TR Politics

[mulj]

Charles Darwim still harboured racist views that whites were at top and that certain inferior races need to be wiped out.

Eventhough he did not do the colonialism or the imperialism his views were no different.

Karl Marx did not invent the gulags or the genocide driven famines of the Soviet Union and Mao Zedongs China but his communism contributed to it.

If his first cousin and assosiate who made term euginic misinterpret him then yes, but it is really hardly to beleive so after so many tea and cookies parties.
People thuiks that scientists are some kind represantation of virtue and tend to worship them blindly as they are not people like anyone else with variety of characters and intentions.
For me disengaging correlaction between his work and eugenic is nothing more then whitewashing to avoid and maintain untouchablity of his premises.

 

[TheInsider]

How so? Can you demonstrate transition of species towrds other species.
With all given knowledge and equipment how they did not demonstrate transition from virus to bacteria, for example. Let alone others.
What is only proven is adaptation WITHIN species but that knowledge is more then 1000 years old.

Yes. But you don't need to prove this in a lab. Wolf to dog is already proof enough.

 

[mulj]

Yes. But you don't need to prove this in a lab. Wolf to dog is already proof enough.

How so? That proof existed couple of thousand years ago and it onky proved WITHIN species. When scientists demonstrate how fsih decided to go out of the water and decided to become men, then we can talk.
Mutations does not explain transitions from specie to speice if it does their would not be many creationists in scientific community with serious credentials all phds, nobel lauretes etc....

 

[CAN_TR]

science doesn't lie.

That my friend is not science but a reddit map based on the majority Y-DNA of each country. You need more than just that.

they were not Turks bro.

Please explain why? Really curious.

 

[Vaggos]

How so? That proof existed couple of thousand years ago and it onky proved WITHIN species. When scientists demonstrate how fsih decided to go out of the water and decided to become men, then we can talk.
Mutations does not explain transitions from specie to speice if it does their would not be many creationists in scientific community with serious credentials all phds, nobel lauretes etc....

Major evolutionary transitions in individuality

The evolution of life on earth has been driven by a small number of major evolutionary transitions. These transitions have been characterized by individuals that could previously replicate independently, cooperating to form a new, more complex life form. For example, archaea and eubacteria...

www.pnas.org

 

[mulj]

Major evolutionary transitions in individuality

The evolution of life on earth has been driven by a small number of major evolutionary transitions. These transitions have been characterized by individuals that could previously replicate independently, cooperating to form a new, more complex life form. For example, archaea and eubacteria...

www.pnas.org

I know for tnis, it is frankly stupid argument, how come trough billions of years viruses did not got estungished and formed advanced specie, it is clearly in contradiction with survival of the fittest thesys...

 

[TheInsider]

It happened in a very very long time span. It is near impossible(but not impossible some of us can comprehend) for humans to comprehend such a long time span. Millions of generations of fish died trying that. But some became successful.

Amphibious fish - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[TheInsider]

I know for tnis, it is frankly stupid argument, how come trough billions of years viruses did not got estungished and formed advanced specie, it is clearly in contradiction with survival of the fittest thesys...

It is the same question as to why apes don't become humans there is a shit load of answers to that. It is a beginner's question, to be honest. Google it.

 

[mulj]

It happened in a very very long time span. It is near impossible(but not impossible some of us can comprehend) for humans to comprehend such a long time span. Millions of generations of fish died trying that. But some became successful.

Amphibious fish - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It happened in a very very long time span. It is near impossible(but not impossible some of us can comprehend) for humans to comprehend such a long time span. Millions of generations of fish died trying that. But some became successful.

Amphibious fish - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

It stucked in evolution like a frog, damn....

 

[Vaggos]

How so? That proof existed couple of thousand years ago and it onky proved WITHIN species. When scientists demonstrate how fsih decided to go out of the water and decided to become men, then we can talk.
Mutations does not explain transitions from specie to speice if it does their would not be many creationists in scientific community with serious credentials all phds, nobel lauretes etc....

Name one Nobel prize winner who is creationist

 

[mulj]

It is the same question as to why apes don't become humans there is a shit load of answers to that. It is a beginner's question, to be honest. Google it.

Maybe because they are cognicitevly less then birds which should not be the case by offical theory of evolution, parrots have more cognitive abilities then them...

 

[TheInsider]

Evolution doesn't mean species have to change

It stucked in evolution like a frog, damn....

Here you go this is the last favor I made to you.

Why Haven't All Primates Evolved into Humans?

Humans did not evolve from apes, gorillas or chimps. We share a common ancestor and have followed different evolutionary paths.

www.livescience.com

 

[mulj]

Name one Nobel prize winner who is creationist

Seven Nobel Laureates in science who either supported Intelligent Design or attacked Darwinian evolution | Uncommon Descent

uncommondescent.com

 

[mulj]

Evolution doesn't mean species has to change

Here you go this is the last favor I made to you.

Why Haven't All Primates Evolved into Humans?

Humans did not evolve from apes, gorillas or chimps. We share a common ancestor and have followed different evolutionary paths.

www.livescience.com

Now i am confused, we are not desendants of monkeys? Shame that none can say who was that common ancestor.

 

[TheInsider]

The size of the brain is not important in cognitive functions. Elephants are not more intelligent than apes or humans.

Parrots are clever because their brains evolved the same way as ours

Like humans, parrots have big brains and good communication skills – now we know the DNA regulating parrot and human brain development evolved in a similar way

www.newscientist.com

 

[TheInsider]

No i am confused, we are not desendants of monkeys? Shame that none can say who was that common ancestor.

Same logic why all the wolves haven't become dogs. Because some wolves were fine in the wild some were not. Humans took them and domesticated them in time they evolved into dogs. The ones who remained in the wild didn't evolve and stayed as wolves.

The common ancestor of humans and the chimp experienced a similar situation with the retreating and changing forest biome some of them evolved bipedalism over time in the bushes of the savanna. Those which remained inside the changing forest biome area evolved to chimps.

 

[mulj]

Same logic why all the wolves haven't become dogs. Because some wolves were fine in the wild some are not. Humans took them and domesticated them in time they evolve to dogs. The ones who remained in the wild didn't evolve and stayed as wolves.

The common ancestor of humans and the chimp experienced a similar situation with the retreating and changing forest biome some of them evolved bipedalism over time in the bushes of savanna. Those which remained inside the changin forest biome area evolved to chimps.

Listen, if you apply to logic i mentioned couple of examples which dispute theory arguments and there are many more, so it is not on your side exlusively, on the contrary if you widen theory to the core and that is basicaly who lit the spark?
Anyway scientific community can not agree absolutely about theory of gravitiy 300 years or more after newton, so i will keep my reservations towards theory of evolution for while and will not consider it as truth.

 

[Vaggos]

Seven Nobel Laureates in science who either supported Intelligent Design or attacked Darwinian evolution | Uncommon Descent

uncommondescent.com

Is any of them alive? What's the point going back two or more generations? Science is evolving, moving forward, not backwards! Guglielmo Marconi??? Come on!!! He was born in 1874!!!

 

[mulj]

Is any of them alive? What's the point going back two or more generations? Science is evolving, moving forward, not backwards! Guglielmo Marconi??? Come on!!! He was born in 1874!!!

Al right, this one is live and kicking ...

Brian Josephson, Nobel Prize-winning physicist

 

[Xenon54]

Really? I read lot of articles with those claims.

You read the wrong articles then, Darvin never advocated eugenics, neither did his work inspire such stuff.