Elitism and Nazism

quote:

---

Of course I don’t have do explain how dangerous this belief of elitism is.

---

Yes it certainly is dangerous when fundamentalist christians consider themselves and elite group above all others in the world and then try to ram this down everyones throat...it has cost millions of people their lives.

quote:

---

Natural Selection justifies, among other things, fascist values and the belief that the higher breed are free to conquer and breed as they please.

---

Nice unsupported stupid assertion The General...ok how about this, christianity justifies among other things slavery, fascism, and the denigration of women?In any case, please show where I can find such justification in Darwin's writings or in a modern evolution textbook...I am interested how the change in allele frequencies observed in L. africana when one moves from the Savanah to the forest justifies fascism.

quote:

---

Adolf Hitler was influenced by the writings of Charles Darwin. His treatment of the Jews at least in part can be attributed to his belief in evolution. To quote P.Hoffman who wrote Hitler's Personal Security, "Hitler believed in struggle as a Darwinian principle of human life that forced every person to try to dominate all others." Darwin also believed in this constant struggle for survival.

---

Acutally Hitler was a christian (Catholic) who was heavily influenced by a bizarre reading of the bible.....what he wrote about evolution and heredity in particular in Mein Kampf is almost as bizarre and full of errors as your posts in the Natural Selection thread...and regarding the christianity part...millions of christian Germans, French, Swiss, Austrians, Italians etc. were more than happy to help Hilter along his violent path...or are you going to show us the armies of Darwin in the trenches in Stalingrad

quote:

---

So, from the mouth of a prominent evolutionist we hear that Hitler was only being consistent in his treatment of Jews. He was simply applying the principles of Darwin's natural selection.

---

Actually, Hitler was being consistent with the ideas of Francis Galton who began the formal eugenics movement. Even Darwin himself told Galton his misreading of the definition of fitness was flawed i.e. Galton attributed wealth and upbringing to fitness which Darwin never did....thus, Hitler was never consistent with the principles of the theory of evolution.

quote:

---

This is frightening that such a theory could be used to justify the attempted elimination of a type of people.

---

It is frightening that someone could misrepresent history, have such a profound lack of understanding of the theory of evolution, and yet be a such a self righteous ass as to infer that anyone who accepts the theory of evolution is a nazi...if anyone represents the dangers of elitism and nazism it is todays fundamentalist christians who operate exactly the way the nazis did in the 30's and 40's.[This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 09-03-2003]

quote:

---

Wasn't there an unofficial rule that anybody who brought up Nazis in a debate automatically loses it?

---

Hi Alex,
The unofficial rule is that those who post baseless assertions, mischaracterizations, and outright lies lose....but that does not keep The General from continuing to post

quote:

---

Mammathus, I am not an Elitist, a fundamentalism and I am certainly not ramming any thing down anyone else's throat. In fact this web site has a great number more evolutionists who believe strongly than it does creationists, so that ramming accusation can go both ways.

---

There are probably more evolutionists here than creationists POSTING, who knows what the composition of lurkers acutally is. As to ramming down ones throat, you have been making wild unsupported accusations towards people who work in a scientific field and claiming it as fact and essentially calling for the end of science in favor of your personal mythology. Your statements regarding your own beliefs, your utter lack of knowledge about science, your historical revisionism and your dismissal of the crimes perpetrated in the name of your own religion firmly puts you in the camp of fundamentalist christian so I do not retract that statement.

quote:

---

If you dont like my pieces so much, simply stop reading them.

---

..or I could do like you in the Natural Selection thread and just ignore challenges to my arguements as you did.

quote:

---

Also your accusation that Christianity justifies slavery, facism, and denigration of women is unsupported by any evidence, unlike my presentation stating the harmful affects of Dariwinian and Nietzcheian thought.

