Racial Evolution 101

Alternatively, you might substantiate your own claims with Darwin's writings, or other evidence. You know, just a thought.

You seem to have misunderstood my position - it's not the characterization of Darwin as a racist that I object to - because he was a racist, like most people of his age - but rather unsupported assertions.So, you supported your assertions. What would have been so hard about doing that in the first place?Don't confuse acceptance of evolution with deification of Darwin. Making men into gods is your bag, not ours, Buz.

Why stop at Darwin? Does the State of Louisiana stand ready to condemn the entire human population in the 1800's, including those residents of Louisiana?If not, it's discrimination, plain and simple. Darwin neither invented racism nor was it's prime proponent. Hitler may have couched his racism in the language of natural selection but he also couched it in the language of the Bible. Is Lousiana ready to condem the authors of Leviticus as well?

You know, except for that whole African slave trade thing, which was vehemently supported by a number of Biblical literalists at the time.I would have thought that everybody familiar with the theory realizes that "survival of the fittest" is a description of a trend, not a perscription for action. Guess I was wrong.

I've heard things that, for me, bring this finding into doubt. For instance that, as part of the research methodology, they eliminated any results that were too close to human DNA, on the assumption that they represented laboratory contamination.Under that circumstance it would seem to be no wonder that they found no "detectable contribution", because any time they did find such a contribution, they rejected it as a contaminant.Can anyone speak to this?

Liar or not, it's against the forum guidelines here:

quote:

---

Debate in good faith by addressing rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not merely keep repeating the same points without further elaboration.

---

You can't repeat claims without addressing rebuttals. Ignoring them doesn't count. Maybe you don't like it, but those are the rules, and you agreed to them when you registered.Get used to addressing rebuttals to your arguments around here. Dismissing them as unsubstantial doesn't cut it.I don't see anything dishonest or pernicious about expecting a participant to follow rules they agreed to.