Evolution Is A Racist Concept?
June 25, 2008
Like This? Then Check Out:
Or, Maybe You're Feeling A Little Random?:
Random Post
Comments
30 Responses to “Evolution Is A Racist Concept?”
Feel free to leave a comment...
and oh, if you want a pic to show with your comment, go get a gravatar!
Its true, anthropologically speaking. Studying the bone structure, shape of the nose, and musculature the negroid features are more similar to great apes than Caucasoid features. Of course this doesn’t necessarily mean that anybody evolved from anything. But that is where some people might draw that conclusion.
Furthermore, I fail to see why Theology and Science are mutually exclusive. To wit: of what consequence is it to morality whether or not humans were formed of dirt or are just smarter apes?
Blame the parents.
Honestly, this just makes me happy to hear. If we were all blacks first, then Adam and Eve were black, and perhaps Abraham was Black, and maybe even further on down the Biblical line. In your face, racist fundies!
Learn maths and some fractal book so you can understand why flowers and trees are made this way. Better to think and wonder than believe and be certain.
Anyway…. why do god believers think they can change other people’s beliefs?
Blame the doctor.
Actually humans are the direct descendants of a rare species of Bolivian carrot. Superman told me so.
Where’s my ::head hitting desk:: emoticon?
Darwin’s work, _The Origin of the Species_ is a racist work. See here: http://books.google.com/books?id=tKgOAAAAYAAJ&printsec=frontcover&dq=origin+species+preservation+favored+races
“…Preservation of favored races” implies that there are unfavored races. That classification on the basis of race is racism by its very definition.
HAHAHA, you are LOSING creationists!! Not because of any controversy, not because anyone said so. But because of reality! Doesn’t matter what you believe. Go back to your flat, 6,000 y/o, geocentric world.
Dear ‘just popping in’:
It’s an archaic use of the word race to mean SPECIES. The meanings of words change over time. A slut used to be a slovenly housekeeper.
But, judging from your nom de plume, you probably just engage in hit-and-run posting (a typical tactic of your kind), so I doubt you’ll read this, anyway.
LynstHolin,
“The meanings of words change over time.”
I see, so back when Darwin wrote his book, the word, _race_, never referred to the different ethnicities of people? C’mon. I doubt that’s true. I grant you that the meanings of words change over time, but the word _race_ back then included people just as it does today.
“A typical tactic of your kind”
Why do you have to turn this into something bordering on an ad hominem attack? I didn’t draw any broad conclusions in my posting–I just injected a fact into the discussion to try to turn it away from name-calling and Christian-bashing. I appreciate your intelligent contribution to the discussion, but you sullied it with your last paragraph.
The Nerd, So true..So funny. Actually, Africans are more genetically diverse than the peoples of all of the other continents. They are just as evolved as (if not more than) the other races. In fact, it is incorrect to even lump all of those of African descent into single “race” because some groups of Africans differ more genetically between other African groups than the genetic difference we see between Caucasian & Asian.
If a complex system implies that there must have been some greater intelligence that created it, then there must be a greater intelligence than God that created him. You can’t have it both ways.
Just popping in:
Ever heard the phrase ‘the human race’? That is using ‘race’ as a synonym of ’species’. If you actually knew anything about the book in question, you would know that was how Darwin was using it.
1. It is a common creationist ruse to say that evolution calls one race ‘more evolved’ than another. All the current races on the planet did evolve from Africa and they evolved to fit their new environment. Meanwhile those still in Africa *continued* to evolve to fit their own environment. At no point does evolution suggest that Africans are less evolved.
2. Saying that there are favored races and unfavored races is *in no way* racist. It is truth. I, being as white as a guy can be, wouldn’t survive 10 days in North Africa. I sunburn under 40 watt bulbs! I am an unfavored race for that environment. My ancestors are better suited for colder areas and, as a result, so am I. It does not make one race better than another, it makes them specialized for their original environment. That is what “favored” means when talking about evolution. Also note: being highly specialized for 1 environment can make a race/species very favored there, but extremely unfavored in any other. Generalized races are much more likely to survive environment changes. All of this is completely independent of socio-political concepts of ‘racism’. And humans are all still one species, not myriad different species.
