I am Darwin

There is a campaign being put on by i-am-darwin.org where users are encouraged to submit videos to YouTube where they describe how Darwin has influenced their lives. It shouldn’t be terribly difficult since the man made one of the most significant scientific discoveries yet known to man.

Advertisements

11 Responses

  1. To bad Francis Galton isn’t around to articulate how Darwinism influenced him to derive the theory of eugenics and so set the stage for one of the most destructive human tragedies of all time.

  2. Jack,

    Galton’s ignorance and arrogance are to blame for his misconceptions. Darwin reviewed his theories and called them overly idealistic to be real or practical in The Descent of Man. The roots of eugenics don’t lie in the theory of evolution, but in Victorian culture.

    http://worldofweirdthings.com/2008/10/21/the-ghosts-of-pseudo-science-past%E2%80%A6/

  3. Galton’s ignorance and arrogance are to blame for his misconceptions. Darwin reviewed his theories and called them overly idealistic to be real or practical in The Descent of Man. The roots of eugenics don’t lie in the theory of evolution, but in Victorian culture.

    I think Darwin laid a great foundation for eugenics in The Descent of Man :

    With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the mained, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed. (133-4/138-9; first page numbers to the 1st ed., second to the 2nd ed.)

    And a modicum of familiarity with the actual history of genetics would have informed you that Darwin’s son, Major Leonard Darwin, not only embraced eugenics, but led the first International Eugenics Conference, which marked the beginning of the implementation of eugenics programs worldwide.

    I guess young Leonard, were he still with us, could say as more than any other evolutionist “I am Darwin”.

  4. Ah of course, copy/paste something from the Discovery Institute website, the one paragraph they found where Darwin blathers on in the typical tone of his time. I can find a myriad of quotes in the Bible advocating genocide and religious hatred. Does that make Judaism and Christianity responsible for some of the greatest acts of slaughter in history? But oh wait… Darwin is not the whole of the theory of evolution. He just introduced the idea.

    A modicum of scientific knowledge would tell you that genetics began as a solid science only after the discovery of DNA in the 1950s. Before then, “genes” were just a term for traits and not for DNA segments that code proteins. And a quick look at a history book will tell you that Darwin wrote The Descent of Man after Galton was already advertising his theory of eugenics. Nobody can lay the foundations for something that was invented before he writes about it. The dim minds at DI hate science so much, they’re willing to create a slanderous history that blames bigotry on textbooks rather than the bigots.

    I would highly suggest holding back on the copy/pasting of creationist claptrap and getting some education of your own. The link I gave you explained in detail that the thinking of the time presumed arrogance and superiority and the same racists, sexists and genocidal manics of the time simply had another excuse to keep up their hate.

  5. Ah of course, copy/paste something from the Discovery Institute website, the one paragraph they found where Darwin blathers on in the typical tone of his time. I can find a myriad of quotes in the Bible advocating genocide and religious hatred. Does that make Judaism and Christianity responsible for some of the greatest acts of slaughter in history? But oh wait… Darwin is not the whole of the theory of evolution. He just introduced the idea.

    Actually I copied it from a site defending Darwin on this very question – but that is irrelevant – Darwin was plainly amenable to the notion that humans could be improved by better breeding – that’s eugenics.

    And if you want to start comparing ‘slaughters’, I think you better start with the atheist regimes first, as the hundreds of millions slaughtered under atheistic governments make all those killed for religious reasons seem insignificant in comparison.

    A modicum of scientific knowledge would tell you that genetics began as a solid science only after the discovery of DNA in the 1950s. Before then, “genes” were just a term for traits and not for DNA segments that code proteins. And a quick look at a history book will tell you that Darwin wrote The Descent of Man after Galton was already advertising his theory of eugenics. Nobody can lay the foundations for something that was invented before he writes about it. The dim minds at DI hate science so much, they’re willing to create a slanderous history that blames bigotry on textbooks rather than the bigots.

    Galton based his theories on .The Origin of Species., not .Descent.. .Descent .is simply quoted to show that Darwin was amenable to Galton’s ideas, which he was – and Darwin’s son went further in helping to find ways to implement them.

    .I would highly suggest holding back on the copy/pasting of creationist claptrap and getting some education of your own. The link I gave you explained in detail that the thinking of the time presumed arrogance and superiority and the same racists, sexists and genocidal manics of the time simply had another excuse to keep up their hate..

    I highly suggest you actually study the history of eugenics; there is almost no early evolutionist who wasn’t also an advocate of eugenics, so at least for the first several decades saying, “I am Darwin” was synonymous with saying you thought the certain people groups were inherently superior to others. Darwin gave those “racists, sexists and genocidal maniacs” the veneer of scientific respectability.

  6. Jack, you’re a terrible liar.

    See what you do is ignore the point and just attack people you don’t like for proposing theories that you don’t want to hear. You also make up your own facts which is downright inexcusable.

    There has never been an atheistic government. There were regimes which were atheistic in name, but not in practice. The USSR was mostly Christian Orthodox. I lived there, I would know. Nazi Germany was Catholic as was Hitler. China was and is still Confucianist, North Korea is a very different matter as their religion is the cult ot the ruling family intermix with whatever shards of Buddhism and Taosim remain.

    And beyond being a fraudulent assertion, it’s also a red herring. If you paid attention other than copy/pasting stale old talking points from people who couldn’t find a clue with a GPS, you would’ve noticed that I was defending the religions from their bigoted, hateful members. If you can do the same with religion, why can’t you do the same with science? Oh yeah, because you hate science.

