do people still deny Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection

[ReadOneBookAWeek]

i didn't expect an intelligent response. I know none of you even understand the theory of evolution and none of you have read Charles Darwin's book.

 

[Dragonfly Jones]

i didn't expect an intelligent response. I know none of you even understand the theory of evolution and none of you have read Charles Darwin's book.

Surely this is obviously the case.

Lets say hypothetically Darwin was indeed a white hood wearing racist (which he was not) does that then render his ideas and conclusions moot?

All of what we've learned in science in the last 200 years thanks to his original hypothesis is completely untrue because he was a racist?

You shouldn't let your personal emotions affect your ability to properly examine a concept

Science is not the place for personal feelings bruh.

Leave that sensitive shyt at the door.

 

[MostReal]

It renders them moot when you are trying to tell me (a blackman) that a white man is a more 'evolved' person than I am.
I reject that.
The theory should be called Adaptation, not Evolution. Language & its use is very important...we as black people need to understand this.

 

[Blaze500]

i didn't expect an intelligent response. I know none of you even understand the theory of evolution and none of you have read Charles Darwin's book.

even if Darwin had a racial implication behind evolution (which he certain did not) it wouldn't matter because it doesn't make his ideas moot...

Darwin's theory is one of the greatest scientific theories of all time, and the vast, vast VAST majority of scientists believe it...the evidence is there


Isaac Newton might of been a homophobic racist, doesn't make his theory of gravity moot

Einstein could of hated black people, doesn't make relativity moot

 

[Blaze500]

plus i don't think Darwin's use of the word "Race" has to do with how we think of it today...

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

plus i don't think Darwin's use of the word "Race" has to do with how we think of it today...

It renders them moot when you are trying to tell me (a blackman) that a white man is a more 'evolved' person than I am.
I reject that.
The theory should be called Adaptation, not Evolution. Language & its use is very important...we as black people need to understand this.

When Darwin used the term "races" he simply means "varieties". Darwin never said the white man is more evolved, where the fukk do you people get this shyt? Language and it's use is very important, so you should probably understand the type of language they used in the late 1800s when darwin wrote his book, look how darwin used the word races

"the several races, for instance, of the cabbage"

I swear, it's like you all hear someone say "DARWIN IS RACIST" once and then believe it the rest of your life. Have you looked this shyt up at all?

 

[Blaze500]

When Darwin used the term "races" he simply means "varieties". Darwin never said the white man is more evolved, where the fukk do you people get this shyt? Language and it's use is very important, so you should probably understand the type of language they used in the late 1800s when darwin wrote his book, look how darwin used the word races

"the several races, for instance, of the cabbage"

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

Darwin laid the foundation for Hitler

http://www.thecoli.com/threads/darwinism-led-to-the-holocaust.264990/

 

[Blaze500]

http://www.thecoli.com/threads/darwinism-led-to-the-holocaust.264990/

 

[Berniewood Hogan]

Read the thread, not the title.

 

[Chez Lopez]

i don't need someone to tell me about darwin, i know what his works are about and there was scientific racism throughout his studies.

The Subtitle for Origin of Species :"The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life"

favored races applied to animals and humans and part of his doctrine was that the white race was the pinnacle of human evolution while negroes and asiatics were considered to be inferior. This is a fact, and you not knowing this reveals that you are not familiar with his writings. Watching and reading OTHER people speak about his works is not the same as studying them for yourself. Go read his book Origin of species and then we can talk. His works were the foundation for scientific racism from america to germany.

Great response. Lol at people defending Darwin itt too, like he didn mean race as in races. He was a eugenicist, which for you educated people means he was all for the holocaust. here is another quote from another of darwins books, the descent of man. Lol guys/


“With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.


In this book he also states that black people are the evolutionary link between humans and apes, which means he believed blacks were lower on the evolutionary ladder than whites, and thus deserve to be exterminated.

“At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace throughout the world the savage races. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state as we may hope, than the Caucasian and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.”

So evolution is at best a theory based on white superiority and at its worst the excuse for waging worldwide genocide against the entire non white population.

/thread.

