Hitler & Darwin URLs
dfo...@gl.umbc.edu
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118403178.860854.170600%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Multi-Pronged Role of Darwinian Thought in Shoah's Arrival
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132080322.482544.299440%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Hitler's actions make sense given his atheism and eugenic, social
Darwinist vision
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1134145559.645139.229550%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
Hitler: "Mendelian Law Of Division"; "artificially hinders nature's
process of selection"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1140187785.048291.134400%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
is Darwin, or Hitler, today's most-famous Darwinist?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1138681336.761356.170100%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
parallel between Hitler and [Darwin]"the inferior vitality of mulattoes
is spoken of in a trustworthy work*(5) as a well-known phenomenon"
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1133927305.339964.266320%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
[Hitler, and Darwin]"Nature... she," in
Darwin in the 6th edition of _Origin_ on [Darwin]"survival of the
fittest" and the [Darwin]"struggle for life"
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132161340.121874.63970%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Darwin: "the finest young men are.... exposed to early death during
war.... feebler men... are left at home"
Http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1136999331.757403.75700%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Malthus in remarks by Hitler
Http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1137178715.710123.107820%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
Darwin: "The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an
operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his
patient...."
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1136917904.909420.245140%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
1874 Darwin: "mongrel population of Negroes and Portuguese....
population of mingled Polynesian and English blood....
population of Polynesians and Negritos crossed in all degrees....
a much crossed race of Portuguese and Indians, with a mixture of the
blood of other races"
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1136494819.673310.232510%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1883 Darwin: "When two races, both low in the scale, are crossed the
progeny seems to be eminently bad."
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1136399794.077073.47030%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
agree with Hitler about who 'Jews' are?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1136226458.258397.34490%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
Darwin: "genius... tends to be inherited... insanity and deteriorated
mental powers... run in families"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135964069.481127.220330%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
Kill/ death to [Darwin]"imbecile, maimed, and other useless members of
society"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135791290.639930.285730%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
Darwin: "The remarkable success of the English as colonists, compared
to other European nations, has been ascribed to their 'daring and
persistent energy'; a result which is well illustrated by comparing the
progress of the Canadians of English and French extraction...."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135653955.843480.126470%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Darwin: "the New Zealander... compares his future fate with that of the
native rat now almost exterminated by the European rat"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135178729.788016.144250%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
Hitler & Darwin on
[Hitler & Darwin]"master[s]"
over
[Darwin]"subjugated... men"
having
[Darwin]"utility to their masters"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135100164.057260.78490%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
this Darwin correct as of: 1888? 1944?: "man differs widely from any
strictly domesticated animal; for his breeding has never long been
controlled, either by methodical or unconscious selection"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1134792419.066594.291390%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
Darwin: [Greg]"the careless, squalid, unaspiring Irishman multiplies
like rabbits"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135088486.532238.194930%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Darwin on selection of Spartan children
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135004225.246782.327080%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Hitler; Darwin: "the evil which the Catholic Church has thus effected
is incalculable"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1134662154.179171.232450%40g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
an exercise: parallels between 1871 Darwin & 1924/5 Hitler?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1134448996.907734.300780%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
4 more Hitler-Darwin parallels
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135092414.972723.104980%40g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Hitler's human breeding plan using [1871 Darwin]"careful selection" +
mutations
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1124684179.251743.95950%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1124731489.829229.220700%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Darwin on [1871 Darwin]"careful selection" in connection with the
breeding of humans;
1924/5 Hitler & 1871 Darwin on heterogeneous & homogeneous peoples
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1133977762.788382.143030%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Thurisaz the Einherjer
been made clear to it a zillion times... but as it has nothing else,
especially not one single valid argument against that which it doesn't
understand (namely atheism and science), it must regurgibabble its bullcrap
again and again, heaping more and more scorn and mockery upon itself, its
fellow fundie anencephalos, and all of religion.
I admit that I'm not really comfortable with the very last one.
--
Romans 2:24 revised:
"For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you
cretinists, as it is written on aig."
Why I am not a christian: http://www.carcosa.de/nojebus/nojebus
Matthew Isleb
....the entire content of your recent posts consist exclusively of links to
previous posts.
-matthew
wf...@comcast.net
>Hitler encounters the T0E as a child: A Victory for Atheism
>http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118403178.860854.170600%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
nice revisionist selection.
ford neglects to mention that any use of science by racists is minor
compared to the facts that
1. creationists murdered 2,000,000 blacks during the slave trade
2. creationists enslaved 10,000,000 blacks during the slave trade
3. creationists caused the bloodiest war in american history in
defense of the slave trade
4. creationists were partially responsible for the genocide in rwanda
in 1994 (cf 'gourevitch')
5. spanish christians were persecuting jews in the 15th century based
on racist views (cf 'the oxford history of christianity')
6. martin luther, a creationist, advocated persecution of jews (cf
'concerning the jews and their lies')
7. jews were expelled from every european country at one time or
another by christians.
8. the 4th lateran council, in 1215, prohibited jews from marrying
christians, and forced them to wear special clothing
to ford, racism was only invented in 1859.
mvil...@gmail.com
I wonder if a creationist ever made this rebuttal:
"Of course the Bible was used to justify racism and genocide before
Darwin, but had Darnwin already written his book then they would've
used that instead."
Robert J. Kolker
> Hitler encounters the T0E as a child: A Victory for Atheism
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118403178.860854.170600%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
>
Why did he not mention Darwin even once in -Mein Kampf-?
Bob Kolker
david ford
googling Haeckel and Hitler:
http://www.devbio.com/article.php?id=219
http://www.bedfordgaol.com/part3-7.html
http://www.bedfordgaol.com/part3-2.html
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v18/i2/haeckel.asp
http://www.creationworldview.org/Articles/Article%2027.htm
http://www.csustan.edu/History/Faculty/Weikart/Response-Arnhart.htm
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:ffSDvcd-L5sJ:www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.cgi%3Fpath%3D80951126890820+Hitler+haeckel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=11
http://www.csustan.edu/History/Faculty/Weikart/response-richards.htm
http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/index.php?command=view&id=2620
http://chronicle.uchicago.edu/050331/richards.shtml
http://members.aol.com/Pantheism0/haeckel.htm
http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Germany/Radical%20Ecology.htm#RACIAL%20HIERARCHY%20A%20NATURAL%20PRINCIPLE
http://www.gbarto.com/guytak/2005_02_27_archive.html
http://www.mazal.org/Lifton/LiftonT441.htm
http://www.rutherford.org/oldspeak/articles/interview/Weikart.html
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v27/i4/nazi.asp
http://www.creationism.org/csshs/v05n2p14.htm
http://evolution-facts.org/Ev-Crunch/c19b.htm
http://www.fixedearth.com/hlsm.html
http://www.islamdenouncesantisemitism.com/thesocial.htm
http://www.godofcreation.com/essays/display.asp?ind=85
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:T52x957a7x4J:www.nwcreation.net/presentations/Heinz_Lycklama/impact.ppt+Hitler+haeckel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=41
http://www.edwardtbabinski.us/latest_2003/racism.html
http://www.worldmag.com/articles/10552
http://metanexus.net/metanexus_online/show_article2.asp?ID=3052
http://www.asa3.org/ASA/PSCF/1992/PSCF6-92Bergman.html
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/1772
http://www.stewartsynopsis.com/hitler_and_the_negro.htm
http://evolution-facts.org/Ev-V3/3evlch33a.htm
http://www.sinaicentral.com/gendercentral/yartseit_science.htm
http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/436
http://bevets.com/equotesh.htm
http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Stein2.htm
http://www.shoaheducation.com/peoplenazitheo.html
http://www.mazal.org/Lifton/LiftonT125.htm
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:YJKhjt2MxK4J:www.defendingsteiner.com/articles/Rudolf%2520Steiner%2520and%2520Ernst%2520Haeckel.pdf+Hitler+haeckel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=68
http://www.toolan.com/hitler/survive.html
http://www.ummah.net/harunyahya/evol/ebk2-3.html
http://www.trufax.org/avoid/scienger.html
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:KA0M8eEZHE8J:www.vuletic.com/hume/cefec/6-14.html+Hitler+haeckel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=72
http://www.archden.org/dcr/news.php?e=153&s=4&a=3499
http://www.de95.dial.pipex.com/02000003.htm
http://www.salaam.co.uk/forum/read.php?f=13&i=45&t=45
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0RMQ/is_30_10/ai_n13782038
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diskussion:Ernst_Haeckel
http://www.daveyd.com/hitlerpol.html
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:WMBFW0qe1i8J:www.vethist.idehist.uu.se/Newsletter_pdf/NewsL_34.pdf+Hitler+haeckel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=87
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:Dyv8PhT8fn4J:www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.cgi%3Fpath%3D37981105462766+Hitler+haeckel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=88
http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=287
http://www.brothersjudd.com/blog/archives/2005/01/corruptors_not_corrupted.html
http://www.brothersjudd.com/blog/archives/2003/08/life_unworthy_of_being_lived_1.html
http://www.christiancourier.com/archives/holocaustWhy.htm
http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/BNaziRacePolicy80.htm
http://www.ourchurch.com/view/?pageID=240414
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.nadir.org/nadir/kampagnen/camp02/artikel_haeckel.htm&prev=/search%3Fq%3DHitler%2Bhaeckel%26start%3D110%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DN
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:pxrlHlqZ830J:home.uchicago.edu/~rjr6/articles/Ryerson%2520Lecture--%2520Moral%2520Judgment%2520in%2520History.pdf+Hitler+haeckel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=118
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=de&u=http://www.weloennig.de/mendel05.htm&prev=/search%3Fq%3DHitler%2Bhaeckel%26start%3D120%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26sa%3DN
http://cghs.dadeschools.net/ib_holocaust2001/Ideology_Death/aryanmyth.htm
http://www.shoaheducation.com/secret.html#monist
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=21776
http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/Total/totallinks.htm
http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3a7e46477ac3.htm
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:ZseXATgbHqAJ:www.gnpcb.org/assets/products/excerpts/1581346778.1.pdf+Hitler+haeckel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=140
http://www.creationism.org/csshs/v08n3p24.htm
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:GkIaCzBUAkkJ:internal.cas.gmu.edu/files/btgxaoizrkgdgzscfxai.doc+Hitler+haeckel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=142
http://www.humanitas-international.org/holocaust/1900-09t.htm
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0018-246X(197209)15%3A3%3C570%3ARIATPO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-7
http://www2.hu-berlin.de/sexology/GESUND/ARCHIV/MHINS1.HTM
http://64.233.179.104/search?q=cache:RWhuEFx-uZQJ:https://people.creighton.edu/~idc24708/Genes%2520Poster/Papers/Ethics_Simenas.doc+Hitler+haeckel&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=164
http://home.snafu.de/bifff/SPDengl.htm
http://www.totse.com/en/fringe/fringe_science/thescientificb168788.html
http://www.looksmartbonds.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_5_57/ai_n13493474
http://home.planet.nl/~gkorthof/korthof.htm
david ford
david ford
I don't know.
