Is the evolutionary doctrine a racist doctrine?

[AdamjEdgar]

It sounds like the question is loaded up with some type of assumption about how white folks from europe descended from black folks from africa.

IF a question asks..."is evolution racist" how do you come to that conclusion given that the descent response about whites coming from blacks out of Africa is an assumption? Do we actually know for sure that black came first? Was it perhaps red, or brown, or yellow??

Given Christ was born in the middle east, and modern Jews, Greeks, Romans, and Macedonians are the colour that they are...does any of this even really matter? The apostle Peter was given a vision by God informing that we do not have the right to decide which race of people are worthy of the gospel and salvation (dream of unclean animals)...it is purely human construct that black is a lower form of life than white and i strongly reject that notion.

Evolutionists do it because we apparently came from ancestors of the apes, Christians do it because of the claim its related to the curse of the mark of Cain (or along these lines). both parties are racist.

 

[Pogo]

IF a question asks..."is evolution racist" how do you come to that conclusion given that the descent response about whites coming from blacks out of Africa is an assumption? Do we actually know for sure that black came first? Was it perhaps red, or brown, or yellow??

Given Christ was born in the middle east, and modern Jews, Greeks, Romans, and Macedonians are the colour that they are...does any of this even really matter? The apostle Peter was given a vision by God informing that we do not have the right to decide which race of people are worthy of the gospel and salvation (dream of unclean animals)...it is purely human construct that black is a lower form of life than white and i strongly reject that notion.

Evolutionists do it because we apparently came from ancestors of the apes, Christians do it because of the claim its related to the curse of the mark of Cain (or along these lines). both parties are racist.

No, it doesn't work that way, we know that humans came from Africa because that is the oldest place they are found, and we know that humans living for many generations will develop skin tones with more or less pigment due to the intensity of the sun.

Actually understanding the subject rather than blaming it on an old folktale is not racist.

 

[Subduction Zone]

IF a question asks..."is evolution racist" how do you come to that conclusion given that the descent response about whites coming from blacks out of Africa is an assumption? Do we actually know for sure that black came first? Was it perhaps red, or brown, or yellow??

Given Christ was born in the middle east, and modern Jews, Greeks, Romans, and Macedonians are the colour that they are...does any of this even really matter? The apostle Peter was given a vision by God informing that we do not have the right to decide which race of people are worthy of the gospel and salvation (dream of unclean animals)...it is purely human construct that black is a lower form of life than white and i strongly reject that notion.

Evolutionists do it because we apparently came from ancestors of the apes, Christians do it because of the claim its related to the curse of the mark of Cain (or along these lines). both parties are racist.

It matters because claiming that the theory of evolution is racist is a lie that some creationists use.

Oh, and when you claim that something is an assumption the burden of proof is upon you. How are you going to prove that the "out of Africa" hypothesis is an assumption?

EDIT: And you still do not understand evolution at all. Evolution does not say that we came from the "ancestors of apes". We share a common ancestor with modern apes, and that ancestor was an ape as well. And so are we. Even the creationist that first came up with the Genre species cataloging system knew that humans were apes. That fact bothered him quite a bit and he had no answer for it.

 

[YoursTrue]

What explanation does the evolutionary doctrine give to the different human races? Does this have to do with the species of apes that populated the different regions of the earth?

In any case, in human likeness, how many different races exist among the apes that later, according to evolutionary doctrine, became the different human races?

Good point.

 

[YoursTrue]

No, it doesn't work that way, we know that humans came from Africa because that is the oldest place they are found, and we know that humans living for many generations will develop skin tones with more or less pigment due to the intensity of the sun.

Actually understanding the subject rather than blaming it on an old folktale is not racist.

Genetics certainly play a part in inheriting particular characteristics, including preponderance for certain illnesses, is that right?

 

[YoursTrue]

So, higher apes do have races like humans have?

So far they don't have census bureaus classifying them by science, I guess.

 

[Revoltingest]

Hi. I laughed when I saw your expression about whales look like fish but are not. Laughing is good for the body sometimes. Anyway, it's ok. I still believe God gives life and takes it away. No matter that scientists may say "we" all come from some random meeting of elements that began evolving to plants and animals by mutations. Oh, and that humans evolved from fish. Even though we have structures that fish may have. It doesn't convince me that natural selection by mutation did it. Some may shrug their shoulder at that but beyond circumchance cannot really explain it biologically that I know of. Even if they could, yup, I believe it's too fantastic to have just "come about." (I mean evolve.) Take care, nice talking with you.

If you want to argue with science types, I've a
really useful tip.....
Don't reduce abiogenesis or evolution to mere
"random" events. Sure, randomness is one
element of the processes. But it is so much more.
With abiogenesis, experiments show self-assembly
of some complex chemicals. Evolution is a stochastic
process, ie, random changes are selected from by a
"fitness function".
Allow for those things, & they'll think "By golly, this
is a smart one.".

