My logic behind my distaste towards sub-Saharan Africans ranges from homicides rapes arsons burglaries armed robberies a feeling of entitlement to other peoples money and space and The need to force their will on innocent bystanders...
This parasitic race of over worshiped hominids should be briefly segregated gassed then deported en mass....
What a bunch of mass media faggots. It would be like me quoting the most popular scientific journal. (Obviously a scientific journal is not scientific because it only exists to serve the economy and must make money. DA! I love how people think that somewhere in the public market they will find something that somehow doesn't obey market principles. Makes me laugh really. So some retard needs to make money so he publishes the idea that the holocaust never happened. I should believe that right?
In my last words. If in your population of primates wouldn't those of higher intelligence seek higher intelligence within a mate. Why would high intelligence reproduce with low intelligence? So though questions remain the simple still confounds all great explanations of life. The truth is that intelligence forced boundaries upon primate groups and time sorted out the rest.
@TheAntiFascist2010 cont..... because they are errors in the replication process, and between 1-3 hundred mutations are acquired per generation. Even accounting for recombination over time that is a lot of degeneration of the genome. You also have to remember that just because an animal acquired some unknown and exceedingly rare beneficial mutation, if they do exist at all, that mutation would still be very hard to get fixed in the general population even through incest.
@benthemiester Mutations are errors in the replication process. You are stuck inside a Pythagorean prime number death spiral. You need to study whole numbers and domination theory.
@benthemiester I apoligize for all the bad language but there are so many retards in the world I just cannot deal with them all. And to hear that your backing away from Darwin. Really, what on earth could be bigger than DNA if not God?
@TheAntiFascist2010 As for my thoughts on your view. I would have to maintain that current data has challenged us to re analyze our whole understanding of the genome and even how to define a gene post ENCODE. I have personally never heard it put the way you have put it. You have to remember most mutations are deleterious......
@benthemiester Man I would like to help you in your current condition. All the new data??????????? What new world have your researchers discovered. It is the same as it has always been. You are in a fringe group and I feel sorry for you because obviously you are not a man of independent thought separated from your patriarchal fathers. :the current data has challenged us" challenged who my dear friend? Only you and your retarded professor who would back away from Natural Selection.
@benthemiester Natural selection is the easiest of theories to understand. A gene or trait beneficial to a population becomes dominant and is passed on through sex. How do your superiors maintain any rebellion against this and still feed themselves?
Is it easier for religious people to find a mate, wed and start families because they accept things they cannot explain and call it GOD? So an Atheist isn't really arguing about supernatural beings but their own failure to move past the surreal and live a fulfilling satisfying life without their own head always arguing the mote point of death and hope. No one wants do die, life is to beautiful and no amount of science and math will change that. Live and let live. I find Atheism putrid and manic.
Why would a politically motivated group such as Atheist spend all their time arguing arbitrarily against a religious majority. Are they secretly insecure. Do Atheist have a hard time bonding with other primates and fulfilling their biological niche to replicate? And do religious people find it easier to do just that. What is the conclusion then? Is Atheism really just a pathetic attempt to mask ones own insecurities by aligning with others who have the same insecurities? What insecurities?
My theory is this. Belief in God has nothing to do with intelligence at all. It is random, some very smart people (Einstein) believe. Some very smart people don't believe ( Hitchens). So, Atheism is a purely politically motivated group and they really should own up to this and accept that they are in fact secretly fascist who love corporate powers and want to restrict religious freedom even thought it is promised in the constitution of the united states of America. I side with the Constitution.
Lets propose that Charles Darwin is a primate of unparallelled intelligence. According to his own computations his genes would be very valuable to the stock and he will mate and bare children. Everyone understands that the bottom of Darwin's theory is in fact fucking the opposite sex right? Why then doesn't Darwin spend all of his hours writing books arguing against the existence of a God? He doesn't, in fact he rarely ever touches the subject. He never hated religious people and never would.
Man Atheist are stupid. Imagine perverting science to try and add fiscal relevance to a theory that remains standing on it's own two legs. No need for Atheist input at all. What Ego trip are Atheist on exactly. Here is the bread and butter. According to Darwin, a process known as Natural Selection chooses the best mates within any population and awards them mating privilege to ensure that those genes and traits are passed on. Now I digress and remove myself from my own ego. next post.
Darwin admittedly was Agnostic. He wasn't an Atheist. Look it up. Why do Atheist thin that Charles Darwin supports them?? Why? This dumb ass says herself that she doesn't even know that much about Darwin. This is why Atheist are actually the retarded children of the scientific community. They listen to mainstream arguments about Evolution and Creationism and immediately draw conclusions and postulate arguments to augment Darwin's theory as if they will somehow help Darwin. What ignorant mules!!
On the Origin of Species By Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life - most people are unaware that this was the original title of Darwin's book, need I say more
People need to learn to read history in context. Historical figures will always fit the modern criteria what it means to be a sexist, racist, etc. They should be appreciated for any advanced thinking they made in their own time and place. Once you can do this, you can see the forward thinking present in Paul, Jesus, Charles Darwin, Abe Lincoln, etc.
Darwin loved black people. He was a VERY stringent abolitionist in his time in the US and publicly wrote about it and said it was disgusting and never wished to see it again. He also HATED racism and rabidly spoke out about it. He even bragged about having had black lovers in the past. So no, he wasn't racist.
Nor was he a chauvinist. Darwin's love for his wife was second to none, enough to make him doubt the tons of proof he had for his theory.
The video posted is entitle "Will the real theory of evolution please stand up"
As I said before, these are evolutionist who are saying this. Stuart Newman even criticized the Dover trial & said it gave people the impression that evolution meant Darwinian evolution, which he doesn't believe is right. He say's people are being told things that simply aren't true, & blames his own colleagues for a lot of this distrust among the public. One thousand more on have signed DISSENT FROM DARWIN list.
The Darwinian synthesis is dead & has been dead for a number of years. J Goud understood this. It was the best kept secret until the Altenberg summit in 2008, when evolutionary scientist finally told the truth, & openly questioned the limitations of Darwinism & proposed the new extended synthesis. Self organization. Will we someday find a mechanism or an empirical axiom for evolution? only time will tell. Sorry country girl, but this 150 year old outdated theory is singing its last swan song.
@benthemiester Do you even knoe what Stephen J Gould (not J Goud) was talking about? Do you understand that punctuated equilibrium - which was not kept a secret, he published it in 1972 with colleague Niles Eldredge - fits very well within evolutionary theory, that it is one of the many ways it works? The Altenberg workshop spoke on the mechanisms of punctuational evolution, nothing more. It was pretty interesting, but by no means meant the end of evolutionary theory.
@Atheistblindchick "The Altenberg workshop spoke on the mechanisms of punctuational evolution, nothing more.
Thats what you think. if you want to deny the proposal of the new extended synthesis and the questioning of the limitations of Darwinism then you should see video I posted. No BS, straight from the mouth of Stuart Newman who was one of the main attendees. PE was one of many things spoken about and old news. The extended synth- non centric gene view, epigenetics & self organization.
@Atheistblindchick PE is a concepts or construct. It is not empirical. The fact that even M. Pigliucci wants to call for a relaxing of the assumptions of the modern synthesis, is something that shouldn't be over looked.
Why do you think Eugenie Scott and the NAS is against this new proposed synthesis? Darwin is their gravy train. To tell the truth, or follow the grant money. It looks like they have chosen there course. The fact that your unaware of this, proves my point about best kept secret.
@benthemiester One species that doesn't rigidly obey the Theory of Natural selection can in no way dismiss the relative evidence for every other species on the planet. Think what your saying man.
@TheAntiFascist2010 "One species that doesn't rigidly obey the Theory of Natural selection can in no way dismiss the relative evidence for every other species on the planet"
I agree with the first part of the sentence, but as for supporting "evidence" nothing could be further from the truth. In the last few years even science journals are publishing studies challenging the limitations of the major tenants of the modern synthesis as well as challenges to molecular biologies central dogma.
@benthemiester Well I am all ears. I have years of well traversed logical parameters in my own head that explain many of the diversities found in nature and Natural Selection has the mechanics to explain each one. If there are species who's arc seems to disobey this rule then I would like to see the facts surrounding such a gap. I have one unanswered question about evolution and that is that no one can explain to me what I call direct evolution. I think that DNA itself is simply dominating life
@benthemiester A better way for me to explain is this. On the topic of awareness. Are Chimpanzees aware of themselves as humans are or is awareness a mutation, a direct result of natural selection? If so then the two "Most aware" primates will mate. But if awareness is a mutation that sets up a purely mathematical bridge for selective breeding among siblings, because the first gene that produced self awareness would be passed on in the litter and those self aware offpring would be facing selec
"because the first gene that produced self awareness would"
The gene centric view is now being seriously questioned as well as the limitations of nat. select, random mutations & molecular biologies central dogma. Jame Shapiro, John Sanford, Michael Denton & even Stuart Newman who I have posted video of, as well as many other evo devos are now speaking out, not to mention the dissent fron darwin list that has been steadily growing with signatories from around the world.
@TheAntiFascist2010 "What are you saying? That you are no longer an Atheist? Help me understand"
Atheism or metaphysical beliefs have nothing to do with the subject, but I can only speak for myself. Its interesting that you postulate an evolutionary scenario and ask me to comment, and then say that I am postulating. I'm not sure I get your point.
@benthemiester You are the most grossly unintelligent human I have ever shared information with ever in my life. You actually postulate that Charles Darwin was incorrect and that Richard Dawkins is more correct. Not a surprise to find some retarded Atheist behind this whole dialog.
