It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


the Dark Face of Darwinism

page: 8
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 08:10 AM

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact

On-topic? You can't be serious right? Many people have tried to get you to answer their on-topic posts and you keep coming back with "I will in good time" and crap like that - yet never actually doing so.

I'm waiting for you to play Mr Innocent again and whinge about the fact that I am on your case and won't let up - like you did when things got tough in another thread.

A troll is a troll is a troll.

whine and scream all you like...

I will not respond to religious rhetoric at this moment and in this thread, maybe that is why there was no response to some.

I am still trying to figure out the significance of what a troll is, or if the ones who scream it is more relevant ?

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 08:17 AM
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact

If you are still attempting to figure out what a 'Troll' is in internet terms, then it goes to show you are quite illiterate when it comes to the Internet.

Small hint - Google it.

Oh and there is no 'whining and screaming' coming from me - just a steadfast resolve to call out the trolls on this website which seem to have grown in number quite dramatically in the last year.
edit on 23/12/2010 by Kryties because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 08:42 AM
reply to post by Kryties

please take it to U2U or another topic/section.

I personally think the ones who scream 'troll' are the trolls themselves because the have no counter that is logical... so one can see their intent quite easily.

what are your intentions ? (answer in a u2u or elsewhere please, instead of attempting to derail this topic.

final response:

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 08:48 AM
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact

Thankyou for proving my point.

I would take it to u2u but you have made it plainly clear to everyone that you only respond to posts you wish to, the rest seem to require the poster to have enough patience to wait until the end of time for you to 'get around to it.'

Oh and why would I take it to u2u when my intention is to publically call you out for the troll you are? Kind of defeats the purpose don't you think?

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 08:48 AM
Double post
edit on 23/12/2010 by Kryties because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 09:47 AM
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact

Hitler was inspired by Martin Luther, the great reformer and creator of Protestantism. Luther believed that if you removed all of the religious trimmings the catholic church had added on to Christianity and presented the pure gospel, the Jews would accept the Christian faith and recognize Jesus as their Messiah. Because they didn't, Luther became increasingly frustrated and enraged with the Jews, ultimately writing anti semitic works. This is the side of Martin Luthers' faith that Hitler was attracted to.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 09:47 AM

Originally posted by felonius

Originally posted by Helmkat
In an alternate reality people blame the Nazis's for using the theory of gravity to drop bombs.

Its just a theory, it is neither good or evil.


This has got to be the funniest thing I've seen in a while! thanks for making my morning start with a smile!

may I use this as a signiture?

Help yourself

This is a second line

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 09:56 AM
The above guy is correct concerning Hitlers religious teachings and views.

Some of the worst behaviour in Human history has come out of a misinterpretation of Darwin's writings. Notably Hitlers horrific abomination that was Eugenics. But Darwin had nothing at all do do with this. At the time of his writings slavery was still widespread and it was widely thought that Africans were of a less intelligence or advanced species of humans. But this does not discredit Darwins theory.

Misinterpretation is not unique to Darwin, Al Qaeda have misinterpreted the teachings of the Quran and its probably worth a mention of the Medieval Crusades. Reading things with their context in mind is required.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:01 AM

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact

man you guys are really hurting

this is still not really the conversation I was looking for, I was looking for what one personally thinks about Darwins Theory...

These videos were made by a Muslim and they are attacking Darwin at the moment, not just Christians !

Theist in general are attacking Darwins Theory from all walks of life... gotta love the internet ! and UK wonders why the Islamic people are freaking out on them over there on their tiny Island.

it is an interesting video, what you guys have to say about Islam ? do Atheist realize if they even uttered a word of what they speaking about on here ats in Arabic or Urdu they would basically have burning oil poured down their throats right ?

Gotta love America's Freedom of Speech, (something UK does not even have)

here is another documentary made by a Muslim, maybe it'll give a better understanding why they hate Atheism so bad... way worse than the majority of Theist !

edit on 12/22/2010 by Cosmic.Artifact because: (no reason given)

Sorry, but as someone in the UK, why are you trying to pick that fight? Actual people who follow the Islamic faith based on its core values aren't freaking out about anyone in the UK anymore than they are in the US - do you recall a little earlier in the year when one of your charming pastors wanted to burn the holy book of Islam? No-one in the States freaking out about that I guess. As to the 'tiny island' thing, we're all on the same tiny speck of dust, but you show your bias and (I'm sure unfounded) personal sense of superiority in a very immature way.

