What Have Darwinists Said That's True? (Abiogenesis, evolution, genesis, atheist)

[Hela cells/lab pandemic]

Yossarian :

...your superfluous use of Latin and your attempts to drag this thread off topic.

For the second and final time....My use of LATIN was NOT superfluous! It had a crucial historical context which you were obviously IGNORANT OF... ‘ Creatio ex Nihilo’ was never off topic, as this doctrine presents a serious challenge to a materialist paradigm which also underpins Darwinism/ atheism and always has !

Furthermore, , I have ‘ FREE WILL’ ...Ergo... For future reference..I WILL DO/ SAY...Whatever I please here. I DON’T NEED UR ‘ FRUGGEN ‘ PERMISSION vis a vis subject MATTER/ MATERIALISM.

Notably, MATERIALISM actually DENIES MAN'S FREE WILL !... please hold onto that thought, as I have gotten ahead of myself...

Yossarian :

...And ( Darwinian ) evolution puts no stock in materialism or anything else for that matter

It is TO LAUGH...You’re spouting pure nonsense here. Without question, Darwinism is COMPLETELY & UTTERLY dependent on a materialist/ naturalistic world view. A world view which ( to reiterate ) DENIES the existence of Man's free will, which is just more materialist/ Darwinian NONSENSE !

An Atheistic Science Has No Ultimate Answers

Our universe ( as even mainstream/ materialist science/cosmology asserts ) simply appeared ( ‘ unbidden??? ’ ) from a dimension-less point ( infinitely smaller than an atom ) in an incomprehensible cataclysm called the Big Bang. Materialist scientists ( also known as ‘ physicalists ’ ) have gone on to assert that; ‘ the material cosmos is all that exists.’ In so doing , they have painted themselves into an intellectual corner. How could the physical cosmos, which is ‘ something ’, come from ‘ nothing ’? And how could consciousness emerge from insensate matter ?

Since their inception, our heavens - as Edwin Hubble ( 1889-1953 ) first discovered - have been expanding at a fantastic rate. In other words, all material objects are in a perpetual state of flux. But if nothing about material existence is ever absolute, how can a strictly materialist science ever claim to know the absolute truth about anything ?

Things only get fuzzier for materialists when they consider the subatomic realm of protons, neutrons, electrons , photons, etcetera. Here, ostensibly solid substances have a nebulous ‘ particle vs. wave duality’ which can only be viewed in one state or the other, but never both simultaneously. Strangely enough, it isn’t matter itself which determines this, but rather one’s state of mind.

The fact that conscious perceptions about ‘ reality ’ actually have the power to shape it, not only hints at the MIND'S PRE-EMINENCE OVER MATTER , but also lends credence to supernaturalist doctrines of ‘ CREATION OUT OF NOTHING ’ ( in Latin ‘ creatio ex nihilo ’ ) as described in Genesis chapter one, and elsewhere in Judeo - Christian scripture.

And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters ( Genesis 1:2 ; KJV )

Son, look upon heaven and earth, and all that is in them; and consider that God made them out of nothing ( 2 Maccabees 7:28 ; The Jerusalem Bible )

Let’s play devil’s advocate and pretend that all supernaturalism is fantasy - that only ‘ physicalists ’ are on the right path. This would mean that the mind too, is naught but matter, and therefore at the mercy of naturalistic laws of cause and effect. This in turn, would seem to negate ‘ free will ’, which is sheer nonsense.

I can take a break for lunch , or keep writing. I can have a ham sandwich, or opt for a pizza slice. I’m certainly ‘ free’ to make these conscious decisions. They’re not predetermined by some arbitrary arrangement of atoms inside my cranium. Those atoms have no say in the matter.

By delving not only into the insights of ancient mystics, but equally into modernday quantum physics, we begin to appreciate the fatal flaw in conventional science's/ Darwinism/ Atheism's much favoured materialist paradigm - FOR THIS PRESUPPOSES AN OBJECTIVE REALITY, INDEPENDENT OF CONSCIOUS PERCEPTIONS, WHEN NO SUCH ANIMAL EXISTS !

***
Yossarian :

...Interesting how you totally sidestep my major points...

Hmmm....Some of your other points were no less laughable/ absurd ( than were your childish objections to my use of Latin/ your feeble attempts to deny the connection between Darwinsim and materialism ) ...One of my favorites was your preposterous commentary about some spurious universe ‘ ostensibly’ giving birth to this one.

