Skip to comments.Darwin reader: Darwin’s racism
Posted on 02/24/2009 7:04:56 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
click here to read article
Thanks for the ping!
The Gibeonites were slave not the holders of any monopoly.
“Now therefore ye [are] cursed, and there shall none of you be freed from being bondmen, and hewers of wood and drawers of water for the house of my God.” (Jos. 9:23)
This was punishment for their deception.
And their water drawing and wood cutting was not just for the temple as vs. 27 says,
“And Joshua made them that day hewers of wood and drawers of water for the congregation, and for the altar of the LORD, even unto this day, in the place which he should choose.”
So it was either do the work or get the chop.
Actually, Blacks themselves didn’t make for good slaves, but rather, Western Africans made for great slaves. Western Africans tend to be stockier, larger, and stronger than Eastern Africans, much like how Germans tend to be larger than Frenchman but are both still white. Case in point, Barry’s daddy’s VERY slim and slight, but Hakeem Olajuwon is huge.
Yes, now do you see the misguided outcry from Al Sharpton about the infamous chimp picture?
And if there’s any such thing as a missing link, it would be 537 statespeople that are in Washington, DC.
Case in point, Barrys daddys VERY slim and slight, [excerpt]He is? (WoWzers!)
Glad to see others are getting it. The way the question is often phrased is ‘should religion be put on an equal footing with evolution in public schools?’ and my reply is, only if the religion you choose is the RIGHT one; i.e. to have an apples to apples comparison you’d a religion which operated on an intellectual basis similar to that of evoloserism and the only candidates would be Rastafari, Santeria, and Voodoo.
Christians basically put a stop to moderrn slavery by having the British navy shut down the West African slave markets in the early 1800s. Except in slammite countries that is; that’s a sort of another world. In other words, you can read about slavery in the Christian world easily enough but youhave to open a history book to do it. You can read about slavery in the slammite world by opening any slammite newspaper to the classified ads under ‘S’ and, for that matter, under ‘w’ as well since women are basically slaves in the slammite world.
Didn't the British navy also protect the slave trade for 200 years prior to that?
The Evo-atheists can’t stand the FACT that their big hero was a nobody who was an academic failure. He was a pathetic dabbler in a sea of professionals. He was simply out of his league. He was pontificating on botany and geology and natural history, but was studying theology, which he couldn’t even get right. The man with no scientific training whatsoever is the “scientist” we are supposed to worship? Sounds more like L Ron Hubbard than Isaac Newton. lol
“You are mistaken. Very few people have the burning hatred and sheer force of will to become a Hitler. But I would argue that the Temple of Darwinistic Materialism paves the way for a Hitler, a Stalin, a Mao, a Chavez, an Ayers, an Obama, etc, etc.”
Ok, I’m glad you clarified that. People who believe in the science of evolution are not only Hitler, they are also materialists, Stalin, Mao, Chavez, Ayers, Obama.
It helps me to have this point clarified, otherwise I’d have thought you were simply being ridiculous.
“I think the take away is that Darwin is not someone to be idolized.”
You are gifted in undertstatement! You may wish to temper the message, but it was quite clear - study/belief in evolution means you are Hitler. Study of science means the preaching the merits hatred and genocide.
This is why the fundamentalist agenda will never achieve political power outside of places like Afghanistan. Most fundmentalists/creationists are not as reasoned as you (though you fall short on calling out your fellow creation believers on their over-the-top rhetoric on this thread, so you seem, if I may be direct, a tad disingenuous)
Science is not faith, it never was, but that is the argument fundamentalists/creationists must have in order to create a “holy war” mentality amongst themselves.
Fundamentalists/creationists have to define a broad category of science as “Darwinism”. They have to elevate Darwin to false-idol status when science does no such thing.
The fundamentalists/creationists have to fight the non-existent philosophical fight with the dissembling that is evident by the most profligate creationist posters on this and the many other threads, and that is that ALL believers in science are Hilterian Stalinists that do not value life, except for the scientific artifacts it provides - and that they are all atheist and materialists.
It’s the Big Lie of creationism that must be preached at the exclusion of everything else. Within this framework a fundamentalist scientist cannot exists. A Christian Engineer is a contradiction.
So, thank you for attempting to portray an all-too-rare reasoned creationist view that admits that science isn’t evil. I think that was your point.
I apologize if I am too tough on you in this post, but the Big Creationist Lie, BCL, if you will, is alive and well on this and the many threads on the subject. It is shockingly Talibanesque.