Why did Hitler not mention Malthus even once in _Mein Kampf_?
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Malthusian thinking in remarks by Hitler
Http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1137178715.710123.107820%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
is Darwin, or Hitler, today's most-famous Darwinist?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1138681336.761356.170100%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
Matthew Isleb
> Matthew Isleb wrote:
>> You know you've been babbling nonsense on Usenet too long when...
>>
>> ....the entire content of your recent posts consist exclusively of links to
>> previous posts.
>
> googling Haeckel and Hitler:
<snip>
We're all impressed, I'm sure.
-matthew
Robert J. Kolker
> Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
That may have been a symptom of some sickness he picked up South America
while he was traveling on -The Beagle-. His illness might have been
excacerbated psychosomatically for a number of reasons:
1. He knew his hypothesis would upset his wife, a devout Christian lady.
Darwin was very dedicated to his wife.
2. The loss of a beloved daughter.
In spite of the symptoms of his illness (both physical and
psychological) he did an enormous amount of research and writing. He did
not waste his time.
Bob Kolker
Robert J. Kolker
>
>
> I don't know.
>
> Why did Hitler not mention Malthus even once in _Mein Kampf_?
Have you considered the possibility that he didn't think Malthus and
Darwin were relevent to his agenda? If Hitler derived his inspiration
from Darwin he almost certainly would have mentioned him.
Bob Kolker
wf...@comcast.net
wrote:
>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
definition of 'stomach'
defintion of ailments?
definition of 'have'?
etc etc...
wf...@comcast.net
wrote:
>Robert J. Kolker wrote:
>> dfo...@gl.umbc.edu wrote:
>>
>> > Hitler encounters the T0E as a child: A Victory for Atheism
>> > http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118403178.860854.170600%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
>>
>> Why did he not mention Darwin even once in -Mein Kampf-?
>
>I don't know.
>
>Why did Hitler not mention Malthus even once in _Mein Kampf_?
but you keep telling us he was a darwin devotee.
oh. you say one thing on monday and wednesday and another thing on
tuesday....
Geoff
news:dford3-11405820...@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Matthew Isleb wrote:
>> You know you've been babbling nonsense on Usenet too long when...
>>
>> ....the entire content of your recent posts consist exclusively of links
>> to
>> previous posts.
>
> googling Haeckel and Hitler:
Try Bible + Hitler
http://www.google.com/search?rls=GGLG%2CGGLG%3A2005-51%2CGGLG%3Aen&q=bible+hitler
Geoff
news:4628dlF...@individual.net...
On the other hand:
"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the
Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the
work of the Lord."
"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It
points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers,
recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against
them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter.
In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage
which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge
to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was
His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two
thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever
before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the
Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I
have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice... And if there is
anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the
distress that daily grows. For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own
people."
"We demand liberty for all religious denominations in the State, so far as
they are not a danger to it and do not militate against the morality and
moral sense of the German race. The Party, as such, stands for positive
Christianity, but does not bind itself in the matter of creed to any
particular confession. It combats the Jewish-materialist spirit within and
without us, and is convinced that our nation can achieve permanent health
from within only on the principle: the common interest before
self-interest."
"We are a people of different faiths, but we are one. Which faith conquers
the other is not the question; rather, the question is whether Christianity
stands or falls.... We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of
Christianity... in fact our movement is Christian. We are filled with a
desire for Catholics and Protestants to discover one another in the deep
distress of our own people."
"National Socialism has always affirmed that it is determined to take the
Christian Churches under the protection of the State.... The decisive factor
which can justify the existence alike of Church and State is the maintenance
of men's spiritual and bodily health, for it that health were destroyed it
would mean the end of the State and also the end of the Church.... It is my
sincere hope that thereby for Germany, too, through free agreement there has
been produced a final clarification of spheres in the functions of the State
and of one Church."
"The fact that the Vatican is concluding a treaty with the new Germany means
the acknowledgement of the National Socialist state by the Catholic Church.
This treaty shows the whole world clearly and unequivocally that the
assertion that National Socialism [Nazism] is hostile to religion is a lie."
"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."
mvil...@gmail.com
WHERE YOU THERE!?!?!?
stew dean
Geoff wrote:
> "Robert J. Kolker" <now...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:4628dlF...@individual.net...
> > david ford wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> I don't know.
> >>
> >> Why did Hitler not mention Malthus even once in _Mein Kampf_?
> >
> > Have you considered the possibility that he didn't think Malthus and
> > Darwin were relevent to his agenda? If Hitler derived his inspiration
> > from Darwin he almost certainly would have mentioned him.
>
> On the other hand:
>
> "Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the
> Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the
> work of the Lord."
<snip quotes supporting the same view that Hitler was a thiest>
David, I hope you can see why I think, sorry, know you are wrong. If
Mein Kampf is to be seen as Hitler's lasting message to the world then
it appears claims of being influenced by Darwin have been greatly
exagerated, especially as it appears he doesnt even get a mention.
Also it appears than many of Hitlers speeches also paint a thiest view
of Hilter.
Darwin is to eugenics as physics is to those who believe crop circles
are the work of aliens ( I know they are many made and can even tell
you how to make them ). Eugenics is psuedo science, much like
intelligent design. Understanding evolution does not indicate any
support for eugenics.
In short I'm trying to show you all the bad connections you've made.
Hitler was religious and was responsible for more deaths (especially
russian) than any athiest. Religion is not evil and has been the power
of good for many, but it has been used far too many times to defend
undefendable actions, including the recent invasion of Iraq by the US
and my country.
Stew Dean
Robert J. Kolker
>
> Darwin is to eugenics as physics is to those who believe crop circles
> are the work of aliens ( I know they are many made and can even tell
> you how to make them ). Eugenics is psuedo science, much like
> intelligent design. Understanding evolution does not indicate any
> support for eugenics.
Here is a question: Why should human stock be any less variable and
subject to modification by breeding than (say) cattle or dogs? Darwin
opened his study of variation within a species by analyzing what
breeders (of both plants and animals) do.
So why should human breeding be any less a valid art than horse
breeding, cattle breeding or dog breeding?
I am quite aware of the ethical restraints on such a practice but beyond
ethics human genetics is still based on the same principles as horse
genetics or cattle genetics.
Bob Kolker
Robert J. Kolker
wf...@comcast.net
just giving the man a taste of his own medicine...
NashtOn
> Ain't dumbford's desperation funny? It _knows_ it babbles bullshit, it's
> been made clear to it a zillion times... but as it has nothing else,
Why not address his point instead of acting like a 6 year-old in a
schoolyard?
> especially not one single valid argument against that which it doesn't
> understand (namely atheism and science), it must regurgibabble its bullcrap
> again and again, heaping more and more scorn and mockery upon itself, its
> fellow fundie anencephalos, and all of religion.
>
> I admit that I'm not really comfortable with the very last one.
>
If you can't see the connection between eugenics and Darwinism, you need
your head examined.
And who really cares about the parameters of your comfort zone?
--
Nicolas
"The reason the theory of evolution is so controversial is that it is
the main scientific prop for scientific naturalism. Students first learn
that "evolution is a fact," and then they gradually learn more and more
about what that "fact" means. It means that all living things are the
product of mindless material forces such as chemical laws, natural
selection, and random variation. So God is totally out of the picture,
and humans (like everything else) are the accidental product of a
purposeless universe. Do you wonder why a lot of people suspect that
these claims go far beyond the available evidence?" Phillip E.Johnson,
The Church Of Darwin
NashtOn
Right Kolker. I can imagine that a man of such integrity such as Hitler
would cite all his sources in his works.
Think man, THINK.
stew dean
Robert J. Kolker wrote:
> stew dean wrote:
> >
> > Darwin is to eugenics as physics is to those who believe crop circles
> > are the work of aliens ( I know they are many made and can even tell
> > you how to make them ). Eugenics is psuedo science, much like
> > intelligent design. Understanding evolution does not indicate any
> > support for eugenics.
>
> Here is a question: Why should human stock be any less variable and
> subject to modification by breeding than (say) cattle or dogs? Darwin
> opened his study of variation within a species by analyzing what
> breeders (of both plants and animals) do.
Artificial selection can produce varied results - the problem is often
these results a specialised and are unable to do well in a general
environment. With humans there are so many factor that to attempt to
create, say, a more intelligent human through breeding will lead to
unexpected results. So varied, yes, fittest - very unlikely.
> So why should human breeding be any less a valid art than horse
> breeding, cattle breeding or dog breeding?
For the reasons cattle, dog and horse breeding are invalid.
> I am quite aware of the ethical restraints on such a practice but beyond
> ethics human genetics is still based on the same principles as horse
> genetics or cattle genetics.
