With all the statues and images being destroyed I haven't heard about any Darwin images being cancelled.His books and other writings are about as racist as anything I've read.
Darwin images
Posts
Total:
71
-->
@ronjs
With all the statues and images being destroyed I haven't heard about any Darwin images being cancelled.His books and other writings are about as racist as anything I've read.
Is Science racist?
-->
@ronjs
Don't you think the term has shifted in definition since Darwin? Hell, since ten years ago. You are a creature of your current culture, not what has passed on. You want to cancel culture, it is your current culture that cancels, and thus, you are forgotten. Well done.
-->
@ILikePie5
If science believes what Darwin believed about' favoured races' then ,yes, science is racist.
-->
@fauxlaw
Actually, I think the cancel culture is ridiculous, although I don't care about statues,
-->
@ronjs
With all the statues and images being destroyed I haven't heard about any Darwin images being cancelled.His books and other writings are about as racist as anything I've read.
The racist exploits of evolutionists in the past have been for the most part forgotten. I don't think too many people even know about scientific racism. But the potential problems are there. James Watson has shown that scientists can never publicly claim any independent, unbiased, objective theory about race that invokes anti-racist public outcry. So ironically, modern scientists are forced to stand by a biblical proclamation that all men are created equal. The let's let the evidence tell us doesn't work in race relations.
And the social grip will only get tighter.
-->
@ronjs
If science believes what Darwin believed about' favoured races' then ,yes, science is racist.
If science says black people aren’t as evolved genetically as white people, is that racist?
-->
@ronjs
science is racist.
^peak leftism
-->
@ronjs
If science believes what Darwin believed about' favoured races' then ,yes, science is racist.
Is survival of the fittest racist? Keeping in mind that fittest in the Darwin sense also meant mentally as well as physically fittest.
And are you sure that "science believes what Darwin believed about' favoured races'" - and not favoured species?
-->
@ILikePie5
It is racist, because it is untrue.
-->
@WaterPhoenix
Ithinkyou missed something, I said science is racist if
-->
@Stephen
Read Darwin's books and letters, it is clear he meant favoured races, it is even in the full title of his most famous book.
-->
@ronjs
If science believes what Darwin believed about' favoured races' then ,yes, science is racist.Is survival of the fittest racist? Keeping in mind that fittest in the Darwin sense also meant mentally as well as physically fittest.And are you sure that "science believes what Darwin believed about' favoured races'" - and not favoured species?Read Darwin's books and letters, it is clear he meant favoured races, it is even in the full title of his most famous book.
I have read his book On the Origin Of Species, and I don't think that "it is clear". So why don't you show us which science and scientist believe Darwinist or his work was racist?
Couldn't be that nature is "racist" in that it favours and dictates the fittest of any species ?
Two things can be simultaneously true: Darwin might have been racist (extremely common in the 19th century) AND natural selection is how life diversifies. One has nothing to do with the other. It's like wondering if rocket science is anti semitic because Nazi research contributed to its development.
-->
@ronjs
It is racist, because it is untrue.
so it couldn't be that the person is just wrong, but they actually have to be racist, gotcha, cry wolf much?
-->
@ronjs
lmao do you mean if as in when you said "if science believes"? you do realize science isn't a person, science is the laws of the universe and is the absolute fact and truth regarding everything you've interacted with and everything you've yet. science doesn't choose to be anything, for it is everything. darwin didn't come up with this willy nilly, he did numerous trials and tests and settled on this conclusion with absolute scientific proof.
-->
@Stephen
Never said that science or scientists believe Darwin to be racist and that would be an appeal to authority, but his various writings speak for themselves.
Nature is not racist, it does not discriminate who or what it kills and it is not always the strongest that survives. Racism is a human concept since there is no biological basis for race, we are all humans with the same blood the same DNA structure and only really minor differences in outward appearance.
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
Racism is wrong and people who discriminate against any group of people are wrong. Don't see your point.
-->
@WaterPhoenix
It goes without saying and most people know that science refers to the scientific community.
Any scientist can attest that science cannot prove anything since they can never be sure they have all the evidence,many facts iin science have been overturned by the discovery of new evidence and this is why scientists almost always use tentative language when reporting their findings.