Evolutionary theory is not racist. That’s not to say that racists won’t try to use it to justify their brand of evil. But it’s no different from racists using the bible to justify their evil (kkk anyone?).
Evolution happens. Almost all creationists openly admit it. They just draw some imaginary line wherein evolution does not cross. They use the term “microevolution” to indicate that imaginary line. The idea being that phenotype changes, but is stopped by some unseen force before it goes further than creationists are comfortable with. They are, of course, completely unable to pinpoint this line, or identify the mechanism behind it. But it is integral to their continued dismissal of evolution in light of all the mountains of evidence supporting it.
Oh, and before anyone says it: “carbon dating” is a form of “radiological dating.” It only measures the age of organic material within about 30,000 years. Other radiological dating methods can measure dates of organic materials for much much longer ranges. The rate at which the radioactive materials decay is incredibly consistent (which is why atomic clocks are the most accurate) and predictable.
Thanks for playing folks! Have a nice day!
Well said William
*claps Willian*
BRAVO, BRAVOOOO!!! My hero =D!
Ja wrote: “You are losing, Creationists!”
It’s not a game. The purpose of the atheist is to disprove God. The purpose of the Christian is to love God. You guys treat it as a competition.
And since you want a competition, I’d have to say no, you’re wrong; more and more scientists are changing their minds about evolution and are realizing the obvious: that SOMETHING started it all. Everything needs a beginning. Whatever the first thing was that ever existed, it had to have ALWAYS existed, therefore being beyond time (as the Bible says God is) and not bound by science laws and stuff. So either you believe God always existed (which he can do because He’s a god), or you can believe the Big Bang always existed (which would mean The Big Bang is in fact beyond science). So you see, even atheists believe in a god.
Atheism: The belief that there was nothing, and nothing exploded, forming everything, without the need for some supernatural intervention. The non-existent nothingness just suddenly became existent, and atheists think this is science?? No, that is beyond science. In order for that to have happened, a higher being needed to have started it all.
And where’re all the missing links? We find fossils of a lizard and fossils of a fish, but SOMEhow we NEVER find the hundreds of transitional fossils that we SHOULD be finding between two species. Even a 5-year-old would tell you that if there are a hundred half-lizard/half-fish fossils, one whole-lizard fossil, and one whole-fish fossil, even that 5-year-old will tell you you’d likely find one of the hundred transitional fossils first. There’s a 1% chance of finding non-transitional fossils, and yet SOMEHOW, that’s all we find. We have found zero transitional fossils, even though 99% of the fossils we’ve ever found should have been transitional. Even Darwin pointed this out in Origin of Species, and it worried him.
http://www.xanga.com/becauseiamdonniedarko
This is in response to “Chris”:
Chris sez: “The purpose of the atheist is to disprove God.”
Wrong. There are jerks in every crowd, but I doubt you’ll find any serious atheist that would fall into such a sophomoric fallacy of logic; ie. that you can “disprove” something - anything. What happens is that religionists have a traditional explanation for something that required a creator. Science advances, and posits a natural explanation, and this becomes more and more supported by empirical evidence. The religionists get offended there’s a strong natural explanation, and so they fall back on your emotional plea “trying to disprove God”.
Chris sez: “more and more scientists are changing their minds about evolution and are realizing the obvious: that SOMETHING started it all.”
Why is it when evolution is brought up, religionists always throw in everything but the kitchen sink? The origin of the universe and the origin of life on Earth are NOT a part of evolutionary theory. Abiogenesis is a completely different theory, and evolution is in no way dependent on it being true or false. Same with the Big Bang.
