Is the evolutionary doctrine a racist doctrine?

[TagliatelliMonster]

It does hmm. So some mutations became plants and others became animals. That is sooo stupid imo of course.

Argument from incredulity.

 

[metis]

So do the evolutionists here believe all life including plants and animals came from a common ancestor?

That is a hypothesis.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It does hmm. So some mutations became plants and others became animals. That is sooo stupid imo of course.

Only to those who don't understand it.

 

[Eli G]

First of all, scientists are divided as to whether the Neanderthals were a separate species, or a subgroup of homo sapiens. Nonetheless, there are certain traits the make it very easy to identify a Neanderthal skeleton:

• Larger noses
• Skull shape was lower and longer
• Heavier jaws
• Shorter and stockier
• Deep set eyes with heavy brows
• Almost no chin
• Wider pelvis
• Larger hands with less fine motor skill
• Noticeable differences in the bones of the middle ear
• A body less structured for long distance pursuit

View attachment 89296

So ... after looking at that illustrative drawing, it seems that the evolutionary doctrine about humans is indeed racist at its core.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So ... after looking at that illustrative drawing, it seems that the evolutionary doctrine about humans is indeed racist at its core.

Show your working, please.

 

[metis]

So ... after looking at that illustrative drawing, it seems that the evolutionary doctrine about humans is indeed racist at its core.

Huh?

 

[Eli G]

First of all, scientists are divided as to whether the Neanderthals were a separate species, or a subgroup of homo sapiens. Nonetheless, there are certain traits the make it very easy to identify a Neanderthal skeleton:

• Larger noses
• Skull shape was lower and longer
• Heavier jaws
• Shorter and stockier
• Deep set eyes with heavy brows
• Almost no chin
• Wider pelvis
• Larger hands with less fine motor skill
• Noticeable differences in the bones of the middle ear
• A body less structured for long distance pursuit

View attachment 89296

Am I the only one who realizes that the differences between the two men in that figure, and the numbered points, are just racial details?

 

[metis]

Am I the only one who realizes that the differences between the two men in that figure, and the numbered points, are just racial details?

We are a byproduct of our genes, and genes are not uniform.

 

[Eli G]

So, I was right: the evolutionary doctrine is a racist doctrine.

If you see the figure in the post#328 you can see a modern typical Hawaiian next to a typical Englishman. Is any of them more evolutionarily advanced than the other?

 

[SkepticThinker]

So, I was right: the evolutionary doctrine is a racist doctrine.

If you see the figure in the post#328 you can see a modern typical Hawaiian next to a typical Englishman. Is any of them more evolutionarily advanced than the other?

No.

 

[Soandso]

So, I was right: the evolutionary doctrine is a racist doctrine.

If you see the figure in the post#328 you can see a modern typical Hawaiian next to a typical Englishman. Is any of them more evolutionarily advanced than the other?

I don't think that anyone is arguing that Hawaiian people are evolutionarily inferior to English people, are they? Can I ask where you got that impression? Who said they were?

 

[Eli G]

I don't think that anyone is arguing that Hawaiian people are evolutionarily inferior to English people, are they? Can I ask where you got that impression? Who said they were?

Follow the dialog.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Follow the dialog.

Anyone who understands evolution understands that Hawaiian people aren't evolutionarily inferior to English people.
Anyone who understands evolution knows that one "race" of human isn't more or less evolved than any other "race" of human.

 

[Eli G]

Anyone can see in the post#328 that a modern Hawaiian person is not considered a "modern human" because of their racial details.

See the figure, points and classifications and judge for yourself.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Anyone can see in the post#328 that a modern Hawaiian person is not considered a "modern human" because of their racial details.

See the figure, points and classifications and judge for yourself.

No.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Am I the only one who realizes that the differences between the two men in that figure, and the numbered points, are just racial details?

Yeah, you are pretty much the only one to think this.

 

[Eli G]

True, I am ashamed that there is a figure created by evolutionists to make people believe that a modern man has to have a skeleton similar to that of a modern Englishman. (See post#328)

 

[Polymath257]

True, I am ashamed that there is a figure created by evolutionists to make people believe that a modern man has to have a skeleton similar to that of a modern Englishman. (See post#328)

Actually, the human species has very little variation compared to most other mammalian species. We are remarkably uniform. Neanderthals are outside of the normal variations found in modern humans but are often still classified as the same species. Many of European descent carry Neanderthal genes, for example.

The difficulty in classifying Neanderthals is one aspect of evolution. When the changes are gradual over time, we *expect* to see cases where classification is ambiguous. We *expect* to see branching of genetics and differences in variation between subspecies and species. This ambiguity is far less when it comes to comparing H. erectus with H. sapiens. At that point, it is clear that we are talking about separate species.

This does NOT mean one is more 'advanced' in evolutionary terms. In fact, ALL species alive today are equally 'advanced' in those terms: all have survived the billions of years of evolution from the first cells.

 

[Subduction Zone]

True, I am ashamed that there is a figure created by evolutionists to make people believe that a modern man has to have a skeleton similar to that of a modern Englishman. (See post#328)

Not at all. The braincase is very different from all Homo sapiens. Perhaps a side view of each:

Not as tall and it sticks out to the read quite a bit more. You cannot tell the race of the skull on the right.

 

[Astrophile]

True, I am ashamed that there is a figure created by evolutionists to make people believe that a modern man has to have a skeleton similar to that of a modern Englishman. (See post#328)

Most modern Englishmen (and modern Englishwomen) have Neanderthal genes.