“Most fundmentalists/creationists are not as reasoned as you”
should be “Most fundmentalists/creationists ON THIS BOARD are not as reasoned as you”
Most fundamentalists I know, aren’t subscribers to the BCL.
I read your tagline “Darwinism is Satanism”. Let me add “Satanism” into the definition of the “Big Creationist Lie”, or BCL for short.
“The Evo-atheists cant stand the FACT that their big hero was a nobody who was an academic failure. He was a pathetic dabbler in a sea of professionals.”
Really? For him to raise such angst amongst you purveyors of the BCL, hundreds of years later he must have had SOMETHING going for him.
All God fearing people pay attention to the follows of Satan. The only thing that Darwin has going for him now is eternal fire. :)
“For someone who obviously fancies himself a master logician, your assertions are, I dare say, moronesque.”
LOL.....I will let others judge me on this - but I will note that there is no shortage of morons on these BCL threads, present company surely not excluded.
“All God fearing people pay attention to the follows of Satan. The only thing that Darwin has going for him now is eternal fire. :)”
Well, you have distilled the Big Creationist Lie, BCL, down to it’s basic element. My hat is off to you!
That should read “followers”
Sounds like you’re reading into the Bible what you think it ought to say, which happens all the time.
Gee, ya, you must be pretty much the smartest guy in the world and stuff, ‘cause you even like made up your own capitalized abbreviation and everything.
Evoloserism is not science and Chuck Darwin was not a scientist. Evolution is a brain-dead ideological doctrine which has brought about two world wars and two political doctrines which are responsible for tens of millions of unnecessary human deaths. The doctrine itself is so far from rational thought and has been disproven so many times and so many ways that nobody with brains or talent is defending it any longer; it's being defended by academic dead wood and losers.
“Gee, ya, you must be pretty much the smartest guy in the world and stuff, cause you even like made up your own capitalized abbreviation and everything.”
Does it bother you?
“The doctrine itself is so far from rational thought and has been disproven so many times and so many ways that nobody with brains or talent is defending it any longer; it’s being defended by academic dead wood and losers.”
I will simply take your own credentials as impeccable for this argument.
This is another facet of the BCL - science is wrong and immutable.
“it’s being defended by academic dead wood and losers.”
If that is the case - when it comes to science and the scientific process, with apologies to Beck: “Soy un perdedor”
No, laughter is good for the soul.
With apologies to Richie, “Yo no soy marinero.”
You might want to watch Ben Stein’s movie. The interview with Dawkins definitively settles the question of whether there could be such a thing as an idiot with a 180 IQ.
“No, laughter is good for the soul.”
Forgive me then, I thought you were bitter an humorless, like most who buy into the BCL.
Then why were Darwin’s books banned in Nazi Germany?
If Hitler was a “fan” and all....
Well? Why were Darwin’s books banned in Nazi Germany?
” With apologies to Richie, Yo no soy marinero. “
See, you DO have a sense of humor.
“You might want to watch Ben Steins movie. The interview with Dawkins definitively settles the question of whether there could be such a thing as an idiot with a 180 IQ.”
Are you accusing me of having a 180 IQ, or being an idiot?
Look, Darwin’s book was all about a few finches, huge stretches of logic, and the rest was an attack on God and His Creation. 150 years later and now we know even the finches were a bust since they are all still finches. When they turn into a dog let us know, until then people of God will rightly laugh at the failure that was Darwin.
Savages are intermediate states between people and apes:
“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 civilised 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.”
Pretty good. But if you’re going to keep up the ruse, you need to capitalize more, misspell about every third word, and salt your posts with more “evo-combinations.” You know, “evo-slime,” “evo-loser,” “evo-mythomaniac,” “evo-pseudologist,” “evo-menteur à triple étage,” that kind of thing.
If you had a 180 IQ you wouldn't be.
“Pretty good.” is not a complete sentence.
Learn to use proper grammar, you evo-dunce.
The Natural Selection discovered by creationists (before Darwin) was a force for conservation, not a blind information-adding nature-god. In short, natural selection means two different things to creationists and evos. One crucial difference being that there is actual evidence supporting the creationist version, whereas I can’t find any evidence backing up the information-adding evo version at all.
“If you had a 180 IQ you wouldn’t be.”
The light comes on for another BCL advocate....
You do not appear to have a sense of humor.
Suffices. : )