---

If you actually want to know why your "presentation" regarding Darwinian thought is utter tripe you should ACTUALLY read what REALLY started the eugenics movement and who the key players are...Daniel Kevles, In the Name of Eugenics.It has nice summary of the history of the origins of the eugenics movement including Darwin's conflict with the instigator of the eugenics movement Francis Galton.Christianity and slavery: http://etori.tripod.com/slave-justify.htmlCATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Ethical Aspect of SlaveryHitler, Franco, name your dictator in South America were all Christians...using your logic as applied to the ToE and Darwin, Christianity supports facism...see how stupid your logic sounds when it is used against you?Denigration of women: http://www.jpnordin.com/christianity/sex/antiwomen.htm

quote:

---

Hitler may have been born Catholic but that is pretty much where his Christian life ends. Many Christian did support Hitler. This is unfortunate, however much of this support came while his policies towards the Jews were still widely unknown. In any event the support was still unfortunate. Many Christians did not support him though and died fighting against him (Bonhoeffer).

---

How do you know? Hitler spoke of religion throughout his life. It is a revisionist myth that the majority of people did not know that the jews were being exterminated here....again the support was unfortunate.But applying your logic, those who used completely distorted versions of the theory of evolution which even Darwin thought was wrong makes me studying allele frequencies in mammoths over time guilty of genocide? Whereas the christians, especially the Catholic churce, aided the near eradication of jews in Europe but christians and christianity are blameless..strange double standard and strange way of thinking about things.

quote:

---

Also fitness was and is not all to evolution and I believe I more specifically mentioned natural selection.

---

Uh, you do know what fitness is don't you...that you have now separated natural selection and fitness from one another strongly suggests you really do not know what you are talking about.

quote:

---

Hitler was consistent with the beliefs of natural selection, and more particularily with Herbert Spencer's 'survival of the fittest.' I really believe Darwin would have opposed Nazism but my question is from his theory, how could he not forsee something along the lines of Nazism?

---

I just saw a paper on the distribuiton of alleles for multiple loci in different human populations....and guess what? Allele frequencies are different....better run to the bomb shelter..the nazis are coming Please do a side by side comparison of references to Darwin and natural selection in Mein Kampf compared to references to god and christianity....you will be enlightened.

quote:

---

I also disagree with your last statement for I have never seen modern Christianity even begin to compare with Nazism. Please in the future if you only wish to blurt out mindless insults, go somewhere else.

---

Look who is talking? You are accusing us of being like nazis with unsupported drivel and lies yet dismissing the crimes of your co-religionists...you are a hypocrite.....and by the way, there were those nice witch burnings, crusades, and the participation of the catholic and protestant church in the extermination of jews during WWII that I can accuse you of.You should focus on whether you understand the theory of evolution and where exactly you can show scientific fault with it and in addition propose and support an alternative that better explains what is observed in nature and spend less time on blathering your fundie bigotry...I doubt you have the capacity to take that advice..but one never knows.[This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 09-05-2003]

quote:

---

Mammathus

---

It is Mammuthus actually but I sincerely doubt you know what that is the name of.

quote:

---

It almost would seem a waste of time responding to you because I think your attitude is rather immature. Please use a little more class when debating please.

---

The same applies to you. If you want to infer that a group of people i.e. evolutionists share common features with the Nazi's you better be damn sure you have your facts straight and are not misrepresenting the other side. To avoid this task suggests you have extremely low ethical standards.

quote:

---

1. Can you take a step out from behind your firewall and explain with detail first how I have been "making wild unsupporting accusations to people in the science field"?

---

You have failed to show specific influence of Darwinism on Hitler as his motivation for genocide considering his religious motiviation expressed in Mein Kampf and elsewhere. You have failed to acknowlede that eugenics movement is not a direct conclusion of the theory of evolution nor of natural selection for that matter but rather an agenda driven mischaracterization used by Galton and his followers. You have consistently mis-characterized the theory of evolution (though it is clearly in part due to ignorance of the subject and science in general but also motivated by your fanaticism)...shall I continue to dissect your fallacies?Well let's keep going a bit. You started another thread called Natural Selection http://EvC Forum: Natural Selection -->EvC Forum: Natural Selection
You have yet to address the errors pointed out to you in your long winded post not to mention the mischaracterizations of evolution and misdefinitions within the total of two posts that you provided in a thread which YOU started....so I maintain that you consistently make unsupported assertions which when shown to be in error results in you becoming angry or discontinuing replying....so I would submit you are the poor and immature debater..or at least you do not appear to take debate seriously.

quote:

---

2. My statements do not show Christian fundamentalism but simply the Creationist side of the debate. If you agreed with it you'd be on this side. But since you don't it still seems silly that you would dismiss it only because you disagree with it.

