buzsaw writes:
Specifically, can you provide any support for your claim that Darwin's theory states that more color = less evolved?
True or false? Apes are dark skinned. True or false? If evolution was factual human primates would tend to dark skin rather than white and much time required for that to change. Methinks Darwin figured dark skinned folks were the lesser evolved and lesser advanced of the human species. Simple as that. Creationists would never have any reason to entertain such thoughts.
Darwin did tend to consider, along with most other Victorians, that his own society represented a kind of pinnacle of civilization and culture. However, this is a cultural matter rather than biological. This distinction was not clearly recognized by naturalists of the time, and even Darwin confuses the two concepts in some contexts; though in others he appears to appreciate it. The co-discoverer with Darwin of the role of natural selection, Alfred Wallace, made this distinction more clear. In any case, Darwin did explicitly address the matter of skin colour in
Descent, and he does not use it as an indicator that black skinned people are less evolved.
Evolution implies that all currently living species are all equally the evolved results of common ancestors, but evolved in different directions. Darwin also recognized this in his writings.
Many people did consider other races, especially negroes, to be "less evolved" and even "less human"; but Darwin was more inclined to see them, correctly, as evolved in a different direction, and to a superficial degree. Darwin also appreciated that the term "negro" obscured considerable variety and did not logically represent a well defined race. Darwin considered humans to represent a single species, with the various differences as biologically superficial. Further work since Darwin's time has increasingly confirmed the superficiality of racial differences.
As for what creationists might think, you underestimate the ingenuity of people to defend their prejudices, even if they are creationists. Creationists believe we are
made in the image of God, and on this basis many have put considerable emphasis on "image". Many have concluded that those who look radically different, in colour for example, are not in the same image. Try doing a web search, for "white adamic race". You might be surprised!
Here is an extreme example, from
The 11th Hour Remnant MessengerAdam Man (Adamite) is mentioned over 2,000 times in the Bible. Human (HUEMAN [tinted or colored skin]) is not mentioned once in the Bible. That is because the Bible, the WORD of Father Yahweh God is written for Adamic White Skinned Aryan Hebrew Israelites only.
Only the Adamic White Skinned race has the physiological ability to blush red. No other race can blush red. The non-race JEWS cannot blush red..
No other race of peoples are mentioned in the Bible except as they occasionally came into contact with His Chosen, his Adamic White Skinned Aryan Hebrew, Israelite people.
It is a lie that Jesus Christ came to redeem any other race other than his own people, the Chosen people of Israel, the Israelites.
I should emphasize, to take the above as representing authentic Christian belief is ridiculous. So also it is ridiculous to represent evolution as a racist notion which ranks the various living races on some kind of progression. Both distortions and cheap and contemptible rhetorical devices, indicating either ignorance of the system they seek to criticise, or else dishonest application of obvious nonsense.
Cheers -- Sylas
™ Version 4.2