Was Darwin Racist and Homophobic at the Same Time?

[james bond]

That's you idea of logic?

I don't think I can say much else to that that wouldn't get me banned. Suffice to say, whatever respect I ever had for you is pretty much gone.

Aside from quote mining me and faking being insulted, what evidence do you have to show Darwin not being racist and treating blacks as his peers? Did he come out and say no that's not what I meant to his cousin or to Herbert Spencer? No. Instead, he borrowed Spencer's "survival of the fittest" and stuck it in his fifth edition! Darwin was clearly raking in the cash by then. I'm surprised he didn't change the title to simply "On the Preservation of Favoured WHITE Races in the Struggle for Life. It's the Survival of the Fittest."

 

[Jose Fly]

Aside from quote mining me

Quote mining you? What th........?

Did you or did you not post, "The logic is Dawkins was wrong about a lot of things in his writings"?

and faking being insulted

Um.....I'm not insulted. My comment about saying something that might get me banned was about something else.

what evidence do you have to show Darwin not being racist and treating blacks as his peers?

See, this is where you're just being stupid. No one cares if Darwin was a racist. It has no bearing at all on the scientific accuracy of his work.

Do you understand that very simple, basic point?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Darwin was not only racist and homophobic, he was also misogynistic, narcissistic, sociopathic, foul-smelling, rude, spiteful, a poor dresser, a mouth breather, a wife beater, a murderer, a tax evader, and an unrepentant sufferer of chronic halitosis.

Well, regardless of which of those things may or may not be true, he was most certainly correct in his establishing the field of the scientific theory of evolution by natural selection.

 

[ArtieE]

Creationists are right in that he was a racist and I think he was a homophobe, too.

I don't know if Darwin was a homophobe. By homophobe you mean like this man? Christian Pastor Says Gays 'Worthy Of Death' At Conference With 3 GOP Presidential Candidates

 

[james bond]

Quote mining you? What th........?

Did you or did you not post, "The logic is Dawkins was wrong about a lot of things in his writings"?


Um.....I'm not insulted. My comment about saying something that might get me banned was about something else.


See, this is where you're just being stupid. No one cares if Darwin was a racist. It has no bearing at all on the scientific accuracy of his work.

Do you understand that very simple, basic point?

There is no "what th..." here. You were caught quote mining me. The entire statement was "The logic is Darwin was wrong about a lot of things in his writings. Creationists are right in that he was a racist and I think he was a homophobe, too."

This brings in what the creationists have demonstrated. Do I have to post the links again and then some? Too much evidence here.

"Darwin wasn’t the first to propose biological arguments for racism, but his works fueled the most ugly and deadly racism. Even evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould wrote, “Biological arguments for racism may have been common before 1859, but they increased by orders of magnitude following the acceptance of evolutionary theory” (Ontogeny and Phylogeny, 1977)."

Did Darwin Promote Racism?.

>>See, this is where you're just being stupid.<< This should get you a warning.

>>No one cares if Darwin was a racist.<< The most ridiculous statement of all, albeit you admitted Darwin was racist.. I already showed the creationists care. We have moral values. Also, the blacks care. Will you tell that to the blacks in Africa? Tell them Darwin's evolutionary theory that states men have continually evolved, and thus some races are more evolved than others. The scientists who are moral and seek the truth care. Even the atheists ones do not want evolutionary racism.

What needs to happen is we have to educate people so they do not celebrate Darwin Day in February. It's shameful in that February is Black History month in the US!

I certainly will get the ball rolling on it thanks to you. No more Google Darwin Day icons! The mofo needs to be taken down.

 

[Jose Fly]

There is no "what th..." here. You were caught quote mining me. The entire statement was "The logic is Darwin was wrong about a lot of things in his writings. Creationists are right in that he was a racist and I think he was a homophobe, too."

You're not making any sense at all.

When I wondered about the logic behind this thread, you answered with the above. Even with both sentences, it still makes absolutely no sense. It's apparently something like....

