New tactic for creationists - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

Jeff Lebowski · 02-09-2008, 03:14 PM

AP story:

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695251387,00.html

Basically, they are making the argument that evolution should be removed from schools, since "Darwinism" has been used as a justification for racism by Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.

The most effective and most frequently used justification for slavery was the bible. I wonder if they are going to stop their children from reading the bible?

SeattleUte · 02-09-2008, 03:42 PM

Yeah, they may want to rethink that path. The Bible's been used to justify even worse things than slavery.

creekster · 02-09-2008, 03:42 PM

That guy's thinking is so wrong on so many levels that it isn't even worth the trouble of dealing with it. DO you think he really believes that hoo-hah?

Cali Coug · 02-09-2008, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

AP story:

http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695251387,00.html

Basically, they are making the argument that evolution should be removed from schools, since "Darwinism" has been used as a justification for racism by Hitler, Stalin, and Mao.

The most effective and most frequently used justification for slavery was the bible. I wonder if they are going to stop their children from reading the bible?

Don't hold your breath.

woot · 02-09-2008, 04:03 PM

Typical lying for Jesus. Ken Ham is among the worst.

What's really funny is that he's just repeating the very old line about the title of Origin.

"On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life"

To a creationist, this means that Darwin was a racist. Someone who has actually read the book will know that Origin does not contain discussion about human evolution. He thought it would be too controversial and wanted to make sure that he published it in an expansive text so that he could explain it well, along with various pre-emptive defenses for the criticisms he knew he would receive.

In addition to not discussing humans, in biology the term "race" refers to subspecies. "Race" in the colloquial sense is wholly without biological foundation and for convenience only. When Darwin talked about race, he was referring to the differential sizes of bills on finches and whatnot.

It should also be emphasized that Darwin was absolutely not a "social Darwinist."

The last point is that "Darwinism" is an outdated and somewhat silly term. Britons still refer to natural selection in this manner, perhaps because they are proud to have produced such a great thinker, but I think it does a disservice to the field. It caused creationists to think that evolution is all about Darwin, when that is clearly not the case. Referring to natural selection as "Darwinism" is like referring to gravity as "Newtonism." The theory of gravitation (yes, theory! I guess Ken Ham should start advocating "intelligent falling" now.) has become much more refined in the last few centuries.

While Darwin came up with perhaps the greatest single idea ever, the reason he published Origin when he did is because Wallace had come up with the same idea and contacted Darwin to get his thoughts. Amazing how evidence does that.

02-09-2008, 03:14 PM	#1
Jeff Lebowski Charon Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the heart of darkness (Provo) Posts: 9,564	New tactic for creationists AP story: http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695251387,00.html Basically, they are making the argument that evolution should be removed from schools, since "Darwinism" has been used as a justification for racism by Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. The most effective and most frequently used justification for slavery was the bible. I wonder if they are going to stop their children from reading the bible? __________________ "... the arc of the universe is long but it bends toward justice." Martin Luther King, Jr.

02-09-2008, 03:42 PM	#2
SeattleUte fairlds.org Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Seattle, WA Posts: 10,665	Yeah, they may want to rethink that path. The Bible's been used to justify even worse things than slavery. __________________ Interrupt all you like. We're involved in a complicated story here, and not everything is quite what it seems to be. —Paul Auster

02-09-2008, 03:42 PM	#3
creekster Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: the far corner of my mind Posts: 8,711	That guy's thinking is so wrong on so many levels that it isn't even worth the trouble of dealing with it. DO you think he really believes that hoo-hah? __________________ Sorry for th e tpyos.

02-09-2008, 04:03 PM	#5
woot Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Denver Posts: 1,502	Typical lying for Jesus. Ken Ham is among the worst. What's really funny is that he's just repeating the very old line about the title of Origin. "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life" To a creationist, this means that Darwin was a racist. Someone who has actually read the book will know that Origin does not contain discussion about human evolution. He thought it would be too controversial and wanted to make sure that he published it in an expansive text so that he could explain it well, along with various pre-emptive defenses for the criticisms he knew he would receive. In addition to not discussing humans, in biology the term "race" refers to subspecies. "Race" in the colloquial sense is wholly without biological foundation and for convenience only. When Darwin talked about race, he was referring to the differential sizes of bills on finches and whatnot. It should also be emphasized that Darwin was absolutely not a "social Darwinist." The last point is that "Darwinism" is an outdated and somewhat silly term. Britons still refer to natural selection in this manner, perhaps because they are proud to have produced such a great thinker, but I think it does a disservice to the field. It caused creationists to think that evolution is all about Darwin, when that is clearly not the case. Referring to natural selection as "Darwinism" is like referring to gravity as "Newtonism." The theory of gravitation (yes, theory! I guess Ken Ham should start advocating "intelligent falling" now.) has become much more refined in the last few centuries. While Darwin came up with perhaps the greatest single idea ever, the reason he published Origin when he did is because Wallace had come up with the same idea and contacted Darwin to get his thoughts. Amazing how evidence does that.