Bane

This post is a beauty by this creationist on the theforce.net. He claims Darwin was a racist?

Anyway, here is the post:

[Text of post deleted. The link is more than enough. -- phlebas]

<a href="http://boards.theforce.net/message.asp?topic=6013822&page=6" target="_blank">Theforce.net</a>

[ April 07, 2002: Message edited by: phlebas ]</p>

Bane

Sorry, should have just quoted the Darwin was racist text.

Utnapishtim

Some of what Darwin says in The Descent of Man would definitely be taken as racist if someone said it today. Darwin was a product of his time, an englishman who thought whites were superior. At one point he warns that the "Noble Scotsman" is being outbred by the "Careless and Squalid Irishman". At other points he implies that Austrailian Aboriginies are sub-human. Darwin was not a perfect human being by any means, but we also should be careful not to judge him too much by modern day standards. If he were alive today and said the same thing however, we might be justified in slugging him

[ April 07, 2002: Message edited by: Utnapishtim ]</p>

Bane

I guess it would be like judging Mark Twain as a racist then? I know he uses "nigger" a lot in some of his writings and letters that have been published.

That creationist seems quite impressed with the typical bs he regurgitated on the forum. If he had read previous posts a lot of the bs he posted has been addressed already.

BLoggins02

Wonderful, if you can't defeat the science, defeat the person. [Scott Evil]Ass.[/Scott Evil]

Major Billy

You might also include this quote from the same post:

Edited to add that if you go back and read Mr Darwin's books, you will see that in the paragraphs which appear racist, Darwin usually is citing another scientist's work.

As a vocal opponent of slavery, Charles Darwin would no doubt have been pleased to learn that evolutionary scientists have now shown that all human races are in fact closely related to one another.

[ April 07, 2002: Message edited by: Major Billy ]</p>

Bill

You might also add that Darwin was one of the first "animal rights" advocates, and was known to intervene if he saw a horse being beaten, etc. It is hard to square allegations of raceism with being so strongly against any form of cruelty to "lesser animals."

== Bill

Vorkosigan

Also, you might add that evolutionists do not "worship" Darwin. He's not a religious figure, so any negative characteristics of his personal nature are meaningless to us as far as his ideas are concerned.

Bane

Thanks for the info guys. It was more curiosity for myself than for debating that kid. I really haven't the patience anymore for debating them. Half of the arguments(if you can call them that)against evolution he posted have been addressed previously in the thread.

I'll let Peez and Darth_SnowDog handle them. They're more knowledgeable than I am anyway. I'm too busy reading The Jesus Mysteries. I also would like to keep my sanity.

Dr.GH

You mught also read the material in the following links;

<a href="http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/troybritain/articles/darwin_on_race.htm" target="_blank">http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/troybritain/articles/darwin_on_race.htm</a>

<a href="http://hometown.aol.com/darwinpage/eugenics.htm" target="_blank">http://hometown.aol.com/darwinpage/eugenics.htm</a>

Your correspondent may be pasting their argument from here:

<a href="http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4184cen_d1999.asp" target="_blank">http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs/4184cen_d1999.asp</a>