Could you also tell me what freedom of speech UK lacks that US has? If you are referring to the law against inciting hatred/violence based on race and creed, yeah, I happen to think that is a valuable thing to have. I did think America was progressive enough to also do this or does the state over there actively condone cross burning these days (hint, that's sarcasm based on your lack of knowledge).

AS someone who's on the fence on this, I actually don't see why both theories (divine designer and evolution) should be considered so poles apart - but it seems both fundamental creationists who make statements not actually in line with any major faith, and fundamental evolutionists who see any question to the theory they uphold as heresy - will never discuss in a rational manner.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:11 AM
Evolution began when the Universe cooled enough for the Hydrogen atom to bind, and that's where it all began, everything from Hydrogen, the Universe's first particle.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:12 AM
I think it's hilarious that you're trying to blame Darwin for things that happened before he was even alive

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:19 AM
reply to post by daggyz

Originally posted by daggyz
reply to post by OzWeatherman

Bollocks, Hitler was a materialist. he was not a Christian unless your inferring that if someone goes to a church it makes them a Christian?

How was Hitler a materialist? Materialists don't go out seeking divine artifacts, they don't say that a deity has endorsed their cause, and they certainly don't say these sorts of things:

May God Almighty give our work His blessing, strengthen our purpose, and endow us with wisdom and the trust of our people, for we are fighting not for ourselves but for Germany.
speech delivered at Berlin, February 1, 1933

And now Staatspräsident Bolz says that Christianity and the Catholic faith are threatened by us. And to that charge I can answer: In the first place it is Christians and not international atheists who now stand at the head of Germany. I do not merely talk of Christianity, no, I also profess that I will never ally myself with the parties which destroy Christianity. If many wish today to take threatened Christianity under their protection, where, I would ask, was Christianity for them in these fourteen years when they went arm in arm with atheism? No, never and at no time was greater internal damage done to Christianity than in these 14 years when a party, theoretically Christian, sat with those who denied God in one and the same Government.
speech delivered at Stuttgart, February 15, 1933

The Government of the Reich, which regards Christianity as the unshakable foundation of the morals and moral code of the nation, attaches the greatest value to friendly relations with the Holy See, and is endeavouring to develop them.
speech to the Reichstag, 23 March 1933[1]

We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.
speech in Berlin, 24 October 1933

The Church's interests cannot fail to coincide with ours alike in our fight against the symptoms of degeneracy in the world of to-day, in our fight against the Bolshevist culture, against an atheistic movement, against criminality, and in our struggle for the consciousness of a community in our national life, for the conquest of hatred and disunion between the classes, for the conquest of civil war and unrest, of strife and discord. These are not anti-Christian, these are Christian principles.
speech at Koblenz, 26 August 1934

Yeah, that man was really a materialist. And he was so definitely an atheist.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:22 AM
I find it odd that after 4 whole pages my entirely on topic post was completely ignored by you Herr Artifact. Oh, I'm going to start calling you Herr Artifact because of your ridiculous equivocation of Hitler (who hated atheists) with Darwin (who could be labelled an atheist).

Now, why is it that you didn't address the post I made which quoted specific words from Darwin that were clearly not racist and clearly in favor of what would be insanely progressive by the standards of the racial politics of his time?

Oh wait, because it's already been pointed out that this is a bait thread. You just bait people and then only respond to posts that you consider 'off topic' while the incredibly valid arguments against you go to the wayside.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:35 AM
reply to post by felonius

Originally posted by felonius
reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact

I've wondered ever expected this much to come from his theory. I dont believe he did. He was a product of his times and probably used more "scientific method" than most "scientists" nowadays.

to much of politics and money in science now.

Yay, false statement! There's no evidence of corruption in the scientific community as a whole. There is a process by which deception is regulated...primarily that of fraud legislation...for those scientists that lie about their results.

Darwinism has its place but MUST be balanced with a bit of creationism. You have to have a source., it mustn't. There is absolutely nothing scientific about the creationist hypothesis. It is a baseless claim and should not even be considered to be at the position of liking the boot of Darwin's theory.

Monkeys to humans?

Well, we have an ancestor that was sort of a monkey. Not a modern monkey, sort of like a protomonkey.

No. I'll stop before I go into Atlantean cruelties.

Um...what Atlantean cruelties? What would Plato's philosophical allegory of Atlantis have to do with Darwin's insanely valid theory?