@TheAntiFascist2010 "You are the most grossly unintelligent human I have ever shared information with ever in my life. You actually postulate that Charles Darwin was incorrect and that Richard Dawkins is more correct"
Do you have some kind of mental condition? Or even understand whats going on? When did I say Dawkins is more correct? I said the gene centric view is being challenged. Dawkins believes in the gene centric view.
If you dont understand the peer review process then u have no clue.
@benthemiester You can peer review my balls but they still exist. And Richard Dawkins is a nannies tit. Good luck in your Atheist adventure but you are definably a fascist.
@benthemiester You gave me a laugh in the end. At least you haven't lost your whole soul. But I would still like to argue your ridiculous theory because as you already know it just won't make it past youtube. Ha HA!
@benthemiester I am going to get drunk and spend the rest of my evening planning my domination of the opposite sex. Whether it fits into the latest from Niels Bohr and Einstein I do not really care.
@benthemiester Yes, I have a mental condition. it controls me. It is called my balls. They teach me to fight all authoritarian rule. Whether it is Government, Church or Science. Fuck you, I choose freedom.
@benthemiester thanks for reviewing your own post but I am past our mutual disagreement. Because in the end neither of us are going to change anything. Your new theory is the decadent proof of that.
@benthemiester Your a fucking overfed college retard. There is no such thing as the gene centric view. This was invented in order to keep dragging you through the dirt so you will pay more money into the system. Obviously college hasn't taught you anything.
@TheAntiFascist2010 "Your a fucking overfed college retard. There is no such thing as the gene centric view"
"The gene-centered view of evolution, gene selection theory or selfish gene theory holds that evolution occurs through the differential survival of competing etc" Wikipedia
@benthemiester How can you question the gene centric view you fucking retard? God, stop for a minute and think about what you are saying. Your SO FUCKING COLLEGE STUPIFIED that you are retreating all the way backwards from evolution itself just so you can justify spending another 30000 on one more year of brainwashing. God, you must be the biggest idiot that has ever survived childhood.
@TheAntiFascist2010 COMPREHENSIVE REFERENCE FOR EVO-DEVO OR COLLECTIVE CHALLENGE TO NEO-DARWINISM?
International Journal of organic evolution.
Some evo-devo researchers see themselves as extending and enhancing the modern ... of development, are mounting an explicit challenge to neo-Darwinism. ...Wikipedia
@benthemiester You are a fucking socialist corporate fascist collegiate zombie. I don't care about the international Journal. They are obviously biased to the New World Order. Get a clue freak. Money rules the world. HELLO!!! And as far as NEO- DARWINISM??????????? You understand the implications of that word right? Or have you recently been fraternized into Eugenics?
Jan 22, 2009 – Now it is the turn of evo-devo to challenge neo-Darwinian orthodoxy. As Mark Blumberg declares in Freaks of Nature, evolutionary biology
@benthemiester In other words. A gene that mastered awareness in the human mind would certainly seek to replicate itself from it's own conception. Surely the simplist way would be through incest. Obviously nature found another way but that doesn;t change the ideal that strong genes in the end seek themselves for reproduction. Your thoughts.
@benthemiester Your so lost. Scientific Journals. Jesus Man. Scientific journals obet economics, not science. Really? If Einstein were here. He would puke.
even if Darwin had been worse than Hitler or Mohammed, what bearing does that have on the discovery of evolution? If Galileo had been a racist, would you discount gravity?
The character of a person has no bearing on science, all that counts is evidence, but of course religious people wouldn't know a thing about evidence, for them it all hinges on the credibility of a person.
Seems like your a bit of a racist yourself, oh and a fool since you admit to not knowing much about darwin. Your, he's a bit of a racist sounds like you think there is nothing wrong with being a little racist. He was completely wrong about blacks being degenerated from whites, so i doubt all his theories, oh and I have read some if his works in his own words.
@rasronin Just to add to rkyeun's reply: it's obvious that you didn't pay attention to what the video was saying either.
So many points just sailed over your head. I'm not surprised that you're a theist, because it's sooo much easier to have someone of authority tell you what god wants you to do than to actually think for yourself.
@rasronin trying to discredit the theory by attacking the man isn't gonna get you anywhere. What your doing by saying he's a racist is implying that his theory suggest that whites are at the top of the evolutionary ladder. If you anything about evolution you would know that's its not a ladder. there is no ''superior'' there is only change. Change to help you survive and propagate your genes.
btw - after reading the video description you need to do some research, because he CERTAINLY was a racist (which is no longer in dispute) and most certainly did renounce his theory before his death.
Believe what you wish, I don't care, but at least be honest.
@Freenetnow "and most certainly did renounce his theory before his death"You people like to say that he did but he did not! If he was racist sure it was much more evident at that time. But nothing here made me an atheist, it was my observation of religion and what a big lie it is!
I totally agree. Funny how the creationist morons love to attack Darwin rather than his theory.
What if Einstein had liked to bathe in the blood of virgins and wander the streets dressed only in a goat kin randomly spitting on people? That wouldn't have made his science any less valid....well....not after sane people double checked it and found it to be good anyway.
And I, as an indigenous Briton, whose ancestry goes way back to before BC time, watch in despair as my land that gave so much to many, turn into a 3rd world sh*thole, because of mass immigration and the promotion of INFERIOR 3rd world cultures. Now look at that again? It's called the 3rd world because it's NOT the 1st world. If I came 3rd in a race would that mean I'm better than the person who came 1st? Yet this simple analysis will be shouted down as racism. Ironic isn't it?
What this has meant has been non whites who don't get jobs, are criticised or refused whatever would automatically bring out the race card in that they're being refused because of their ethnicity. This then throws out the basic fact they simply are not qualified. Then add to that Harmen's positive discrimination bill and simply put ethnics get jobs disproportionate to their racial demographic and skillset, to the detriment of the indigenous.
Today however, immigrants bring with them their own, expect to live by all the benefits Britain gives them (education, healthcare, social welfare) but live by their own laws and cultures. Thus what we are seeing is COLONIZATION - that is the movement to another land with the soul purpose of taking it over for their own cultural practice.
The problem with non whites is a simple one. Like the Jews they've lived under a victim mentality culture.
Have you ever heard of WHITE FLIGHT? Well this is happening all over the UK in the major cities - London, Birmingham, Bradford, Leicester etc. White Flight occurs when immigrants move into and take over white communities. They create what are called ghettos and NO WHITE ZONES are created. WHITE FLIGHT is the ACTUAL EVIDENCE OF WHITE PLIGHT in the west. More so, what you fail to understand is that unlike in the 50's through to the 70's, immigrants embraced British culture.
I would be 100% against the colonization of Africa and Asia by whites and yet they have no problem of doing this to us, as they harp back to "you did it to us at the time of the Empire" bollox! I didn't. Were you alive then? NO. Yet you and most Africans think it's ok to do so? This shows overwhelming prejudice against whites and one day, you will see the tolerant peoples of the west, decide enough's enough. You will have brought any retribution upon yourselves for your actions.
@WinstontheSmithy I'm against colonization because I don't care how many racial laws you create race mixing will happen and also this would destroy both cultures and races. And I thinks blacks and whites have the right to live peacefully on this planet separately of course. The only reason you have know problem with colonizing Africa is commit a genocide against the African people but I guess years later you will deny that genocide like the Jewish holocaust you guys deny.
This is nothing to with hating of other cultures and races. What this is is understanding that the indigenous peoples of the UK are becoming a minority within their own land that would never be accepted outside of the west in the 2nd/3rd world with their own. Immediately people shout racism at pointing out these truths, which is another way of grabbing the truth by the collar and throwing it into a prison, shutting it up for good. It is about destroying all debate against colonization.
What we'd see is complaints that the whites were COLONIZING those lands and ethnically cleansing the indigenous peoples from them. The same thing is happening here in the UK and Europe. We will by mid century drop to the minority when compared to Africans and Asians (predominantly Asians). The difference of course is that the UK is the land of the white man, not the black or the Asian.
And you have the nerve to state "the exaggerated plight of the white man?"
@WinstontheSmithy That is again simply more 24 carat rolled gold Winnie bullshit! State from what source you get these statistics about whites becoming a minority!
Darwin was a racist now that doesn't mean that his theory is invalid but his theory does hold to some racist ideas.I doubt that Darwin would have the same opinion of the darker races if he had access to the new information out there now but we will never know.And yet Darwin theory should have come with a warning. People like WinstontheSmithy thinking has lead to some of the biggest genocides of the 20th century if you view people has inferior it makes it easier to do wicked things to them.
What angers me the most about having debates like this is that any criticism towards blacks is looked upon as racism. It's exactly the same with criticism of Judaism and the anti semitic slur. I spent 16 years of my life immersing myself in African, W.Indian and Asian cultures. Hell I dated black and asian women! I had many an aki and saltfish/curried goat evening. And my experiences made me realise that there are good and bad things in all cultures, but my culture was being destroyed
Blacks have Africa. Asians have Asia. The Whites homeland in the world is being ethnically cleansed by forced uncontrolled immigration upon it. Like it or not statistics speak for themselves, not only in black on white/black violence but white population size in the world. At the moment we're around 8%. By the end of the century it will drop to 2%.
Our lands are being colonised by non whites, alien to our culture and who have no respect for our culture. This is simple fact
Lastly, you talk about "the way I think that makes me hate blacks?" How on earth can you come to that conclusion? Would you hate chicken if you were forced to eat it day in day out? You may, but more likely you'd become sick of it and wouldn't want to eat it anymore. Well this is the way I feel. Hearing kids in London speak Jafaican, destroying the English language, adopting American gangsta rap/hip hop culture and patrolling in packs like hyeenas made me sick.
