Ancestor Racism

Discussion in 'Science' started by jcrawford, Oct 26, 2005.

  1. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Evolutionist statements based on neo-Darwinist 'theories' and claims that the original ancestors of Arabic, Hamitic, Islamic and Semitic people were African Homo sapiens who evolved from common ancestors of African monkeys and apes are a modern form of ancestral and scientific racism.

    All neo-Darwinist attempts to publically, politically and religiously suppress the teaching of all other theories and beliefs about human origins are a modern form of scientific, academic, religious and political facism.
     
  2. Bunyon

    Bunyon
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Poppycock!
     
  3. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Define "poppycock."
     
  4. Bunyon

    Bunyon
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    "the original ancestors of Arabic, Hamitic, Islamic and Semitic people were African Homo sapiens who evolved from common ancestors of African monkeys and apes are a modern form of ancestral and scientific racism."-----------------------------------------------------------------

    Poppycock!
     
  5. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    What is your scientific definition of the English word, "poppycock?"

    If none, then your usage of the word "popppycock" may be an exemplary instance of mere 'poppycock' on your part due to a failure on your part to intelligently respond to the OP with more than one word.

    Care to say anything else?
     
  6. Bunyon

    Bunyon
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    No. I have no idea what you are trying to say or what your point is.
     
  7. UTEOTW

    UTEOTW
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2002
    Messages:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    0
    You just like starting new threads every once and a while on the same topic while still parroting the same useless phrases? To each his own I suppose.

    "Evolutionist statements based on neo-Darwinist 'theories' and claims that the original ancestors of Arabic, Hamitic, Islamic and Semitic people were African Homo sapiens who evolved from common ancestors of African monkeys and apes are a modern form of ancestral and scientific racism. "

    Oh, there are so many problems here. First off is that you seem to have left a few groups off your list of humans. Like the rest of the population. It is not just some groups that are said to have evolved from a common ancestor with the other apes, it is ALL humans. And all humans are equidistant in relationship from said ancestor.

    So it is hard to understand how a theory that says that ALL humans are related to a common ancestor with the other apes and that ALL humans are equally as far removed from said ancestor can be considered to be racists. Maybe you have just been given some bad information. Try reading some real science instead of the pseudoscience you keep trying to peddle and you might begin to understand.

    Second, as has been pointed out to you before, not all of the ancestor apes and monkeys were in Africa. Some along the line are known to have lived elsewhere. But a practiced YEer never lets the facts get in the way of a good story, do they?

    "All neo-Darwinist attempts to publically, politically and religiously suppress the teaching of all other theories and beliefs about human origins are a modern form of scientific, academic, religious and political facism."

    There are no other theories that adequately explain the observations to suppress. There are, however, some false "sciences" out there built on preconceived ideas and ignoring the evidence that needs to be kept out of the public classrooms.

    -------------------------------------

    "No. I have no idea what you are trying to say or what your point is."

    Neither does anyone else. He just likes to ramble on while promoting Lubenow's book which, if his posts are any indication of content, goes on for a few hundred pages saying that evolution is racist over and over. A lie repeated often enough tends to become believed, so it is not a bad strategy.

    He keeps claiming that there are other ideas in there, with references, but when pressed he is unable to make a single coherent argument based on what he claims to have learned. From this, I too conclude that the work is "poppycock."
     
  8. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    At least you honestly admit your ignorance of the subject at the outset.
     
  9. Bunyon

    Bunyon
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2005
    Messages:
    1,708
    Likes Received:
    0
    "At least you honestly admit your ignorance of the subject at the outset."-----------------------------------------------------------------------

    I don't think it is ignorance, I think the way you popped on their and the way you presented whatever you are trying to say, is confusing in the way you said it. I am not sure where you are comming form.
     
