1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Racial Evolution 101

Discussion in 'Free-For-All Archives' started by jcrawford, Mar 24, 2004.

  1. jcrawford

    jcrawford New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    UTE:

    "And thanks for the high praise of calling evolution a theory. There is not much higher praise in science."
    ++++++++++++++++++

    Thanks for the tip-off. I'll be sure to refrain from bestowing such dignity on it in future.

    I've been to that smithsonian link and others like it before. I've seen all the skull views that fit to prove evo. It's a 'skull and bones' shell game. Like you said in an earlier post, they're now thinking of sticking some chimps under Homo. (poor chump)

    I love reading Darwin. He's so anachronistic.
     
  2. jcrawford

    jcrawford New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Racial Evolution 101.1

    "Do the races or species of men, whichever term may be applied, encroach on and replace one another, so that some finally become extinct?"

    - Charles Darwin, "THE DESCENT of MAN, and Selection in Relation to Sex." Princeton University Press, 1981, Chapter 1, Page 10
    =====================

    1 Is Charles Darwin using the terms 'races' and 'species' of 'men' interchangeably here according to "whichever term may be applied" by the reader or is there a definite biological distinction between human 'races' and 'species?'

    2 Did Charles Darwin confuse "races" with "species" when he applied his evolutionary thesis to Humankind?

    3 Are there separate and distinct Human 'species' or did Charles Darwin just imagine there were based on his perception of different and separate Human races?

    4 Why would Charles Darwin imagine that separate and distinct human species ever existed in Human history if modern-day biologists have proved that humanity can't be divided racially?

    5 Are Charles Darwin's racial theories of Human evolution merely an intellectual aberration or mutation in the mainstream of Human thought, development and progress in history?
     
  3. jcrawford

    jcrawford New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Racial Evolution 101.2

    "It appears as if the posterior molar or wisdom-teeth were tending to become rudimentary in the more civilised races of man. These teeth are rather smaller than the other molars, as is likewise the case with the corresponding teeth in the chimpanzee and orang; and they have only two separate fangs....

    In the Melanian races, on the other hand, the wisdom-teeth are usually furnished with three separate fangs, and are generally sound; they also differ from the other molars in size, less than in the Caucasian races. Schaaffhausen accounts for this difference between the races by "the posterior dental portion of the jaw being always shortened" in those that are civilised and this shortening may, I presume, be attributed to civilised men habitually feeding on soft, cooked food, and thus using their jaws less."

    - Charles Darwin, "THE DESCENT of MAN, and Selection in Relation to Sex." Princeton University Press, 1981, Chapter 1, Page 26
    ===============

    1. What further evolutionary associations may we 'safely' presume from these racial observations about the 'different' capacities exhibited by various Humans around the world to chew?
     
  4. jcrawford

    jcrawford New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Racial Evolution 101.3

    "We have seen in the last two chapters that man bears in his bodily structure clear traces of his descent from some lower form; but it may be urged that, as man differs so greatly in his mental power from all other animals, there must be some error in this conclusion. No doubt the difference in this respect is enormous, even if we compare the mind of one of the lowest savages, who has no words to express any number higher than four, and who uses hardly any abstract terms for common objects or for the affections, with that of the most highly organised ape."

    - Charles Darwin, "THE DESCENT of MAN, and Selection in Relation to Sex." Princeton University Press, 1981, Chapter 2, Page 34.
    ========

    Who were Darwin's "lowest savages" and why did he compare one of their 'minds' with "that of the most highly organised ape?"
     
  5. jcrawford

    jcrawford New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2004
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Darwinists confuse human the original human races with human species. If there were no separate and distinct human races in human history then there were no spearate and disctinct humans species such as Neandertal Man, Homo sapiens or Homo erectus.

    We are all human members of the one same human race that descended from Adam and Eve through sexual selection and procreation with natural modification.
     
  6. Paul of Eugene

    Paul of Eugene New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2001
    Messages:
    2,782
    Likes Received:
    0
    For jcrawford:

    All Mary Leakey meant to say was we can't say for sure if a given fossil actually was an ancestor or a relative of an ancestor.

    She didn't mean to say this was any kind of evidence at all that evolution isn't true; she was trying to say we don't have fossils of all the intermediate stages; and that is not a surprise, since fossilization is a rare and lucky thing to happen.

    If we depended on fossils alone, we couldn't prove that chimpanzees exist. There are no known fossils of the chimpanzee. . .

    Hmmm. Do you think chimpanzees existed at the same time dinosaurs existed?
     
Loading...