@WinstontheSmithy And Asians would stand for whites to colonize their countries. I notice you haven't said a word about muslim countries I guarantee your guys wouldn't mess with them either. You want to bully the Africans around because you know you can get away with it. Europeans foot has been on the neck of Africans for a long time now. Sometimes I only think that black nationalist are serious about racial separation.
Your ignorance on much is overwhelming - "Jewish holocaust?" - "African holocaust?" What the f*ck are you on about?
You say that you think we should have our own lands yet look at the white population of Africa/Asia then look at the African/Asian population of Europe?
What is happening is ethnic genocide of whites and you're all to busy (blacks and non whites) drowning in victim status to see any different.
Whites make up 8% of the world population. By the end of the century - 2%
@WinstontheSmithy That's why I believe in separation all Africa diaspora should return to mother Africa. The only thing I would ask of Europeans is to stay out of the economic and political affairs of Africa.I believe the continent of Europe and Africa should trade but I believe are friendship should end there.Marcus Garvey said it best Africa for the Africans we shouldn't allow bad history between our two races affect us forever separation is only way Africa for Africans and Europe for whites.
P.S. What's this "always exaggerate the fairytale plight of the white man" b.sh*t? Anyone with half a brain would see that the white population is on the decrease compared to the non white. Why? Well thanks to feminism (misandry), white peoples are having one child per family if that. More so blacks and asians are leaving their already overpopulated lands and heading to the west where they continue to procreate in their large numbers.
@WinstontheSmithy Industrialization has a lot to do with the decrease of the white population in the western world. The global elites are white they created and maintain white european population control they are following a program. Colonization disease and warfare has really kept the African population low by design of course. Now the asians has a huge population and growing it's going to be a problem in the future and Africans are leaving Africa because there's no opportunities.
Add to that healthcare available to them that wasn't in their own lands and the infant mortality rate drops, meaning less WHITES and more NON WHITES. Are you getting this?
Now what would all the happy-clappy liberals be saying if the same was going on with blacks in Africa.Asia as whites in the west? What would happen if the population of whites in Africa/Asia was growing 4 times that of blacks/asians and by the end of the century whites would be the majority in those lands?
@WinstontheSmithy African population has just begun to regain just a little and if whites was growing in Africa well all of the Africans would be dead and displaced like the native Americans and the aborigines.
And yet many racist do use Darwins model to justify their racism. This superior attitude that whites have has lead to many atrocities against indigenous people. The was hundreds of millions of Native Americans that was wiped out their numbers are so low I don't see how their race will see a new century. Same thing happen to the aborigines of Australia and slavery and colonialism has fractured Africans into a thousand pieces look at Europe right now is extremely hostile towards blacks.
There were no 'great' NEGRO civilizations, controlled and run by NEGROS (not semitic Muslims or Jews) period. You can look up as much as you like but the bottom line is simple, had there never been outside WHITE influence on Africa it would still be in the stone age. No one likes to hear their people are intellectually inferior to others and unable to create society but that's just the way it is I'm afraid. Blacks are good at running, jumping and hitting but nothing else.
@WinstontheSmithy There was no great WHITE civilization see I can do the same thing it doesn't make it true. You just can't ignore facts and data because it doesn't support your ideology. Can you at least acknowledge that tribal blacks had moved out of the stone age by the time the Europeans invaded Africa I mean the Zulus did have metal spears. Africans had societies that was destroyed by closed minded Europeans like yourself. Whites are good at sports to so your last sentence is ridiculous.
Stone Age, Bronze Age, Iron Age all no different really when compared to the advanced western civilization. My last sentence is not ridiculous in fact it highlights my point. Therefore considering that blacks in the UK make up about 5% of the population and in the USA around 13% then why is there no proportional representation within sports? It means one of two things:
1. Blacks are better than whites at sports.
2. Blacks are playing sports because of positive discrimination.
Blacks should never have been imported into the west for a multitude of reasons because the culture they were brought into was not there own and it should never have been forced upon them. Blacks who succeed in the west do so because they embrace white culture. Sadly though as the black population increases society is dropping back to African tribalism and violent culture. Statistics prove overwhelmingly that blacks are prone to more violence than whites.
@WinstontheSmithy What about Colonialism has fractured and damaged the African people greater than slavery ever had. There was all kind of tribal violence in Iraq after the Americans destabilized the region. So the Americans figured that they could at least stabilize the region well the whites didn't do that in Africa. In fact tribal violence and wars have been encouraged and created by white nations in Africa. Violence is a symptom of a sick system it's not genetic.
Colonialism DRAGGED the Africans out of the STONE AGE (sorry Iron Age). The West gave them education, medicine, transport systems, law and order, liberty, science, literature... Putting it bluntly, there would still be widespread canibalism and ritual sacrifice in Africa were it not for the West going in, although to say that still happens. Ironically as well Africa still practices slavery, something THE WHITES got rid of. Ever heard of William Willberforce?
Blacks ARE HOSTILE TO WHITES. It is the media that continually portrays the false image that whites are hostile to blacks. Take a look at police statistics all over the USA and Europe and you'll find overwhelmingly that the highest percentage per demographic of violence towards whites (and blacks) is by blacks. Statistics speak for themselves.
I agree 100% with you. My ancestors were wrong to have been involved in the slave trade. Blacks should never have left Africa.
@WinstontheSmithy Come on now tell the truth white and blacks are hostile towards each other for sometime righteous and ridiculous reasons. I will acknowledge that black crime is a problem most of it is because of a wicked system and blacks need to start taking some responsibility for their actions. It doesn't matter if blacks left Africa or not because Whites kept coming to Africa during colonialism at least you do acknowledge that your ancestors was wrong that's a first.
I am telling the truth. There is far more black to white hostility that the other way around. Tell me, what would happen if whites behaved to blacks as blacks do in the west - oh wait that happened - Apartheid in Africa and look where that is today? The best solution is for blacks to leave the west, they're no longer slaves, never have been and should go back to mother Africa and live the great life they continually tell us Africa offers them.
I left London (UK) because of the downright prejudice towards whites from blacks. Not just that but we continually hear that our establishment are institutionally racist which itself is a joke. They are racist TO WHITES! Take council housing and association housing. You automatically go up the list if you're black. Even better a black immigrant.
I do not hate anyone for their colour but many sadly do because of mine, in my own land, I have become 2nd class to aliens.
@WinstontheSmithy I doubt that you left the UK because a few angry black folks in a majority white country. Besides I thought that the Arab muslims was a bigger threat to the UK in the first place. White right wingers always exaggerate the fairytale plight of the white man. I don't believe that your not a racist tho it's impossible to believe what you believe and not hate blacks in some form. It's how you think is what makes you hate blacks.
I never left the UK. I left London in England because I watched my culture be destroyed by immigration. The movies you see of quaint old London and Britain are nothing but media propaganda. Black gangs (and Asian) now battle one another all over the main cities within the UK. At the moment in London the main gangs battling it out with one another are the Nigerian origins of the West and Somalians in the North. And of course we've got the Asians in the East (Muslims).
White right wingers paint a true picture of society and I AM A RACIST in that I love my people, my culture and wish to teach it to my children but I DO NOT hate other races and cultures. I have always shown the utmost respect to people and their cultures when I visit them on holidays, but that's just it - I VISIT THEM. I don't want to see my culture being detroyed by inferior 3rd world ones and their peoples who promote them. Like it or not the 1st world is superior to the 3rd.
@WinstontheSmithy But who are you superior to Winnie? You are a halfwit! An embarrassment to the culture that gave us Shakespeare, Newtown, and Darwin.
Thus what we see as the truth is shouted down as racism in order to not offend ergo it is better to deceive than it is to tell the truth, a sad reflection upon our times and overall society.
Again, were there no slave trade there would be no blacks alive today within the west. That again is fact as no white involvement within Africa would certainly mean that blacks living there would be no different to the many Amerindian tribes we see dotted all around the S.American rainforests.
@WinstontheSmithy And it is shouted down has racist because it is racist their is tons of new information out their about Africa now that Darwin didn't have access to at that time. I know you want to believe that blacks that was taken from the west Africa was Savages but it wasn't the case. West Africans was Muslims and Arabs and Jews lived among them. In fact Africans was apart of a Muslim coalition of Berber and Arabs the moors that invaded Europe.
However, if a NEGRO is removed from Africa and educated as a white person would be educated, that is as the ONLY BLACK man in a class of predominant whites, that is if he accepts their culture as his own then he will succeed and aspire to do great things. If however he lives in a predominantly NEGRO society, under black culture then he won't, because unless he's kicking a ball, punching someone, running or jumping, the odds are greatly raised against him.
Bottom line is that people will immediately state point 3 is racist yet agree with 2. That is as longs as blacks are being praised then everything's ok.
We all evolved within our lands and many differently. Africans never had to store food however whites did, thus thought process came more into play, thinking about the future.
The sad reality is that were there no trans Atlantic slave trade, there'd be no blacks outside of Africa and all within would be still be living in the stone age.
@WinstontheSmithy Some black civilizations Kushite Empire, Axum, Mali empire, look some of them up and the truth is archaeologist are still digging up massive structures up in Africa right now. Darwin was a racist but he had limited access to the new information right now. And how was blacks would still be in the stone age when even the most inferior African tribes was making Iron weapons Africans moved out of the stone age long ago my friend.
