0
   

From Darwin to Hitler

 
 
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 10:16 am
There are four things the average person needs to know about evolution:

1. It's junk science, which has been massively disproven over the last century.

2. As junk science goes, it's dangerous junk science. It was the major philosophical corner stone of naziism, communism, and the various eugenics programs in western countries.

3. It is utterly incompatible with Christianity or any other meaningful religion.

4. It is part and parcel of certain agendas which may or may not be of any use to you; individual mileage may vary.

Newt Gingrich once described the problem with evolution and ethics very succinctly, noting that the question of whether a man viewed his neighbor as a fellow child of God or as a meat byproduct of random events, simply has to affect human relationships.

Serious and thoughtful evolutionists like Sir Arthur Keith have noted that evolution and Christianity are utterly incompatible:

http://www.designeduniverse.com/evolutionandethics.htm

And now, new printed material on the topic is beginning to emerge:

From Darwin to Hitler, by Richard Weikart:

http://www.nrbookservice.com/BookPage.asp?prod_cd=c6573

http://www.townhall.com/bookclub/weikart.html

Quote:
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 3,219 • Replies: 57
No top replies

 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 12:36 pm
Did you ever finish elementary school? No wonder this country is in trouble! Anyone denying the obvious, like evolution, ought to lose his privilege to vote. No wonder global warming and pollution are denied as realities: just too subtle for people like this.

Of course, we all know the snake just wants to rattle our chains. he's probably some kid in a special needs class, logging on to a computer while the teacher is working with another student. Either that, or he's someone from the WWII generation who never understood why time in school is wasted on science.

Hope bi-polar bear is tuning in to this one!
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 12:37 pm
If evolution doesn't exist, then how do animals adapt? Magic?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 12:52 pm
plainoldme

Quote:
Either that, or he's someone from the WWII generation who never understood why time in school is wasted on science.


Hey watch your mouth. First you insult the people of the greatest generation by implying they were stupid and then even more of an insult try to equate the snake with them. Hey he is your burden don't try to shift the blame.. Evil or Very Mad
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:04 pm
Re: From Darwin to Hitler
gungasnake wrote:
There are four things the average person needs to know about evolution:


Oh brother, here we go *AGAIN* with this nonsense.
0 Replies
 
Etruscia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:11 pm
"It is utterly incompatible with Christianity or any other meaningful religion. "

you say this like its a bad thing.

" It's junk science, which has been massively disproven over the last century."

disproven, then reproven, then disproven, then reproven. Im waiting for the results. Considering that they have created proto-life in the lab, and are able to predict that very simple forms of life would eventually form is quite promising.

http://www.ictp.trieste.it/~sci_info/News_from_ICTP/News_106/features_Origins.html

And if you think evolution is "junk science" whats your alternative?? Creation Science. Thats a laugh.

Major philosophical cornerstone of Communism?

Considering that it was corrupt and bloodthirsty leaders, which killed many people, not communism the ideal itself, i dont think negative connotation on it is neccessary.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:12 pm
plainoldme wrote:
Did you ever finish elementary school?


Violation of A2K TOS reported.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:16 pm
Bella Dea wrote:
If evolution doesn't exist, then how do animals adapt? Magic?


There IS such a thing as MICROEVOLUTION, or adaptation, in which animals adapt in order to better function in their normal way. The includes the familiar cases of moths changing colors, the differences Darwin noted in various kinds of finches etc. etc. Nonetheless no such change involves a change into a new KIND of animal.

Aside from that there is evidence that new kinds of animals HAVE arisen at various points in the past, nonetheless in all cases they arose suddenly from nowhere with no tracable ancestry involving other kinds of animals, and the evidence indicates they were either created from scratch or retro-engineered somehow or other, i.e. that intelligent processes were at work and not the mindless kinds of processes which evolutionists believe in.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:18 pm
au -- Don't take it personally. There are many older men who have trouble speaking properly (e.g., pronounce the second person plural as "youse") who launch into tirades against the current education system at the drop of a hat.

belladea -- These people think change is a bad thing!

Oooh! The snake has me shaking in my boots! If the snake were an adult male, he would not consider a simple little statement like


plainoldme wrote:
Did you ever finish elementary school?

a violation of anything. Balanced with the rant about Hitler and whatever, he just makes himself look foolish and simple.
0 Replies
 
Etruscia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:21 pm
"arose suddenly from nowhere"

could you give me some examples. Intelligent design, sure. The thing about that is you cannot offer any sort of proof. Even if evolution is completely disproven (which it wont be) we can just assume intelligent design, because there is no proof and no way to quantify it.
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:22 pm
snake,
They are still discovering life; in the rainforest, in the ocean..... They are finding species they have never seen before. How can you say they can't find traceable ancestry? It might be there, just hasn't been discovered.
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:24 pm
they arose suddenly from nowhere with no tracable ancestry involving other kinds of animals

Oh! I forgot about that! Did you know that if you put a dirty rag into a jar, added some grain, covered the jar and waited a week or two, you'd make mice?