True and doing that with humans would lead to more problems than you
get in other forms of artificial breeding. Anyway each individual does
their own selection based on many many different criteria, most they
are unaware of. This selection criteria it's self has been evolved.
Now if you think nature gets it wrong that's a different discussion.
Stew Dean
SRNissen
NashtOn wrote:
> Thurisaz the Einherjer wrote:
> > Ain't dumbford's desperation funny? It _knows_ it babbles bullshit, it's
> > been made clear to it a zillion times... but as it has nothing else,
>
> Why not address his point instead of acting like a 6 year-old in a
> schoolyard?
>
> > especially not one single valid argument against that which it doesn't
> > understand (namely atheism and science), it must regurgibabble its bullcrap
> > again and again, heaping more and more scorn and mockery upon itself, its
> > fellow fundie anencephalos, and all of religion.
> >
> > I admit that I'm not really comfortable with the very last one.
> >
>
> If you can't see the connection between eugenics and Darwinism, you need
> your head examined.
> And who really cares about the parameters of your comfort zone?
What point? It is merely a large amount of tertiary litterature.
There's not point to his thread.
The last paper I wrote in english, my synopsis started with "The topic
of this present work is the investigation of structures and states on
the nanolevel..." You know why? Because people reading it need to know
what the point of the paper was. I could have just written down all the
data on a stack of A4 and called that my paper, but that would have
been unacceptably stupid, because without an introduction and a
conclusion, nobody would get what I were trying to say.
In conclusion, what point?
> --
> Nicolas
>
> "The reason the theory of evolution is so controversial is that it is
> the main scientific prop for scientific naturalism. Students first learn
> that "evolution is a fact," and then they gradually learn more and more
> about what that "fact" means. It means that all living things are the
> product of mindless material forces such as chemical laws, natural
> selection, and random variation. So God is totally out of the picture,
> and humans (like everything else) are the accidental product of a
> purposeless universe. Do you wonder why a lot of people suspect that
> these claims go far beyond the available evidence?" Phillip E.Johnson,
> The Church Of Darwin
Trim your damn sig. I've asked over and over. It's longer than most of
your posts. It's a waste of valuable bandwith.
SRNissen
- Søren
david ford
> wf...@comcast.net wrote:
> > On 21 Feb 2006 20:32:38 -0800, "david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu>
> > wrote:
> >
> >>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
> >
> > definition of 'stomach'
> >
> > defintion of ailments?
> >
> > definition of 'have'?
>
> Don't be stupid.
That's my job.
> > etc etc...
floyd
david ford wrote:
> Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
Yes, he did; he complained frequently about them in letters and
conversations. Whether these pains were caused by illness or were
predominantly psychosomatic or some combination of the two is not
entirely resolved. Fortunately for us, his fluctuating health did not
prevent him from completing his work. His illness, whatever its cause,
has no bearing whatsoever on the validity of natural selection as a
mechanism of evolution.
Why do you ask?
david ford
> On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 05:53:16 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
> <now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> >wf...@comcast.net wrote:
> >> On 21 Feb 2006 20:32:38 -0800, "david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
> >>
> >> definition of 'stomach'
> >>
> >> defintion of ailments?
> >>
> >> definition of 'have'?
> >
> >Don't be stupid.
>
Koster states on 185 that "digestive problems" are among "the
psychosomatic footprints of the atheist syndrome."
Hitler had stomach ailments, as did Romanian dictator Antonescu.
Ref:
Waite, Robert G.L. Afterword to
Langer, Walter C. 1972. _The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime
Report_ (NY and Ontario: New American Library), 286pp., 236.
Hitler was an atheist.
Was Darwin:
an atheist?
a closet atheist?
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Koster: scientific atheism is an idea whose time is gone
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0406212033.90a39c1%40posting.google.com
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0406230445.7cff0545%40posting.google.com
Peter Bjørn Perlsø
> Hitler encounters the T0E as a child: A Victory for Atheism
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118403178.860854.170600%40g49
> g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
<snip>
Hitler's fanatical Christian beliefs:
http://www.nobeliefs.com/hitler.htm
-- regards, Peter Bjørn Perlsø - http://haxor.dk
http://liberterran.org http://haxor.dk/fanaticism/
Peter Bjørn Perlsø
> 3. creationists caused the bloodiest war in american history in
> defense of the slave trade
Pardon my ignorance, but which war was that?
david ford
> david ford wrote:
> > Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
>
> Yes, he did; he complained frequently about them in letters and
> conversations. Whether these pains were caused by illness or were
> predominantly psychosomatic or some combination of the two is not
> entirely resolved.
Thanks.
> Fortunately for us, his fluctuating health did not
> prevent him from completing his work. His illness, whatever its cause,
> has no bearing whatsoever on the validity of natural selection as a
> mechanism of evolution.
Meaning of "evolution"?
legerdemain in the use of the word 'evolution'
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132102419.915797.111840%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
> Why do you ask?
I decline to answer.
david ford
Very well said, on the whole. What "ethical restraints" do you refer
to?
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
1916/ 1922 Nordau; infanticide, slavery, and genocide
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132847220.475151.206790%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
Reagan's allegation that there exists
some [Reagan]"natural law," some [Reagan]"higher law of morality."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132849740.419205.114320%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Hitler's brilliant human breeding plan using [1871 Darwin]"careful
selection" + mutations
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1124684179.251743.95950%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1124731489.829229.220700%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Darwin on [1871 Darwin]"careful selection" in connection with the
breeding of humans;
1924/5 Hitler & 1871 Darwin on heterogeneous & homogeneous peoples
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1133977762.788382.143030%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
2004 Kater
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1126752603.953619.262940%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
Himmler, a former chicken farmer..., was ruled by very
strong beliefs regarding the application of breeding
theories to humans-- by way of positive selection for the
"Aryans" and negative selection for their natural enemies,
the Slavs, Gypsies, and Jews.
an exercise: parallels between 1871 Darwin & 1924/5 Hitler?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1134448996.907734.300780%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
4 more Hitler-Darwin parallels
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135092414.972723.104980%40g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Fooj
I seriously doubt reading was the cause of the problem.
Geoff
news:1140617950....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Good one
>
> - Søren
ROFLMAO...is SRNissen serious? They blame Darwin for everything from
abortion to halitosis, but I had to be an eyewitness to know that Hitler
wrote these things?
david ford
a claim: Hitler was a Christian
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=1131389424.486586.51840%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Stephen, Leslie. "Pantheism and Agnosticism" in
Darrow, Clarence and Wallace Rice. 1929. _Infidels and Heretics: An
Agnostic's Anthology_ (Boston, MA: The Stratford Company, Publishers),
293pp., 34. On 34:
We no longer doubt, it is true, whether there be a
God, for our God means all reality.... We keep the
old word [i.e. 'God']; we have altered the whole of its
contents.
Hitler and an Ethical Culture person on 'God'
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1136317045.783426.125490%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
zawa...@yahoo.com
zawa...@yahoo.com
A better analogy, perhaps would be Darwin is to eugenics as Einstein is
to atomic weapons or Newton to military ballistics or Faraday to the
electric chair.
Darwin, Einstein, Newton and Faraday explained properties of the
universe, it was up to others to use/misuse the knowledge.
zawa...@yahoo.com
david ford wrote:
> wf...@comcast.net wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 05:53:16 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
> > <now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > >wf...@comcast.net wrote:
> > >> On 21 Feb 2006 20:32:38 -0800, "david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
> > >>
> > >> definition of 'stomach'
> > >>
> > >> defintion of ailments?
> > >>
> > >> definition of 'have'?
> > >
> > >Don't be stupid.
> >
> > just giving the man a taste of his own medicine...
>
> Koster states on 185 that "digestive problems" are among "the
> psychosomatic footprints of the atheist syndrome."
>
My grandmother, a devout a Catholic as you ever met had "digestive
problems" as does my sister-in-law (another devout, who regularly makes
pilgimages to Rome and Jerusalem on a school bus
drivers salary)
So your point is?
Matt Silberstein
<dfo...@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-11406215...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> wrote:
>wf...@comcast.net wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 05:53:16 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
>> <now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> >wf...@comcast.net wrote:
>> >> On 21 Feb 2006 20:32:38 -0800, "david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
>> >>
>> >> definition of 'stomach'
>> >>
>> >> defintion of ailments?
>> >>
>> >> definition of 'have'?
>> >
>> >Don't be stupid.
>>
>> just giving the man a taste of his own medicine...
>
>Koster states on 185 that "digestive problems" are among "the
>psychosomatic footprints of the atheist syndrome."
>
>Hitler had stomach ailments, as did Romanian dictator Antonescu.
>Ref:
>Waite, Robert G.L. Afterword to
>Langer, Walter C. 1972. _The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime
>Report_ (NY and Ontario: New American Library), 286pp., 236.
>
>Hitler was an atheist.
>
>Was Darwin:
>an atheist?
>a closet atheist?
>
Americans spend some $13 billion a year on heartburn medicines. Are
all those people atheists?
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
Windy
> david ford wrote:
> > > >>>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
> > > >>
> > Koster states on 185 that "digestive problems" are among "the
> > psychosomatic footprints of the atheist syndrome."
> >
> My grandmother, a devout a Catholic as you ever met had "digestive
> problems" as does my sister-in-law (another devout, who regularly makes
> pilgimages to Rome and Jerusalem on a school bus drivers salary)
Not to mention these famous atheists:
Pope Alexander VI, cause of death: "his stomach became swollen and
turned to liquid, while his face became wine-coloured and his skin
began to peel off. Finally his stomach and bowels bled profusely."
Pope John XXIII, cause of death: stomach cancer
Pope John Paul II, suffered from stomach ailments for years & had
appendix surgery.
etc...
-- w
Robert J. Kolker
>
>
> Koster states on 185 that "digestive problems" are among "the
> psychosomatic footprints of the atheist syndrome."