1. Loyd Pye's theory on the homonoids and them being the missing link is far more probable that Darwin's theory of evolution.
2. Blacks are superior physically to whites, hence although a massive minority within the west yet their continuing dominance in sport.
3. Whites are superior intellectually to blacks. Simple fact of looking at the mess of Africa, black achievers and the fact that there's never been any great black civilizations through time.
@WinstontheSmithy Is you reading from a book from the 19th century. Their was many black civilizations you ever heard of the Nubian Kushites rivals to the Egyptians. Much of the science people like you still believe about blacks is outdated read from the updated version please. You whites are never aware of the world around Africa is struggling just like latin America it has more to do with the World Bank and the wars created by the CIA.
@Oxstayne Because most laws are the simplest observable phenomenon. There is nothing simple about evolution, so it (like most theories) must be constantly refined to be as accurate as possible.
Evolution has not been challenged on an academic level, it is one of the strongest theories we have, bourne out by numerous fields of research.
The only people to challenge Evolution are those of a theistic bent, and their challenges are not based on any demonstrable fact. They posit no evidence to contradict Evolutionary theory and they do not present a viable alternative falsifiable theory.
@dedseason It's akin to throwing the parts of your laptop (times a thousand) onto a table and after billions of years they assemble correctly and we post a comment.
Evolution is a far larger leap than any religious faith.
@Freenetnow You obviously have never learnt what evolution is or heard about NATURAL SELECTION, it's not random at all. There is a lot of information on the internet that you can look for yourself.
@Freenetnow It depends on how you define design. A river is shaped in a certain way does that mean that an Intelligent Being designed it that way or is it because came from a direction and could get through the weakest parts of the soil?
If you want a designer then I guess it will be the environment in the case of evolution. So now you got your "god" -the unintelligent, natural environment which changes naturally and makes some animals die and some survive. It doesn't have to be intelligent.
@Freenetnow I don't know where you got the idea from that I'm just guessing. That evolution happens is a fact and the theory of evolution explains why evolution happens and it's based on the fact of evolution, DNA, the law of inheritance etc.
I think you should look up Ockham's razor and try to use it. You're little god idea only works if you make a lot of assumptions that you can't answer in any sufficient way and can't be backed up by fact.
@lilmarome Why are there no transitional fossils to back up your beliefs?
"The case at present (problems presented by the fossil record) must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained." - Darwin
But, as by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?"
@Freenetnow As you can see in the next paragraph that Darwin writes it is because of the flaws of the fossil record and we have made many discoveries since Darwins time that bad´ck up evolution like the discovery of DNA, DNA is the best evidence for evolution that we have. But you are still wrong when you say that there are NO transitional fossils, every fossil is a transitional fossil between what came before and what came after, there are millions of them.
@lilmarome Uh, no. It's a fish which belongs with the Coelacanth - part of the lobefish group. This was determined after the usual initial trumpeting of a found missing link. It's fins were not load bearing as first suggested - they were just used for swimming. And like the coelacanth it hasn't changed in over a hundred million years.
@Freenetnow Ofc it was a fish but it was a fish like the mudskippers that push themselves forward with their limbs when the water level is low. And the time that it was around does not matter how long it has been around, like I said: every fossil and every animal that has ever existed is a transitional fossil. You are a transitional fossil between what came before you and what will come after you.
@Freenetnow a transition doesn't happen with just one species you have to look at many too see that a transition actually is taking place, if you look at a list of transitional fossils you will see the change over time. Evolution is all about tiny changes but I think that you're looking at some dishonest site for creationists and not on a scientific site about what we know to be true today.
Evolution hasn't been challenged in 150 years?It has. However, the scientific establishment gets paranoid & hysterical whenever other, just as valid theories get proposed. Witness how Intelligent Design is called "creationism in disguise" by Darwinists; this is paranoia.New Scientist has an article arguing Darwin was wrong about the "tree of life." If he was wrong about that,, then why not evolution as a whole? The answer is simple. Because Darwinists won't allow it to be wrong, even if it is
@ChristianMission ''The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board's ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.'
they never found the missing link and even if they did, they would have to find many just to proove his stupid theory....hes right to a point, but i think earth history is full of surprises..ufo wink wink ;0
@ChristianMission Well by that logic, if Christians or Creationists are wrong about things, are we to trust their "theories?" Because I can think of many things they've gotten wrong...
"The fact that life evolved out of nearly nothing, some 10 billion years after the universe evolved out of literally nothing - is a fact so staggering that I would be mad to attempt words to do it justice."
Richard Dawkins
google it, look it up etc...
Atheism is the belief in nothing, something coming from nothing is a scientific impossibility.
When you eliminate the impossible, what remains is not only possible, but probable.
This falls into opinion, racist, I can agree for the provided facts.
But he was not a Pig and was not chovanist, but I do agree with you, he was a MALE and acording to you (what you heard and have not witnessed or known yourself) they need to be disliked and not asked questions that could be thought about.
Question, Is a Chauvinist a Feminist if the hormones are replaced?
Darwinism is nothing but a way for selfish people to make excuses for the shit they do that they know is wrong. Yeah, granted the church is not perfect, in fact church is bullshit. Why dont you people stop worrying about what the CHURCH tells you and find out what THE BIBLE says. Its meaning is much different than you would think, if you look CLOSELY at it. If there is no god, the human race is doomed. Bottom line.
"Darwinism is nothing but a way for selfish people to make excuses for the shit they do that they know is wrong."
So you don't think it's a way to describe nature then?
The theory of evolution by natural selection (what you inaccurately and disingenuously call darwinism) does not pretend to make any comment whatsoever on the morality of behaviour. So it cannot be used as an excuse.
My logic behind my distaste towards sub-Saharan Africans ranges from homicides rapes arsons burglaries armed robberies a feeling of entitlement to other peoples money and space and The need to force their will on innocent bystanders...
This parasitic race of over worshiped hominids should be briefly segregated gassed then deported en mass....
Tokyo64Shinobi 1 month ago in playlist ImperiumX
What a bunch of mass media faggots. It would be like me quoting the most popular scientific journal. (Obviously a scientific journal is not scientific because it only exists to serve the economy and must make money. DA! I love how people think that somewhere in the public market they will find something that somehow doesn't obey market principles. Makes me laugh really. So some retard needs to make money so he publishes the idea that the holocaust never happened. I should believe that right?
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
It is like me quoting Newsweek. Was there ever really a recession?
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
In my last words. If in your population of primates wouldn't those of higher intelligence seek higher intelligence within a mate. Why would high intelligence reproduce with low intelligence? So though questions remain the simple still confounds all great explanations of life. The truth is that intelligence forced boundaries upon primate groups and time sorted out the rest.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@TheAntiFascist2010 cont..... because they are errors in the replication process, and between 1-3 hundred mutations are acquired per generation. Even accounting for recombination over time that is a lot of degeneration of the genome. You also have to remember that just because an animal acquired some unknown and exceedingly rare beneficial mutation, if they do exist at all, that mutation would still be very hard to get fixed in the general population even through incest.
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester Mutations are errors in the replication process. You are stuck inside a Pythagorean prime number death spiral. You need to study whole numbers and domination theory.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@benthemiester I apoligize for all the bad language but there are so many retards in the world I just cannot deal with them all. And to hear that your backing away from Darwin. Really, what on earth could be bigger than DNA if not God?
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@TheAntiFascist2010 As for my thoughts on your view. I would have to maintain that current data has challenged us to re analyze our whole understanding of the genome and even how to define a gene post ENCODE. I have personally never heard it put the way you have put it. You have to remember most mutations are deleterious......
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester Man I would like to help you in your current condition. All the new data??????????? What new world have your researchers discovered. It is the same as it has always been. You are in a fringe group and I feel sorry for you because obviously you are not a man of independent thought separated from your patriarchal fathers. :the current data has challenged us" challenged who my dear friend? Only you and your retarded professor who would back away from Natural Selection.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@benthemiester Natural selection is the easiest of theories to understand. A gene or trait beneficial to a population becomes dominant and is passed on through sex. How do your superiors maintain any rebellion against this and still feed themselves?
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
Is it easier for religious people to find a mate, wed and start families because they accept things they cannot explain and call it GOD? So an Atheist isn't really arguing about supernatural beings but their own failure to move past the surreal and live a fulfilling satisfying life without their own head always arguing the mote point of death and hope. No one wants do die, life is to beautiful and no amount of science and math will change that. Live and let live. I find Atheism putrid and manic.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
Why would a politically motivated group such as Atheist spend all their time arguing arbitrarily against a religious majority. Are they secretly insecure. Do Atheist have a hard time bonding with other primates and fulfilling their biological niche to replicate? And do religious people find it easier to do just that. What is the conclusion then? Is Atheism really just a pathetic attempt to mask ones own insecurities by aligning with others who have the same insecurities? What insecurities?