"Darwin was a racist and homophobe, therefore much of what he wrote about evolution was wrong"

If you truly think that's logical, then I stand by my characterization of you.

This should get you a warning.

Except as evidenced above, it's accurate.

The most ridiculous statement of all, albeit you admitted Darwin was racist.

Good grief man, do you struggle with reading comprehension? I never admitted anything; I simply noted that whether or not Darwin was a racist has no bearing on the scientific accuracy of his work. And I'll ask again.....do you understand that simple point?

I already showed the creationists care. We have moral values.

Really? So if I showed where prominent creationists expressed racist views, what would that mean?

Also, the blacks care. Will you tell that to the blacks in Africa? Tell them Darwin's evolutionary theory that states men have continually evolved, and thus some races are more evolved than others. The scientists who are moral and seek the truth care. Even the atheists ones do not want evolutionary racism.

What needs to happen is we have to educate people so they do not celebrate Darwin Day in February. It's shameful in that February is Black History month in the US!

I certainly will get the ball rolling on it thanks to you. No more Google Darwin Day icons! The mofo needs to be taken down.

You've had the whole "races" thing explained to you multiple times by multiple people and you refuse to get it.

Ignorance can be overcome, willful ignorance cannot.

 

[Simurgh]

There's a reason I put quotation marks around "logic".


Yep, it certainly is about faith. As far as the catnip, well......as long as you're sharing.......

there he thinks i didn't get that, you clearly need a break from this onerous reading exercise. and yes, i will share. i'm good that way.

 

[Simurgh]

I'm not sure if it was more religious compared to today. It changed in the 19th century to be more atheist due to Charles Lyell and his prized pupil Charles Darwin.

oh lay of the dead dudes, you cannot blame everything you dislike on them. agnosticism, humanism, and atheism just became more socially acceptable once the church lost the stranglehold on education because people became more mobile--remember the industrial revolution? people started to discover other people's ideational systems, and different sacred texts started to be translated. then there is this whole archaeological thingy that made people interested in a world outside their narrow world. yep, and thus independent thinking took off. Darwin and Lyell were products of the widening of the cultural horizons. discovery and science moved away from blind faith.
and now we thank the germans for inventing religionswissenschaft. the thing that became religious studies in the US and which has given us some great reading materials.

 

[David M]

>>No one cares if Darwin was a racist.<< The most ridiculous statement of all, albeit you admitted Darwin was racist..

His racism has no effect on the facts of evolution. So rational people don't care in the context of talking about evolution. I don't care.

I already showed the creationists care. We have moral values.

No they don't care. Its just a cynical display of false outrage to launch and ad hominem attack against the Theory of Evolution.

Also, the blacks care. Will you tell that to the blacks in Africa? Tell them Darwin's evolutionary theory that states men have continually evolved, and thus some races are more evolved than others. The scientists who are moral and seek the truth care. Even the atheists ones do not want evolutionary racism.

The theory of evolution states no such thing. Every human race is equally evolved.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Aside from quote mining me and faking being insulted, what evidence do you have to show Darwin not being racist and treating blacks as his peers? Did he come out and say no that's not what I meant to his cousin or to Herbert Spencer? No. Instead, he borrowed Spencer's "survival of the fittest" and stuck it in his fifth edition! Darwin was clearly raking in the cash by then. I'm surprised he didn't change the title to simply "On the Preservation of Favoured WHITE Races in the Struggle for Life. It's the Survival of the Fittest."

What evidence do we have that You are not a closet racist.

When it comes to Darwin's work racism is a non sequitur.
What Spencer or any one else thought, is down to them.

What was added to his various editions was initially down to his own decisions and after his death by the editors. Like all scientific work they are revised as evidence makes it necessary.

Gray's Anatonomy. Has been revised and up dated many times, and versions sold today are absolutely up to date. But they still bare his name.

 

[james bond]

You're not making any sense at all.

When I wondered about the logic behind this thread, you answered with the above. Even with both sentences, it still makes absolutely no sense. It's apparently something like....

"Darwin was a racist and homophobe, therefore much of what he wrote about evolution was wrong"

If you truly think that's logical, then I stand by my characterization of you.


Except as evidenced above, it's accurate.


Good grief man, do you struggle with reading comprehension? I never admitted anything; I simply noted that whether or not Darwin was a racist has no bearing on the scientific accuracy of his work. And I'll ask again.....do you understand that simple point?


Really? So if I showed where prominent creationists expressed racist views, what would that mean?


You've had the whole "races" thing explained to you multiple times by multiple people and you refuse to get it.

Ignorance can be overcome, willful ignorance cannot.

Darwin's racist theories led to Jewish and black genocide and the promotion of scientific racism. It's ugly. I'll be starting a thread on this soon.

Let's move on to Darwin's "scientific accuracy" since you will not peer-review creation theory despite all the evidence. Darwin was wrong about survival of the "fittest." Part of it is the strongest, fastest and smartest will get dates and mates and a chance to "pass their genes." They'll be the ones to get to procreate, consume and survive. We see this with humans. Plants and animals, as well, but it's not in every case. We do not have a "one answer fits all" like Darwin tried to promote. Humans, plants and animals also cooperate instead of being in competition. Thus, Darwin was wrong about the drivers of natural selection. Darwin was also wrong with his racist theories of humans evolving from chimpanzee-like-apes. People will not accept Lucy and we have evidence that evos committed fraud with the other apes and early man. What people have realized is that evolution scientists committed fraud and scientific racism in trying to promote their ToE. Fossil evidence doesn't really lead one to the truth when one doesn't know what happened to the earth or the fossils. Fossil evidence is scant, too. Evos do not understand how dinosaurs died, for example. As for creation, I think it will become stronger once baraminology has been made into a book or complete theory. The evo scientists are stealing creation science ideas because they cannot explain their own theories. Today, we have science nut jobbers like Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Bill Nye. Interesting that they defend evolution science when scientific racism tried to destroy their people. Tyson has set science back to the dark ages with his advocacy of ToE, dark energy, dark matter, multiverses and the universe is suitable for life ramblings. At least Nye knows something about science and can explain it even though he isn't a scientist.

 

[james bond]

oh lay of the dead dudes, you cannot blame everything you dislike on them. agnosticism, humanism, and atheism just became more socially acceptable once the church lost the stranglehold on education because people became more mobile--remember the industrial revolution? people started to discover other people's ideational systems, and different sacred texts started to be translated. then there is this whole archaeological thingy that made people interested in a world outside their narrow world. yep, and thus independent thinking took off. Darwin and Lyell were products of the widening of the cultural horizons. discovery and science moved away from blind faith.
and now we thank the germans for inventing religionswissenschaft. the thing that became religious studies in the US and which has given us some great reading materials.

More quote mining haha.

 

[Simurgh]

Darwin's racist theories led to Jewish and black genocide and the promotion of scientific racism. It's ugly. I'll be starting a thread on this soon.

Let's move on to Darwin's "scientific accuracy" since you will not peer-review creation theory despite all the evidence. Darwin was wrong about survival of the "fittest." Part of it is the strongest, fastest and smartest will get dates and mates and a chance to "pass their genes." They'll be the ones to get to procreate, consume and survive. We see this with humans. Plants and animals, as well, but it's not in every case. We do not have a "one answer fits all" like Darwin tried to promote. Humans, plants and animals also cooperate instead of being in competition. Thus, Darwin was wrong about the drivers of natural selection. Darwin was also wrong with his racist theories of humans evolving from chimpanzee-like-apes. People will not accept Lucy and we have evidence that evos committed fraud with the other apes and early man. What people have realized is that evolution scientists committed fraud and scientific racism in trying to promote their ToE. Fossil evidence doesn't really lead one to the truth when one doesn't know what happened to the earth or the fossils. Fossil evidence is scant, too. Evos do not understand how dinosaurs died, for example. As for creation, I think it will become stronger once baraminology has been made into a book or complete theory. The evo scientists are stealing creation science ideas because they cannot explain their own theories. Today, we have science nut jobbers like Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Bill Nye. Interesting that they defend evolution science when scientific racism tried to destroy their people. Tyson has set science back to the dark ages with his advocacy of ToE, dark energy, dark matter, multiverses and the universe is suitable for life ramblings. At least Nye knows something about science and can explain it even though he isn't a scientist.

oh please, let's keep beating that dead horse some more. get off the racist homophobe train, it's a non-issue. and in regard to survival of the fittest, there are studies that show that the biggest, strongest, whatever is not always the one who gets to mate. while the two aspiring alphas clonk each other over the head, or rip each others throats out or whatever, the SMART guy sneaks in and mates with the female, hence the fittest DOES procreate. it's just not what you assume denotes ultimate fitness. it isn't muscle and viciousness, it's intelligence!
And so what if Darwin wasn't up on whatever the latest DNA/genetic studies now tell us. It didn't exist in his day, so i guess we can give him a pass for it.

what people are you talking about in regard to Lucy and how we evolved from a common ancestor that we share with apes? did you flunk Evolution 101?
seriously, those comments you make about fossils and real scientists stealing those creationist fantasies just shows your inability to accept science and need to hang on to creationism, because you want to keep your status as special snowflake.
PS: you still need to explain the concept of scientific racism. are you referring to eugenics? that was actually a much applauded concept here in the US , where they wanted to get rid of deviants (criminals, homosexuals, mentally ill, etc.
Hitler learned how to exterminate people while pretending it was done in the name of science from people like Britain's Sir Francis Galton, American W.E. B. Dubois,Thomas Wyatt Turner, and foundations that financed the study of eugenics were Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations.
So stop spewing that nonsense about Darwin's racism and homophobia, neither of which you can actually prove. science moves on and discovers new things. Darwin was a foundational force in the study of the natural world.

just admit you're a creationist and you don't like anything that makes you question your little world.

 

[james bond]

His racism has no effect on the facts of evolution. So rational people don't care in the context of talking about evolution. I don't care.



No they don't care. Its just a cynical display of false outrage to launch and ad hominem attack against the Theory of Evolution.



The theory of evolution states no such thing. Every human race is equally evolved.

There are no facts of evolution or else both creationists and evos can use it. Get a life besides being an internet atheist. That's all I can recommend for you.

 

[james bond]

oh please, let's keep beating that dead horse some more. get off the racist homophobe train, it's a non-issue. and in regard to survival of the fittest, there are studies that show that the biggest, strongest, whatever is not always the one who gets to mate. while the two aspiring alphas clonk each other over the head, or rip each others throats out or whatever, the SMART guy sneaks in and mates with the female, hence the fittest DOES procreate. it's just not what you assume denotes ultimate fitness. it isn't muscle and viciousness, it's intelligence!
And so what if Darwin wasn't up on whatever the latest DNA/genetic studies now tell us. It didn't exist in his day, so i guess we can give him a pass for it.

what people are you talking about in regard to Lucy and how we evolved from a common ancestor that we share with apes? did you flunk Evolution 101?
seriously, those comments you make about fossils and real scientists stealing those creationist fantasies just shows your inability to accept science and need to hang on to creationism, because you want to keep your status as special snowflake.
PS: you still need to explain the concept of scientific racism. are you referring to eugenics? that was actually a much applauded concept here in the US , where they wanted to get rid of deviants (criminals, homosexuals, mentally ill, etc.
Hitler learned how to exterminate people while pretending it was done in the name of science from people like Britain's Sir Francis Galton, American W.E. B. Dubois,Thomas Wyatt Turner, and foundations that financed the study of eugenics were Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations.
So stop spewing that nonsense about Darwin's racism and homophobia, neither of which you can actually prove. science moves on and discovers new things. Darwin was a foundational force in the study of the natural world.

just admit you're a creationist and you don't like anything that makes you question your little world.

