Is the evolutionary doctrine a racist doctrine?

[Polymath257]

No, it did not? And so you have the evidence they did not? What is it? Maybe like we are fish, right? Maybe you don't understand my answer. So let me tell you what I mean. This IS no evidence that homo sapiens evolved from fish to denisovans intermingling.

Our fish ancestors were over 350 million years ago. The modern human line interacted with the Denisovan line around 100 *thousand* years ago.

You are somehow merging the two extreme ends of a very long progression that, yes, we do have evidence for.

 

[YoursTrue]

Our fish ancestors were over 350 million years ago. The modern human line interacted with the Denisovan line around 100 *thousand* years ago.

And so? apparently, according to 'scientists,' humans are descendants of fish. Can it be shown in detail? No. But who needs details when there are theories and assumptions?

You are somehow merging the two extreme ends of a very long progression that, yes, we do have evidence for.

Hardly is Tiktaalik evidence that humans morphed, I mean evolved, from fish whatever they were or are (the fish, I mean). And really by this time examining the theory, I see no "evidence" that fish interbred or morphed to land-dwelling animals with lungs and legs, including apes. But thanks for your comments.

 

[Polymath257]

And so? apparently, according to 'scientists,' humans are descendants of fish. Can it be shown in detail? No. But who needs details when there are theories and assumptions?

If you want a fossil every million years, no. But that is a very unreasonable request, don't you think?

Hardly is Tiktaalik evidence that humans morphed, I mean evolved, from fish whatever they were or are (the fish, I mean).

And how do you explain the similarities with the Rhipidistian fishes? And the timing? And that there are no amphibians prior to that time?

Rhipidistia - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

And really by this time examining the theory, I see no "evidence" that fish interbred or morphed to land-dwelling animals with lungs and legs, including apes. But thanks for your comments.

Maybe you should look at the *modern* lungfish.

Lungfish - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

They are the closest remaining relatives of the ancient Sacopterygian fish that are the ancestors of land welling animals. The Rhipidistian fish were a type of Sarcopterigian fish.

Apes came much, much later. Again, why do you always write it as if the fish immediately morphed into apes? That is NOT what happened.

 

[YoursTrue]

If you want a fossil every million years, no. But that is a very unreasonable request, don't you think?

And how do you explain the similarities with the Rhipidistian fishes? And the timing? And that there are no amphibians prior to that time?

Many fish have swim bladders (a prelude to lungs). We know fish that had the precursors to limbs. And we know of fish today that can survive on land for a while.

Apes came much, much later. Again, why do you always write it as if the fish immediately morphed into apes? That is NOT what happened.

I know, according to the theory, that humans came way after fish. But they evolved, supposedly, from the natural selection and mutations in fish that eventually led to humans.
By the way, speaking of humans, did you know that Sweden had massive forced sterilizations until 1976? Eugenics and racism, isn't that interesting? Why did Sweden sterilise up to 30,000 people against their will?

 

[metis]

There is not the slightest possibility that a modern human would have offspring with an ape.

Evolutionists assume that such an event was possible at some point many thousands of years ago.

What do evolutionists base this assumption on?

Entirely false premise.

 

[metis]

For example: if a Neanderthal is discovered to be intellectually identical to a modern human, what prevents him from being considered "homo sapiens"?

Some anthropologists use "Homo sapiens neanderthalensis" and "Homo sapiens sapiens".

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Again: how did two genetically compatible apes find themselves to procreate a modern human?

What????

 

[Pogo]

By the way, speaking of humans, did you know that Sweden had massive forced sterilizations until 1976? Eugenics and racism, isn't that interesting? Why did Sweden sterilise up to 30,000 people against their will?

Are you proud of comments like this? They reflect badly on your education.

 

[Polymath257]

I know, according to the theory, that humans came way after fish.

No humans existed for hundreds of millions of years after fish appeared. Of that, there is no doubt.

But they evolved, supposedly, from the natural selection and mutations in fish that eventually led to humans.

Through many, many intermediates. I’m not sure why you keep saying fish morphed into humans. That is, at least, trivializing the process.