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
My theory is this. Belief in God has nothing to do with intelligence at all. It is random, some very smart people (Einstein) believe. Some very smart people don't believe ( Hitchens). So, Atheism is a purely politically motivated group and they really should own up to this and accept that they are in fact secretly fascist who love corporate powers and want to restrict religious freedom even thought it is promised in the constitution of the united states of America. I side with the Constitution.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
Lets propose that Charles Darwin is a primate of unparallelled intelligence. According to his own computations his genes would be very valuable to the stock and he will mate and bare children. Everyone understands that the bottom of Darwin's theory is in fact fucking the opposite sex right? Why then doesn't Darwin spend all of his hours writing books arguing against the existence of a God? He doesn't, in fact he rarely ever touches the subject. He never hated religious people and never would.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
Man Atheist are stupid. Imagine perverting science to try and add fiscal relevance to a theory that remains standing on it's own two legs. No need for Atheist input at all. What Ego trip are Atheist on exactly. Here is the bread and butter. According to Darwin, a process known as Natural Selection chooses the best mates within any population and awards them mating privilege to ensure that those genes and traits are passed on. Now I digress and remove myself from my own ego. next post.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
Darwin admittedly was Agnostic. He wasn't an Atheist. Look it up. Why do Atheist thin that Charles Darwin supports them?? Why? This dumb ass says herself that she doesn't even know that much about Darwin. This is why Atheist are actually the retarded children of the scientific community. They listen to mainstream arguments about Evolution and Creationism and immediately draw conclusions and postulate arguments to augment Darwin's theory as if they will somehow help Darwin. What ignorant mules!!
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
Darwin's other book was entitled, The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex, need I say more again, read it for yourselves
joeysimply 7 months ago
On the Origin of Species By Means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life - most people are unaware that this was the original title of Darwin's book, need I say more
joeysimply 7 months ago
People need to learn to read history in context. Historical figures will always fit the modern criteria what it means to be a sexist, racist, etc. They should be appreciated for any advanced thinking they made in their own time and place. Once you can do this, you can see the forward thinking present in Paul, Jesus, Charles Darwin, Abe Lincoln, etc.
Keysteeze 10 months ago
Darwin loved black people. He was a VERY stringent abolitionist in his time in the US and publicly wrote about it and said it was disgusting and never wished to see it again. He also HATED racism and rabidly spoke out about it. He even bragged about having had black lovers in the past. So no, he wasn't racist.
Nor was he a chauvinist. Darwin's love for his wife was second to none, enough to make him doubt the tons of proof he had for his theory.
tskasa1 1 year ago
The video posted is entitle "Will the real theory of evolution please stand up"
As I said before, these are evolutionist who are saying this. Stuart Newman even criticized the Dover trial & said it gave people the impression that evolution meant Darwinian evolution, which he doesn't believe is right. He say's people are being told things that simply aren't true, & blames his own colleagues for a lot of this distrust among the public. One thousand more on have signed DISSENT FROM DARWIN list.
benthemiester 1 year ago
The Darwinian synthesis is dead & has been dead for a number of years. J Goud understood this. It was the best kept secret until the Altenberg summit in 2008, when evolutionary scientist finally told the truth, & openly questioned the limitations of Darwinism & proposed the new extended synthesis. Self organization. Will we someday find a mechanism or an empirical axiom for evolution? only time will tell. Sorry country girl, but this 150 year old outdated theory is singing its last swan song.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@benthemiester Do you even knoe what Stephen J Gould (not J Goud) was talking about? Do you understand that punctuated equilibrium - which was not kept a secret, he published it in 1972 with colleague Niles Eldredge - fits very well within evolutionary theory, that it is one of the many ways it works? The Altenberg workshop spoke on the mechanisms of punctuational evolution, nothing more. It was pretty interesting, but by no means meant the end of evolutionary theory.
Atheistblindchick 1 year ago
@Atheistblindchick "The Altenberg workshop spoke on the mechanisms of punctuational evolution, nothing more.
Thats what you think. if you want to deny the proposal of the new extended synthesis and the questioning of the limitations of Darwinism then you should see video I posted. No BS, straight from the mouth of Stuart Newman who was one of the main attendees. PE was one of many things spoken about and old news. The extended synth- non centric gene view, epigenetics & self organization.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@Atheistblindchick PE is a concepts or construct. It is not empirical. The fact that even M. Pigliucci wants to call for a relaxing of the assumptions of the modern synthesis, is something that shouldn't be over looked.
Why do you think Eugenie Scott and the NAS is against this new proposed synthesis? Darwin is their gravy train. To tell the truth, or follow the grant money. It looks like they have chosen there course. The fact that your unaware of this, proves my point about best kept secret.
benthemiester 1 year ago
@benthemiester Just try to get the facts right before you start posting absolute nonsense, trying to come off as educated. You obviously are not.
Atheistblindchick 1 year ago
@Atheistblindchick Says the cunt that doesn't know how to spell "Know."
Knoe....Really?
whoiswhobutwho 7 months ago
@benthemiester One species that doesn't rigidly obey the Theory of Natural selection can in no way dismiss the relative evidence for every other species on the planet. Think what your saying man.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@TheAntiFascist2010 "One species that doesn't rigidly obey the Theory of Natural selection can in no way dismiss the relative evidence for every other species on the planet"
I agree with the first part of the sentence, but as for supporting "evidence" nothing could be further from the truth. In the last few years even science journals are publishing studies challenging the limitations of the major tenants of the modern synthesis as well as challenges to molecular biologies central dogma.
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester Well I am all ears. I have years of well traversed logical parameters in my own head that explain many of the diversities found in nature and Natural Selection has the mechanics to explain each one. If there are species who's arc seems to disobey this rule then I would like to see the facts surrounding such a gap. I have one unanswered question about evolution and that is that no one can explain to me what I call direct evolution. I think that DNA itself is simply dominating life
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@benthemiester A better way for me to explain is this. On the topic of awareness. Are Chimpanzees aware of themselves as humans are or is awareness a mutation, a direct result of natural selection? If so then the two "Most aware" primates will mate. But if awareness is a mutation that sets up a purely mathematical bridge for selective breeding among siblings, because the first gene that produced self awareness would be passed on in the litter and those self aware offpring would be facing selec
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@TheAntiFascist2010
"because the first gene that produced self awareness would"
The gene centric view is now being seriously questioned as well as the limitations of nat. select, random mutations & molecular biologies central dogma. Jame Shapiro, John Sanford, Michael Denton & even Stuart Newman who I have posted video of, as well as many other evo devos are now speaking out, not to mention the dissent fron darwin list that has been steadily growing with signatories from around the world.
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester What are you saying? That you are no longer an Atheist? Help me understand.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheAntiFascist2010 "What are you saying? That you are no longer an Atheist? Help me understand"
Atheism or metaphysical beliefs have nothing to do with the subject, but I can only speak for myself. Its interesting that you postulate an evolutionary scenario and ask me to comment, and then say that I am postulating. I'm not sure I get your point.
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester You are the most grossly unintelligent human I have ever shared information with ever in my life. You actually postulate that Charles Darwin was incorrect and that Richard Dawkins is more correct. Not a surprise to find some retarded Atheist behind this whole dialog.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@TheAntiFascist2010 "You are the most grossly unintelligent human I have ever shared information with ever in my life. You actually postulate that Charles Darwin was incorrect and that Richard Dawkins is more correct"
Do you have some kind of mental condition? Or even understand whats going on? When did I say Dawkins is more correct? I said the gene centric view is being challenged. Dawkins believes in the gene centric view.
If you dont understand the peer review process then u have no clue.
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester You can peer review my balls but they still exist. And Richard Dawkins is a nannies tit. Good luck in your Atheist adventure but you are definably a fascist.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
Comment removed
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester You gave me a laugh in the end. At least you haven't lost your whole soul. But I would still like to argue your ridiculous theory because as you already know it just won't make it past youtube. Ha HA!
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@TheAntiFascist2010 "Yes, I have a mental condition. it controls me. It is called my balls"
No I think its more like your balls browned eyed neighbor who lives right behind.
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester Listen man, I think that you are a very intelligent person. Please don't bring my white trash neighbors into this.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@benthemiester I am going to get drunk and spend the rest of my evening planning my domination of the opposite sex. Whether it fits into the latest from Niels Bohr and Einstein I do not really care.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@benthemiester P.S. I hate niggers. Don't over analyze that, I always add it to all my salutations.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@benthemiester Yes, I have a mental condition. it controls me. It is called my balls. They teach me to fight all authoritarian rule. Whether it is Government, Church or Science. Fuck you, I choose freedom.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@benthemiester You are in love with quoting people, much like your predecessor Dawkins. He does the same shit.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@TheAntiFascist2010 "You can peer review my balls but they still exist"
Spelling error correction. I meant to say......
I wish the same could be said of your brain. Take care, very weird and angry person.
benthemiester 1 second ago
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester thanks for reviewing your own post but I am past our mutual disagreement. Because in the end neither of us are going to change anything. Your new theory is the decadent proof of that.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@benthemiester You seem to be lost in the world of Ivy league postulation.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@benthemiester Your a fucking overfed college retard. There is no such thing as the gene centric view. This was invented in order to keep dragging you through the dirt so you will pay more money into the system. Obviously college hasn't taught you anything.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheAntiFascist2010 "Your a fucking overfed college retard. There is no such thing as the gene centric view"
"The gene-centered view of evolution, gene selection theory or selfish gene theory holds that evolution occurs through the differential survival of competing etc" Wikipedia
Tell me what am I again??
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester Why would an overfed retard like yourself continually quote Wikipedia?
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheAntiFascist2010 "Your a fucking overfed college retard. There is no such thing as the gene centric view".
Edge: LIFE: A GENE-CENTRIC VIEW — Craig Venter & Richard Dawkins
What was that word you called me again?
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester I called you an Atheist. Remember.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@benthemiester How can you question the gene centric view you fucking retard? God, stop for a minute and think about what you are saying. Your SO FUCKING COLLEGE STUPIFIED that you are retreating all the way backwards from evolution itself just so you can justify spending another 30000 on one more year of brainwashing. God, you must be the biggest idiot that has ever survived childhood.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@benthemiester You follow Evo Devos? That means That they are Gay. You get that right?