Chris sez: “or you can believe the Big Bang always existed (which would mean The Big Bang is in fact beyond science)”
There are multiple theories on the origin of the Universe. Science by definition is composed of naturalistic explanations of the universe, and all such observation points to something like the Big Bang happening billions of years ago: inflation, creation of baryonic matter, etc. So the Big Bang is NOT beyond science. What I think you don’t understand is that from a scientific standpoint, it’s okay that science hasn’t explained with authority what was before the “Big Bang”, or even the nature of the Big Bang itself. Since space and time break down at the Big Bang, strongly empirical supported theory may be far off, or never arrived at. There are many things science has yet to explain, but there is no need to create a “god-did-it” in the gaps as creationists are wont to do; in other words, it is about as far removed from belief in a God, as you suggest.
Chris sez: “In order for that to have happened, a higher being needed to have started it all.”
Says who? You’re anthropomorphizing the universe, like the cartoon above. Because human constructions require a creator, then so must everything else. Logically, it’s an empty assertion. One does not necessarily follow the other.
Chris sez: “We have found zero transitional fossils, even though 99% of the fossils we’ve ever found should have been transitional. ”
Think of it this way: most fossils *are* transitional, with perhaps the exception of dead ends. Looking at a fossil, you may assume that it evolved from something earlier, but that it is also an ancestor to some lifeform later in time. (speaking in *very* broad strokes here)
There are plenty of examples of “transitional fossils”, and perhaps the best concise source on the Internet is: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
ha ha ha ha you are all idiots.
Man isn’t evolving he is devolving.
We are becoming more like animals every day.
There is no god that is a philosophical construct designed to make it easier for oppressed suffering idiots to get through their miserable lives without killing themselves.
Heaven and hell are here on earth.
The concepts of God, the Devil, heaven and hell were all created as metaphors to control ignorant people and stop them from eating each other’s young.
Ahhh why waste my breath you zealots will believe what you have been indoctrinated with any way…..
In Buddah we trust
this is one of the stupidest comics I have ever read. Absolutely no intelligence went into creating this and whatever artists were involved should be embarrassed and ashamed.
Actually, that would mean black people are MORE evolved… because they’ve been around longer, and so have had more time to experience genetic variation and natural selection, thus becoming fitter and more adapted within their environment.
I LOLed at the creationist kid conflating Homo erectus with Homo sapiens. “Whoops, I have to gloss this over while still sounding scientific - lies FTW!”
words fail me.
everything was created by one being - his name was Tom Bombadil - nuff said
This comic strip is a poor attempt at brainwashing and uses emotive terms to persuade people, it trys to be politically correct, it tries to be clever, it wants to appear informed… Yet we are not persuaded, in fact we are mostly offended. It tries to use science to disprove science, it is like trying to pick yourself up by your own shoe laces impossible… If you want to have an argument you cannot use the assumptions of the other party as a basis to disprove their assumptions.
The bottom line is belief. What your experience has lead you to believe, or not believe. In belief is meaning, we all search for meaning… It validates our experience. More experience, more meaning, more belief. The thing is that until we have a crisis of belief we continue to believe what we believe until we have a reason to disbelieve it. A good book to read is “Mans Search for Meaning” by Viktor Frankil.
Science is not about belief it is about fact… The ability to present enough evidence to go beyond a reasonable doubt that something is correct. That is we have a ‘theory’ and that theory remains correct until enough evidence to prove it wrong is presented. Science is about probability not truth. The higher the probability the more sure we are something is correct… Science is about expanding or refining our understanding of the known world… Or even the unseen world, e.g. Dark Matter or String Theory etc… Newton made mistakes, Einstein made mistakes, and other ‘Scientists’ (actually the two above we not scientists but theorists but that is a whole other argument) make mistakes… And we hope they get it right some times
And they PROBABLY do…
The question (in the comic) is not what is fact but what is truth, as Neo said in The Matrix…. “It is like a splinter of glass in my mind.” The truly scary thing is that in the dark hours of the night we all shudder with fear at the prospect we may be wrong, that is we do not know what the truth is!!! Plato called truth the “Forms”. Neo called truth “The Matrix”. The Christian Bible calls Truth “Jesus”, Etc… Truth is beyond empirical evidence it is unprovable, it does not require best guesses… It just is!!! The thing is what we really want to know is the ‘truth’. Religion, Philosophy and Science try to lead us to the truth. Each are tools men use to make sense (give meaning to) of the world. Tools we have created to bring meaning to our existence. And the truth is out there, and we ‘all’ believe we have discovered that truth, we know that truth is or we are owners of that truth… And everyone else is wrong!
