Could Trump reconcile our political dissension well enough to fix America without the Leftist inflaming the stupids into calling him a dictator?

Boris Norris said:
You wouldn't know if you shit yourself so to not understand the difference is plausible.

I did not say he did, you did. I've never hidden anything. You're just sour because his findings completely debunked your silly god.

Well tell us because millions don't know. Isn't it coincidental you know all these things but never read a word written about him.
Click to expand...
I call it racism, no matter what you want to call it, but in Darwin's case millions of Bible-rejecting rubes were racists and didn't know it. Evolution theory is itself racist. Here is just a small segment of Darwin's racist diatribe in his book The Descent of Man. (His other book is more famous and it is subtitled The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life)


The Descent of Man


We can see why it is that aborigines, who have long inhabited islands, and who must have been long exposed to nearly uniform conditions, should be specially affected by any change in their habits, as seems to be the case. Civilised races can certainly resist changes of all kinds far better than savages; and in this respect they resemble domesticated animals, for though the latter sometimes suffer in health (for instance European dogs in India), yet they are rarely rendered sterile, though a few such instances have been recorded. (47. 'Variation of Animals,' etc., vol. ii. p. 16.) The immunity of civilised races and domesticated animals is probably due to their having been subjected to a greater extent, and therefore having grown somewhat more accustomed, to diversified or varying conditions, than the majority of wild animals; and to their having formerly immigrated or been carried from country to country, and to different families or sub-races having inter-crossed. It appears that a cross with civilised races at once gives to an aboriginal race an immunity from the evil .
 
Werbung:
Boris Norris said:
Debunked by whom? Religion inspired nut cases?

The new scientist magazine has form around religious beliefs. Nothing more us to be expected.
Click to expand...
 
mark francis said:
I call it racism, no matter what you want to call it, but in Darwin's case millions of Bible-rejecting rubes were racists and didn't know it. Evolution theory is itself racist. Here is just a small segment of Darwin's racist diatribe in his book The Descent of Man. (His other book is more famous and it is subtitled The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life)


The Descent of Man


We can see why it is that aborigines, who have long inhabited islands, and who must have been long exposed to nearly uniform conditions, should be specially affected by any change in their habits, as seems to be the case. Civilised races can certainly resist changes of all kinds far better than savages; and in this respect they resemble domesticated animals, for though the latter sometimes suffer in health (for instance European dogs in India), yet they are rarely rendered sterile, though a few such instances have been recorded. (47. 'Variation of Animals,' etc., vol. ii. p. 16.) The immunity of civilised races and domesticated animals is probably due to their having been subjected to a greater extent, and therefore having grown somewhat more accustomed, to diversified or varying conditions, than the majority of wild animals; and to their having formerly immigrated or been carried from country to country, and to different families or sub-races having inter-crossed. It appears that a cross with civilised races at once gives to an aboriginal race an immunity from the evil .
Click to expand...
Still stuck in the distant past lol
 
mark francis said:
Click to expand...

it has never been drbumked by science and you are a liar. Every scholar worth he's salt knows it's a fact except godbothering dickheads like you. Grow up.
mark francis said:
Click to expand...

mark francis said:

  • As reported by LiveScience, According to researchers running a major National Science Foundation evolution experiment, "If Darwin was right", they would have documented the evidence for his claimed insight on competition and the tree of life. Instead, their results falsified Darwin's claim.