Do you know that if you leave meat on the counter for a few days, that you will make flies?
0 Replies
 
plainoldme
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:31 pm
When I was in sixth grade (academic 1958-59) in a Catholic School in Dearborn, Michigan, a member of my class asked our teacher, Sister Thomasine, if it was alright to believe in evolution. She said, "As long as you believe that at some point, God took the smartest male ape and breathed a soul into him and the most beautiful female ape and breathed a soul into her, of course it is alright."

Well, her answer, while sexist (okay, it was the 1950s), answered what he meant to ask, which was, "Is it alright to believe men descended from apes?" For a traditionally religious person, it is an appropriate and, if the person is at all sensible, a comforting answer.

That people today are still in a tizzy about evolution and human descent from apes is nuts. Just unbelievable to me.

I read parts of Descent of Man and Origin of the Species shortly thereafter.

When I saw the PBS show about kids at Wheaton College worrying about losing their immortal soul if they study biology, I was dismayed and saddened.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:31 pm
Etruscia wrote:
"arose suddenly from nowhere"

could you give me some examples.


All life forms are examples of this:

"The history of most fossil species includes two features inconsistent with
gradualism: 1. Stasis. Most species exhibit no directional change during
their tenure on earth. They appear in the fossil record looking much the
same as when they disappear ... 2. Sudden Appearance. In any local area, a
species does not arise gradually by the steady transformation of its
ancestors; it appears all at once and 'fully formed'."

Stephen Jay Gould, Prof of Geology and
Paleontology, Harvard University
Natural History, 86(5):13, 1977
0 Replies
 
Etruscia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:43 pm
I meant some animal exapmles . . . regardless;

Sudden Appearance, what does that mean. In geological terms, sudden appearance could mean over a 100, 000 years, which is completely believable. As for the stasis, i quesiton whether certainc changes which may have happened can be derived from the fossils.

I assume that the fossils we find exponentially less, than the number of animals that existed. In that effect, i would suggest that we only have a small number of pieces in the puzzle as a whole.

One could suggest that animals evolve faster than anticipated when in certain conditions. That a sudden appearance only seems like a sudden appearance, but is in fact a rapid adaptation to changing conditions.
0 Replies
 
Rex the Wonder Squirrel
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:49 pm
Thanks a lot snake. Basically you've flushed yourself down the toilet on this one, spouting off with really no facts and just adding fuel to the evolutionists' fire. No wonder they all laugh at "Creation science" and stuff-- guys like you and Bib are the ones trying to back it up.

Just to the evolutionists in this thread, you know there are Creationists out there, like me, who actually can carry an intelligent discussion about Creation vs. Evolution using science and hard facts. rosborne'll tell you-- we've had some relatively nice conversations in the "Evolution- Who wants to know?" thread, haven't we? Aside from Bib. Razz
0 Replies
 
Etruscia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:55 pm
hmm, well. Evolutionist is a loose term at best, i dont believe in it. I just accept it as the best, well proven explanation for how things are as they are.

Anyways, i have found little to nothing of unrefutable creationist evidence supporting they're view, and most of it is supported by their own dogma. So it is only self-serving.

Ps. " Guns don't kill people; Abortion kills people"

This makes no sense. If guns dont kill people, then in effect abortion doesnt kill. Both are only a means to kill. I say means to kill, not kill people because whether an abortion is killing a person is another debate which i wouldnt like to get into.
0 Replies
 
Bella Dea
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 01:58 pm
Etruscia, I was thinking that the two can't be connected in any way. Except that they are means. It doesn't make any sense to me either.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 02:05 pm
Rex the Wonder Squirrel wrote:
Just to the evolutionists in this thread, you know there are Creationists out there, like me, who actually can carry an intelligent discussion about Creation vs. Evolution using science and hard facts. rosborne'll tell you-- we've had some relatively nice conversations in the "Evolution- Who wants to know?" thread, haven't we? Aside from Bib. Razz


If I remember correctly, you do seem to have a better grip on reality than many other "creationists" I've heard from. But I'm not sure we ever actually agreed on anything Smile

I prefer discussions which contain actual fact, rather than the rhetoric and cut/paste tactics we've seen from Gunga and Bib, so if you have a claim you want to debate, I will look forward to it.
0 Replies
 
Etruscia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 Feb, 2005 02:10 pm
Same here, same here.
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. » From Darwin to Hitler
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 02/21/2020 at 04:03:27