 

[MostReal]

When Darwin used the term "races" he simply means "varieties". Darwin never said the white man is more evolved, where the fukk do you people get this shyt? Language and it's use is very important, so you should probably understand the type of language they used in the late 1800s when darwin wrote his book, look how darwin used the word races

"the several races, for instance, of the cabbage"

I swear, it's like you all hear someone say "DARWIN IS RACIST" once and then believe it the rest of your life. Have you looked this shyt up at all?

question:
Is The Descent of man...not a book based on his Evolutionary Theory?

of course it is, thus when quotes such as this arrive in the book edited: previously stated above

He leaves me no choice but to challenge it.
So to address your question of 'where do we get this from?' Simply put...We get it from him

 

[Blaze500]

question:
Is The Descent of man...not a book based on his Evolutionary Theory?

of course it is, thus when quotes such as this arrive in the book edited: previously stated above

He leaves me no choice but to challenge it.
So to address your question of 'where do we get this from?' Simply put...We get it from him

you do realize that darwin rejected polygenism, which was the dominant scientific racist ideology of the time


way to take darwin's quotes completely out of context..

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

question:
Is The Descent of man...not a book based on his Evolutionary Theory?

of course it is, thus when quotes such as this arrive in the book edited: previously stated above

He leaves me no choice but to challenge it.
So to address your question of 'where do we get this from?' Simply put...We get it from him

Most of these quotes are taken completely out of context to fit a specific argument that Darwin himself did not support.

With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination. We build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.

The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil. Hence we must bear without complaining the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; but there appears to be at least one check in steady action, namely the weaker and inferior members of society not marrying so freely as the sound; and this check might be indefinitely increased, though this is more to be hoped for than expected

The great break in the organic chain between man and his nearest allies, which cannot be bridged over by any extinct or living species, has often been advanced as a grave objection to the belief that man is descended from some lower form; but this objection will not appear of much weight to those who, from general reasons, believe in the general principle of evolution. Breaks often occur in all parts of the series, some being wide, sharp and defined, others less so in various degrees; as between the orang and its nearest allies—between the Tarsius and the other Lemuridae between the elephant, and in a more striking manner between the Ornithorhynchus or Echidna, and all other mammals. But these breaks depend merely on the number of related forms which have become extinct. At some future period, not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilised races of man will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes, as Professor Schaaffhausen has remarked, will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilised state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as now between the negro or Australian and the gorilla.

here is what DARWIN HIMSELF said SPECIFICALLY ABOUT RACES

Although the existing races of man differ in many respects, as in colour, hair, shape of skull, proportions of the body, &c., yet if their whole organisation be taken into consideration they are found to resemble each other closely in a multitude of points. Many of these points are of so unimportant or of so singular a nature, that it is extremely improbable that they should have been independently acquired by aboriginally distinct species or races. The same remark holds good with equal or greater force with respect to the numerous points of mental similarity between the most distinct races of man. The American aborigines, Negroes and Europeans differ as much from each other in mind as any three races that can be named; yet I was incessantly struck, whilst living with the Fuegians on board the Beagle, with the many little traits of character, shewing how similar their minds were to ours; and so it was with a full-blooded negro with whom I happened once to be intimate."

he is literally saying there is NO DIFFERENCE between the various races of men.

and on the topic of SLAVERY

While strolling about the town Darwin was disgusted at the sight of black slaves, and upon returning to the Beagle he got into a big quarrel with Capt. FitzRoy about the ethics of treating humans as property. FitzRoy [who was a devout Christian] flew into a temper and forbid Darwin to share his dinner table with him ever again. After a short cooling off period Capt. FitzRoy apologized to Darwin and his privilege to dine with him was restored.

'We had several quarrels; for when out of temper he [FitzRoy] was utterly unreasonable. For instance, early in the voyage at Bahia in Brazil he defended and praised slavery, which I abominated, and told me that he just visited a great slave-owner, who had called up many of his slaves and asked them whether they were happy, and whether they wished to be free, and all answered 'No.' I then asked him, perhaps with a sneer, whether he thought that the answers of slaves in the presence of their master was worth anything. This made him excessively angry

Does this sound like the words of a man who believed blacks to be inferior? Did he support slavery? The man was an abolitionist in a time where that was EXTREMELY EXTREMELY RARE.

 

[Sensitive Blake Griffin]

you do realize that darwin rejected polygenism, which was the dominant scientific racist ideology of the time


way to take darwin's quotes completely out of context..

I really don't understand what folks get out of thinking Darwin is a racist... is it their disgust for evolutionary theory stemming from religious views? I know @iLLaV3 is very religious if memory serves me correct. What is it? Is it just an assumption that all white people from the past are racist fukks? (most were...but darwin wasn't) If he was racist (which he isn't) does that make his theory of evolution not true? It doesn't. That's why it's an accepted scientific theory. natural selection is a fukking fact. evolution is a fact.