    Darwin Was Wrong about the Tree of Life | KGOV.com​

Click to expand...
 
mark francis said:
I call it racism, no matter what you want to call it, but in Darwin's case millions of Bible-rejecting rubes were racists and didn't know it. Evolution theory is itself racist. Here is just a small segment of Darwin's racist diatribe in his book The Descent of Man. (His other book is more famous and it is subtitled The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life)


The Descent of Man


We can see why it is that aborigines, who have long inhabited islands, and who must have been long exposed to nearly uniform conditions, should be specially affected by any change in their habits, as seems to be the case. Civilised races can certainly resist changes of all kinds far better than savages; and in this respect they resemble domesticated animals, for though the latter sometimes suffer in health (for instance European dogs in India), yet they are rarely rendered sterile, though a few such instances have been recorded. (47. 'Variation of Animals,' etc., vol. ii. p. 16.) The immunity of civilised races and domesticated animals is probably due to their having been subjected to a greater extent, and therefore having grown somewhat more accustomed, to diversified or varying conditions, than the majority of wild animals; and to their having formerly immigrated or been carried from country to country, and to different families or sub-races having inter-crossed. It appears that a cross with civilised races at once gives to an aboriginal race an immunity from the evil .
Click to expand...
Oh dear. You certainly require immediate help.

What colour straight jacket do you like.
 
Boris Norris said:
it has never been drbumked by science and you are a liar. Every scholar worth he's salt knows it's a fact except godbothering dickheads like you. Grow up.
Click to expand...
Darwin's Tree of Life speculation has never been debunked? Maybe not before you got out of school but it certainly was debunked more than 2 decades ago.
 
Boris Norris said:
Oh dear. You certainly require immediate help.

What colour straight jacket do you like.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing you never read Chapter 7 of Darwin's Descent of Man or, if you have, you did not understand what he was suggesting about the inferior races of "aboriginal savages."
 
mark francis said:
I'm guessing you never read Chapter 7 of Darwin's Descent of Man or, if you have, you did not understand what he was suggesting about the inferior races of "aboriginal savages."
Click to expand...
I'm guessing you never read the origin of the species.

It doesn't matter if he was racist. His findings about evolution is still a fact. It doesn't matter if you don't accept it. It's still a fact.
Get over it idiot.
 
Boris Norris said:
I'm guessing you never read the origin of the species.
Click to expand...
Are you talking of Darwin's racist ramblings titled the Origin of Species in which he does not talk about origins at all and only briefly touches on the issue of species that he clearly did not have a good grasp of? But he was honest for subtitling his opinionated book of fiction "The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life." Darwin was a racist but the way his modern disciples try to cover up his racism I guess we will just have to say he was a closet racist who could not keep his foolish assumptions and speculations locked in the closet where they belonged.
 
mark francis said:
Are you talking of Darwin's racist ramblings titled the Origin of Species in which he does not talk about origins at all and only briefly touches on the issue of species that he clearly did not have a good grasp of? But he was honest for subtitling his opinionated book of fiction "The Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life." Darwin was a racist but the way his modern disciples try to cover up his racism I guess we will just have to say he was a closet racist who could not keep his foolish assumptions and speculations locked in the closet where they belonged.
Click to expand...
That's proof you have never read it.

Let's not rely on what someone with a similar narrative to you and take it as fact.
Aboriginal people were part of evolution just like you. Racism doesn't come into it.

It doesn't matter what you think or how you condemn it, it's still a fact. It doesn't matter about black people all over the world, it's still a fact.

Post some more irrelevant bullshit and I'll have another swing at you.
 
Boris Norris said:
That's proof you have never read it.

Let's not rely on what someone with a similar narrative to you and take it as fact.
Aboriginal people were part of evolution just like you. Racism doesn't come into it.

It doesn't matter what you think or how you condemn it, it's still a fact. It doesn't matter about black people all over the world, it's still a fact.

Post some more irrelevant bullshit and I'll have another swing at you.
Click to expand...
Early evolutionists agreed with Darwin that blacks were savages who descended from animals. That is why the leading racist zoologist Madison Grant had blacks put in cages to showcase early evolution development. Hitler called Grant's racist book The Passing of the Great Race his Bible for weeding out the 'weak and undeserving humans' as he built his 'superhuman race' of white Caucasians.

Nobody can convince me those fascist leftist evolutionist morons were not stupid and wicked.
 
Werbung:
Back
Top