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@TheAntiFascist2010 COMPREHENSIVE REFERENCE FOR EVO-DEVO OR COLLECTIVE CHALLENGE TO NEO-DARWINISM?
International Journal of organic evolution.
Some evo-devo researchers see themselves as extending and enhancing the modern ... of development, are mounting an explicit challenge to neo-Darwinism. ...Wikipedia
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester You are a fucking socialist corporate fascist collegiate zombie. I don't care about the international Journal. They are obviously biased to the New World Order. Get a clue freak. Money rules the world. HELLO!!! And as far as NEO- DARWINISM??????????? You understand the implications of that word right? Or have you recently been fraternized into Eugenics?
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@benthemiester Wikipedia is publicly known to be a liberal based organization.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
It doesn't surprise me in the least that this conversation has become what it is. Not about the facts at all.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
Jan 22, 2009 – Now it is the turn of evo-devo to challenge neo-Darwinian orthodoxy. As Mark Blumberg declares in Freaks of Nature, evolutionary biology
The Journal Nature
benthemiester 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheAntiFascist2010
Is Darwinism Past Its 'Sell-by' Date? The Challenge of Evo-Devo Video
"You follow Evo Devos? That means That they are Gay. You get that right?"
I didn't know that all evolutionary development biologist were gay, but thats no concern of mine.
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester In other words. A gene that mastered awareness in the human mind would certainly seek to replicate itself from it's own conception. Surely the simplist way would be through incest. Obviously nature found another way but that doesn;t change the ideal that strong genes in the end seek themselves for reproduction. Your thoughts.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
@TheAntiFascist2010
As I have said before even evolutionary developmental biologist are now questioning and challenging the limitations of modern synthesis.
I can back up everything I've said with verifiable citations.
benthemiester 6 months ago
@benthemiester Your so lost. Scientific Journals. Jesus Man. Scientific journals obet economics, not science. Really? If Einstein were here. He would puke.
TheAntiFascist2010 6 months ago
even if Darwin had been worse than Hitler or Mohammed, what bearing does that have on the discovery of evolution? If Galileo had been a racist, would you discount gravity?
The character of a person has no bearing on science, all that counts is evidence, but of course religious people wouldn't know a thing about evidence, for them it all hinges on the credibility of a person.
annata12 1 year ago
Seems like your a bit of a racist yourself, oh and a fool since you admit to not knowing much about darwin. Your, he's a bit of a racist sounds like you think there is nothing wrong with being a little racist. He was completely wrong about blacks being degenerated from whites, so i doubt all his theories, oh and I have read some if his works in his own words.
rasronin 1 year ago
@rasronin
Just by reading your comment, I can tell you haven't.
rkyeun 1 year ago
@rasronin Just to add to rkyeun's reply: it's obvious that you didn't pay attention to what the video was saying either.
So many points just sailed over your head. I'm not surprised that you're a theist, because it's sooo much easier to have someone of authority tell you what god wants you to do than to actually think for yourself.
sleazybtd 1 year ago
@rasronin ouch, the stupid, it hurts! Watch the video instead of responding to the title...
Atheistblindchick 1 year ago
@rasronin trying to discredit the theory by attacking the man isn't gonna get you anywhere. What your doing by saying he's a racist is implying that his theory suggest that whites are at the top of the evolutionary ladder. If you anything about evolution you would know that's its not a ladder. there is no ''superior'' there is only change. Change to help you survive and propagate your genes.
moh490234890238490 10 months ago
@rasronin here's a little more on what i said, its a 3 part video showing the erroneous association of Darwinian evolution with racism.
/watch?v=VV3duw4lJE0&feature=channel_video_title
moh490234890238490 10 months ago
It doesn't matter if darwin was "A Racist And A Male Chauvinist Pig" His theory still stands strong.
iscay666 1 year ago
btw - after reading the video description you need to do some research, because he CERTAINLY was a racist (which is no longer in dispute) and most certainly did renounce his theory before his death.
Believe what you wish, I don't care, but at least be honest.
Freenetnow 1 year ago
@Freenetnow "and most certainly did renounce his theory before his death"You people like to say that he did but he did not! If he was racist sure it was much more evident at that time. But nothing here made me an atheist, it was my observation of religion and what a big lie it is!
MarkusZatac 1 year ago
I totally agree. Funny how the creationist morons love to attack Darwin rather than his theory.
What if Einstein had liked to bathe in the blood of virgins and wander the streets dressed only in a goat kin randomly spitting on people? That wouldn't have made his science any less valid....well....not after sane people double checked it and found it to be good anyway.
kakaze 1 year ago
Creationists are so retarded that they think it would actually matter if darwin had converted on his deathbed.
DutchNordic 1 year ago
yes jolly good
Earthunite 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
And I, as an indigenous Briton, whose ancestry goes way back to before BC time, watch in despair as my land that gave so much to many, turn into a 3rd world sh*thole, because of mass immigration and the promotion of INFERIOR 3rd world cultures. Now look at that again? It's called the 3rd world because it's NOT the 1st world. If I came 3rd in a race would that mean I'm better than the person who came 1st? Yet this simple analysis will be shouted down as racism. Ironic isn't it?
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy Finally Winnie I agree with you, it is a simple analysis from a simpleton!
neuterallrednecks 1 year ago
Comment removed
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@neuterallrednecks
And my little pet puppy continues to follow wherever I go. Doggy do poo poo and pee pee. Bad doggy.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@neuterallrednecks
And my little pet puppy continues to follow wherever I go. Doggy do poo poo and pee pee. Bad doggy.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy Yes I'm happy to continue to shaat all over your moronic assertions.
neuterallrednecks 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
What this has meant has been non whites who don't get jobs, are criticised or refused whatever would automatically bring out the race card in that they're being refused because of their ethnicity. This then throws out the basic fact they simply are not qualified. Then add to that Harmen's positive discrimination bill and simply put ethnics get jobs disproportionate to their racial demographic and skillset, to the detriment of the indigenous.
Britain's truly f*cked up because of it!
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE,
Today however, immigrants bring with them their own, expect to live by all the benefits Britain gives them (education, healthcare, social welfare) but live by their own laws and cultures. Thus what we are seeing is COLONIZATION - that is the movement to another land with the soul purpose of taking it over for their own cultural practice.
The problem with non whites is a simple one. Like the Jews they've lived under a victim mentality culture.
(cont)
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE,
Have you ever heard of WHITE FLIGHT? Well this is happening all over the UK in the major cities - London, Birmingham, Bradford, Leicester etc. White Flight occurs when immigrants move into and take over white communities. They create what are called ghettos and NO WHITE ZONES are created. WHITE FLIGHT is the ACTUAL EVIDENCE OF WHITE PLIGHT in the west. More so, what you fail to understand is that unlike in the 50's through to the 70's, immigrants embraced British culture.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE,
I would be 100% against the colonization of Africa and Asia by whites and yet they have no problem of doing this to us, as they harp back to "you did it to us at the time of the Empire" bollox! I didn't. Were you alive then? NO. Yet you and most Africans think it's ok to do so? This shows overwhelming prejudice against whites and one day, you will see the tolerant peoples of the west, decide enough's enough. You will have brought any retribution upon yourselves for your actions.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy But that's not what you said 15 hours ago on another channel Winnie. More lies from Winniethecockhead!
neuterallrednecks 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@neuterallrednecks
And my little pet puppy continues to follow wherever I go. Doggy do poo poo and pee pee. Bad doggy.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy I'm against colonization because I don't care how many racial laws you create race mixing will happen and also this would destroy both cultures and races. And I thinks blacks and whites have the right to live peacefully on this planet separately of course. The only reason you have know problem with colonizing Africa is commit a genocide against the African people but I guess years later you will deny that genocide like the Jewish holocaust you guys deny.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
This is nothing to with hating of other cultures and races. What this is is understanding that the indigenous peoples of the UK are becoming a minority within their own land that would never be accepted outside of the west in the 2nd/3rd world with their own. Immediately people shout racism at pointing out these truths, which is another way of grabbing the truth by the collar and throwing it into a prison, shutting it up for good. It is about destroying all debate against colonization.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE,
What we'd see is complaints that the whites were COLONIZING those lands and ethnically cleansing the indigenous peoples from them. The same thing is happening here in the UK and Europe. We will by mid century drop to the minority when compared to Africans and Asians (predominantly Asians). The difference of course is that the UK is the land of the white man, not the black or the Asian.
And you have the nerve to state "the exaggerated plight of the white man?"
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy That is again simply more 24 carat rolled gold Winnie bullshit! State from what source you get these statistics about whites becoming a minority!
neuterallrednecks 1 year ago
Comment removed
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
Darwin was a racist now that doesn't mean that his theory is invalid but his theory does hold to some racist ideas.I doubt that Darwin would have the same opinion of the darker races if he had access to the new information out there now but we will never know.And yet Darwin theory should have come with a warning. People like WinstontheSmithy thinking has lead to some of the biggest genocides of the 20th century if you view people has inferior it makes it easier to do wicked things to them.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
What angers me the most about having debates like this is that any criticism towards blacks is looked upon as racism. It's exactly the same with criticism of Judaism and the anti semitic slur. I spent 16 years of my life immersing myself in African, W.Indian and Asian cultures. Hell I dated black and asian women! I had many an aki and saltfish/curried goat evening. And my experiences made me realise that there are good and bad things in all cultures, but my culture was being destroyed
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
Blacks have Africa. Asians have Asia. The Whites homeland in the world is being ethnically cleansed by forced uncontrolled immigration upon it. Like it or not statistics speak for themselves, not only in black on white/black violence but white population size in the world. At the moment we're around 8%. By the end of the century it will drop to 2%.
