Evolution is a racist doctrine

Already have and have already won the debate...But evolutionists never admit defeat because their whole lives are dependant on luck and chance, even in debating.But do answer evolutionists if evolution teaches whether one species or KIND turns into another species or KIND.Come on..... and theres your simplified certified and verified answer for your question whether evolution is a racist doctrine. The answer as proven in over 300 posts, maybe 60 of them mine is...YES, Yes, as in Yes... evolution is a racist doctrine that supports racism or can be used to support racism in weak minded individuals and weak minded nations and their weak minded leaders.

quote:

---

"Pigeon chess" or "like playing chess with a pigeon" is a figure of speech originating from a comment made in March 2005 on Amazon by Scott D. Weitzenhoffer[1] regarding Eugenie Scott's book Evolution vs. Creationism: An introduction:

Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory."

---

... makes me think about someone who is constantly claiming victory but not making any effort to achieve it.

Reminds me of one evolutionist preaching to another evolutionist when neither evolutionist knows from whence they came or where they are going ?Now back to evolution is a racist doctrine, as Razz used the word 'branching' even though within and earlier, evolutionists denied that evolution taught branching and diversity into supposed new species from the old species called 'humans'Thats racism folks and READERS,, even though evolutionists from their branches will not admit it.Jesus wins, racism loses, equality wins, racism loses.

In which post did you explain how evolution is racist?

How is "branching" racist?

Just answer the question, rather than worrying about getting trapped by your elusive answers. Just be honest and answer ..Does one species branch off and become a new species and KIND according to evolutionary doctrine ?

I am not the one dodging the question.How is it racist if two species share a common ancestor?

Above Razz writes her new theory on where we come from, because evolutionists in no way agree on where we came from... and all strive to become the brightest theorist of the theorists that theorise on their theories.More proof that evolutionists dont know which is why they are so hesitant to answer and be honest... and admit their ignorance.They hate to admit that evolution dictates that humans themselves have to be branching out if evolution is tue, and that means that new human species or kinds or races would be different than the original species, meaning it is a basis for racism in weakened minds.Jesus is for equality and is not a racist and has no favorites unlike evolutionary doctrine.

Evolution does not dictate that all populations must be continually branching off. As long as there is free interbreeding between modern humans we will continue to be the same species. If there are changes over time then we will all change together as long as we all freely interbreed.

Wow, 'If there are changes over time then we will all change together as long as we all freely interbreed.'You evolutionists are truly ytricky and deceptive and only have semantics as I have shown over and over again and again...Taq, you use the word IF, if as in IF, and then suggest or tell an untruth or lie, and state that we will all change together.. CHANGE TOGETHER.... what ? You cant make evolution make all of us change together so that we become a whole new species and KIND all together.Where did you god of selection disappear to, thats prtobably the most desperate irrational cop out sentence I have ever heard from an evolutionist EVER. WE WILL CHANGE TOGETHER,,, IF If.Anf then you state that If we do not interbreed, and yet you have stated that inbreeding proves evolution on other threads. You evolutionists have to get real and consistent. You love inbreeding when it suits your contrived purposes, and then when you know you are backing a branching racist doctrine, then you want to bind humans into not inbreeding or separating into different envirorments for their god to select from.Evolution is craizier than crazy and makes its portonents say the craziest things and cop outs and denials and inconsistentsies.

Lets pinpoint another untruth or lie or inconsistency with what you stated Taq.... Lets this time concentrate on your first sentence about CONTINUALLY branching, as you suggest that you can stop your god of evolution from branching out if you so desire, or if she doesnt want new branches forming... Taq, evolution is not a living being, it doesnt have choice and will, it if true (which it isn;t) would be consistent and if branching was true it would always be branching.You can;t turn off your branching just because we are humans and you dont want to admit racism in evolutionary doctrine.Evolution is strictly semanticsMystery solved again and proven again...Edited by Davidjay, : No reason given.

I never suggested anything about a "god of evolution". Please point to where I spoke of a "god of evolution". Do you not know how nature works?Where I am today it is sunny. Does this mean that every single day from this point forward will be sunny? If I say that some days it will be sunny and some days it will be rainy, does this mean that I am personally turning sunny off and on?It is a fact that species are not continually branching off. If there is free interbreeding then speciation will not happen, just as if there are no clouds it won't rain. It isn't about me doing anything.Also, you still haven't explained how branching is racist.

I am not making evolution do anything. If I say that if you throw a ball in the air it will fall back down, am I making gravity act that way?If there is free interbreeding between modern humans, just as there is now, then any mutations that occur will be spread through the entire population. This means that all modern humans will evolve together. This is the consequence of the facts. What "god of selection"? Please point to a single post where I proposed a "god of selection" doing anything. If you can't find such a post, please stop lying about what I say.

Your definition of "racism" appears to differ wildly from any normal definition. You are saying that any diversity is racist?I don't follow what you are saying, it just makes not sense. Changing definitions of words doesn't make it valid.

quote:

---

Racism is discrimination and prejudice towards people based on their race or ethnicity. Today, the use of the term "racism" does not easily fall under a single definition.[1][2]

​

The ideology underlying racist practices often includes the idea that humans can be subdivided into distinct groups that are different in their social behavior and innate capacities and that can be ranked as inferior or superior.[3] The Holocaust is a classic example of institutionalized racism which led to the death of millions of people based on race. While the concepts of race and ethnicity are considered to be separate in contemporary social science, the two terms have a long history of equivalence in both popular usage and older social science literature. "Ethnicity" is often used in a sense close to one traditionally attributed to "race": the division of human groups based on qualities assumed to be essential or innate to the group (e.g. shared ancestry or shared behavior). Therefore, racism and racial discrimination are often used to describe discrimination on an ethnic or cultural basis, independent of whether these differences are described as racial. According to a United Nations convention on racial discrimination, there is no distinction between the terms "racial" and "ethnic" discrimination. The UN convention further concludes that superiority based on racial differentiation is scientifically false, morally condemnable, socially unjust and dangerous, and there is no justification for racial discrimination, anywhere, in theory or in practice.[4]

---

Curiously I don't see anything in there about evolution and the development of diversity: increasing diversity does not cause bias, prejudice or discrimination.Perhaps you could clarify your inept assertion.Enjoy

First state whether inbreeding is proof of evolution or not.