I've mated already. Have you? Ha ha?

 

[Simurgh]

I've mated already. Have you? Ha ha?

ok, so what? you and a few billion other people have managed to do that. is this supposed to mean in that regard you accept the survival of the fittest concept, because it applies to you? or are you telling me that as unfit as you are you still managed to find someone who accepted you in spite of all short comings?

 

[james bond]

ok, so what? you and a few billion other people have managed to do that. is this supposed to mean in that regard you accept the survival of the fittest concept, because it applies to you? or are you telling me that as unfit as you are you still managed to find someone who accepted you in spite of all short comings?

According to Darwin's ToE and survival of the fittest, I am fitter than you. If you believe in social Darwinism, then you should be exterminated. See my new thread -- Darwin's Theory of Evolution and Darwinism Has Led To The Holocaust And Genocide Of Blacks .

I do not accept ToE, the survival of the fittest, social Darwinism and eugenics according to Darwin's cousin. The latter's ideas of negative eugenics ended up with the Nazis and the Holocaust. Forced sterilization and eradication of blacks came through Planned Parenthood in the US. The same Planned Parenthood that promotes abortion today.

To my way of thinking, human races are equal under the law and considered equal. Individuals are not equal in their accomplishments which includes fastest, strongest, smartest, etc. Thus, it's better to not accept the Darwin's notion that we descended from apes and what he considers survival of the fittest.

 

[Simurgh]

According to Darwin's ToE and survival of the fittest, I am fitter than you. If you believe in social Darwinism, then you should be exterminated. See my new thread -- Darwin's Theory of Evolution and Darwinism Has Led To The Holocaust And Genocide Of Blacks .

I do not accept ToE, the survival of the fittest, social Darwinism and eugenics according to Darwin's cousin. The latter's ideas of negative eugenics ended up with the Nazis and the Holocaust. Forced sterilization and eradication of blacks came through Planned Parenthood in the US. The same Planned Parenthood that promotes abortion today.

To my way of thinking, human races are equal under the law and considered equal. Individuals are not equal in their accomplishments which includes fastest, strongest, smartest, etc. Thus, it's better to not accept the Darwin's notion that we descended from apes and what he considers survival of the fittest.

what makes you believe that you are "fitter" than I am? the fact that you attribute eugenics and forced sterilization to planned parenthood? I said SMARTER not "enamored of alternative facts". wilful ignorance is not something that makes you look smart. anyone who thinks Darwin's theory of natural selection led to the Nazis and the holocaust is ignorant and does not understand the sociocultural dynamics of europe at that time, or for that matter global politics. and your attitude against planned parenthood is is beyond rational thought. like i said, you fear and hate anything and anyone who is in disagreement with you.

.....oh, if being mated is your criteria for being fitter than me, i hate to disappoint you. i was mated and have children. and why would hitler have exterminated me? because i am blond and blue-eyed? in the end, darwin was right in many of his thoughts regarding natural selection. since then we have learned more about behaviors and genetic inheritance. you just cannot deal with that reality, that's obvious.

any biologist and/or anthropologist can tell you that there is only one race--the human race.

 

[David M]

There are no facts of evolution or else both creationists and evos can use it. Get a life besides being an internet atheist. That's all I can recommend for you.

So mutations in DNA during cell replication don't exist? Allele frequencies in populations changing over time doesn't exist? Speciation doesn't happen even though its been observed multiple times?

All of these are facts. Most Creationists admit that these are facts.

Your petty insults just show your realization of how thoroughly your "arguments" have been demolished with facts.

 

[David M]

To my way of thinking, human races are equal under the law and considered equal. Individuals are not equal in their accomplishments which includes fastest, strongest, smartest, etc. Thus, it's better to not accept the Darwin's notion that we descended from apes and what he considers survival of the fittest.

Common ancestry with apes says nothing other than that we share a common ancestor with apes. Its not racist and its not homophobic.

You have no idea what "survival of the fittest" means. It certainly doesn't just mean "fastest, strongest, smartest".