That's funny. I don't get tummy aches. I do not believe that the God of
Isaac, Abraham and Jacob exists. I believe C'thulu exists though. Who
else could be responsible for the lumbar region of the human spine?
Bob Kolker
Robert J. Kolker
>
>
> Meaning of "evolution"?
Descent with modification over time. This is the phrase Darwin, himself,
used.
Bob Kolker
Robert J. Kolker
>
> My grandmother, a devout a Catholic as you ever met had "digestive
> problems" as does my sister-in-law (another devout, who regularly makes
> pilgimages to Rome and Jerusalem on a school bus
> drivers salary)
> So your point is?
I know many atheists who do not have chronic tummy aches. They are in
very good health. And their spirits are good since they do not carry a
load and burden of unearned guilt. Original sin, my ass!''
Tummy aches and philosophical positions are un-correlated.
Bob Kolker
>
Robert J. Kolker
>
>
> Not to mention these famous atheists:
>
> Pope Alexander VI, cause of death: "his stomach became swollen and
> turned to liquid, while his face became wine-coloured and his skin
> began to peel off. Finally his stomach and bowels bled profusely."
>
> Pope John XXIII, cause of death: stomach cancer
>
> Pope John Paul II, suffered from stomach ailments for years & had
> appendix surgery.
But Mr. Ford said nothing about believers with tummy aches. He was
talking about atheists with tummy aches. I think we can safely conclud
there is no correlation between atheism and tummy aches.
Bob Kolker
Robert J. Kolker
> <wf...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>>3. creationists caused the bloodiest war in american history in
>>defense of the slave trade
>
>
> Pardon my ignorance, but which war was that?
The American Civil War. More Americans (counting both sides since it was
a civil war) were killed than in ALL the other wars America has been in.
Six hundred twently thousand dead one and a half mill wounded. Since the
country had a population of about 30 million the death toll amounted to
five percent of the population. Comparing with the current population of
the U.S. that would be fifteen million dead in a war. Without a doubt
far and away the Civil War is America's bloodiest war.
Bob Kolker
Robert J. Kolker
> Robert J. Kolker wrote:
>>
>>I am quite aware of the ethical restraints on such a practice but beyond
>>ethics human genetics is still based on the same principles as horse
>>genetics or cattle genetics.
>
>
> Very well said, on the whole. What "ethical restraints" do you refer
> to?
We are not allowed to make people couple against their will. It is
illegal for starters and besides, it is not nice. We are also not
allowed to cull "undesireable issue" which would mean sterilization to
prevent further cross breeding. That is very not nice. By and large we
leave breeding to love, lust, and fickle romance.
Bob Kolker
Lt. Kizhe Catson
> wf...@comcast.net wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 05:53:16 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
>><now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>
>>>wf...@comcast.net wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 21 Feb 2006 20:32:38 -0800, "david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
>>>>
>>>>definition of 'stomach'
>>>>
>>>>defintion of ailments?
>>>>
>>>>definition of 'have'?
>>>
>>>Don't be stupid.
>>
>>just giving the man a taste of his own medicine...
>
>
> Koster states on 185 that "digestive problems" are among "the
> psychosomatic footprints of the atheist syndrome."
>
> Hitler had stomach ailments, as did Romanian dictator Antonescu.
Now how did I just *know* that was coming? Fordiot gets stupider every day.
-- Kizhe
floyd
david ford wrote:
> floyd wrote:
> > david ford wrote:
> > > Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
> >
> > Yes, he did; he complained frequently about them in letters and
> > conversations. Whether these pains were caused by illness or were
> > predominantly psychosomatic or some combination of the two is not
> > entirely resolved.
>
> Thanks.
You're welcome.
> > Fortunately for us, his fluctuating health did not
> > prevent him from completing his work. His illness, whatever its cause,
> > has no bearing whatsoever on the validity of natural selection as a
> > mechanism of evolution.
>
> Meaning of "evolution"?
Descent, with modification. The term is generally used to describe the
differential persistence of variant alleles over the course of
generations, but is also used to describe the differential persistence
of phenotypic characters in lineages of organisms. The *fact* of
evolution is the observed changes in the relative frequencies of
alleles/phenotypic characters from one generation to the next. The
*theory* is that natural selection, along with drift, mutation and gene
flow, are the primary causes of those observed changes.
>
> legerdemain in the use of the word 'evolution'
> http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132102419.915797.111840%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
It looks, from that link, more like you have misinterpreted the use of
the term. I assure you that biologists, paleontologists,
anthropologists, ecologists and others whose professional
responsibility it is to study the phenomena do not have the same
misunderstandings as you express in the linked post. We know what we
mean when we use the term. Most of us are willing to explain what we
mean and provide examples, when asked politely. We only become
frustrated when people with little or no background in the relevant
disciplines try to argue against the science on unsolid grounds. You
have done so in the past. I hope to see you try to behave in a more
reasonable manner in the future. We are not all idiots, I assure you.
We do have very good reasons for thinking what we think.
>
> > Why do you ask?
>
> I decline to answer.
That demurral on your part does not inspire much confidence on my part.
If you have an honest and honorable reason for making this inquiry,
why do you not wish to share it?
Fooj
>There is no 'equality' meter in science. Equality is a metaphysical ideal, not a scientific concept
>
>You really need to quit imposing MORAL values on secular science.
Do you mean to word where science doesn't support the equality of
mankind? I strongly disagree. It is a known fact that mental
retardation is caused not by random mutation or breeding yet it is a
birth defect. Would you care to explain how the science in stem cell
research has nothing to do with morality here?
Thurisaz the Einherjer
> Why not address his point instead of acting like a 6 year-old in a
> schoolyard?
There is no point in any of dumbford's postings, Mr 3-year-old in
Kindergarten. Besides, its nonsense has been refuted a zillion times...
only that it, like every good braindead jebus cultist, preferred to ignore
all the refutations.
> If you can't see the connection between eugenics and Darwinism, you need
> your head examined.
Care to explain how Mr Darwin's theory is supposed to have started something
many years before it was even conceived, hmmm?
Care to provide any _reasonable_ argument justifying the multiple genocide,
ethnic cleansing, however one wants to call it that is described in your
"holy" book and that has been re-enacted by so many "loving christians"
during the centuries of fanatical darkness, hmmm?
Oops, I did it again *dons blonde hairpiece* - I used that satanic eeeevil
_logic._
My bad...
> And who really cares about the parameters of your comfort zone?
More people than those who care about your braindead babblings, fundie brat.
--
Romans 2:24 revised:
"For the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles through you
cretinists, as it is written on aig."
Why I am not a christian:
http://www.carcosa.de/nojebus/nojebus
Dave
What did Hitler do that wasn't in the Bible? The breeding of animals
for specific traits is an ancient practice.
david ford
Koster, Jr., John P. 1989. _The Atheist Syndrome_
(Brentwood, Tennessee: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc.),
199pp. On 148:
Hitler's anti-Semitism... he based it clearly on
Darwinian principles.
Before Hitler, anti-Semites had attacked Jews
verbally or physically because of their religious
differences from Christians. Hitler's anti-Semitism
identified the Jews as a race. This identification of
course has no basis in science, because modern
Jews are composed of several different national and
racial stocks. To talk about the Jewish "race" is as
absurd as talking about the Catholic "race" or the
American "race."
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
agree with Hitler about who 'Jews' are?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1136226458.258397.34490%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
Multi-Pronged Role of Darwinian Thought in Shoah's Arrival
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132080322.482544.299440%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1859 Darwin vs. the Judeo-Christian conception of the unity of man
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1120016676.023811.113660%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
david ford
Do you reject as incorrect those proposals in which there is both:
intelligent design & common descent?
If someone accepts "descent with modification over time" and also
accepts intelligent design of that "descent," would you consider that
person a believer in 'evolution'?
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
ID + common descent: A Proposal
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0404181835.d59cf7d%40posting.google.com
religious faith and common descent
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0405051933.522f5d0e%40posting.google.com
1910s remarks by Caullery, Edmund B. Wilson, and Bateson on the idea of
top-down unfolding/ [Bateson]"unpacking of an original complex which
contained within itself the whole range of diversity which living
things present"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0405161853.5f28f100%40posting.google.com
david ford
> dfo...@gl.umbc.edu wrote:
> > Hitler encounters the T0E as a child: A Victory for Atheism
> [...]
>
> What did Hitler do that wasn't in the Bible?
I can't think of anything. E.g., homosexuality is "in the Bible," and
Hitler engaged in homosexual activity.
> The breeding of animals
> for specific traits is an ancient practice.
"The breeding of animals for specific traits"
Do you consider 'humans' "animals"?
Do you reject classification systems which say there are:
animals, humans, and plants?
wbarwell
> Do you agree with any of this?:
>
> Koster, Jr., John P. 1989. _The Atheist Syndrome_
> (Brentwood, Tennessee: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc.),
> 199pp. On 148:
> Hitler's anti-Semitism... he based it clearly on
> Darwinian principles.
Another fool who does not know the real roots of Nazism, Christian
anti-Semitism, Herder's Volkgeist, Gobibneau's Aryan mythology.
--
"If I saw a man beating a tied up horse, I could
not prove it was wrong, but I'd know it was wrong."
- Mark Twain
Cheerful Charlie
david ford
> zawa...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > My grandmother, a devout a Catholic as you ever met had "digestive
> > problems" as does my sister-in-law (another devout, who regularly makes
> > pilgimages to Rome and Jerusalem on a school bus
> > drivers salary)
> > So your point is?
>
> I know many atheists who do not have chronic tummy aches. They are in
> very good health. And their spirits are good since they do not carry a
> load and burden of unearned guilt. Original sin, my ass!''
convert to secular humanism to enjoy guiltless sexual activity of many
varieties
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-b1c67abe.0409241109.17e2611d%40posting.google.com
the question of accountability favors conversion to atheism
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1137184204.545825.116810%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
1999 Paul Vitz on personal convenience; 2002 Benjamin Wiker
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-35qe6lF4orjsoU1%40individual.net
> Tummy aches and philosophical positions are un-correlated.