  10. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Including people of Arabic, Semitic, Hamitic and Islamic ancestry in neo-Darwinst racial theories of human evolution out of Africa is racist to the extent that Arabic, Semitic, Hamitic and Islamic ancestors didn't originate from African people or apes. Neo-Darwinists may claim that they originated from African people and apes, but to say that Mohammed, Moses and Noah shared common ancestry with African people and apes is racist.

    African people share common ancestry with Mohammed, Moses, Noah and Jesus Christ, not monkeys and apes, as neo-Darwinist race theorists would tell them.
     
  11. UTEOTW

    UTEOTW
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2002
    Messages:
    4,087
    Likes Received:
    0
    You keep trying to pull out individual groups.

    It cannot be racist if ALL groups are said to have done so. There is no outgroup which can have a basis for racial opinions based on the ancestry of the others. Everyone is in the same boat.
     
  12. Paul of Eugene

    Paul of Eugene
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,782
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yas. JC's schtick is to say its racist to claim common origin (a) but not racist to claim common origin (b).


    The logic kind of leaves ME in the lurch . . .
     
  13. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm trying to figure out what the issue is. All humans are homo sapiens. The current prevailing scientific theory is that all humans alive today can be genetically traced back in the past to one sole female individual in northern Africa. It's called the Mitochondrial Eve theory, and it has so far held up to the scrutiny of the scientific method. I fail to see any recism in this whatsoever.
     
  14. Petrel

    Petrel
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,408
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's racist because the hypothetical people that would like to say they are descended from Neanderthals (even though none of us are. . .) are being deprived of their rights. I think. :confused:
     
  15. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    All racial groups cannot be said to be equally racist in terms of their human origins and destiny. It is only a matter of racism when one group (eg. neo-Darwinists) proclaim common human ancestry from African people and apes, as neo-Darwinist race theorists are wont to do.

    Neo-Darwinist evolutionists and biblical creationists constitute two human outgroups which are racially at odds about human ancestry and origins. Neo-Darwinists pre-suppose and proclaim that primitive African people originatated from African ape, monkey and chimp ancestors. Bibical creation scientists believe that African people descended from Adam and Eve, just like everyone else.
     
  16. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    It's racist to theorize that African people originated from non-human apes in Africa. It's not racist to contend that African people descended from Adam and Eve, just like everyone else did.
     
  17. jcrawford

    jcrawford
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your obvious error is to initially consider "all humans homo sapiens."

    Wherever, however and whenever did some neo-Darwinist Homo sapiens manage to transplant that idea into your brain?

    You're no more Homo sapiens than I am. We are Human species; that's it.

    If you want to consider yourself to be sapiens, then call yourself Human species sapiens. That way, you are a just a more sapient species of Human than Human species erectus whose only claim to fame is that s/he could walk upright.
     
  18. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hehehe! There's no genetic evidence to suggest that Homo Sapiens and Homo Neandertalensis merged. That was a theory put forth, but that theory is not standing up to the scientific method. It looks like Sapien and Neandertalensis lived together at the same time, but that Neandertalensis eventually died out on its own.
     
  19. Paul of Eugene

    Paul of Eugene
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,782
    Likes Received:
    0
    (groan) so now calling the species "homo sapiens" instead of "human species" is being "racist".

    Carry on JC we are all mesmerized by the wonderful rationalizations - keep em coming!

    Real thinking, however, will also continue, elsewhere.
     
  20. Johnv

    Johnv
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2001
    Messages:
    21,321
    Likes Received:
    0

    Is this a serious comment?

    Let me know which humans today are not homo sapien.

    You're no more or less homo sapien than anyone else alive todday. Clearly, your ignocance abounds. All humans are of the Eukarya domain, the Animalia kingdom, the Chordate phymul, the Vertebrate subphylum, the Mammal class, the Primates order, the Hominid family, the Homo Genus, and the Sapien species.

    It's incorrect to refer to the "human species". "Human" referrs to the genus, not the species. All members of the Homo genus are/were humans. We are all members of the species "sapien". No other species are alive today.
     

Share This Page

Loading...