 

[YoursTrue]

For now I'm leaving the topic open as the question has been answered; you just don't like the answer. Race is a social construct.

"Modern science regards race as a social construct, an identity which is assigned based on rules made by society. While partly based on physical similarities within groups, race does not have an inherent physical or biological meaning."

- Race (human categorization) - Wikipedia

Just for my edification, race has nothing to do with genetics, is that right?

 

[Pogo]

Good point.

No, it is Polygenism which was an abandoned hypothesis from the mid 1800s though often spouted by racists. Today unless you are a Raelian It is known to be false.

 

[Pogo]

Just for my edification, race has nothing to do with genetics, is that right?

New word for you Phenotype.
What is a simple definition of phenotype

Phenotype refers to an individual's observable traits, such as height, eye color and blood type. A person's phenotype is determined by both their genomic makeup (genotype) and environmental factors.

That said there is not enough difference in human genotypes to subdivide humans into races, we are all one race.

 

[YoursTrue]

As

An educated person is usually a decent person with good social communication habits.
Why are there so many forum members here who pretend to be "scientists" and at the same time are so vulgar?

As a matter of fact, I was reading about Einstein's life outside of his mental vagaries and his personal life was a mess by choice. He disrespected, insulted by personal decree his wife, a brilliant mathematician in her own right. For starters. Then there was a child he supposedly had but never seemed to acknowledge.

 

[YoursTrue]

New word for you Phenotype.
What is a simple definition of phenotype


That said there is not enough difference in human genotypes to subdivide humans into races, we are all one race.

Like monkeys and gorillas? So let's go back to genetics and human disease. Do you think genetics play a part in transmitting certain diseases or deformities?

 

[YoursTrue]

It may seem that way to you but all of us are descendants of 1 or 2 populations in africa ~ 200,000 years ago. This can be demonstrated using the exact same methodology that is used in courts to determine parentage and recently even to identify unknown criminals from genetic databases.

BTW, your idea is a good example of the worst of 19th century racism which has been so totally disproven that it is more likely to get you into a fight than a rational discussion.

Seriously, start with this article from wikipedia Out of Africa Theory read it and come back and then we can the various species ancestral to homo Sapiens. (us)

Oddly enough written accounts of birth records etc weren't developed 100,000 years ago let alone 50,000 or 200,000 years ago.

 

[Pogo]

Oddly enough written accounts of birth records etc weren't developed 100,000 years ago let alone 50,000 or 200,000 years ago.

Not so oddly enough, that is irrelevant to your question.

 

[Secret Chief]

Just for my edification, race has nothing to do with genetics, is that right?

"Researchers have investigated the relationship between race and genetics as part of efforts to understand how biology may or may not contribute to human racial categorization. Today, the consensus among scientists is that race is a social construct, and that using it as a proxy for genetic differences among populations is misleading."

- Race and genetics - Wikipedia

 

[Polymath257]

Good point.

Not really. The development of human variation came after we split from other apes and not from different ‘races’ of apes.

Once again, the concept of race is cultural not biological. There is no way to separate humans biologically into races.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not really. The development of human variation came after we split from other apes and not from different ‘races’ of apes.

Once again, the concept of race is cultural not biological. There is no way to separate humans biologically into races.

Doing some reading on the internet, especially sources
claiming that race is only cultural, I discern that race is
indeed genetic. But the genetic variation is very slight,
so it doesn't rise to the level of being useful to biologists.
So human "race" could be described as primarily cultural,
with a biological basis.

 

[Pogo]

Doing some reading on the internet, especially sources
claiming that race is only cultural, I discern that race is
indeed genetic. But the genetic variation is very slight,
so it doesn't rise to the level of being useful to biologists.
So human "race" could be described as primarily cultural,
with a biological basis.

Yeah, that is about the size of it, variations within a "race" are not significantly different than between them. Well except for the Scottish maybe.

 

[YoursTrue]

No, it doesn't work that way, we know that humans came from Africa because that is the oldest place they are found, and we know that humans living for many generations will develop skin tones with more or less pigment due to the intensity of the sun.

Actually understanding the subject rather than blaming it on an old folktale is not racist.

So studies have shown, have they, that humans did not "come from" Ireland or Canada, since you say we know humans came from Africa, right?

 

[YoursTrue]

Doing some reading on the internet, especially sources
claiming that race is only cultural, I discern that race is
indeed genetic. But the genetic variation is very slight,
so it doesn't rise to the level of being useful to biologists.
So human "race" could be described as primarily cultural,
with a biological basis.

So are there or are there not races of mankind?