Darwin was a misogynist and a racist- we need to stop worshipping him

Edger
Posts: 104
Joined: 2007-01-14
User is offlineOffline
Darwin was a misogynist and a racist- we need to stop worshipping him

Hilarious! If anyone cares to give this dolt some traffic. Have fun Smiling

http://5twenty8.com/shane/?p=51

-edited to correct link


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10137
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
I just had to reply. Even

I just had to reply. Even though it's likely that he'll not show my reply. So I'll post it here too, like I told him I would. Smiling

Vastet Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.
April 28th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
“Although, that they have been proven to be in error and still remain as fact in many textbooks is troubling, that will be a topic for another time.”

First lie. Evolution is fact, creationism is fiction.

“Thankfully paleontologists already confirm his erroneous theories are simply fables.”

Second lie.

“This letter is to discuss the symbol of your religion: the Darwin “fish”. Yes “religion”, as you have greater faith than I to believe that random chance created the intricate and delicate balance of the universe all from an exploding speck of dust.”

Strawman fallacy. Learn your logic, and your science. Evolution has nothing to do with how or why existance is, just in how life changes over time. There is nothing in evolution that suggests anything about how life began. That’s abiogenesis. Completely different topic.

“What you may not have known when you bought your charming, legged, fish is that it is a symbol of hate. It is more racist in its creation than a burning cross or swastika. Simply because, the symbols mentioned are perversions of their peaceful and spiritual origin. Your fish however was created specifically to reflect (worship) on Darwin’s (your prophet) theories about the omnipotent one: time (your god).”

This is pure fiction. Fiction that you don’t even attempt to back up with reason, fact, or logic. Proving how assailable your position really is. And the idea that Darwin is worshipped like a god is ludicrous. I might as well say you worship Edison and Davy for the light bulb.

“At this point I am sure you greatly concerned, as you never intended to be a bigot or a sexist.”

Should you show I am one I may become concerned, though I’ll know I’m still far better off than any theist. Bigotry, racism, and sexism are the hallmarks of religion.

“First, there is a misconception about the title of Darwin’s book, “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection”. This is, in fact, half of the truth. The full title to Darwin’s book is, “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life”. Did you catch that? “Favored Races”? Adolph Hitler certainly did, hook, line and sinker. Adolph was very much interested in and influenced by Darwin’s work.”

Hitler was even more influenced by the catholic church. Your point? Oh yeah, I just nullified it. Oops.

“It is this type of inane racist banter that fuels butchers like Adolph Hitler and Karl Marx. Their philosophies powered by evolution led to the destruction of millions of so-called “subhuman” Jews and Christians respectively.”

One look at the crusades shows just how hypocritical a comment this is. I wonder how it would have looked had the christian terrorists had modern weaponry. Hitler would probably look pretty good in comparison.

That aside, it doesn’t matter what Darwin’s personal beliefs were. In science, the man is not recognized as an ultimate authority(unlike religion). The man is a man. The science has nothing to do with the mans philosophies. Merely the science. And since every credible scientist for the last hundred odd years has contributed to proving evolution, attacking Darwin in an attempt to disprove it is laughable at best.

I would continue in the deconstruction of your lies and logical fallacies, but I have better things to do. I’ll post this response at http://www.rationalresponders.com/ , just in case you don’t have the intellectual honesty to leave this up. Perhaps you’d like to take a swing by and see just how little you know about what you think you know.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


deludedgod
Rational VIP!ScientistDeluded God
deludedgod's picture
Posts: 3221
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
“First, there is a

“Thankfully paleontologists already confirm his erroneous theories are simply fables.”

You just conjured this lie out of thin air.  I am a biologist, not a paleontologist, but I can still tell you that this is nothing short of complete deceit, and now I have good reason not to take anything you say seriously henceforth since you know nothing about science.