Our lands are being colonised by non whites, alien to our culture and who have no respect for our culture. This is simple fact
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
Lastly, you talk about "the way I think that makes me hate blacks?" How on earth can you come to that conclusion? Would you hate chicken if you were forced to eat it day in day out? You may, but more likely you'd become sick of it and wouldn't want to eat it anymore. Well this is the way I feel. Hearing kids in London speak Jafaican, destroying the English language, adopting American gangsta rap/hip hop culture and patrolling in packs like hyeenas made me sick.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy And Asians would stand for whites to colonize their countries. I notice you haven't said a word about muslim countries I guarantee your guys wouldn't mess with them either. You want to bully the Africans around because you know you can get away with it. Europeans foot has been on the neck of Africans for a long time now. Sometimes I only think that black nationalist are serious about racial separation.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
Comment removed
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
Your ignorance on much is overwhelming - "Jewish holocaust?" - "African holocaust?" What the f*ck are you on about?
You say that you think we should have our own lands yet look at the white population of Africa/Asia then look at the African/Asian population of Europe?
What is happening is ethnic genocide of whites and you're all to busy (blacks and non whites) drowning in victim status to see any different.
Whites make up 8% of the world population. By the end of the century - 2%
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy That's why I believe in separation all Africa diaspora should return to mother Africa. The only thing I would ask of Europeans is to stay out of the economic and political affairs of Africa.I believe the continent of Europe and Africa should trade but I believe are friendship should end there.Marcus Garvey said it best Africa for the Africans we shouldn't allow bad history between our two races affect us forever separation is only way Africa for Africans and Europe for whites.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
P.S. What's this "always exaggerate the fairytale plight of the white man" b.sh*t? Anyone with half a brain would see that the white population is on the decrease compared to the non white. Why? Well thanks to feminism (misandry), white peoples are having one child per family if that. More so blacks and asians are leaving their already overpopulated lands and heading to the west where they continue to procreate in their large numbers.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy Industrialization has a lot to do with the decrease of the white population in the western world. The global elites are white they created and maintain white european population control they are following a program. Colonization disease and warfare has really kept the African population low by design of course. Now the asians has a huge population and growing it's going to be a problem in the future and Africans are leaving Africa because there's no opportunities.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
Add to that healthcare available to them that wasn't in their own lands and the infant mortality rate drops, meaning less WHITES and more NON WHITES. Are you getting this?
Now what would all the happy-clappy liberals be saying if the same was going on with blacks in Africa.Asia as whites in the west? What would happen if the population of whites in Africa/Asia was growing 4 times that of blacks/asians and by the end of the century whites would be the majority in those lands?
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy African population has just begun to regain just a little and if whites was growing in Africa well all of the Africans would be dead and displaced like the native Americans and the aborigines.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
And yet many racist do use Darwins model to justify their racism. This superior attitude that whites have has lead to many atrocities against indigenous people. The was hundreds of millions of Native Americans that was wiped out their numbers are so low I don't see how their race will see a new century. Same thing happen to the aborigines of Australia and slavery and colonialism has fractured Africans into a thousand pieces look at Europe right now is extremely hostile towards blacks.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
There were no 'great' NEGRO civilizations, controlled and run by NEGROS (not semitic Muslims or Jews) period. You can look up as much as you like but the bottom line is simple, had there never been outside WHITE influence on Africa it would still be in the stone age. No one likes to hear their people are intellectually inferior to others and unable to create society but that's just the way it is I'm afraid. Blacks are good at running, jumping and hitting but nothing else.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy There was no great WHITE civilization see I can do the same thing it doesn't make it true. You just can't ignore facts and data because it doesn't support your ideology. Can you at least acknowledge that tribal blacks had moved out of the stone age by the time the Europeans invaded Africa I mean the Zulus did have metal spears. Africans had societies that was destroyed by closed minded Europeans like yourself. Whites are good at sports to so your last sentence is ridiculous.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
Stone Age, Bronze Age, Iron Age all no different really when compared to the advanced western civilization. My last sentence is not ridiculous in fact it highlights my point. Therefore considering that blacks in the UK make up about 5% of the population and in the USA around 13% then why is there no proportional representation within sports? It means one of two things:
1. Blacks are better than whites at sports.
2. Blacks are playing sports because of positive discrimination.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
Blacks should never have been imported into the west for a multitude of reasons because the culture they were brought into was not there own and it should never have been forced upon them. Blacks who succeed in the west do so because they embrace white culture. Sadly though as the black population increases society is dropping back to African tribalism and violent culture. Statistics prove overwhelmingly that blacks are prone to more violence than whites.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy What about Colonialism has fractured and damaged the African people greater than slavery ever had. There was all kind of tribal violence in Iraq after the Americans destabilized the region. So the Americans figured that they could at least stabilize the region well the whites didn't do that in Africa. In fact tribal violence and wars have been encouraged and created by white nations in Africa. Violence is a symptom of a sick system it's not genetic.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
Colonialism DRAGGED the Africans out of the STONE AGE (sorry Iron Age). The West gave them education, medicine, transport systems, law and order, liberty, science, literature... Putting it bluntly, there would still be widespread canibalism and ritual sacrifice in Africa were it not for the West going in, although to say that still happens. Ironically as well Africa still practices slavery, something THE WHITES got rid of. Ever heard of William Willberforce?
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
Blacks ARE HOSTILE TO WHITES. It is the media that continually portrays the false image that whites are hostile to blacks. Take a look at police statistics all over the USA and Europe and you'll find overwhelmingly that the highest percentage per demographic of violence towards whites (and blacks) is by blacks. Statistics speak for themselves.
I agree 100% with you. My ancestors were wrong to have been involved in the slave trade. Blacks should never have left Africa.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy Come on now tell the truth white and blacks are hostile towards each other for sometime righteous and ridiculous reasons. I will acknowledge that black crime is a problem most of it is because of a wicked system and blacks need to start taking some responsibility for their actions. It doesn't matter if blacks left Africa or not because Whites kept coming to Africa during colonialism at least you do acknowledge that your ancestors was wrong that's a first.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
I am telling the truth. There is far more black to white hostility that the other way around. Tell me, what would happen if whites behaved to blacks as blacks do in the west - oh wait that happened - Apartheid in Africa and look where that is today? The best solution is for blacks to leave the west, they're no longer slaves, never have been and should go back to mother Africa and live the great life they continually tell us Africa offers them.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
I left London (UK) because of the downright prejudice towards whites from blacks. Not just that but we continually hear that our establishment are institutionally racist which itself is a joke. They are racist TO WHITES! Take council housing and association housing. You automatically go up the list if you're black. Even better a black immigrant.
I do not hate anyone for their colour but many sadly do because of mine, in my own land, I have become 2nd class to aliens.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy I doubt that you left the UK because a few angry black folks in a majority white country. Besides I thought that the Arab muslims was a bigger threat to the UK in the first place. White right wingers always exaggerate the fairytale plight of the white man. I don't believe that your not a racist tho it's impossible to believe what you believe and not hate blacks in some form. It's how you think is what makes you hate blacks.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
I never left the UK. I left London in England because I watched my culture be destroyed by immigration. The movies you see of quaint old London and Britain are nothing but media propaganda. Black gangs (and Asian) now battle one another all over the main cities within the UK. At the moment in London the main gangs battling it out with one another are the Nigerian origins of the West and Somalians in the North. And of course we've got the Asians in the East (Muslims).
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
White right wingers paint a true picture of society and I AM A RACIST in that I love my people, my culture and wish to teach it to my children but I DO NOT hate other races and cultures. I have always shown the utmost respect to people and their cultures when I visit them on holidays, but that's just it - I VISIT THEM. I don't want to see my culture being detroyed by inferior 3rd world ones and their peoples who promote them. Like it or not the 1st world is superior to the 3rd.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy But who are you superior to Winnie? You are a halfwit! An embarrassment to the culture that gave us Shakespeare, Newtown, and Darwin.
neuterallrednecks 1 year ago
(cont)
Thus what we see as the truth is shouted down as racism in order to not offend ergo it is better to deceive than it is to tell the truth, a sad reflection upon our times and overall society.
Again, were there no slave trade there would be no blacks alive today within the west. That again is fact as no white involvement within Africa would certainly mean that blacks living there would be no different to the many Amerindian tribes we see dotted all around the S.American rainforests.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy And it is shouted down has racist because it is racist their is tons of new information out their about Africa now that Darwin didn't have access to at that time. I know you want to believe that blacks that was taken from the west Africa was Savages but it wasn't the case. West Africans was Muslims and Arabs and Jews lived among them. In fact Africans was apart of a Muslim coalition of Berber and Arabs the moors that invaded Europe.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
@JETTYAGE
However, if a NEGRO is removed from Africa and educated as a white person would be educated, that is as the ONLY BLACK man in a class of predominant whites, that is if he accepts their culture as his own then he will succeed and aspire to do great things. If however he lives in a predominantly NEGRO society, under black culture then he won't, because unless he's kicking a ball, punching someone, running or jumping, the odds are greatly raised against him.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
(cont)
Bottom line is that people will immediately state point 3 is racist yet agree with 2. That is as longs as blacks are being praised then everything's ok.
We all evolved within our lands and many differently. Africans never had to store food however whites did, thus thought process came more into play, thinking about the future.
