Tell me: what was Hitler's motive for the Holocaust? darwinism One man killed thousands of Jews Yes What was Hitler's view? That Jews were subhuman and primitive Does Darwinism justify the mass murder of almost an entire race? Survival of the Fittest. So, yes
Bahh, your intelligent designer can kiss my arse (That he designed apparently - shoddy workmanship by the way). Tell me - why would a 'erfect being' create creatures with such great physical and mental faults? Also, can you give me a plausible mechanism, that differentiates from those found in the theory of evolution, to which we can attribute such large diversity (both in species and the animal/plant kingdoms as a whole)?
Tell me: what was Hitler's motive for the Holocaust? darwinism One man killed thousands of Jews Yes What was Hitler's view? That Jews were subhuman and primitive Does Darwinism justify the mass murder of almost an entire race? Survival of the Fittest. So, yes
Tell me if this was justified.
Oh stop with that nonsensical attack on Evolution. One aspect of the connection, which can cause confusion, is the generally accepted fact that Hitler's conception of racial of national struggle and supremacy bore some relationship to social Darwinism, a political theory which can be summed up as "survival of the fittest, applied to people". Social Darwinism is distinct from the biological theory of evolution, and only loosely connected with Charles Darwin, whom Hitler is not known to have ever mentioned.
Furthermore, using Hitler's belief in evolution as an argument against evolutionary science is an example of the logical fallacy of an argument from adverse consequences, suggesting that we should not accept the theory of evolution because it could lead to the kind of racist views perpetuated by Hitler. This is also an example of the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, implying that Hitler's racist views were inspired directly by a belief in evolution. In fact, even if the connections between the theory of evolution, social Darwinism and the Holocaust can be made, this does not imply that evolution is a dangerous theory, only that Hitler had perverted the theory to justify his beliefs and actions.
However, it seems that there is at least some evidence to suggest that, far from embracing Darwin's work and social Darwinism, the Nazis tried to ban them. The 1935 edition of the official Nazi journal for lending libraries, Die Bücherei, contains a list of banned books. One of the entries in this edition of Die Bücherei is "Writings of a philosophical and social nature whose content deals with the false scientific enlightenment of primitive Darwinism and Monism (Häckel)"
That is what you believe, isn't it? Can you tell us why you believe so, and the facts of this Jesus?
Before you attack my religion, friend, I would like to ask you a few questions:
1. Where did the particles that created the Earth come from? 2. How do you know there isn't an intelligent designer? 3. How can you scientifically prove that the Earth evolved over millions of years
1. Current scientific theory is that they're a result of the Big Bang. 2. You're the one asserting the claim - the burden of proof lays with you. However, if you want our proof, then look at your lack of it. Also, look at the scientific theories which do perfectly well without relying on some deity or deities to get involved. 3. The Earth itself hasn't evolved - inanimate objects cannot biologically evolve.
Where did the particles that created the Earth come from?
We don't know. A fundamental law of energy however states that "matter cannot be created nor destroyed". Therefore, this energy that we have had has always been here.
2. How do you know there isn't an intelligent designer?
Proving there isn't an intelligent designer is the same thing as proving there IS. You cannot. I cannot.
How can you scientifically prove that the Earth evolved over millions of years
Earth does not evolve, as it is not living. Our biosphere however, has. You like fossils? We got plenty. Scientists have done extensive research linking fossils to species down the evolutionary path and found that they are directly responsible for how they are.
Where did the particles that created the Earth come from?
We don't know. A fundamental law of energy however states that "matter cannot be created nor destroyed". Therefore, this energy that we have had has always been here.
2. How do you know there isn't an intelligent designer?
Proving there isn't an intelligent designer is the same thing as proving there IS. You cannot. I cannot.
How can you scientifically prove that the Earth evolved over millions of years
Earth does not evolve, as it is not living. Our biosphere however, has. You like fossils? We got plenty. Scientists have done extensive research linking fossils to species down the evolutionary path and found that they are directly responsible for how they are.
1. So you don't know. That means you truly don't know how the Earth was created? Or do you support Richard Dawkin's theory on a Darwinian advanced race that could have caused the Earth? 2. You cannot prove evolution though. In fact, more evidence lies with creation than evolution. Take for instance, Oxygen. Scientific proof is available that Oxygen would have run out by a period of a million years or so 3. Agreed. Earth is not alive, the inhabitants however are. One note, evolutionists do not keep one theory. They keep changing there theories and if necessary to "rove" that intelligent design is not real then they will add a million more years or whatever date is necessary.
So you don't know. That means you truly don't know how the Earth was created? Or do you support Richard Dawkin's theory on a Darwinian advanced race that could have caused the Earth?
Read the second part of my sentence. The matter has always been there.
You cannot prove evolution though. In fact, more evidence lies with creation than evolution. Take for instance, Oxygen. Scientific proof is available that Oxygen would have run out by a period of a million years or so
Who says? Oxygen was plentiful both in the oceans and on land. The plants in the oceans and land supplied the oxygen and the animal life there supplied them with carbon dioxide.
Also, provide a source here. I don't believe you.
Agreed. Earth is not alive, the inhabitants however are. One note, evolutionists do not keep one theory. They keep changing there theories and if necessary to "rove" that intelligent design is not real then they will add a million more years or whatever date is necessary.
That's not how scientists work, though YOU may think so. If there is anything in a hypothesis or theory that conflicts with another, they will research it more. They will continue to ask questions, provide data, and eventually change their information to suit the new data. They do not just change information on a whim without any reason.
1. So you don't know. That means you truly don't know how the Earth was created? Or do you support Richard Dawkin's theory on a Darwinian advanced race that could have caused the Earth? 2. You cannot prove evolution though. In fact, more evidence lies with creation than evolution. Take for instance, Oxygen. Scientific proof is available that Oxygen would have run out by a period of a million years or so 3. Agreed. Earth is not alive, the inhabitants however are. One note, evolutionists do not keep one theory. They keep changing there theories and if necessary to "rove" that intelligent design is not real then they will add a million more years or whatever date is necessary.
1. We do not know YET. Key word in the sentence is yet. We one day will know. And nothing is ever certain, but it we have supporting evidence which allows us to conclude that we are realitively certain.
2. >.> Mage where is your wall of links? And to adress the oxygen issue, what "roof" do you have that it should have run out by now? I have proof that we have an oxygen cycle to renew oxygen.Here
3. The theories change because new evidence is present which requires them to change. Do you even know what a theory is?
1. Ahem, you're confusing Evolution and Big Bang theories - a common mistake for people of lesser intelligence such as yourself. 2. Ever heard of Plants? They take in the CO2 and pump out good clean air. Also, what evidence are you talking about? The Lieble? 3. We change our theories to adapt to new evidence or proof - unlike religious people, who don't change their evidence at all - not even when we present evidence for our case that easily wins over yours.
Theory- A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena
So, how have plants been able to survive for millions of millions of years?
Because they are rooted in the ground that provides carbon, much later given CO2 by animals, and otherwise being given energy from the sun?
But how does this have anything to do with proving a god's existence or not proving one, rather?
To put a long story short, God is simply not needed for Earth to be run. We can take care of ourselves to prosper. God was not needed for the universe to be run. God is not needed for anything, except to reinforce good feelings to those that already have them.