---

There is no evidence for creationism and there is no such thing as creation science. I could never be for it or on your side as you suggest. I prefer the scientific method, hypothesis testing and evidence over dogmatic belief in mythology any day or can you do the following to prove me wrong about creationism:1. propose a testable hypothesis of creationism
2. explain how it is falsifiable
3. provide the supporting evidence
4. show how it better explains what is observed in nature and in the lab than competeing hypothesis or theories.If you cannot do that simple exercise I have no more reason to take your religion seriously than to believe that the universe is the anus of a giant pink goat which spews out new species occassionally ex nihilo.

quote:

---

"My utter lack of science"? Where does that come from. I have been hailed from both sides in my writings as a person who understands both sides. Just because you dont like it, doesnt mean I have an utter lack of knowledge in this field.
"Historical Revisionism?" Come on...

---

Must have missed all the "hailing of your writings"...but maybe then you could define or explain the following again.The theory of evolution
natural selection
abiogenesisyour so called writings or internet postings or whatever you have claimed you are being hailed for are so full of errors I would like to see you again concisely address the above...for more examples of your errors here again is the thread you bailed out on when questioned earlier http://EvC Forum: Natural Selection -->EvC Forum: Natural SelectionYes you are a historical revisionist by denying the christian role in the holocaust and claiming it is the theory of evolution and evolutionists that were responsible.

quote:

---

However those were not my sins and I am still proud that the Church has turned away from certain wrongs.

---

That Galton did not know diddly about evolution and was in this case a very poor scientist is not my fault that there was a eugneics movement...Darwin is also not to be blamed that religiously motivated hate mongers like Hitler used religion and eugenics to perpetrate crimes.....that I study changes in allele frequency over time in mammoths and elephants does not make me a nazi...the thread you have started implies that I am...or that anyone who does not share your religious views must also be genocidal...if Darwin is responsible for eugenics by your logic...you are responsible directly for the crimes of your church as you support the organization that perpetrated the crimes as I accept the theory of evolution. I find that logic invalid, you should to.

quote:

---

3. Concerning your links to pages showing how Christianity justifies different crimes, I started to read it but I have not the time to make an in depth response. I didn't find much merit in the one I quickly scanned over. If you would like to make a case for any of those, simplify them and most them on here where I will be more likely to respond.

---

If you are interested in the subject, start another thread perhaps in the Faith and Belief thread. You suggested that there was no evidence for christian justification of various crimes. I provided interpretations that suggest otherwise. I will also point out, a creationist fundamentalist on this board also used the bible to justify slavery (Wordswordsman) claiming it was beneficial to the lower cultures. Thus, there has been and and continues to be interpretation of religion used to justify crimes including slavery. According to your logic all religion is therefore guilty...seems like a pretty lousy proposition.

quote:

---

4. BElieve it or not, but i am losing interest in your responses.I could continue to respond to your points but it will be a waste of time.

---

Believe it or not I don't care. If you post fallacies on an open internet forum you should be confident enough to withstand criticism and views that differ from yours. If you are unable to support your claims then get your facts straight and post substantive arguements or go post somewhere where you a prioi know people will agree with you to make yourself feel important if that is what your goal is.

quote:

---

5. YOur bitterness about "Elitism and Nazism" comes not from my lips but from biographer P.Hoffman and respected evolutionist Sir Arthur Keith. However because it is I who is the Creationist I must bear the burden.
Very objective of you Mammathus. (Do you note the sarcasm?)