That’s such wild conjecture ( bordering on SuperNaturalism ) that you might as well be arguing about the number of angels that might dance on the head of a pin

Spurious / ludicrous or not....I’ll respond to some of your other points in due course

CHEERS

[Hela cells/lab pandemic]

Camanintx:

...Do you really think that Darwin's Theory of Evolution is responsible for Hitler's final solution or the development of Eugenics?

Historically All...I REPEAT ALL...Of the leaders of the Eugenics movement on both sides of the Atlantic were ( and/or still are ) staunch Darwinists, that was NO ACCIDENT/ MERE COINCIDENCE. Eugenics was nothing less than the evil twin of ' Social Darwinism' ( whose name says it all ). Although there were also undeniable connections with Malthusianism, which likewise enormously influenced Darwin's own thinking/ writing/ world view

The ' survival of the fittest' dogmas of Darwinism/ Charles Darwin were not only cruel , but utterly racist. In fact, Darwin's ‘ The Origin of Species ’ had been subtitled, ‘ The Preservation of the Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life’ ! In his 1871 book, ‘ The Descent of Man’, Darwin described Negroes as a‘ less evolved species’, also calling them ‘ savages,’ ‘ barbarians,’ and ‘ low and degraded inhabitants’. Darwin warned that if black Africans bred with ‘ civilized ’ human beings, their offspring would be ‘ feeble’ and ‘ sterile’

There is absolutely NO DOUBT that Darwinism played a major role / was a major influence on Nazi ideology/ the mind of Adolf Hitler and that of his cronies... as all manner of historians have admitted.

The following works of academia are among those which explore the various links between Darwinism; social Darwinism; eugenics; scientific racism; and the Nazi movement...Beyerchen, A.D., Scientists under Hitler, Yale university press, new haven, ct, 1977. ...Stein, G., Biological Science And The Roots Of Nazism, American Scientist 76(1):50–58, 1988. ...Tobach, E., Gianusos, J., Topoff, H. and Gross, C.G., The Four Horsemen; Racism, Sexism, Militarism, and Social Darwinism, Behavioral Publications, New York, 1974...Gasman, D., The Scientific Origin of National Socialism, American Elsevier, New York, p. xiv, 1971....King, J., The Biology Of Race, University of California Press, 2nd ed., Berkeley, Ca, p. 156, 1981. ...Stanton, W., The Leopard’s Spots; Scientific Attitudes Towards Race In America, 1815–1859, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Il, 1960...Weindling, P., Health, Race and German Politics Between National Unification and Nazism 1870–1945, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Ma, 1989...Mueller-hill, B., Murderous Science: Elimination By Scientific Selection Of Jews, Gypsies, And Others, Germany 1933–1945, Oxford University Press, Oxford, p. 23, 1988....
Gray, P., Cursed By Eugenics, Time, january 11, pp. 84–85, 1999...Jones, E. M. (Ed.), Darwin And The Vampire: Evolution’s Contribution To The Holocaust, Culture Wars 17:11, 1998....Haas, P.J., Nineteenth Century Science And The Formation Of Nazi Policy, Journal Of Theology, 1995....Youngson, R., Scientific Blunders; A Brief History Of How Wrong Scientists Can Sometimes Be, Carroll and Graf Pub., New York, 1998....Darwinism as a Factor in the Twentieth-Century Totalitarianism Holocausts Creation Research Society Quarterly. Vol. 39, June 2002]

Here’s a few more pertinent quotes

A scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, - a mere heart of stone.
Charles Darwin

His (Darwin's) theory of the survival of the fittest was warmly welcomed by the social scientists of the day, and they believed mankind had achieved various levels of evolution culminating in the white man's civilization. By the second half of the nineteenth century racism was accepted as fact by the vast majority of Western scientists.
Indian anthropologist Lalita Vidyarthi: ‘ Racism, Science and Pseudoscience ’

(Hitler) was a firm believer and preacher of evolution. …his book, ‘ Mein Kampf ’, clearly set forth a number of evolutionary ideas, particularly those emphasizing struggle, survival of the fittest and the extermination of the weak to produce a better society
Historian R. Hickman: ‘ Biocreation

Darwin’s characterization of history, in terms of selfish conflict, DID exact a cruel/bloody toll on humanity, throughout the 20th century, and continues to do so IMO. Marxists slanted social Darwinism, in efforts to promote class struggle. Totalitarian fascists and blue bloods, foresaw world domination by a race of super-men . Countless others similarly co-opted Darwin’s survivalist doctrine , to further their own selfish causes. While far from the whole story, a growing belief in the theory of evolution, helped to seed two World Wars

