Evolution is racist!!!!! (Page 12)

MJ59: Yeah he was a bit disappointing tbh, seemed rather wishy washy

MJ59: Oh he's long gone now
PJ Keating

MJ59: He's doin ok!

MJ59: As ya do!

zeffur: Nothing like those who love to hate...

MJ59:

zeffur: Gn

MiataMike: Why do people want to stir the pot ?

zeffur: It helps to keep bits from sticking to the bottom of the pot?

MJ59: Claim CA005:
Evolution promotes racism.
Source:
Morris, Henry M. 1985. Scientific Creationism. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, p. 179.
Response:

When properly understood, evolution refutes racism. Before Darwin, people used typological thinking for living things, considering different plants and animals to be their distinct "kinds." This gave rise to a misleading conception of human races, in which different races are thought of as separate and distinct. Darwinism helps eliminate typological thinking and with it the basis for racism.

Genetic studies show that humans are remarkably homogeneous genetically, so all humans are only one biological race. Evolution does not teach racism; it teaches the very opposite.

Racism is thousands of years older than the theory of evolution, and its prevalence has probably decreased since Darwin's day; certainly slavery is much less now. That is the opposite of what we would expect if evolution promotes racism.

Darwin himself was far less racist than most of his contemporaries.

Although creationism is not inherently racist, it is based upon and inseparable from religious bigotry, and religious bigotry is no less hateful and harmful than racism.

Racism historically has been closely associated with creationism (Moore 2004), as is evident in the following examples:

George McCready Price, who is to young-earth creationism what Darwin is to evolution, was much more racist than Darwin. He wrote,

The poor little fellow who went to the south
Got lost in the forests dank;
His skin grew black, as the fierce sun beat
And scorched his hair with its tropic heat,
And his mind became a blank.

In The Phantom of Organic Evolution, he referred to Negroes and Mongolians as degenerate humans (Numbers 1992, 85).

During much of the long history of apartheid in South Africa, evolution was not allowed to be taught. The Christian National Education system, formalized in 1948 and accepted as national policy from 1967 to 1993, stated, among other things,

that white children should 'receive a separate education from black children to prepare them for their respective superior and inferior positions in South African social and economic life, and all education should be based on Christian National principles' (Esterhuysen and Smith 1998).

The policy excluded the concept of evolution, taught a version of history that negatively characterized non-whites, and made Bible education, including the teaching of creationism, and religious assemblies compulsory (Esterhuysen and Smith 1998).

The Bible Belt in the southern United States fought hardest to maintain slavery.

Henry Morris, of the Institute for Creation Research, has in the past read racism into his interpretation of the Bible:

Sometimes the Hamites, especially the Negroes, have even become actual slaves to the others. Possessed of a genetic character concerned mainly with mundane, practical matters, they have often eventually been displaced by the intellectual and philosophical acumen of the Japhethites and the religious zeal of the Semites (Morris 1976, 241).

None of this matters to the science of evolution.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA005.html

zeffur: Evolution is a 100% complete fraud. It is nothing more than a biased & bogus pseudoscientific conjob that was created for atheists & other nitwits to have a false belief system to cling to in vain.... Anyone who isn't intelligent enough to realize that is insane, irrational, dishonest, &/or delusional...

kittybobo34: Zef,, if the above is true, One would have to explain the 10's of 1000's of fossils that say otherwise, the fact that none of todays species are found in he past, the evidence of 5 mass extinctions , the Evidence of a very old planet of 4.5 billion years, the Evidence within DNA that shows a past evolution, the Evidence of island life that we know didn't start until the island was there, and the variety of new species on those islands, Evidence of present day species that have diverged, Evidence of life in isolated places like Australia where life has evolved in a totally different direction... it all fits the TOE

zeffur: re: "kittybobo34: Zef,, if the above is true, One would have to explain the 10's of 1000's of fossils that say otherwise,..."
______
Fossils don't 'say' anything. People evaluate & misinterpret what THEY often incorrectly think the fossils indicate.

re: "the fact that none of todays species are found in he past, the evidence of 5 mass extinctions"

That ^^ is an assumption--not a fact. Different life could have been brought to & seeded on earth many times in the past. That would easily explain what you wrongly assume nature magically has the ability to do--but can't actually do & never has done because it has NO intelligence to 'evolve' anything. Jumping to the conclusion that life 'evolved' when there is no genuine evidence that evolution has ever happened, is not science---it's just unwise & silly.

re: "the Evidence of a very old planet of 4.5 billion years..."