---

My bitterness comes from buttheads who attempt to minimalize the holocaust (I live in Germany not far from Dachau) by using it to further their religious agenda by claiming that people they disagree with are Nazi's. You are badly guilty of this crime and should be a little more introspective when slinging around such an accusation. Especially considering your shallow grasp of the facts and your shoddy presentation of the key issues. I have never heard of Sir Arthur Keith so your ascribing some special importance to him for evolution is of your own making as the sciences do not rely on appeal to authority like religion..todays star is tomorrows guy who was totally wrong. That you hold such perverted views of science and scientists is truly sad and a failure on your own part to inform yourself better.[This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 09-09-2003]

quote:

---

Now maybe you will ask references for all of that, but I'm not willing to provide, since it's just a game with you. You seek to minimalize the link between Darwinism and Nazism and put all your cleverness to work for that.

---

I see the Admins let you out of your hole....so you will will not provide any references or anything to substantiate the crap you spew and then claim I am the one minimalizing the the 3rd Reich...you are an unbelievable hypocrite...with an emphasis on unbelievable since you never ever substantiate anything you say there is absolutely no reason to believe you.

Hi Dan
They also developed the Volkswagon....so if you drive a VW you must also be a Nazi....gotta hate those VW driving pythagoran Nazi's...who did algebra on their way to Dachau

I certainly take it more seriously than you. You rather act as a revisionist regarding the motivations of both the nazi party, the Germans that were complicit (not to mention the French and the Vichy regime) and the Catholic church in particular which aided and to this day benefits from the 3rd Reich via a church tax initiated during the time the nazi's were in power.And if you make a stupid assertion and then state you refuse to back it up with evidence then I will proceed to make fun of you like I would anyone else foolish enough to argue the way you do.[This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 09-10-2003]

quote:

---

While I have not read wordswordsman's post yet, if he did write what you say he did they he is without a doubt mistaken. Christian should mean the same as Christ-like, and I know for a fact that to be supportive of slavery is not Christ-like. (The same would go of 'Christian' during the Holocaust. I dont deny many played a part. What I do take issue with is the fact again they are certainly not Christ-like and so not real Christians. But if there are many like this that is the Churches fault and not those who have a real belief in CHrist).

---

I will try to dig up Wordswordsmans threads (or if Admin could lend a hand?) How do you know that wordswordsman was wrong? His claim is that HE was christ-like. He made this argument often. He also claimed to be the keeper of all truth christian and would therefore claim you are wrong. How do you know he is wrong? How does he know you are wrong? Both of you claim to be real Christians and to know the truth. His claim was slavery is consistent with christianity and that the bible supports his assertion. You claim otherwise. Yet both of you claim to be true christians.

quote:

---

In no way do I minimalize the holocaust. It was arguably the worst atrocity of the certury. (By the way, I also was in the Dachau camp over the summer and the things that happened there bother me very much also. Just as the sign there says in five different languages, 'Never Again,' it is a sobering visit).

---

The entire continent reeks of the WWII. I have lived in Germany about 5 years in total and the holocaust pervades society at every level...and wild assertions about who and what is responsible for the 3rd Reich are not tolerated very well by the Jewish community, by the muslims, by the christians, by the politicians by anybody. If you have an accusation to make you better have irrefutable documentation.

quote:

---

It was terrible but how does that make me shy away from Darwin and Nietczhe's involvement (even if it was just promoting a vague theory).

---

Darwin was a scientist and had a specific theory about how the diversity of life developed by natural selection over time. Nietczhe was a philosopher who contributed nothing to the theory of evolution...strange that you conflate the writing of the two.

quote:

---

These are not just my opinions. As I stated, and this you failed to respond to, but prominent evolutionists also accept Darwin and Nietczhe's involvement. Oh, wait---you have never heard of Sir Arthur Keith? If I made known such ignorance you would go off with the most bizare of accusations 'fundamentalist' 'utter lack of science' etc. All I will suggest is look him up. Your lack of knowledge on a particular source in no way discredits him.