Would you say that these "are un-correlated"?:
1. "tummy aches"
and:
2. {certain "philosophical positions"-- namely atheism-- and growing
up with a weak, dead, or abusive father}.
Hitler grew up with an abusive father.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Vitz, Paul C. 1999. _Faith of the Fatherless: The
Psychology of Atheism_ (Dallas: Spence Publishing
Company), 174pp.
wbarwell
Most likely he suffered from basic gastro-esophigal
reflux, or ulcers.
Von R. Smith
david ford wrote:
> floyd wrote:
> > david ford wrote:
> > > Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
> >
> > Yes, he did; he complained frequently about them in letters and
> > conversations. Whether these pains were caused by illness or were
> > predominantly psychosomatic or some combination of the two is not
> > entirely resolved.
>
> Thanks.
>
> > prevent him from completing his work. His illness, whatever its cause,
> > has no bearing whatsoever on the validity of natural selection as a
> > mechanism of evolution.
>
> Meaning of "evolution"?
>
> http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132102419.915797.111840%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
>
>
> I decline to answer.
Of course. Why start now?
skyeyes
> > Koster states on 185 that "digestive problems" are among "the
> > psychosomatic footprints of the atheist syndrome."
> >
>
> My grandmother, a devout a Catholic as you ever met had "digestive
> problems" as does my sister-in-law (another devout, who regularly makes
> pilgimages to Rome and Jerusalem on a school bus
> drivers salary)
As did my devout Evangelical Lutheran mother.
> So your point is?
That atheists have stomach aches, and nobody else does.
Oh, wait....
Brenda Nelson, A.A.#34
EAC Professor of Feline Thermometrics and Cat-Herding
skyeyes
> Would you say that these "are un-correlated"?:
> 1. "tummy aches"
> and:
> 2. {certain "philosophical positions"-- namely atheism-- and growing
> up with a weak, dead, or abusive father}.
>
> Hitler grew up with an abusive father.
>
> /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> Vitz, Paul C. 1999. _Faith of the Fatherless: The
> Psychology of Atheism_ (Dallas: Spence Publishing
> Company), 174pp.
My father was kind, engaged, wise, loving, gentle, nuturing, and had a
great sense of humor. And I *still* turned out to be an atheist.
Hmmmm....
Mitchell Coffey
Quite possibly. You have to believe in something.
Mitchell
Mitchell Coffey
david ford wrote:
> Robert J. Kolker wrote:
> > wf...@comcast.net wrote:
> > > On 21 Feb 2006 20:32:38 -0800, "david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
> > >
> > > definition of 'stomach'
> > >
> > > defintion of ailments?
> > >
> > > definition of 'have'?
> >
> > Don't be stupid.
>
Evidently it's sweeps week.
Mitchell Coffey
Mitchell Coffey
> david ford wrote:
> > floyd wrote:
> > > david ford wrote:
> > > > Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
> > >
> > > Yes, he did; he complained frequently about them in letters and
> > > conversations. Whether these pains were caused by illness or were
> > > predominantly psychosomatic or some combination of the two is not
> > > entirely resolved.
> >
> > Thanks.
>
> You're welcome.
> > > Why do you ask?
Because he's read that atheists tend to have stomach ailments.
Understand, please, I am only reading his mind, I could be wrong.
Just kidding about the mind reading part; he notes a possible
correlation between atheism and stomach problems elsewhere in this
thread. And, truth be told, I assume you've read that by now. It's
just such a wonderfully idiotic thing for him to claim, I had to note
it.
> > I decline to answer.
>
> That demurral on your part does not inspire much confidence on my part.
> If you have an honest and honorable reason for making this inquiry,
> why do you not wish to share it?
Surely you don't seriously imagine Ford didn't know about Darwin's
belly aches before asking the question?
Mitchell Coffey
Mark Isaak
>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
CA131.
--
Mark Isaak eciton (at) earthlink (dot) net
"Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of
the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are
being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and
exposing the country to danger." -- Hermann Goering
Mitchell Coffey
david ford wrote:
> wf...@comcast.net wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 05:53:16 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
> > <now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > >wf...@comcast.net wrote:
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> defintion of ailments?
> > >>
> > >> definition of 'have'?
> > >
> > >Don't be stupid.
> >
>
> Koster states on 185 that "digestive problems" are among "the
> psychosomatic footprints of the atheist syndrome."
>
> Hitler had stomach ailments, as did Romanian dictator Antonescu.
And William Henry Harrison.
Mitchell Coffey
rupert....@gmail.com
david ford wrote:
> wf...@comcast.net wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 05:53:16 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
> > <now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > >wf...@comcast.net wrote:
> > >> On 21 Feb 2006 20:32:38 -0800, "david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
> > >>
> > >> definition of 'stomach'
> > >>
> > >> defintion of ailments?
> > >>
> > >> definition of 'have'?
> > >
> > >Don't be stupid.
> >
> > just giving the man a taste of his own medicine...
>
> Koster states on 185 that "digestive problems" are among "the
> psychosomatic footprints of the atheist syndrome."
Pope John Paul II had stomach ailments, too. Was he an atheist?
http://www.cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=2305
>
> Hitler had stomach ailments, as did Romanian dictator Antonescu.
> Ref:
> Waite, Robert G.L. Afterword to
> Langer, Walter C. 1972. _The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime
> Report_ (NY and Ontario: New American Library), 286pp., 236.
>
> Hitler was an atheist.
>
> Was Darwin:
> an atheist?
> a closet atheist?
>
> /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
> Koster: scientific atheism is an idea whose time is gone
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0406212033.90a39c1%40posting.google.com
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=b1c67abe.0406230445.7cff0545%40posting.google.com
Kurt Gavin
<dfo...@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message
news:dford3-11405760...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Hitler encounters the T0E as a child: A Victory for Atheism
In some of Hitler's speeches, he made reference to the "creator". He was
raised a Catholic. If you're trying to discredit any idea or institution he
could be associated with, then you're picking one, and leaving out others,
which hurts your credibility.
Also, ideas and theories can't be discredited just by pointing out who does
or doesn't agree with them. Stalin "believed" in nuclear physics enough to
put resources into an atomic bomb. Does that discredit nuclear physics?
SRNissen
Geoff wrote:
> "SRNissen" <soren....@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1140617950....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> > Good one
> >
> > - Søren
>
> ROFLMAO...is SRNissen serious? They blame Darwin for everything from
> abortion to halitosis, but I had to be an eyewitness to know that Hitler
> wrote these things?
... No?
No, I am not serious. Mvill...@gmail.com was obviously making a joking
parody of crazy creationists who claim we cannot know anything about
the beginning because we weren't there. I laughed at his joke. It was a
"Good one."
- Søren
(Who does not believe social darwinism is Darwins fault, and is very
aware that Hitler was a christian.)
Dave
> Dave wrote:
> > dfo...@gl.umbc.edu wrote:
> > > Hitler encounters the T0E as a child: A Victory for Atheism
> > [...]
> >
> > What did Hitler do that wasn't in the Bible?
>
> I can't think of anything. E.g., homosexuality is "in the Bible," and
Probably with Catholic priests.
> > The breeding of animals
> > for specific traits is an ancient practice.
>
> "The breeding of animals for specific traits"
>
> Do you consider 'humans' "animals"?
Irrelevant. The concept that someone's lineage made them who they are
was totally accepted even in ancient times.
> Do you reject classification systems which say there are:
> animals, humans, and plants?
As being totally childish? Yes.
Elmer
> david ford wrote:
>
>>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
>
>
> conversations. Whether these pains were caused by illness or were
> predominantly psychosomatic or some combination of the two is not
> prevent him from completing his work. His illness, whatever its cause,
> has no bearing whatsoever on the validity of natural selection as a
> mechanism of evolution.
>
>
Postgrad Med J. 2005 Apr;81(954):248-51. "Darwin's illness revealed." By
Campbell AK, Matthews SB. The Darwin Centre for Biology and Medicine,
Milton, Pembrokeshire, UK.
After returning from the Beagle in 1836, Charles Darwin suffered for
over 40 years from long bouts of vomiting, gut pain, headaches, severe
tiredness, skin problems, and depression. Twenty doctors failed to treat
him. Many books and papers have explained Darwin's mystery illness as
organic or psychosomatic, including arsenic poisoning, Chagas' disease,
multiple allergy, hypochondria, or bereavement syndrome. None stand up
to full scrutiny. His medical history shows he had an organic problem,
exacerbated by depression. Here we show that all Darwin's symptoms match
systemic lactose intolerance. Vomiting and gut problems showed up two to
three hours after a meal, the time it takes for lactose to reach the
large intestine. His family history shows a major inherited component,
as with genetically predisposed hypolactasia. Darwin only got better
when, by chance, he stopped taking milk and cream. Darwin's illness
highlights something else he missed--the importance of lactose in
mammalian and human evolution.
VoiceOfReason
Windy wrote:
> zawa...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > david ford wrote:
> > > > >>>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
> > > > >>
> > > psychosomatic footprints of the atheist syndrome."
> > >
> > problems" as does my sister-in-law (another devout, who regularly makes
> > pilgimages to Rome and Jerusalem on a school bus drivers salary)
>
>
> Pope Alexander VI, cause of death: "his stomach became swollen and
> turned to liquid, while his face became wine-coloured and his skin
> began to peel off. Finally his stomach and bowels bled profusely."
>
> Pope John XXIII, cause of death: stomach cancer
>
> Pope John Paul II, suffered from stomach ailments for years & had
> appendix surgery.
George Bush Senior puked on the Japanese (prime minister?) Yet another
closet atheist! All those Bushes should come out of the closet now!
chris.li...@gmail.com
david ford wrote:
> wf...@comcast.net wrote:
> > On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 05:53:16 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
> > <now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
> > >wf...@comcast.net wrote:
> > >> On 21 Feb 2006 20:32:38 -0800, "david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu>
> > >>
> > >>>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> defintion of ailments?