This quote from World War I general, Friedrich von Bernardi was nothing if not Darwinian in character :

War is a biological necessity...as necessary as the struggle of the elements of nature; ( it ) gives a biologically just decision, since its decisions rest on the very nature of things. ( For a more comprehensive study of the role of Darwinism in helping to inflame pre-World War I mind sets, see ‘ Europe Since 1870 ' by British historian James Joll .)

it's been said that cruel Darwinian racism/’ ‘ survival of the fittest’ ideology was also a driving force behind the slaughter of an estimated 15 million Congolese by King Leopold’s forces of Belgium in the early 20th century

Speaking of the Belgian Congo. Here’s another little known but Decidedly Dark Chapter in Darwinian history

The Death Of Ota- Benga !

In his 1871 book ‘ The Descent Of Man’, Charles Darwin claimed that non-white races were ‘ less evolved’ than civilized Europeans.’ This led to crazy and blatantly racist notions that surviving ‘ missing link’ human ancestors, could still be found in unexplored parts of the globe.

In 1904, Darwinist researchers captured and caged a Congolese Pygmy named Ota Benga. Still caged, Ota Benga was put on display at the St. Louis World’s fair, and later the Bronx zoo. Housed alongside chimpanzees and other apes, and treated like an animal , Ota Benga , who had a wife and 2 children in the Belgian Congo, was touted as "the closest transitional link to man."
After years of abuse, Ota Benga committed suicide; after years of racist deception and fraud ( masquerading as science ) its high time that Neo-Darwinism did the same !

***

To reiterate Darwin WAS a racist who condoned/ predicted genocide and who heinously saw this as contributing to Civilization’s advance/ the betterment of man ( again see ‘ The Descent of Man’ etc ) . Darwin’s writing’s/ Darwin’s savage ‘ survival of the fittest’ ideology was the driving force behind the entire Eugenics movement. Darwin was also a major influence on pretty much the entire ‘ Who’s Who’ of Communism, most especially on a young Joseph Stalin ( who gave up his studies for the priesthood and changed his name almost immediately after reading ‘ The Origin of Species’ ) again as all manner of scholars/ historians have admitted/documented

I would say that Charles Darwin/ his Dangerous ( albeit erroneous ) world-view HAS contributed indirectly to the death of tens of millions ( at a bare minimum ) ....Not that religious fundamentalism doesn’t similarly have the blood of millions of innocents on its hands. No doubt in my mind that it does...

A good book on this Darwinian / Nazi connection is ‘ FROM DARWIN TO HITLER: Evolutionary Ethics , Eugenics & Racism in Germany’ by Richard Weikart.

[logician]

Darwin was the greatest scientist that ever lived, the notion that his theories are reponsible for genocide are ludicrous.

[Hela cells/lab pandemic]

Darwin was a racist whose highly influential writings openly promoted/ supported genocide ...that's NOT even a matter for debate ! IT'S A FACT !

As for being a great scientist ? His theory of evolution was/is unsupported pseudoscience ENDOSTOREY...

Which brings us back to square one...' What have Darwinists said that is true ? '

[camanintx]

Originally Posted by Hela cells/lab pandemic

Camanintx:

Historically All...I REPEAT ALL...Of the leaders of the Eugenics movement on both sides of the Atlantic were ( and/or still are ) staunch Darwinists, that was NO ACCIDENT/ MERE COINCIDENCE. Eugenics was nothing less than the evil twin of ' Social Darwinism' ( whose name says it all ). Although there were also undeniable connections with Malthusianism, which likewise enormously influenced Darwin's own thinking/ writing/ world view

If you are going to condemn Darwinism because it was twisted to support eugenics and genocide, you would also have to condemn Christianity since it was equally used to support these causes.

A good book for you to read would be Preaching Eugenics: Religious Leaders and the American Eugenics Movement, 2004, by Christine Rosen.

Originally Posted by Hela cells/lab pandemic

The ' survival of the fittest' dogmas of Darwinism/ Charles Darwin were not only cruel , but utterly racist. In fact, Darwin's ‘ The Origin of Species ’ had been subtitled, ‘ The Preservation of the Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life’ ! In his 1871 book, ‘ The Descent of Man’, Darwin described Negroes as a‘ less evolved species’, also calling them ‘ savages,’ ‘ barbarians,’ and ‘ low and degraded inhabitants’. Darwin warned that if black Africans bred with ‘ civilized ’ human beings, their offspring would be ‘ feeble’ and ‘ sterile’

If you think the subtitle of The Origin of Species is derogatory in any way, I suggest you bone up on the scientific definition of race. As for your claim that Darwin was racist, his own words refute this.