---

from:
Emuseum – Minnesota State University, Mankato
Sir Arthur Keith
1866 - 1955
Sir Arthur was a Physical Anthropologist and an Anatomist. He was an excellent teacher and inspired many of his students. He is best known for his work on fossilized humanoid forms.He was born on February 5, 1866 to John Keith and Jessie MacPherson. In 1888, he received a Bachelor of Medicine Degree from the University of Aberdeen, then traveled as a physician on a gold mining trip to Siam. There, he dissected monkeys and became interested in racial types. In 1892, he returned to Britain and studied anatomy. In 1893, he won the first Struthers Prize at Aberdeen. In 1894, he became a fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons of England. In 1895, he was appointed Senior Demonstrator of Anatomy at the London Hospital and in 1899, he became head of the department.He also studied primate skulls and published An Introduction to the Study of Anthropoid Apes in 1897and in 1900 he married Celia Gray. In 1902, his work Human Embryology and Morphology was published. In 1908, he resigned from the hospital and became the Conservator of the Royal College of Surgeons Museum. He thought that curators should make the resources of their museums available to researchers.In 1911, he published Ancient Types of Man, in which he said that moderns humans are as old as extinct forms of humans. In 1915, he published The Antiquity of Man, which basically had the same theme, and was an anatomical survey of all important human fossil remains. He was knighted in 1921. In 1931, New Discoveries was published in which he admitted that modern humans probably arose from types already separate in the early Pleistocene. In 1932, he helped found a research institute at Downe, where Charles Darwin once lived, and was appointed Master of the Institute in 1933, where he worked until his death on January 7, 1955 at the age of 88.As I suspected he is a long dead and for modern evolutionary biology not particularly relevant scholar who worked on human evolution. This is your sum total of the "many evolutionists" that support your claim that Darwinism leads to Nazism? That is pretty pathetic.Now here are some things for YOU to look up for your evolutionary edification:1. Daniel Kevles, In the name of Eugenics http://www.amazon.com...2. Charles Darwin, The Orgin of species http://www.amazon.com...3. Douglas Futuyma, Evolutionary Biology http://www.amazon.com...Amazon.com links provided for your convenience.Maybe if you read a little bit of this easy to get material you will actually be able to debate from a position of knowledge as opposed to bald assertion without merit.

quote:

---

His quote is on science also, actually his field of study 'evolution.' I didnt realize you considered evolution a religion.
General

---

If I considered evolution a religion I would turn my brain off, believe what anyone who claimed to be an authority said, and worship Darwin, Keith, Dawkins, Gould etc. as prophets....instead I attack them and criticize them every chance I get...so no, I consider evolution a scientific theory like the theory of gravity or any other scientific theory....do you know what a scientific theory is?{Shortened display form of 3 URL's, to restore page width to normal - Adminnemooseus}[This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 09-10-2003]

quote:

---

Sure the French and the Vichy regime....wow really impressive detailed knowledge you have..., about more or less insignificant side issues.

---

The Vichy regime an insignificant side issue ? Nice revisionism...ask the families of all the people murdered under that regime if they think it was insignificant.
And who are you to criticize detail? You provide absolutely nothing but unsupported assertions (which is why I think you were previously confined to the Free for All as an internet troll).

quote:

---

The church tax which the Nazi's hate

---

And the evidence for this is what?...oh let me guess, you are not going to provide any since that would be against your ethics i.e. to actually support what you say.

quote:

---

You have no clue

---

Coming from you I will take that as a compliment

quote:

---

You are just posturing, intimidating, silencing, not discussing.

---

You are just asserting, lying, and trolling, not discussing.

quote:

---

You have made up your mind that Darwinism had nothing much to do with Nazism, and any evidence like Hitleryouth being taught Darwinism in schools styled to Darwinist notions can not change that one little bit.

---

You were the one who claimed that you would refuse to provide evidence for your assertions and nobody with a single firing neuron in their brain would take your unsupported assertions as "evidence".Corrupted versions of christianity and the inherently corrupt eugenics movement had a lot to do with the nazi ideology....so I guess by your definition both christianity and eugenics must be eradicated?...the eugenics movement has collapsed but christianity is still around..guess you have work to do.