> > >>
> > >> definition of 'have'?
> > >
> > >Don't be stupid.
> >
> > just giving the man a taste of his own medicine...
>
> psychosomatic footprints of the atheist syndrome."
>
> Ref:
> Waite, Robert G.L. Afterword to
> Langer, Walter C. 1972. _The Mind of Adolf Hitler: The Secret Wartime
> Report_ (NY and Ontario: New American Library), 286pp., 236.
>
> Hitler was an atheist.
>
> Was Darwin:
> an atheist?
> a closet atheist?
I am an atheist and you make me want to puke.
Where does that put you?
Chris
Mark K. Bilbo
ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
> floyd wrote:
>> david ford wrote:
>> > Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
>>
>> Yes, he did; he complained frequently about them in letters and
>> conversations. Whether these pains were caused by illness or were
>> predominantly psychosomatic or some combination of the two is not
>> entirely resolved.
>
> Thanks.
>
>> Fortunately for us, his fluctuating health did not
>> prevent him from completing his work. His illness, whatever its cause,
>> has no bearing whatsoever on the validity of natural selection as a
>> mechanism of evolution.
>
> Meaning of "evolution"?
Meaning of "meaning?"
Meaning of "of?"
Meaning of "?"
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
Churches are closing...
http://makeashorterlink.com/?M611110AC
Mardi Gras is rolling...
http://www.nola.com/mardigras/
Now, what was this about god's judgement?
"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com
Mark K. Bilbo
ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu> wrote:
> wf...@comcast.net wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 05:53:16 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
>> <now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> >wf...@comcast.net wrote:
>> >> On 21 Feb 2006 20:32:38 -0800, "david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
>> >>
>> >> definition of 'stomach'
>> >>
>> >> defintion of ailments?
>> >>
>> >> definition of 'have'?
>> >
>> >Don't be stupid.
>>
>> just giving the man a taste of his own medicine...
>
> Koster states on 185 that "digestive problems" are among "the
> psychosomatic footprints of the atheist syndrome."
That is the stupidest thing I've heard so far this millennium...
John Wilkins
> david ford wrote:
>
> Most likely he suffered from basic gastro-esophigal
> reflux, or ulcers.
I think he had rather more than that. I suspect something viral and systemic,
although he may also have carried Heliobacter pylori. He also had what looks
to me like Chronic Fatigue Syndrome, but he began to suffer it early, before
he got controversial in public, and I wonder idly if it might have been due to
the taxing (and taxonomising) work on the barnacles.
--
John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Biohumanities Project
University of Queensland - Blog: evolvethought.blogspot.com
Servum tui ero, ipse vespera
Windy
> exacerbated by depression. Here we show that all Darwin's symptoms match
> systemic lactose intolerance. Vomiting and gut problems showed up two to
> three hours after a meal, the time it takes for lactose to reach the
> large intestine. His family history shows a major inherited component,
> as with genetically predisposed hypolactasia. Darwin only got better
> when, by chance, he stopped taking milk and cream.
Incorporating this into david ford's weirdness...
If David's assertions are all true (Darwin was an atheist and it was
connected to his ailment) it might mean that atheism is genetic, and
linked to lactose intolerance. However, we see that populations where
lactose intolerance is prevalent (such as SE Asians, most Africans and
African-Americans) are not particularly atheistic.
But, we can turn the hypothesis around, and check if the opposite is
true. What do we find? The highest proportion of lactose tolerants are
found in Northern Europe. _And this is also where we find the most
atheistic nations!_ Sweden is #1 on both lists, followed by other
ungodly Europeans.
But it is possible that it is not lactose tolerance per se that causes
atheism. A more parsimonious explanation is that both are connected to
a single thing - MILK! The following facts support my theory:
- It is said that we are all born atheists. What do we drink during our
atheistic phase? You guessed it.
- Darwin formulated his atheistic theory in England, while under the
influence of milk, as shown by the new study. The tummy ache was just a
side effect.
- Millions of muslims are currently boycotting Swedish and Danish milk
products. Maybe they are onto something.
So, got milk? :)
wf...@comcast.net
Bjørn Perlsø) wrote:
><wf...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> 3. creationists caused the bloodiest war in american history in
>> defense of the slave trade
>
>Pardon my ignorance, but which war was that?
our civil war...over 650,000 dead on both sides....WW2 killed 450,000
americans...
Mark K. Bilbo
<wbar...@mylinuxisp.com> wrote:
> david ford wrote:
>
> Most likely he suffered from basic gastro-esophigal reflux, or ulcers.
Prilosec cures atheism?
wf...@comcast.net
wrote:
>wf...@comcast.net wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 Feb 2006 05:53:16 -0500, "Robert J. Kolker"
>> <now...@nowhere.com> wrote:
>> >wf...@comcast.net wrote:
>> >> On 21 Feb 2006 20:32:38 -0800, "david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
>> >>
>> >> definition of 'stomach'
>> >>
>> >> defintion of ailments?
>> >>
>> >> definition of 'have'?
>> >
>> >Don't be stupid.
>>
>> just giving the man a taste of his own medicine...
>
>Koster states on 185 that "digestive problems" are among "the
>psychosomatic footprints of the atheist syndrome."
ah the atheist syndrome...let me consult my DSM IV...
>
>Hitler had stomach ailments, as did Romanian dictator Antonescu.
so did martin luther...famous for his arguments with the devil while
he was...ahem...biologically indisposed.
>
>Hitler was an atheist.
wrong.
>
>Was Darwin:
>an atheist?
>a closet atheist?
who know? who cares?
feynman was an atheist. steven weinberg is an atheist. both won nobel
prizes in physics
wf...@comcast.net
wrote:
>wf...@comcast.net wrote:
>>There is no 'equality' meter in science. Equality is a metaphysical ideal, not a scientific concept
>>
>>You really need to quit imposing MORAL values on secular science.
>
>Do you mean to word where science doesn't support the equality of
>mankind? I strongly disagree. It is a known fact that mental
>retardation is caused not by random mutation or breeding yet it is a
>birth defect. Would you care to explain how the science in stem cell
>research has nothing to do with morality here?
yes, science does not support the equality of mankind. it does not
support the INEQUALITY either.
automobile mechanics does not support either one as well.
the stem cell has no morals. you impose morals on it. the chemistry
doesn't particularly care what your morals are. it's still chemistry.
wf...@comcast.net
wrote:
>//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>agree with Hitler about who 'Jews' are?
is this any relation to 'where the boys are'?
Mark Stahl
"david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message
news:dford3-11406391...@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Robert J. Kolker wrote:
>> zawa...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> > My grandmother, a devout a Catholic as you ever met had "digestive
>> > problems" as does my sister-in-law (another devout, who regularly makes
>> > pilgimages to Rome and Jerusalem on a school bus
>> > drivers salary)
>>
>> I know many atheists who do not have chronic tummy aches. They are in
>> very good health. And their spirits are good since they do not carry a
>> load and burden of unearned guilt. Original sin, my ass!''
>
> convert to secular humanism to enjoy guiltless sexual activity of many
> varieties
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-b1c67abe.0409241109.17e2611d%40posting.google.com
>
> the question of accountability favors conversion to atheism
> http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1137184204.545825.116810%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
>
> 1999 Paul Vitz on personal convenience; 2002 Benjamin Wiker
> http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-35qe6lF4orjsoU1%40individual.net
>
>> Tummy aches and philosophical positions are un-correlated.
>
> Would you say that these "are un-correlated"?:
> 1. "tummy aches"
> and:
> 2. {certain "philosophical positions"-- namely atheism-- and growing
> up with a weak, dead, or abusive father}.
>
> Hitler grew up with an abusive father.
But Hitler was a Christian.... so, what's your point?
david ford
> <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message
> news:dford3-11405760...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> > Hitler encounters the T0E as a child: A Victory for Atheism
>
> In some of Hitler's speeches, he made reference to the "creator".
What, if anything, do you conclude from that?
a claim: Hitler was a Christian
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=1131389424.486586.51840%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
"Hitler's speeches... reference to the 'creator'"
"Speeches" to who-- the voting public?
What, if anything, do you conclude from Darwin's use of [Darwin]"the
Creator" in the 6th edition of _Origin_?
Darwin
http://www.literature.org/authors/darwin-charles/the-origin-of-species-6th-edition/chapter-15.html
Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the
most exalted object which we are capable of conceiving,
namely, the production of the higher animals, directly
follows. There is grandeur in this view of life, with its
several powers, having been originally breathed by the
Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this
planet has gone circling on according to the fixed law of
gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most
beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being
evolved.
Do you think that when Darwin wrote [Darwin]"the Creator" seen above,
he was writing an equivalent of [Hitler, and Darwin]"Nature... she"?
[Hitler, and Darwin]"Nature... she"
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132161340.121874.63970%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
What, if anything, do you conclude from Mencken's use of [Mencken]"God"
here?:
Mencken, H. L. 1918, 1922. _In Defense of Women_, (NY: Alfred A.
Knopf), 210pp. Text from
http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext98/ndwmn11.txt
The most they can ever accomplish in the way of
genuine originality is an occasional brilliant spurt,
and half a dozen such spurts, particularly if they
come close together and show a certain co-
ordination, are enough to make a practitioner
celebrated, and even immortal. Nature, indeed,
conspires against all such genuine originality, and I
have no doubt that God is against it on His heavenly
throne, as His vicars and partisans unquestionably
are on this earth. The dead hand pushes all of us
into intellectual cages; there is in all of us a strange
tendency to yield and have done.
> He was raised a Catholic.
Goebbels "was raised a Catholic." Do you consider the adult Goebbels
"a Catholic"?