I believe the truth is the person of Jesus Christ… That I believe so strongly I am willing to put it in here for you to have a good laugh and giggle… Do I believe because of clever arguments… NO, I believe because of ‘personal’ experience. I am a scientist and I use the scientific method on a daily basis. I teach the scientific method and I encourage others to use it. It is a tool I use to make a difference in the world. I am its master and it serves me well. I am not threatened by it or even against it. It has no life or meaning outside of its application by men and women. Neither is God threatened by it…
Anyone conceited enough to believe his is the fount of all knowledge is truly lost and has no humility. You know a man by the way he spends his time and his money… My money is on the person of Jesus Christ. Therefore I find meaning to my life by serving His purpose. Brainwashed maybe… But it is not blind faith it is a choice to beleive one thing over another. I believe there is a God, he created the Universe and all people will have to answer to him for their actions.
You may feel this is all very draconian… A little controlling… Unfair and not at all reasonable. But then I am in good company for Einstein and Newton both believed in God…
“Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God’s love present in his heart. It’s like the cold that comes when there is no heat, or the darkness that comes when there is no light.”, Albert Einstein
Even evolutionists get this wrong.
Black people cannot be more evolved than white people. White people cannot be more evolved than black people. People are not more evolved than monkeys, apes, or ameobas. That’s because evolution isn’t about a quantity or level of “evolution” in terms of linear “progress.” Evolution is about adaptation to the environment. A fish is no “more” evolved than a dog because it swims underwater, it is just adapted for that purpose.
So, you know, shut the fuck up.
I think Yaaaarg… Has a point and he says it so well…
Chris-
EVOLUTION: you’re doing it wrong.
I suggest you look at some of Stephen Jay Gould’s essays, particularly those pertaining to “bushes and ladders” and punctuated equilibrium. You should be able to find answers to your fossil-related questions there. Your concept of evolution is a little bit outdated.
should we not be more concerned with the problems facing the human race as a whole? All this blathering about where we come from or how we got here are mute points.. We are here so what now?
In my opinion, no religion should ever be controling enough to want to use their with-holding of some promised reward after death to influence any decision made by another. There are too many wars both fought and waiting to be fought in the name of supernatural beliefs for me to fathom how any of it benifits mankind .
I would suspect religion in its many forms is nothing short of a death cult, Use your common sense, Fear rules. Relgion is based on fear. Fear of Hell, fear of seperation from your GOD for all eternity fear of being cast out of your social group for not conforming, fear of not being accepted fear of GOD;s retribution, whatever…
I personally could not believe that any GOD loves me enough to ask me to kill another human to please itself GOD in what ever form does not have the right to order the murder of another being. If God wants something dead let God itself kill it. God should not need me to act out its fantasy in this respect.
ffurther mmmore as fffor your using the cccomputer to beat science to the ground is jjjust as ssensless.
Cripes you got me so angry I I I am starting to sssstutter.
@Yaaaaarg. Well put, my friend.
Anyways, I’m a Christian, and this comic still makes me want to vomit. Seriously, some Christians can be so retarded sometimes. I believe that both evolution and creationism are true, because all species could have been “made” to “evolve”, if that makes any sense. Basically, I think that it’s not so far off that genetics would have made it so that some species with different qualities adapt better to an environment than others, and therefore, the particular quality is reproduced more and over time, changes the animals. But I also believe that original creatures had to be created by SOMETHING, and I just don’t want to think that I came from a prokaryote.
However, this right-wing Christian bullshit is stupid, it makes me wish some Christians would just die and go to hell already for being this retarded.