way because the vast bulk of all mutations are harmful or fatal, and that means you'd be being exceedingly generous to admit that one mutation in every 10,000 or so might be "beneficial". In fact the normal English term for 'mutation' is "birth defect" and you might have noticed that the women going door to door for the Mothers' March of Dimes are ALWAYS collecting for research to PREVENT mutations and not to CAUSE them...

Nonetheless the claim which evolutionites make is that evolution is driven by a combination of chance mutations and "natural selection". Now, this also means that you cannot have multiple mutations spreading through the herd at one time in the process; the bulk of the mutations spreading around would be harmful/fatal and wipe out the herd.

That means that the only way this process can work at all is for one new trait (beneficial mutation) to get passed entirely through the herd, and then the next, and the next, and the next; thus the idea of a pipeline in ten foot segments, which does not allow the old stock past the gate at any one segment.

According to the theory, "genetic death" is the agency of all this. A "genetic death" occurs when somebody dies without heirs, i.e. takes himself out of the gene pool. The theory of evolution requires that there be a "cost" of substituting a genetic change into the herd and that this cost be in terms of genetic death. J.B.S. Haldane came up with a figure of 30 genetic deaths per substitution which was as favorable to evolution as he could get, and that means that for either you or me to get the good "beneficial mutation" AND THE WHOLE PIPELINE SCHEME WORK, 30 people have to die without heirs.

This dying out without heirs is supposedly CAUSED by the supposed advantage and selection pressure of the "beneficial mutation" involved at each step; this is the thing which weeds out all those not having the beneficial mutation at each step. In other words, the introduction of each new "beneficial mutation" causes all of those not having it to die out from jealousy and/or the inability to compete with those having it.

If that sounds stupid, it's probably because it IS stupid; nonetheless that's the way the theory supposedly works.

Haldane also figured that historically, when you include every sort of gentic death which the human birth rate has to compensate for, our species has had an excess birth rate capacity of something like ten percent, meaning that it would take 300 generations on average for each 30 turnovers of the population involved in substituting a single genetic change through the whole ape===>human evolving population.

Nobody had ever tried to quantify the whole thing before. The basic result indicates that it would take quadrillions of years to evolve from ape to man. That is the so-called "Haldane Dilemma".

This basic pipeline/genetic-death scheme is also the thing which Hitler and the other nazis were seeing in evolutionism. They were simply taking Charles Darwin at his word and, granted they were a bunch of **** and were guilty of a whole lot of ****, they were NOT guilty of any sort of a breakdown in basic logic. They were assuming that if the rise of a new and supposedly better racial stock GUARANTEED the extinction of the old stock, then they were not doing the members of the old stock any favors by prolonging the agony. Similarly, when asked about the firebombing raids over Japan, Curtis LeMay replied that you're not doing a dog with a cancerous tail any favors by cutting the tail off in slices.

Hitler and others were assuming that Jews and gypsies and what not are not going to make the cut one way or another for this pass through the evolution meatgrinder, and that they were not doing them any favors leaving them around to a slow and unpleasant group demise.


THEY WASTED AN ENTIRE COUNTRIES RESOURCES ON DESTROYING RACES THAT THE KIDS WHO PICKED ON POOR OL HITLER IN SCHOOL WERE DESCENDED FROM. I GUESS A JEW RIPPED HITLER OFF AND HE NEVER SHOOK THE GRUDGE. OR HE TEASED HIM, WHO CARES.

THEY WOULD BE THE ONES WHO DIDNT MAKE IT THROUGH THE GRINDER, THEREFORE THEY ARE DEFYING THEIR OWN LOGIC BY BEING IDIOTIC AND IGNORANT AND THINKING THEY SHOULD PASS ON THEIR GENES, RIGHT?
PARADOX, OXYMORON? WHAT?!?!?!?!?!
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 09:47 am
Those who signed the punitive treaty at the end of WW1 created Hitler. And they must have known that they would do. So why did they do it?

A peace like the one after WW11 would have had Hitler painting houses Nietzsche or no Nietzsche, Darwin or no Darwin.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 09:54 am
That's got me wondering.

Have the American people had punitive debt enforced on them?