1943 Goebbels & Hitler agree on "the insanity of the Christian doctrine
of redemption"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1120260213.363834.164990%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
> If you're trying to discredit any idea or institution he
> could be associated with, then you're picking one, and leaving out others,
> which hurts your credibility.
>
> Also, ideas and theories can't be discredited just by pointing out who does
> or doesn't agree with them. Stalin "believed" in nuclear physics enough to
> put resources into an atomic bomb. Does that discredit nuclear physics?
No.
Hitler believed in Darwinian natural selection enough to put resources
into a human breeding project. Does that discredit Darwin's theory of
natural selection?
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
2004 Kater
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1126752603.953619.262940%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
Himmler, a former chicken farmer..., was ruled by very
strong beliefs regarding the application of breeding
theories to humans-- by way of positive selection for the
"Aryans" and negative selection for their natural enemies,
the Slavs, Gypsies, and Jews.
Hitler's human breeding plan using [1871 Darwin]"careful selection" +
mutations
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1124684179.251743.95950%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1124731489.829229.220700%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Darwin on [1871 Darwin]"careful selection" in connection with the
breeding of humans;
1924/5 Hitler & 1871 Darwin on heterogeneous & homogeneous peoples
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1133977762.788382.143030%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
an exercise: parallels between 1871 Darwin & 1924/5 Hitler?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1134448996.907734.300780%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
4 more Hitler-Darwin parallels
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135092414.972723.104980%40g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
July 1947 indictment by Allies of SS Race and Settlement
Office leaders:
Kidnapping the children of foreign nationals in order to
select for Germanization those who were considered of
'racial value.'.... Encouraging and compelling abortions
on Eastern workers.... Preventing marriages and
hampering reproduction of enemy nationals.
Cited in
Black, Edwin. 2003. _War Against the Weak: Eugenics and America's
Campaign to Create a Master Race_ (NY: Four Walls Eight Windows),
550pp., 405.
Hitler's actions make sense given his atheism and eugenic, social
Darwinist vision
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1134145559.645139.229550%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
david ford
I don't know what you're referring to.
Do you agree with any Dawkins views below?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=1136816955.742178.140650%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Dawkins also questions the fundamental tenets of
Christianity. On the idea of a spiritual creator, he says:
"The God of the Old Testament has got to be the most
unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous, and proud of it,
petty, vindictive, unjust, unforgiving, racist." The author of
"The Selfish Gene" then criticises Abraham, compares
Moses to Hitler and Saddam Hussein, before calling the
New Testament "St Paul's nasty, sado-masochistic
doctrine of atonement for original sin."
Do you agree with any Ingersoll views below?
Ingersoll, Robert Green. "The Jews"
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/robert_ingersoll/jews.html
The Jewish people should outgrow their own
superstitions. It is time for them to throw away the
idea of inspiration. The intelligent Jew of to-day
knows that the Old Testament was written by
barbarians, and he knows that the rites and
ceremonies are simply absurd. He knows that no
intelligent man should care anything about
Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, three dead barbarians.
In other words, the Jewish people should leave their
superstition and rely on science and philosophy.
Do you agree with any Mencken views below?
Mencken, H. L. 1918, 1922. _In Defense of Women_, (NY: Alfred A.
Knopf), 210pp. Text from
http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext98/ndwmn11.txt
Again, marriage offers her the only safe opportunity,
considering the levantine view of women as
property which Christianity has preserved in our
civilization, to obtain gratification for that powerful
complex of instincts which we call the sexual, and,
in particular, for the instinct of maternity.
==
The notion that honour in women is exclusively a
physical matter, that a single aberrance may
convert a woman of the highest merits into a woman
of none at all, that the sole valuable thing a woman
can bring to marriage is virginity-- this notion is so
preposterous that no intelligent person, male or
female, actually cherishes it. It survives as one of
the hollow conventions of Christianity; nay, of the
levantine barbarism that preceded Christianity. As
women throw off the other conventions which now
bind them they will throw off this one, too, and so
their virtue, grounded upon fastidiousness and self-
respect instead of upon mere fear and conformity,
will become afar more laudable thing than it ever
can be under the present system. And for its
absence, if they see fit to dispose of it, they will no
more apologize than a man apologizes today.
david ford
> david ford wrote:
> > Dave wrote:
> > > dfo...@gl.umbc.edu wrote:
> > > > Hitler encounters the T0E as a child: A Victory for Atheism
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > What did Hitler do that wasn't in the Bible?
> >
> > I can't think of anything. E.g., homosexuality is "in the Bible," and
> > Hitler engaged in homosexual activity.
>
> [...]
>
> Probably with Catholic priests.
Do you think that any of the "Catholic priests" the Nazis charged with
having engaged in pedophilia actually did engage in pedophilia?
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
_Goodbye, Good Men: How Liberals Brought Corruption Into the Catholic
Church_
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0895261448/ref=sr_11_1/002-1321204-3712802?
Thompson, Howard, i.e. Gofreemind. 1998/05/22. "Questions for
Leaders of American Atheists, Inc." from the 22 May 98 issue of The
Texas Atheist newsletter. At
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=1998052218175400.OAA07579%40ladder01.news.aol.com
For newer atheists, Madalyn was anything but
heroic. Her rude, obnoxious public displays
were an embarrassment. Her court rejected
attempt at looting the Hervey Johnson
foundation was outrageous. Her shuffling of
funds among ten or more family owned
corporations was shady, at best. We'll never
know the total of member donated funds
appropriated for personal use, funds beyond the
$600,000 her son Jon Murray apparently took
during the last weeks.
The issue of moral integrity for atheists is clear.
If we lack the courage and honesty to openly
examine our leaders, then we must forever
remain silent when stories of Jim Bakers and
pedophile Priests titillate the media. We must
forever refrain from presenting atheism as a
better alternative than theism.
> > > The breeding of animals
> > > for specific traits is an ancient practice.
> >
> > "The breeding of animals for specific traits"
> >
> > Do you consider 'humans' "animals"?
>
> Irrelevant. The concept that someone's lineage made them who they are
> was totally accepted even in ancient times.
During which years was "the concept that someone's lineage made them
who they are" generally accepted in America?
Did Darwin accept that "concept"?
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Darwin: "The remarkable success of the English as colonists, compared
to other European nations, has been ascribed to their 'daring and
persistent energy'; a result which is well illustrated by comparing the
progress of the Canadians of English and French extraction...."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135653955.843480.126470%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
> > Do you reject classification systems which say there are:
> > animals, humans, and plants?
>
> As being totally childish? Yes.
"Childish"-- how so?
Suppose a laboratory is going down in flames. An elderly paraplegic
human is in the building, and a young gorilla.
You can only save the paraplegic or the gorilla from the burning
building, but not both.
Which would you decide to save-- the young gorilla, or the elderly
paraplegic human?
david ford
> david ford wrote:
>
> >
> > Koster, Jr., John P. 1989. _The Atheist Syndrome_
> > (Brentwood, Tennessee: Wolgemuth & Hyatt, Publishers, Inc.),
> > 199pp. On 148:
> > Hitler's anti-Semitism... he based it clearly on
> > Darwinian principles.
>
> Another fool who does not know the real roots of Nazism, Christian
> anti-Semitism, Herder's Volkgeist, Gobibneau's Aryan mythology.
What is "Christian anti-Semitism"?
Is there such a thing as 'atheist anti-Semitism'?
Is there such a thing as 'Darwinist anti-Semitism'?
Do you detect any "anti-Semitism" in this Marx?:
Marx, Karl. 1959. _A World without Jews_, translated from the
original German, with an introduction and an epilogue by Dagobert D.
Runes, fourth, enlarged edition (New York: Philosophical Library),
83pp. On 37 and 45 this appears in enlarged, bolded characters:
Let us look at the real Jew of our time; not the Jew of the
Sabbath, whom Bauer considers, but the Jew of everyday
life.
What is the Jew's foundation in our world? Material
necessity, private advantage.
What is the object of the Jew's worship in this world?
Usury. What is his worldly god? Money.
Very well then; emancipation from usury and money, that
is, from practical, real Judaism, would constitute the
emancipation of our time.
....
The social emancipation of Jewry is the emancipation of
society from Jewry.
What is:
"Herder's Volkgeist"?
"Gobibneau's Aryan mythology"?
Do you agree with any of this Darwin?:
[1871/ 74 Darwin]"Europeans and Hindoos... belong to the same Aryan
stock.... Jews... belong to the Semitic stock"
[1872 Darwin]"Blushing is evident in all the Aryan nations of
Europe.... The
Semitic races blush freely, as might have been expected, from their
general similitude to the Aryans."
[Darwin]"Dr. Saviotti in... 1871... remarks that it more frequently
occurs in prognathous skulls, not of the Aryan race, than in others"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132942108.117285.130610%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
david ford
Every week is "sweeps week."
If each adult Jew in 1920s Germany persuaded 2 friends to become Jews
before 1930, would the Holocaust have happened?
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
agree with Hitler about who 'Jews' are?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1136226458.258397.34490%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
wf...@comcast.net
wrote:
>Robert J. Kolker wrote:
>> zawa...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> > My grandmother, a devout a Catholic as you ever met had "digestive
>> > problems" as does my sister-in-law (another devout, who regularly makes
>> > pilgimages to Rome and Jerusalem on a school bus
>> > drivers salary)
>> > So your point is?
>>
>> I know many atheists who do not have chronic tummy aches. They are in
>> very good health. And their spirits are good since they do not carry a
>> load and burden of unearned guilt. Original sin, my ass!''
>
>convert to secular humanism to enjoy guiltless sexual activity of many
>varieties
AHA!! so THAT'S what I've been missing...
wf...@comcast.net
wrote:
>wf...@comcast.net wrote:
>> On 22 Feb 2006 11:46:36 -0800, "david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
>> >agree with Hitler about who 'Jews' are?
>>
>> is this any relation to 'where the boys are'?
>
>I don't know what you're referring to.
>
c'mon...you've never heard of connie francis?