That ^^ is another assumption--not a fact. We really don't know how old earth is. We've already been over the various problems with radiometric dating that make it questionable in many ways.

re: "the Evidence within DNA that shows a past evolution...?

You can't look in DNA & arrive at such a conclusion. Arbitrarily deciding that certain groups/patterns of nucleotides means whatever you choose to pretend they mean doesn't make it true...it makes it blackbox DNA misinterpretation/manipulation--nothing more--as you cannot prove ANY of your conclusions (opinions) are valid/true in any way whatsoever.

re: "the Evidence of island life that we know didn't start until the island was there, and the variety of new species on those islands..."

Again, that ^^ is an assumption--not a fact. Different life could have been brought to & seeded on earth many times in the past. That would easily explain it. Jumping to the conclusion that life 'evolved' when there is no genuine evidence that evolution has ever happened, is not science---it's unwise & silly.

re: "Evidence of present day species that have diverged..."

That ^^ is again an assumption & arbitrary belief--not a proven fact. You cannot actually prove ANY kind has actually 'diverged' into another other kind of creature. Pretending it is true doesn't prove it is true nor does it provide ANY compelling/convincing evidence with a cogent explanation that substantiates/verifies such imaginary beliefs are valid/true in any way.

re: "Evidence of life in isolated places like Australia where life has evolved in a totally different direction... it all fits the TOE"

That ^^ is another assumption--not a fact. Isolated unique life doesn't automatically mean 'evolution'. IF you look at all of the extinct creatures in the fossil record, you will find plenty of unique & isolated (in the region that they lived--which isn't all over earth) creatures that existed & then ceased to exist. All an island does is provide suitable protection from predators which increases the likelihood of survival for a longer period of time. A unique & island isolated organism can also become extinct. There is only one thing interesting about island isolation--and that is that it can reduce predators to a smaller set than in other land areas. There is ZERO credible evidence that ANY island isolated kind has ever 'evolved' into any other island isolated kind. Darwin's finches have been & will always be finches--they aren't becoming ANY other kind of creature & there is ZERO sound basis to show otherwise. Extrapolating based on your goofy atheistic (naturalistic/materialistic) beliefs is NOT proof of ANY kind nor is it compelling/convincing evidence with a cogent explanation that shows it is true in any way whatsoever...

MJ59: Obtuse twat lol

zeffur: re: "MJ59: Obtuse twat lol"

And that ^^ is all you have to offer because you have ZERO proof & ZERO compelling/convincing evidence with a cogent explanation to substantiate/verify that your biased & bogus evo chump beliefs are valid/true in any way...

You aren't fooling anyone except for yourself. Deluding yourself doesn't make evolution true--it just makes you a worse person...

MJ59: Yep, you're a genius, all the scientists in the world are dummies and evo chumps.

Denigrating and deriding folk for having an understanding of evolution, which you don't, doesn't make you right, just a worse person.

zeffur: Still no proof or compelling/convincing scientifically verified evidence that substantiates your evo chump beliefs are valid/true...

The truth is that I understand evolution better than you will ever understand it. The difference between you & I is that I am not gullible enough to accept unproven & unprovable assumptions, whereas you apparently aren't honest or intelligent enough to admit that they are not verified (valid/true) facts.

tick tock old man...

p.s.: Still waiting for you to prove the following:

zeffur: My hypothesis is that if I hit your thumb with a metal hammer with enough force I will injure your thumb.

I can prove that belief is true with a simple test in which I strike your thumb with a metal hammer.

I perform the test & your thumb becomes injured. The test result proves my hypothesis/belief is true.

Now you do that with evolution's beliefs:

1. That a single microbe is the orgin of all life on earth.
2. That evolution of that microbe has actually occurred.
3. That evolution continues to actually occur today.

We all know you cannot prove your beliefs are true because you cannot create a test that proves your beliefs are true. If you don't agree--then prove me wrong.

Ridiculous eye rolls aside... Ready, set, go!

MJ59: Whatever you reckon sparky. You must know, after all, you have The TRUTH
Oh and they aren't MY beliefs ya twazzle, I just agree with em

MJ59: PS: you're off topic