“This letter is to discuss the symbol of your religion: the Darwin “fish”. Yes “religion”, as you have greater faith than I to believe that random chance created the intricate and delicate balance of the universe all from an exploding speck of dust.”

You wear your ignorace of science on your sleeve. First of all, my friend, you have no understanding basic probability theory, because you invoke no God as equal to random chance. In the universe exists almost 100 billion galaxies, all uniformly bound by identical laws of physics. No God. No random chance.

Second of all, an exploding speck of dust? Is this a joke? An explosion implies sound and dust implies rock, neither of which were present when the universe was formed. Are you referring to the energy false-vacuum state of the universal gravity distrubtion at the asympotic singularity point at the moment of the hyper-expansion of the universe. Presumably you are. However, I used multisyllabic words which might be difficult for your 5th-grade brain to comprehend (I imagine you are a small child judging by your prose).

Thirdly. the universe is extremely unbalanced.  The unifying forces are broken like a shattered mirror, the thermodynamic functions which dictate the progression of closed energy systems are causing slow universal decay.

Educate yourself in basic English, phsyics and mathematics. AKA go back to elementry school.

“First, there is a misconception about the title of Darwin’s book, “The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection”. This is, in fact, half of the truth. The full title to Darwin’s book is, “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life”. Did you catch that? “Favored Races”? Adolph Hitler certainly did, hook, line and sinker. Adolph was very much interested in and influenced by Darwin’s work.”

Nonsense. First of all, in science, the word "races" does not refer to human skin color. It refers to the different genetic arms of any species, whose divergence results in a speciative mechanism called cladogenesis. As a definitional hang up, this is the same as claiming "evolution is a theory" as an argument

There is no evidence of a link between Hitler and Darwin. I think you are thinking of Galton, you moron. Adolf Hitler hated the theory of evolution, and your ignorance of History reflects you do not know this. The reason is that Hitler believed the Germans to be a divine race. Obviously the thought that human beings were a divergent arm of the monkey family was horrifying to him. German biology textbooks were rewritten to depict blonde-haired blue-eyed Germans as Master races from God, a notion he reflected in Mein Kampf.

Also, Darwin was not a Eugenicist. That was his cousin Francis Galton, who Darwin detested. Together, Darwin and Huxley spent much time debunking the social Darwinism fallacy in the book The Descent of Man. You were refuted 150 years before you were born.

Of course, it doesn't matter what Darwin thought. I don't really care because his work has been confirmed by every scientist since then. There are over 200,000 papers in molecular and cellular biology, genetics, paleontology, ecological mathematics, population dynamics, biochemistry and regarding evolution published annually. Perhaps I should go up to the scientific community and timidly explain that a ranting 5th grader has debunked them. You see, I actually have this little scroll-like piece of paper from an accredited institution which confirms the fact that I have, in fact, studied evolutionary biology for years.

Science is morally neutral. It can only give us facts. And this is what science tells us about how life originated. It has nothing to do with Hitler's genocide or any of that insanity.

When you do approach the scientific community, you might have some problems. You see, absolutely nothing in biology makes sense except in the context of evolution, so you would have debunk all that other "nonsense" like, oh I don't know, molecular biology, medicine, virology, genetics, bacteriology, etc etc ad infinitum.

Your fish however was created specifically to reflect (worship) on Darwin’s (your prophet) theories about the omnipotent one: time (your god).”

You religious idiots think that everyone has your deluded mindset. Darwin was a scientist. Like any scientist, he got a great deal of things wrong, but he is worthy of respect, not worship. I believe the Earth revolves around the fucking sun. Do I worship Galileo and Copernicus?

Hey I know! You should stop using your computer, your ipod, your TV, your microwave, your car, your phone etc. You know why? Because the man who invented the microchip transistor (William Shockley) was a Eugenecist. You use all these devices, so you worship Shockley! Racist!

Also, why Darwin? Surely, if I believe in evolutionary theory, I also worship Huxley, Mendel, Haldene, or in fact anyone (ie hundreds of thousands of biologistis) who have made a contribution to our understanding of evolution.