Kurt Gavin
"david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message
news:dford3-11406652...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Kurt Gavin wrote:
>> <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu> wrote in message
>> news:dford3-11405760...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
>> > Hitler encounters the T0E as a child: A Victory for Atheism
>>
>> In some of Hitler's speeches, he made reference to the "creator".
>
> What, if anything, do you conclude from that?
You're confused. I wasn't "concluding" anything. I was pointing out a falacy
in the the original post.
Matthew Isleb
>> I am quite aware of the ethical restraints on such a practice but beyond
>> ethics human genetics is still based on the same principles as horse
>> genetics or cattle genetics.
>
> Very well said, on the whole. What "ethical restraints" do you refer
> to?
David, I would very much be interested in hearing how you respond to
these many quotations from Mein Kampf directly invoking Christianity and
the curious lack of reference to Darwin.
-matthew
Honest Aryan
The 'race or religion?' question was
settled long ago. The answer is neither.
Semitism is a *RACKET*.
--
Visit the Cybermuseum of BBC War Crimes at:
http://users.bluecarrots.com/rbisto/BBC/BBC.html
Admission *FREE* - even for libruls!
bob young
david ford wrote:
> Dave wrote:
> > dfo...@gl.umbc.edu wrote:
> > > Hitler encounters the T0E as a child: A Victory for Atheism
> > [...]
> >
> > What did Hitler do that wasn't in the Bible?
>
> I can't think of anything. E.g., homosexuality is "in the Bible," and
> Hitler engaged in homosexual activity.
>
>
> > The breeding of animals
> > for specific traits is an ancient practice.
>
> "The breeding of animals for specific traits"
>
> Do you consider 'humans' "animals"?
>
> Do you reject classification systems which say there are:
> animals, humans, and plants?
Yes, we are mammals as are the chimps and a million other species, all breathing air though our nostrils
and producing offspring via intervaginal intercourse.
stew dean
david ford wrote:
> Robert J. Kolker wrote:
> > zawa...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> > > My grandmother, a devout a Catholic as you ever met had "digestive
> > > problems" as does my sister-in-law (another devout, who regularly makes
> > > pilgimages to Rome and Jerusalem on a school bus
> > > drivers salary)
> > > So your point is?
> >
> > I know many atheists who do not have chronic tummy aches. They are in
> > very good health. And their spirits are good since they do not carry a
> > load and burden of unearned guilt. Original sin, my ass!''
>
> convert to secular humanism to enjoy guiltless sexual activity of many
> varieties
That's not how it works David. I am free from guilt because I have done
no nasty acts in recent history. I have a strong view of good and evil
based upon the real world and my relationship with the people around
me. I try and do good friends and strangers. If I sleep with my best
friends girl then that is bad.
This is not athiesm but humanism and having empathy with your fellow
humans.
In short - if there is a god then I'm not in trouble unless you want to
include the silly stuff like 'thou shalt never hop on a thursday' and
the general rules which were good at the time they where written (not
eating pork is a useful tip if you're in a hot country - it goes off in
a nasty way).
My view is because my morals are based upon reality and on the people
around me (the technical name is a relatavist) then I am more
responsible and therefore moral then someone who bases their view on
more abstract rules taught without explaination (the absolutes often
found in religion).
Or to put it another way - I have no god so if you can't draw a cartoon
of my god and make me want to kill you and start a war.
I also recongnise that many religions get stuff right - for example
forgiveness in christianity is a great and wonderful idea that many
right wing christians are further away from them myself. The whole
'what would Jesus do' thing is great if you understand christianity in
the kind of sandles and beard way that the religious folk I know do.
Being an athiest or religoin doesnt make you good or bad - but religion
can be used as an reason/excuse for both, potentialy to a greater
extreme. Hitler is one case in point that you are choosing to deny
despite what is now conclusive evidence against you . You have been
guilty of ignoring that which disagrees with you.
Stew Dean
Matt Silberstein
<dfo...@gl.umbc.edu> in
<dford3-11406676...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com> wrote:
>Mindreader Mitchell Coffey wrote:
>> david ford wrote:
>> > Robert J. Kolker wrote:
>> > > wf...@comcast.net wrote:
>> > > > On 21 Feb 2006 20:32:38 -0800, "david ford" <dfo...@gl.umbc.edu>
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >>Did Darwin have stomach ailments?
>> > > >
>> > > > definition of 'stomach'
>> > > >
>> > > > defintion of ailments?
>> > > >
>> > > > definition of 'have'?
>> > >
>> > > Don't be stupid.
>> >
>> > That's my job.
>>
>> Evidently it's sweeps week.
>
>Every week is "sweeps week."
>
>If each adult Jew in 1920s Germany persuaded 2 friends to become Jews
>before 1930, would the Holocaust have happened?
Now there are some thoughts that probably scares you a great deal.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
Peter Bjørn Perlsø
> our civil war...over 650,000 dead on both sides....WW2 killed 450,000
> americans...
And how do you reckon "creationists" caused this war?
--
regards, Peter Bjørn Perlsø - http://haxor.dk
http://liberterran.org
http://haxor.dk/fanaticism/
Jack Dominey
<deanlan...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>wf...@comcast.net wrote:
>>There is no 'equality' meter in science. Equality is a metaphysical ideal,
>>not a scientific concept
>>
>>You really need to quit imposing MORAL values on secular science.
>Do you mean to word where science doesn't support the equality of
>mankind? I strongly disagree. It is a known fact that mental
>retardation is caused not by random mutation or breeding yet it is a
>birth defect. Would you care to explain how the science in stem cell
>research has nothing to do with morality here?
Something has rendered your first sentence unintelligible, and most of
the remainder disconnected. Please try again.
Your third sentence is incorrect. There are many causes of mental
retardation. There are genetic causes, either mutations or inherited
conditions. There are developmental issues not linked directly to
genetics. There are maternal behaviors (resulting in e.g. Fetal
Alcohol Syndrome or "crack babies"). There are "simple" causes like
birth trauma, as when an infant's oxygen is cut off too long during
birth.
And the science that wf3h refers to, in stem cell research or any
other area, is the process of understanding the world and the
descriptions derived from that process. There is nothing inherently
moral or immoral about understanding how stem cells work or figuring
out ways to use them. The question you are trying to raise is how
human embryos may be treated, which *is* a moral question. Science
won't give an answer to that one.
--
"I'm gonna act grown up/That's my plan"
Jack Dominey
jack_dominey (at) email (dot) com
R.I.P. Bob Denver
david ford
What was that "falacy in... the original post," reproduced below?
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
From: dfo...@gl.umbc.edu
Newsgroups: talk.origins,alt.talk.creationism
Subject: Hitler & Darwin URLs
Date: 21 Feb 2006 18:40:33 -0800
Lines: 109
Message-ID:
<dford3-11405760...@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com>
Hitler encounters the T0E as a child: A Victory for Atheism
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1118403178.860854.170600%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Multi-Pronged Role of Darwinian Thought in Shoah's Arrival
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132080322.482544.299440%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Hitler's actions make sense given his atheism and eugenic, social
Darwinist vision
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1134145559.645139.229550%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
Hitler: "Mendelian Law Of Division"; "artificially hinders nature's
process of selection"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1140187785.048291.134400%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
is Darwin, or Hitler, today's most-famous Darwinist?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1138681336.761356.170100%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
parallel between Hitler and [Darwin]"the inferior vitality of mulattoes
is spoken of in a trustworthy work*(5) as a well-known phenomenon"
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1133927305.339964.266320%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
[Hitler, and Darwin]"Nature... she," in
Darwin in the 6th edition of _Origin_ on [Darwin]"survival of the
fittest" and the [Darwin]"struggle for life"
http://www.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1132161340.121874.63970%40g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Darwin: "the finest young men are.... exposed to early death during
war.... feebler men... are left at home"
Http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1136999331.757403.75700%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Malthus in remarks by Hitler
Http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1137178715.710123.107820%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
Darwin: "The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an
operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his
patient...."
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1136917904.909420.245140%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
1874 Darwin: "mongrel population of Negroes and Portuguese....
population of mingled Polynesian and English blood....
population of Polynesians and Negritos crossed in all degrees....
a much crossed race of Portuguese and Indians, with a mixture of the
blood of other races"
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1136494819.673310.232510%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
1883 Darwin: "When two races, both low in the scale, are crossed the
progeny seems to be eminently bad."
http://groups.google.co.in/groups?selm=dford3-1136399794.077073.47030%40z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com
agree with Hitler about who 'Jews' are?
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1136226458.258397.34490%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
Darwin: "genius... tends to be inherited... insanity and deteriorated
mental powers... run in families"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135964069.481127.220330%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
Kill/ death to [Darwin]"imbecile, maimed, and other useless members of
society"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135791290.639930.285730%40f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com
Darwin: "The remarkable success of the English as colonists, compared
to other European nations, has been ascribed to their 'daring and
persistent energy'; a result which is well illustrated by comparing the
progress of the Canadians of English and French extraction...."
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135653955.843480.126470%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Darwin: "the New Zealander... compares his future fate with that of the
native rat now almost exterminated by the European rat"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135178729.788016.144250%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
Hitler & Darwin on
[Hitler & Darwin]"master[s]"
over
[Darwin]"subjugated... men"
having
[Darwin]"utility to their masters"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135100164.057260.78490%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
this Darwin correct as of: 1888? 1944?: "man differs widely from any
strictly domesticated animal; for his breeding has never long been
controlled, either by methodical or unconscious selection"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1134792419.066594.291390%40o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com
Darwin: [Greg]"the careless, squalid, unaspiring Irishman multiplies
like rabbits"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135088486.532238.194930%40g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Darwin on selection of Spartan children
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1135004225.246782.327080%40g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com
Hitler; Darwin: "the evil which the Catholic Church has thus effected
is incalculable"
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=dford3-1134662154.179171.232450%40g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com