And a little more for The General and Syamsu"I believe today that my conduct is in accordance
with the will of the Almighty Creator."
[Adolph Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, pp. 46]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"This human world of ours would be inconceivable without
the practical existence of a religious belief."
[Adolph Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, pp.152]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"What we have to fight for...is the freedom and independence
of the fatherland, so that our people may be enabled to fulfill
the mission assigned to it by the Creator."
[Adolph Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, pp. 125]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"And the founder of Christianity made no secret indeed of his
estimation of the Jewish people. When He found it necessary,
He drove those enemies of the human race out of the Temple of God."
[Adolph Hitler, _Mein Kampf_, pp.174]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It may be that today gold has become the exclusive ruler of life, but
the time will come when man will again bow down before a higher god."
[Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" Vol. 2 Chapter 2]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"....the personification of the devil as the symbol
of all evil assumes the living shape of the Jew."
[Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf", Vol. 1, Chapter 11,
precisely echoing Martin Luther's teachings]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Thus inwardly armed with confidence in God and the unshakable
stupidity of the voting citizenry, the politicians can begin
the fight for the 'remaking' of the Reich as they call it."
[Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" Vol. 2 Chapter 1]--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The greatness of Christianity did not lie in attempted negotiations for
compromise with any similar philosophical opinions in the ancient world, but
in its inexorable fanaticism in preaching and fighting for its own doctrine."
[Adolph Hitler, "Mein Kampf" Vol. 1 Chapter 12]"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.-Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)more here : http://www.nobeliefs.com/hitler.htmand then all I could find in English translated quotes on eugenicsIn the struggle for daily bread all those who are weak and sickly or less determined succumb, while the struggle of the males for the female grants the right or opportunity to propagate only to the healthiest. And struggle is always a means for improving a species' health and power of resistance and, therefore, a cause of its higher development...Nature does just this by subjecting the weaker part to such severe living conditions that by them alone the number is limited, and by not permitting the remainder to increase promiscuously, but making a new and ruthless choice according to strength and health. No more than Nature desires the mating of weaker with stronger individuals, even less does she desire the blending of a higher with a lower race, since, if she did, her whole work of higher breeding, over perhaps hundreds of thousands of years, night be ruined with one blow. Historical experience offers countless proofs of this. (1:X)[Speaking against artificial population control:] For as soon as procreation as such is limited and the number of births diminished, the natural struggle for existence which leaves only the strongest and healthiest alive is obviously replaced by the obvious desire to 'save' even the weakest and most sickly at any price, and this plants the seed of a future generation which must inevitably grow more and more deplorable the longer this mockery of Nature and her will continues. And the end will be that such a people will some day be deprived of its existence on this earth; for man can defy the eternal laws of the will to conservation for a certain time, but sooner or later vengeance comes. A stronger race will drive out the weak, for the vital urge in its ultimate form will, time and again, burst all the absurd fetters of the so-called humanity of individuals, in order to replace it by the humanity of Nature which destroys the weak to give his place to the strong. (1:IV)For anyone who believes in a higher development of living creatures must admit that every expression of their life urge and life struggle must have had a beginning; that one subject must have started it, and that subsequently such a phenomenon repeated itself more and more frequently and spread more and more, until at last it virtually entered the subconscious of all members of a given species, thus manifesting itself as an instinct. (2:II)The stronger must dominate and not blend with the weaker, thus sacrificing his own greatness. Only the born weakling can view this as cruel, but he after all is only a weak and limited man; for if this law did not prevail, any conceivable higher development of organic living beings would be unthinkable. The consequence of this racial purity, universally valid in Nature, is not only the sharp outward delimitation of the various races, but their uniform character in themselves. The fox is always a fox, the goose a goose, the tiger a tiger, etc., and the difference can lie at most in the varying measure of force, strength, intelligence, dexterity, endurance, etc., of the individual specimens. But you will never find a fox who in his inner attitude might, for example, show humanitarian tendencies toward geese, as similarly there is no cat with a friendly inclination toward mice. Therefore, here, too, the struggle among themselves arises less from inner aversion than from hunger and love. In both cases, Nature looks on calmly, with satisfaction, in fact. (1:X)Note that the last paragraph sounds like the crappy fallacies Syamsu spews about evolution....by your logic Sy, that makes you a Nazi.

quote:

---

in stead of my view of selection as "nature wet in penis and vagina", you have no case.