Margret Sanger , while contributing to fewer unwanted pregnacies via contraceptives (5+ were common at the time) and the women being told to "lay back and think of England", DID use Darwinian principles in the end for negative ends.

What Darwinian principles did she use? Did she use common descent? Natural selection?
Exactly what did she do?

She was :


Which isn't all that bad, especially since a 'socialist' government was in power for quite a while in Britain. Of course, you're clearly one of those Americans that gets their definition of socialism from such philosophical luminaries as Ronald Reagan, who wouldn't know the Socratic method if Socrates gave him a day of questioning.


Um...I'm not sure about this. How was she a Eugenicist? Did she call for selective breeding programs? Forced sterilization? Forced abortions?

and a Darwinian.

I'm sorry, but I weep for the educational state of the world when someone says "a Darwinian". You cannot be a Darwinian. Unless of course I'm a Copernican for thinking the Earth goes round the Sun, a Newtonian for accepting the laws of motion, an Einsteinian for accepting general relativity, a Euclidian for understanding geometry, etc.

Darwin came up with a scientific theory. It is an accepted scientific theory. If there's something about it that's wrong, come to this thread and point it out.

Her Darwinian stance has also led to millions of needless abortions. How the hell does that make any sense? How does her acceptance that there is a change in allele frequency over successive generations have anything to do with abortion? How does it even qualify as a stance?

A stance is something you have when there's actual discourse going on over an issue. There is no discourse over evolution except when it comes to the specifics of it. We know it happens.

I dont think Darwin was necessarily "evil" but (as in many cases) his work was pounced on and used as an excuse for evil things.

Where? Please, show me one example where his work was used for evil things. Were people breeding finches to form attack squads?

Both of their views on eugenics have points but to give that power to a government body? No dice.

Darwin had no view on eugenics. Eugenics actually has absolutely nothing to do with anything that Darwin proposed.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:37 AM
reply to post by Cobra.EXE

Originally posted by Cobra.EXE
this video confirms that darwin was a racist atheistic bigotory arrogant fool.

You say 'atheistic' like it's a bad thing.
Oh, and if you look at my earlier post in this thread, Darwin was not a racist. Just check my 'posts in thread'

this video confirms that all atheist morons are are a bunch of racists too.

Wow, ironic that you're being a bigot towards a group of people that you're labeling as racist. How is 'not believing in any deity' a racist position? Sure, there are racist atheists, but I wouldn't say they make up any statistically significant portion of the population. There are racists in every group.

it also confirms that hitler got his spark from him aswell.

No, it didn't. Hitler was against that sort of thing. He considered the theory of evolution to be some sort of Jewish lie. Of course, it's neither a lie nor is it Jewish. Though if it were Jewish it wouldn't be any less valid. It's just the truth.

maybe we should blame darwin for all of this destruction over the years.

...not sure if serious....

i am not surprised, monkey see monkey do.

Stupid is as stupid does.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:44 AM
I think the point that the opening is trying to make, is that even though the theory of evolution has been put to good use, it has also been put to bad use. Such as it being used to justify treating the native americans and africans in such an inhumane and harsh manner, since they weren't considered "human enough".

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:46 AM
Its far more likely that "the tool that justified it" is actually the very same thing that has caused most of the worlds war which is... religion. Use the fear of god to control people and at a very primitive level you brainwash your people. Im not saying I dont believe in a god because something created this universe, but the books written by man are my question. But I refuse to argue with religion nuts because no matter how many facts you throw at them they always think theyre right.

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:49 AM

Originally posted by OutlanderHuman24
I think the point that the opening is trying to make, is that even though the theory of evolution has been put to good use, it has also been put to bad use. Such as it being used to justify treating the native americans and africans in such an inhumane and harsh manner, since they weren't considered "human enough".

Again, that wasn't the reason they were mistreated...the white man just wanted their land and resources!!

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 10:58 AM

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
I find it odd that after 4 whole pages my entirely on topic post was completely ignored by you Herr Artifact

am I the one who bailed out of the theology section

you do not answer back there and I do not answer you back here...

easy math !

posted on Dec, 23 2010 @ 11:00 AM
reply to post by madnessinmysoul

also the way you try to disassemble everyone and each single sentence they write serves no purpose... It shows much of your character... there is no use in speaking with someone such as this.

when some people learn to write paragraphs maybe other will read and respond to you also...

you seriously think I am the only one not reading that long-winded garbage ?

new topics

top topics

<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in