[camanintx]

Originally Posted by Hela cells/lab pandemic

Which brings us back to square one...' What have Darwinists said that is true ? '

Actually, the question you are asking is "what have Darwinists said that I will agree with?"

[Autodidact]

Well, let's start at the beginning. What is a Darwinist? Are you referring to all modern biologists who accept the theory of evolution? Or something else? If so, what?

[Hela cells/lab pandemic]

ChristineES:

Darwin was not an atheist. (I know this is off-topic but I felt moved to write it)

Midnight Blue :

He ( Darwin ) was an agnostic.

ChristineES:

I think people sound desperate to prove that Darwin was an atheist, but he was not (at least from I have learned). I heard he was an agnostic, too. That means that he did not know if there were a God or gods or not.
I certainly could be wrong about it, since Darwin is no longer alive to ask for certain.

Hela :

Tut Tut....Why not cite Darwin’s volumous/massive written/ recorded thoughts to support your position. Otherwise, kindly stop insisting ( without a smattering of evidence ) that : ‘ Darwin was NOT an atheist ‘

Midnight Blue :

No, you're NOT wrong ( Christine )

Hela :

So ( Midnight Blue ) find the pertinent quote/ text ( where he/Darwin says he’s an ‘ agnostic’/has ‘ never been an atheist’ ) rather than keep on insisting that you're right/ you heard it through a friend / a friend of a friend/ blah blah blah...all based on NO documentation.

Midnight Blue :

I didn't keep insisting I was right

Hela:

You kept making the same claim , with no documentation to back it up...while calling me ' WILFULLY IGNORANT' which amounts to the same thing...in my books

Midnight Blue :

I have a quote and the citation for it at hand

I’ll wager dollars to donuts YOU GOT NOTHING

MidnightBlue :

I would have supplied them ( the documentation ) the first time if you ( Hela ) had asked in a CIVIL manner

.

So now I’m uncivil eh ? Talk about the kettle calling the pot black ! Earlier You called me ‘ WILFULLY IGNORANT’ ( among other condescending statements ) remember? Yet at no point did I respond in kind ...ah well....‘ SOME PEOPLE WILL BELIEVE WHATEVER THEY PLEASE REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE FACTS ARE...sound familiar ?

Hmmm...here’s the exact quotes

Midnight Blue :

When he was alive, he ( Darwin ) said very plainly that he was an agnostic and was not and never had been an atheist. However, some people ( read Hela ) WILL BELIEVE WHATEVER THEY PLEASE REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE FACTS ARE; PEOPLE WHO MAKE IT THEIR BUSINESS TO ATTACK DARWIN ARE ALWAYS THAT KIND OF PEOPLE.


That's okay. One of the things that makes my life so pleasant is that I never trouble myself about the opinions of the WILLFULLY IGNORANT. ( read Hela ) :

Not that we need to keep score here...BUT... Much of your previous response ( Midnight Blue ) to yours truly, was similarly condescending . Want another example ? ......

Midnight Blue :

You have demonstrated very clearly, though, that you ( Hela ) don't understand either Darwin or punctuated equilibrium.

Try me oh condescending one...scratch that ...doubtless you cannot...because once again ...when push comes to shove...YOU’VE GOT NOTHING!

Midnight Blue :

One may doubt whether genocide was inevitable, but there is no doubt that the Abrahamic god not only justifies it, but demands it, and that his followers have often been its enthusiastic proponents.

This is one of the few statements you’ve made that I AGREE WITH, Which is why I’m NO FAN of religious fundamentalism/ Biblical literalism. However, an oft times racist ‘ survival of the fittest’ Darwinism/ atheistic science ( which recognizes no penultimate moral/godly authority ) also has a lot of blood on its hands. In terms of body count, I would contend that an atheistic science is way ahead on points...IF death is how we’re keeping score

Midnight Blue:

Welcome ( Hela ) to my ignore list

Frankly my dear Blue/Scarlet....I don’t give a damn....don't care if you don't wanna share all your ' mythological' Darwinian secrets either...take your proverbial ' ball ' and ' go home' ...that's all prefectly kosher with me

CHEERS