---

Survival of the wettest? It appears you have become lost in the internet Syamsu and have posted your internet pornography contributions to the EvCforum...how else could one explain such an off topic bizarre reply?Do you have anything of substance to say or are you going to continue to troll?[This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 09-10-2003]

quote:

---

Here are just a few historical facts to combat Mammathus' mindless speculation that Christians aided in the Nazi persecution of Jews. (The only detail he offered in his defence was that Hitler was Catholic, which more accurately would be he was born Catholic. However I have already dealt with this misconception.

---

Sorry General...mindless would be to claim that the 3rd Reich rose to power because of natural selection and the thoery of evolution but nobody would be stupid enough to suggest that while claiming that christians played no part in nazi atrocities now would they? Having dealt with this so called misconception you have failed to deal with post 39 and post 44 which clearly show you are wrong.points 1-4 of your post merely demonstrate what is well known, there was resistance to the nazi's in Germany and elsewhere...ever here of the French resistance? That in a few cases the decent people managed to prevent Nazi policy (surprised you did not mention Oskar Schindler) does not absolve the christian role in the 3rd Reich and your pathetic attempt to push off that responsibility on others..for example in point 5 you point to Pope Pius XII as a hero when the guy was a potential war criminal.Amazon.comAnd the General uses a common tactic among people who wish to absolve there side of any responsibility...he claims the millions of Germans who supported the war were not "real christians" since after all the luftwaffe, SS, and regular army and navy could only have been populated by non-christians during WWII according to him...and my arguments are supposedly mindless...get real and get a clue.

Now that we all seem to be revealing our disgust, I am disgusted by your constant assertion that everyone else is arrogant and not looking at evidence when you have NEVER presented any. Your constant posting of unsupported assertions including stateing that you would refuse to provide any support for your assertions earlier in this thread strongly suggests that YOU are the one with supreme arrogance.You should find the majority of posts on this forum intimidating. With your profound lack of knowledge, inability to support your assertions, and clear lack of capacity for logical thinking I am surprised you don't keep silent.Your casual ignoring or dismissal of important issues in this thread are truly reasons to be disgusted.It is because of people like you and The General that there will always be a danger that atrocities like the 3rd Reich could occur again.

find it arrogant that you say I have a profound lack of knowledge about the issue, also since as far as I can tell my knowledge on the subject is wider then yours. I have more then enough knowledge on the subject for a discussion about it on an internetforum.M: Then by all means, show me that you have more than enough knowledge and provide detailed support for each and every one of the assertions you have made in this thread.

I think we are disputing that the theory of evolution is used as a basis for nazism. Eugenics which is based on a false characterization of natural selection is the basis of Hitler's writings in Mein Kampf. If you can glean from Mein Kampf anything resembling what Darwin wrote in the Origin of Species I would like to see it since everything I have read is a confused jumble demonstrating Hitler had zero clue about natural selection (like Galton) and didnt know diddly about genetics. The rest is a mix of bizarre christian and pagan symbolism and rants against the Jews.In the case of evolution one can at least point out that what the nazi's said had bears no relationship to the actual theory of evolution put forth by Darwin or studied today....The General's only defense of christian participants in the holocaust is to claim he "knows" they were not real christians.Your point about science being used for bad purposes is a good one and makes me wonder that nobody is criitcizing the scientists who developed nuclear weapons during the Manhattan project where the clear objective was a weapon of mass destruction...or current development of biological weapons etc. The science is a tool, what you make of with it or do with it can be good or bad..the science is not intrinsically one or the other.