You see, science is not like religion. In religion, an ignorant prophet makes up garbage and idiocy and pulls it out of his ass. In science, we have many hardworking people all using experiments, logic, deduction, induction and fair critique to discover truth. Darwin alone hardly "discovered" the evolutionary process. He worked together with at least a dozen individuals like Wallace and Huxley.

I laughed so hard at this. You are living proof of evolution. Some people just don't evolve quite as fast.

"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.

-Me

Books about atheism


mrjonno
Posts: 726
Joined: 2007-02-26
User is offlineOffline
This all kind of misses the

This all kind of misses the point

You may not like the fact that we evolved and inherited some nasty tendencies but that doest change the fact we did. We do however have the ability to rise above our biological origins

Also science does not revolve around personalities Darwin could have millions of known and unknown faults but its doesnt stop he scientific theories from being correct as there are tested

 

Same as Newtonian laws of gravity are testable (even through he was an alchemist and deeply religious)

Fundamentally a good scientist (or rational person) worships no one religious or secular

 I don't believe in the laws of science because it tells me in a book or because a teacher teaches me it I believe it because its testable (and has practical uses) 

 


GUNT
Silver Member
GUNT's picture
Posts: 54
Joined: 2007-03-23
User is offlineOffline
deludedgod... If you ever

deludedgod...

If you ever want a holiday in Western Australia... I'll shout you a free trip. 

I wish I had your ability to express myself so eloquently.

G


deludedgod
Rational VIP!ScientistDeluded God
deludedgod's picture
Posts: 3221
Joined: 2007-01-28
User is offlineOffline
I wish I had your ability

I wish I had your ability to express myself so eloquently.

LOL. One problem I have is that I cannot control myself when I debate someone who says something incredibly, mind-bogglingly stupid. And I take the opportunity to use a debate tactic known as "running them over" in much the same way that a tank runs over a picket fence.

"Physical reality” isn’t some arbitrary demarcation. It is defined in terms of what we can systematically investigate, directly or not, by means of our senses. It is preposterous to assert that the process of systematic scientific reasoning arbitrarily excludes “non-physical explanations” because the very notion of “non-physical explanation” is contradictory.

-Me

Books about atheism


BenfromCanada
atheist
BenfromCanada's picture
Posts: 811
Joined: 2006-08-31
User is offlineOffline
My reply might not get

My reply might not get posted, so here it is.

 There is so much that is fallacious here....I'll just point out the two things I didn't see debunked on the Rational Response Squad's website.

"While my own religion, which is that of The Messiah, teaches of the equality of all humanity; it is one that is mocked by the many Darwinians."

Nowhere in the old or new testament of the bible does it suggest that all people are equal. All believers, yes, in one verse that Paul supposedly wrote. However, the writer went back on his misogynistic track later on in the letter, so I don't think the one verse really validates this claim. There are a lot of instances in the bible of one form of racism or another, and a lot of anti-nonbeliever discrimination. Do you know of the "Curse of Canaan/Ham" which was written, essentially, to justify the horrible mistreatment of the Canaanites? Later on, it was used to justify mistreatment of black people. Meanwhile, Darwin opposed his distant cousin Francis Galton's Eugenics idea, which is what Hitler ACTUALLY took from.

Secondly, one must take the time and place he lived into consideration. Racism and misogyny was rampant in 19th century Europe, and the UK was no different. If Darwin truly was racist, he'd be conforming to the standard of the time.


kmisho
kmisho's picture
Posts: 298
Joined: 2006-08-18
User is offlineOffline
These days I answer

These days I answer arguments of this type in the same way every time.

The implication is that we should reject evolution because it influenced racists or is itself racist or it makes people bad or whatever EVEN IF IT'S TRUE.

This exposes a blatant disdain for truth-seeking. Nuff said.