The sad reality is that were there no trans Atlantic slave trade, there'd be no blacks outside of Africa and all within would be still be living in the stone age.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy Some black civilizations Kushite Empire, Axum, Mali empire, look some of them up and the truth is archaeologist are still digging up massive structures up in Africa right now. Darwin was a racist but he had limited access to the new information right now. And how was blacks would still be in the stone age when even the most inferior African tribes was making Iron weapons Africans moved out of the stone age long ago my friend.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
I think you need to face facts:
1. Loyd Pye's theory on the homonoids and them being the missing link is far more probable that Darwin's theory of evolution.
2. Blacks are superior physically to whites, hence although a massive minority within the west yet their continuing dominance in sport.
3. Whites are superior intellectually to blacks. Simple fact of looking at the mess of Africa, black achievers and the fact that there's never been any great black civilizations through time.
WinstontheSmithy 1 year ago
@WinstontheSmithy Is you reading from a book from the 19th century. Their was many black civilizations you ever heard of the Nubian Kushites rivals to the Egyptians. Much of the science people like you still believe about blacks is outdated read from the updated version please. You whites are never aware of the world around Africa is struggling just like latin America it has more to do with the World Bank and the wars created by the CIA.
JETTYAGE 1 year ago
He may well have been a dirty stinking pig fucker, no matter he started the ongoing massacre of religion, well done me old son.
richybinns 1 year ago
I love your voice
Segepop 1 year ago
It's just a THEORY very few THEORIES actually become LAWS.
Oxstayne 1 year ago
@Oxstayne Because most laws are the simplest observable phenomenon. There is nothing simple about evolution, so it (like most theories) must be constantly refined to be as accurate as possible.
D0g63rt 1 year ago
just to be clear...the theory is something from nothing with no one in control?
zmc33 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
darwins theory is completely WRONG, he is a retard and wanted to make some money...and had nothing better to do.
SpooKiiEE 1 year ago
Angry feministic bitch.
martinbelmont 1 year ago
Evolution has not been challenged on an academic level, it is one of the strongest theories we have, bourne out by numerous fields of research.
The only people to challenge Evolution are those of a theistic bent, and their challenges are not based on any demonstrable fact. They posit no evidence to contradict Evolutionary theory and they do not present a viable alternative falsifiable theory.
DiClarkio1 2 years ago 5
just so im clear. is evolution just one big accident?
dedseason 1 year ago
@dedseason You're not clear apparently... The mutations are random, but natural selection is not.
Atheistblindchick 1 year ago
Well.. Technically... Natural Selection occurs... due to Mutations in genes of an organism...
... if you believe in the Theory-- Darwinian.. than... it's pretty much Random.
ooooooRamyoooooo 1 year ago
@dedseason It's akin to throwing the parts of your laptop (times a thousand) onto a table and after billions of years they assemble correctly and we post a comment.
Evolution is a far larger leap than any religious faith.
Freenetnow 1 year ago
@Freenetnow You obviously have never learnt what evolution is or heard about NATURAL SELECTION, it's not random at all. There is a lot of information on the internet that you can look for yourself.
lilmarome 1 year ago
@lilmarome If it's not random then are you saying it had a design?
Freenetnow 1 year ago
@Freenetnow It depends on how you define design. A river is shaped in a certain way does that mean that an Intelligent Being designed it that way or is it because came from a direction and could get through the weakest parts of the soil?
If you want a designer then I guess it will be the environment in the case of evolution. So now you got your "god" -the unintelligent, natural environment which changes naturally and makes some animals die and some survive. It doesn't have to be intelligent.
lilmarome 1 year ago
@lilmarome So you really just kind of guess and make things up as you go along - right?
At least I take a view. One that can be analyzed and discarded if you wish.
But you are a convenient moving target of "could-be's" and "maybe".
I believe God created ALL. You - heck I still don't know what you believe, and I wonder if you do.
-take care
Freenetnow 1 year ago
@Freenetnow I don't know where you got the idea from that I'm just guessing. That evolution happens is a fact and the theory of evolution explains why evolution happens and it's based on the fact of evolution, DNA, the law of inheritance etc.
I think you should look up Ockham's razor and try to use it. You're little god idea only works if you make a lot of assumptions that you can't answer in any sufficient way and can't be backed up by fact.
lilmarome 1 year ago
@lilmarome Why are there no transitional fossils to back up your beliefs?
"The case at present (problems presented by the fossil record) must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained." - Darwin
But, as by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?"
-Darwin
Okay, dodge and weave again.
Freenetnow 1 year ago
@Freenetnow As you can see in the next paragraph that Darwin writes it is because of the flaws of the fossil record and we have made many discoveries since Darwins time that bad´ck up evolution like the discovery of DNA, DNA is the best evidence for evolution that we have. But you are still wrong when you say that there are NO transitional fossils, every fossil is a transitional fossil between what came before and what came after, there are millions of them.
lilmarome 1 year ago
@lilmarome Name one.
Freenetnow 1 year ago
@Freenetnow Tiktaalik.
lilmarome 1 year ago
@lilmarome Uh, no. It's a fish which belongs with the Coelacanth - part of the lobefish group. This was determined after the usual initial trumpeting of a found missing link. It's fins were not load bearing as first suggested - they were just used for swimming. And like the coelacanth it hasn't changed in over a hundred million years.
I asked for a transitional fossil.
Freenetnow 1 year ago
@Freenetnow Ofc it was a fish but it was a fish like the mudskippers that push themselves forward with their limbs when the water level is low. And the time that it was around does not matter how long it has been around, like I said: every fossil and every animal that has ever existed is a transitional fossil. You are a transitional fossil between what came before you and what will come after you.
lilmarome 1 year ago
@lilmarome But those fins were not connected to it's skeleton in any way - right?
So where's the transition? There is none. It belonged to a wholly separate species.
C'mon you have to at least be honest about things.
Freenetnow 1 year ago
@Freenetnow a transition doesn't happen with just one species you have to look at many too see that a transition actually is taking place, if you look at a list of transitional fossils you will see the change over time. Evolution is all about tiny changes but I think that you're looking at some dishonest site for creationists and not on a scientific site about what we know to be true today.
lilmarome 1 year ago
@lilmarome Show me the list of transitional fossils. Thanks.
Freenetnow 1 year ago
@Freenetnow just type it in google, you will get tons of results.
lilmarome 1 year ago
@Freenetnow I realize I'm late for this conversation...but wikipedia seems to think that Tiktaalik's fins were indeed connected to its skeleton.
You should look this up.
Telamnar 1 year ago
@dedseason depends on who you ask. they are all over the place.
Freenetnow 1 year ago
Evolution hasn't been challenged in 150 years?It has. However, the scientific establishment gets paranoid & hysterical whenever other, just as valid theories get proposed. Witness how Intelligent Design is called "creationism in disguise" by Darwinists; this is paranoia.New Scientist has an article arguing Darwin was wrong about the "tree of life." If he was wrong about that,, then why not evolution as a whole? The answer is simple. Because Darwinists won't allow it to be wrong, even if it is
ChristianMission 2 years ago
@ChristianMission ''The proper application of both the endorsement and Lemon tests to the facts of this case makes it abundantly clear that the Board's ID Policy violates the Establishment Clause. In making this determination, we have addressed the seminal question of whether ID is science. We have concluded that it is not, and moreover that ID cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents.'
Judge John E. Jones
Kitzmuller v Dover Area School District.
gamesbok 1 year ago
they never found the missing link and even if they did, they would have to find many just to proove his stupid theory....hes right to a point, but i think earth history is full of surprises..ufo wink wink ;0
4thechange 1 year ago
@ChristianMission Well by that logic, if Christians or Creationists are wrong about things, are we to trust their "theories?" Because I can think of many things they've gotten wrong...
pukeoncops123 1 year ago
Very sage vid, Atheistblindchick! Right on the money! Nice accent too...
TheLizardPeople 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"The fact that life evolved out of nearly nothing, some 10 billion years after the universe evolved out of literally nothing - is a fact so staggering that I would be mad to attempt words to do it justice."
Richard Dawkins
google it, look it up etc...
Atheism is the belief in nothing, something coming from nothing is a scientific impossibility.
When you eliminate the impossible, what remains is not only possible, but probable.
God is possible. Atheism is not.
moonlightbateman 2 years ago
This falls into opinion, racist, I can agree for the provided facts.
But he was not a Pig and was not chovanist, but I do agree with you, he was a MALE and acording to you (what you heard and have not witnessed or known yourself) they need to be disliked and not asked questions that could be thought about.
Question, Is a Chauvinist a Feminist if the hormones are replaced?
MrSpitfireXVI 2 years ago
Darwinism is nothing but a way for selfish people to make excuses for the shit they do that they know is wrong. Yeah, granted the church is not perfect, in fact church is bullshit. Why dont you people stop worrying about what the CHURCH tells you and find out what THE BIBLE says. Its meaning is much different than you would think, if you look CLOSELY at it. If there is no god, the human race is doomed. Bottom line.
devildriver4687 2 years ago
"Darwinism is nothing but a way for selfish people to make excuses for the shit they do that they know is wrong."
So you don't think it's a way to describe nature then?
The theory of evolution by natural selection (what you inaccurately and disingenuously call darwinism) does not pretend to make any comment whatsoever on the morality of behaviour. So it cannot be used as an excuse.
"If there is no god, the human race is doomed."
Why?
m3141592 2 years ago 9
I give omage to SCOTLAND!!! jajajaja
Nautilus987 2 years ago