By the way, speaking of humans, did you know that Sweden had massive forced sterilizations until 1976? Eugenics and racism, isn't that interesting? Why did Sweden sterilise up to 30,000 people against their will?

Interesting, and sad. But not relevant to this discussion. Why did you bring it up?

 

[The Hammer]

It is quite possible that it was this boxer - Nikolai Valuev:

View attachment 90033

Too much chin

 

[YoursTrue]

No humans existed for hundreds of millions of years after fish appeared. Of that, there is no doubt.

Through many, many intermediates. I’m not sure why you keep saying fish morphed into humans. That is, at least, trivializing the process.

Interesting, and sad. But not relevant to this discussion. Why did you bring it up?

Because of the idea of science hoping to impose a better form of humans. And the concept of racism. In other words, there was a dominant feeling of race as we can see from cultural attitudes in many places.

The return of race science and why it matters for family science

Race science attributes differences in human populations to biology and genetics that reflect a hierarchy of human races with whiteness at its pinnacle. This article examining the history of race science and current family scholarship and practice contends ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Are you aware that in many states imposed sterilization is legal?

 

[Revoltingest]

It is quite possible that it was this boxer - Nikolai Valuev:

View attachment 90033

He's 7' tall though.

 

[Revoltingest]

Because of the idea of science hoping to impose a better form of humans.

Science doesn't impose anything.
But some people use science to do dubious things.
Other things...anything...can be used for such purposes,
eg, religion, philosophy, economics, medicine.
We shouldn't blame useful fields for misuse by some.

 

[YoursTrue]

Science doesn't impose anything.
But some people use science to do dubious things.
Other things...anything can be used for such purposes,
eg, religion, philosophy, economics, medicine.
We shouldn't blame useful fields for misuse by some.

Nevertheless, evidently some people have the idea of racism as to a superior race and so (some) scientists impose their feelings on certain ones hoping to stop, I suppose, the propagation of mentally handicapped people. Of course that involves warfare, too, in terms of killing one's enemy, but on different levels. Forced Sterilization Is Still Legal in the U.S..
Or the extermination of indigenous people in northern Canada in recent times. Plus more.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Because of the idea of science hoping to impose a better form of humans.

I don't even know what that means.

And the concept of racism. In other words, there was a dominant feeling of race as we can see from cultural attitudes in many places.

The return of race science and why it matters for family science

Race science attributes differences in human populations to biology and genetics that reflect a hierarchy of human races with whiteness at its pinnacle. This article examining the history of race science and current family scholarship and practice contends ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Are you aware that in many states imposed sterilization is legal?

"Scientific racism" has been utterly discredited by science. It is a mere pseudo science, no better than astrology or flat earth nonsense.

 

[YoursTrue]

I don't even know what that means.

"Scientific racism" has been utterly discredited by science. It is a mere pseudo science, no better than astrology or flat earth nonsense.

So why do you think 31 states in the U.S. have legally imposed sterilizations on the law books? Forced Sterilization Is Still Legal in the U.S..

 

[YoursTrue]

I don't even know what that means.

"Scientific racism" has been utterly discredited by science. It is a mere pseudo science, no better than astrology or flat earth nonsense.

That's what happened in Nazi Germany when the Nazis wanted to impose their idea of a "Master Race," killing untold millions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's what happened in Nazi Germany when the Nazis wanted to impose their idea of a "Master Race," killing untold millions.

Correct. That was not science. That was not evolution. it was not inspired by evolution. In fact Hitler was an evolution denier. Hitler hated teh idea of common descent. He as an incredible racist, and you should know by now that flies in the face of evolution:

Nazi racial theories - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[YoursTrue]

Correct. That was not science. That was not evolution. it was not inspired by evolution. In fact Hitler was an evolution denier. Hitler hated teh idea of common descent. He as an incredible racist, and you should know by now that flies in the face of evolution:

Nazi racial theories - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I am not saying you are incorrect about that, but how do you feel about imposed sterilization?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

So why do you think 31 states in the U.S. have legally imposed sterilizations on the law books? Forced Sterilization Is Still Legal in the U.S..

I wouldn't know. Why do so many states allow parents to force their young teenage daughters to marry their rapists? I don't know the answer to that either.