    How do I figure? Well you use the term “evolutionist” which is an insult to say the least. You haven’t studied the history of eugenics. You heard on some TV special that eugenics was a popular perversion of the theory of evolution, wet your pants from excitement and embraced the Darwin-is-the-Devil meme.

    Please, you’re as transparent as a pane of glass.

  7. Jack, you’re a terrible liar.

    Once again the failure of logic causes another new atheist to resort to name calling

    See what you do is ignore the point and just attack people you don’t like for proposing theories that you don’t want to hear. You also make up your own facts which is downright inexcusable.

    Feel free to defend Galtons’ theories if you like them so much. And as you spend most of your post throwing out ad homs rather than logical arguments, I find it more than humorous that you are ‘offended’ by me attacking people for their theories.

    There has never been an atheistic government. There were regimes which were atheistic in name, but not in practice. The USSR was mostly Christian Orthodox. I lived there, I would know. Nazi Germany was Catholic as was Hitler. China was and is still Confucianist, North Korea is a very different matter as their religion is the cult ot the ruling family intermix with whatever shards of Buddhism and Taosim remain.

    This is what happens when people don’t pay attention. No one said there were no religious people in those countries (or even mentioned Hitler, though that is a different set of beliefs inspired by Darwin and Galton) but that their governments, which were lead by totalatarian leaders, were atheistic. And there is no verifiable fact (notice I said fact, not chiildhood memory) to indicate that Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and the Ils were anything but atheist – thus the primary heads of the government were indeed atheistic, and horribly destructive.

    Oh, as well as Revoltionary France. Forgot about them.

    And beyond being a fraudulent assertion, it’s also a red herring. If you paid attention other than copy/pasting stale old talking points from people who couldn’t find a clue with a GPS, you would’ve noticed that I was defending the religions from their bigoted, hateful members. If you can do the same with religion, why can’t you do the same with science? Oh yeah, because you hate science.

    Well, thanks for defending religion; like you I was just defending atheism from its hateful and bigoted members.

    And I love science, that’s why I majored in biology. What I do hate is when people confuse science with atheism.

    How do I figure? Well you use the term “evolutionist” which is an insult to say the least. You haven’t studied the history of eugenics. You heard on some TV special that eugenics was a popular perversion of the theory of evolution, wet your pants from excitement and embraced the Darwin-is-the-Devil meme.

    Please, you’re as transparent as a pane of glass.

    I know it’s hard to be introspective at your age, but have you noticed your congenital inability to actually respond to arguments without resorting to ad homs? I suppose not.

  8. Condescension and constant self-praise a legitimate argument does not make. You also continue to lie and use strawmen arguments.

    I like Galton’s theories? Yes, I must love them. Why else would I write a point by point refutation of them on my site?

    And your claim about how totalitarian government are atheistic with no backing evidence is definitely more than authoritative enough for me. Obviously a random web troll with a superiority complex is a much better source than… um… well… history books. And accounts of the time.

    You love science so much you don’t even know its basics. Yes, of course you majored in biology… I believe you… No, really.

  9. Condescension and constant self-praise a legitimate argument does not make. You also continue to lie and use strawmen arguments.

    I agree – why do you keep using them?

    I like Galton’s theories? Yes, I must love them. Why else would I write a point by point refutation of them on my site?

    I don’t know how I would know what is on ‘your site’, but if you think eugenics was a bad thing then great – we are in agreement there.

    And your claim about how totalitarian government are atheistic with no backing evidence is definitely more than authoritative enough for me. Obviously a random web troll with a superiority complex is a much better source than… um… well… history books. And accounts of the time.

    Well, I recommend you read The Twilight of Atheism: The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World by Oxford Professor Alister McGrath. It does an excellent job of chronicling the destructiveness of atheistic governments. Of course, it’s a book, so it may be too much for you.

    So there is that, and the experience of my own in-laws, who are of Ukrainian decent and whose family was devastated by Stalin’s purges – and I can say with a high degree of certainty that this didn’t occur at the hands of the ‘Orthodox church’ of which they are a part.

    You love science so much you don’t even know its basics. Yes, of course you majored in biology… I believe you… No, really.

    I personally don’t care whether you believe I studied biology at Iowa State in my youth, since I have no more proof of your credentials than you have of mine; I am certain in any discussion of science I could hold my own against your obviously mediocre knowledge of the subject any day of the week, and have been doing so long before you started playing with your keyboard.

    Of course, by your blog it seems you are an expert on the high science of ufology so I won’t even try to contend in that arena.

  10. Anyone wishing to read my latest research entitled “It’s Not Darwin’s or Wallace’s’Theory” should search Google for “wainwrightscience”.Essential pre-Darwin bean feast reading!

    Dr Milton Wainwright,Department of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology University of Sheffield,UK-(a secular agnostic!)

  11. Jack, belated as my response may be, here’s a debunking to your mutilation of Darwin’s quote. If you actually quoted the whole two passages from the Descent of Man without dishonestly excising half the words from it, you would’ve shown that Darwin was of the mind that eugenics and selective human breeding was inhumane and evolutionarily damaging to our species:

    http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=six-things-ben-stein-doesnt-want-you-to-know

    Also, if you actually read my blog and was honest about what you read there, you would’ve noticed that I’m a researcher in science and alternative theology and my articles about UFOs are actually explorations of culture, myth-making and military history and technology. My expertise is in computer technology, digital media and technical design (which is in my bio on the blog).

    Like I said, you are a terrible liar since your lies are so transparent and so easily disproved, it literally takes five minutes to prove you wrong.

Leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: