I know you're bitter about your Christian past, but I always thought of you as supremely intelligent, until now!
"What does SOCIAL DARWINISM have to do with DARWINISM?"
How can you ask that without sounding FAR less intelligent than I know you are?
What does Mao's Little Red Book have to do with books, or Mao, or the color red?
There are two problems here:
First. You have deliberately misquoted me with
"What does SOCIAL DARWINISM have to do with DARWINISM?"
What I actually wrote was:
Again, what does Social Darwinism have to do with Evolution?
I have never in my life called
Evolution “Darwinism”, so this is strawman attack.
I always referred to Evolution as
“Evolution”, and never as “Darwinism” or “Darwinian Evolution”.
Plus, I have always called what Charles Darwin wrote in his works, he always described his mechanism as
“Natural Selection”, and again never as “Darwinism”, because Charles Darwin have never named anything after himself.
And you are forgetting that Charles Darwin wasn’t the only one who was writing about Evolution by Natural Selection and Biogeography; the other author was Alfred Russel Wallace, Darwin’s contemporary naturalist and biologist, who wrote Malay Archipelago.
Wallace also didn’t name Natural Selection as “Darwinism”.
Natural Selection is the proper scientific name for one of the evolutionary mechanisms, not “Darwinism” or “Darwinian Evolution”.
So stop misquoting me. You are being deliberately dishonest by using the term “Darwinism” instead of “Evolution” in your post.
So if anyone is being less than honest and not intelligent at all, it is you, BilliardsBall.
Second, associating Evolution with Social Darwinism is not only strawman argument, it is also false equivalence argument. One is not related to the other.
Nothing in Darwin’s works, his travel journey notes in the 2nd voyage of HMS Beagle (1831-1836), On Origin Of Species (1859), The Descent Of Man (1871), etc, does he ever talk of wars and genocides.
Wars and genocides are not part of evolutionary biology or the theory of evolution, because they (wars and genocides) involved with political and social issues.
Darwin was never involved in writing about Social Darwinism. Just because some political philosophers hijacked his name, doesn’t mean Natural Selection is the same as Social Darwinism.
You are the one who repeatedly brought up Social Darwinism, not us, as attack because you know you already have weak argument regarding to biology, so you falsely use Nazi politics and the Holocaust to blame Darwin’s Natural Selection.
I think you are shameless dishonest member, who has been trying to change the subject, by focusing on Hitler, Stalin and Mao, which have absolutely nothing to do with the theory of evolution.
You are not a Jew, but you have trying to pass off as one, and you are shamelessly dishonest by bringing up the WW2 Holocaust. You are not a Jew, and yet you are trying to use emotional blackmail by bringing up Hitler and Nazi and what they did to the Jews. You are one sick person.
You are lying again. I have never once mentioned Mao or Mao’s red book. You are still trying to change the subject.
You want to talk about Social Darwinism, then fine, start new thread in the Political Debate forum. Social Darwinism is a social and political ideology, not biology.
I refuse to explain myself again why Social Darwinism is irrelevant in this thread, and will not respond to any more of your posts should you mention Social Darwinism in this thread again.
You are being tiresomely ignorant and biased, by putting words in my mouth.