Why would the young voluntarily repay it when they didn't run it up. The injustice is bound to find a leader as a prism finds an apex and radical measures are mandatory past a certain point.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 11:13 am
Re: Genetic Death: What the Nazis Saw in Darwinism
OGIONIK wrote:

THEY WASTED AN ENTIRE COUNTRIES RESOURCES ON DESTROYING RACES THAT THE KIDS WHO PICKED ON POOR OL HITLER IN SCHOOL WERE DESCENDED FROM. I GUESS A JEW RIPPED HITLER OFF AND HE NEVER SHOOK THE GRUDGE. OR HE TEASED HIM, WHO CARES.

THEY WOULD BE THE ONES WHO DIDNT MAKE IT THROUGH THE GRINDER, THEREFORE THEY ARE DEFYING THEIR OWN LOGIC BY BEING IDIOTIC AND IGNORANT AND THINKING THEY SHOULD PASS ON THEIR GENES, RIGHT?
PARADOX, OXYMORON? WHAT?!?!?!?!?!


Hey, I never said any of this **** made sense; all I'm claiming is that this is what was going on in those people's minds 70 years ago and it starts with a super dickhead by the name of Chuck Darwin.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 03:01 pm
Re: Genetic Death: What the Nazis Saw in Darwinism
gungasnake wrote:
Huge events like world wars have many causes; not the least amongst the causes of WW-II in particular and of the ideologies which it was fought over, was the idea of viewing ones neighbor as a meat byproduct of random events rather than as a fellow child of God, which had previously been the case.

There will always be a disturbed subset of the population who will twist the realities of the world into a rationalization for promoting their own agenda... take you for example.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 04:33 pm
And please take him very far away.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 05:59 pm
Dear Settin Aah-aah,

You are a history expert.

Explain to us all on the Abled 2 Know principle what you think would have happened had punitive damages enough to drive a great nation into despair not been levied at the end of WW1.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 06:15 pm
The Germans didn't pay the reparations. But i'm not surprised to see you peddling Nazi propaganda more than 60 years after their fearless leader committed suicide.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 06:28 pm
Cheap shot.

Demonstrates intellectual bankruptcy.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 06:32 pm
There's a name for it but it's too tiresome to remember.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 06:36 pm
You've got a gall to allege intellectual bankruptcy in anyone else. All you do here is piddle about and pull your intellectual pecker, indulging in masturbatory fantasies about the excellence of your superior understanding. Gutter politicians and Ludendorf and his cronies were condemning the terms of the Allies peace treaty before the Versailles Treaty had been completed and presented publicly. It became an axiom of right-wing political furor in Germany that they were being bankrupted by the vengeful French before a single of pfennig of reparations had ever been demanded of Germany. I am not suprised to see you peddling that horseshit--history is high on the list of subjects about which you have consistently demonstrated complete ignorance.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 06:45 pm
Come on Settin'. They were having to pay workers every hour inflation was going that fast.

Are you claiming that there was another cause besides the treaty. German incompetence for example. Saturn being ascendent. Something of that nature.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 07:24 pm
German industry and agriculture had collapsed before the war ended. Ruinous inflation began and accelerated beginning in 1918. The Germans were already on the brink of starvation when the armistice was signed in November, 1918. Hebert Hoover took charge of the effort to feed central and eastern Europe in 1919-20, at the behest of and the expense of the victorious allied powers. I have discussed this in detail in another thread in which a member alleged that wars are produced by economic inflation and eminent economic collapse. In the case of Germany in 1918, that would be a case of confusing cause and effect.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Nov, 2007 07:31 pm
A noted German historian has pointed out the origin of accelerating inflation in Germany's shaky financial world as early as 1914. See The German Inflation, 1914-1923. Causes and Effects in International Perspective, Carl-Ludwig Holtfrerich, Berlin, de Gruyter, 1986.

I have only referred to the period from the beginning of 1918, because that is the period in which "run-away" inflation can be said to have begun.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Evolution 101 - Discussion by gungasnake
Typing Equations on a PC - Discussion by Brandon9000
The Future of Artificial Intelligence - Discussion by Brandon9000
The well known Mind vs Brain. - Discussion by crayon851
Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter' - Discussion by oralloy
Blue Saturn - Discussion by oralloy
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Discussion by gungasnake
DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Genetic Death: What the Nazis Saw in Darwinism
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 11/05/2024 at 05:05:15