-->
@ronjs
Racism is wrong and people who discriminate against any group of people are wrong. Don't see your point.
racism is wrong and I totally understand why you don't see my point, many who can't objectively look at things have great difficulty understanding any other point of view except their own and those who agree with them, so I totally understand why you don't see it.
do you think those with a lot of melanin in their skin would have a big advantage living in very sunny and hot climates?
but to your topic, is it racism if Darwin was basing what he thought on the science and things they knew at the time? Just because they were wrong and the science then is very poor compared to what we know now doesn't mean it's racism.
something else to consider the word racism has really lost any meaning and effect because of how it's easily used and misused, but such is human language.
-->
@ronjs
Never said that science or scientists believe Darwin to be racist
I know. You said "If science believes what Darwin believed about' favoured races' then ,yes, science is racist".#4
we are all humans with the same blood the same DNA structure and only really minor differences in outward appearance.
I am glad you brought that up as it appears now,that here in the UK at least, Covid 19 favours killing black people, yes you couldn't make it up could you? Authorities are seemingly saying that Covid 19 is racist. If this indeed be the case ( I personally doubt it) this would make it genetic fault maybe? and suggest that we are not "all humans of the same DNA structure".
"Black people are more than four times more likely to die from Covid-19 than white people, according to stark official figures exposing a dramatic divergence in the impact of the coronavirus pandemic in England and Wales"
-->
@ronjs
It goes without saying and most people know that science refers to the scientific community.
...no....it really doesn't. those two are completely different things. one is a topic and the other is a community.
Any scientist can attest that science cannot prove anything since they can never be sure they have all the evidence,many facts iin science have been overturned by the discovery of new evidence and this is why scientists almost always use tentative language when reporting their findings.
sure i guess, but no new evidence disproving darwin's theory has come up, and darwin remains the father genetics.
-->
@ronjs
@ILikePie5
If science believes what Darwin believed about' favoured races' then ,yes, science is racist.
If science says black people aren’t as evolved genetically as white people, is that racist?
Of course, both questions are conditional and hypothetical.
Science is and always has been a measuring stick upon which to draw accurate conclusions.
-->
@wlsw9
All I’m asking is why is it racist to say white people have evolved more genetically than black people? Forget about the concept of truth. Why is that sentence racist?
-->
@ILikePie5
All I’m asking is why is it racist to say white people have evolved more genetically than black people? Forget about the concept of truth. Why is that sentence racist?
Allow me to explain.
The universal, fundamental characteristics of those who are racist are that they are both ignorant and arrogant.
As such, a racist, therefore, would be too ignorant to know that he or she is racist and too arrogant to want to know that he or she is a racist.
Therefore and, quite tellingly so, you have both unwittingly and rhetorically answered your own question.
-->
@wlsw9
Allow me to explain.The universal, fundamental characteristics of those who are racist are that they are both ignorant and arrogant.As such, a racist, therefore, would be too ignorant to know that he or she is racist and too arrogant to want to know that he or she is a racist.Therefore and, quite tellingly so, you have both unwittingly and rhetorically answered your own question.
So I’m a racist? Aight lol
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
@WaterPhoenix
We‘re racists bois.
-->
@ILikePie5
it's fine, the word lacks any real meaning, affect or impact. Amazing how a group who is rabid about tolerance and inclusion is so intolerant and judgemental. How long before pedos are just another protected class, I can see it happening given their mindset of nothing is wrong.
Certain "genetics" mostly unique to peoples origins have disadvantages. Sickle cell anemia is a good one.
If a race is not predisposed to diabetes, high blood pressure etc then wouldn't that race or group be superior to those that are prone to those diseases/disorders?
-->
@TheDredPriateRoberts
If a race is not predisposed to diabetes, high blood pressure etc then wouldn't that race or group be superior to those that are prone to those diseases/disorders?
No doubt about it. There’s a reason why disease was the biggest killer in the New World. Europeans had an immunity developed over the course of years, while natives had not.
-->
@ILikePie5
With all the statues and images being destroyed I haven't heard about any Darwin images being cancelled.His books and other writings are about as racist as anything I've read.Is Science racist?
Science is not a person or persons. Thus it is not racist. Scientists, those who participate in science, can be. Social Darwinism has caused many problems, of which racism is one of them when it has been adopted into cultures.