Creationists Demand Equal Airtime Over Cosmos Content

[mope54]

I feel like I'm having to repeat myself here. For all of human history, a million years or so, we've had a natural fear of 'others' that has led us to enslave and kill each other. For all of recorded history we've been making up justifications for this behavior. Initially we tried to carry over those ideas to science, but because of the self-correcting nature of science it only took a few decades to figure out that these ideas were completely wrong. That's incredible, no other idea in the history of the human species has been able to accomplish any sort of change like that so rapidly.

To argue that it was science that 'essentially led to the holocaust' is to be willfully ignorant of the facts. It was ignorance and hatred that led to the holocaust. There was never any real evidence for racial supremacy, people just wanted to dress up a deeply held belief in scientific terms. If you're going to argue that science caused the holocaust you might as well argue that it was science that led the Catholic Church to burn poor Bruno alive. Their ignorant view of the universe was widely believed by scholars of the time, after all.

You have the timeline backwards if I'm reading your post correctly. You seem to be saying that racial discrimination on the basis of scientific "evidence" was only around for a few decades and then self-corrected.

Scientific "evidence" for racial discrimination was used for roughly 150 years and it's only been in the past few decades that genetic information has been used to undermine that position.

 

[SRTie4k]

I feel like I'm having to repeat myself here. For all of human history, a million years or so, we've had a natural fear of 'others' that has led us to enslave and kill each other. For all of recorded history we've been making up justifications for this behavior. Initially we tried to carry over those ideas to science, but because of the self-correcting nature of science it only took a few decades to figure out that these ideas were completely wrong. That's incredible, no other idea in the history of the human species has been able to accomplish any sort of change like that so rapidly.

To argue that it was science that 'essentially led to the holocaust' is to be willfully ignorant of the facts. It was ignorance and hatred that led to the holocaust. There was never any real evidence for racial supremacy, people just wanted to dress up a deeply held belief in scientific terms. If you're going to argue that science caused the holocaust you might as well argue that it was science that led the Catholic Church to burn poor Bruno alive. Their ignorant view of the universe was widely believed by scholars of the time, after all.

If you want to argue semantics, the idea of eugenics 'was used' as a build up towards the eventual genocide, just as how religion 'was used' as a build up to various wars.

No, obviously the science behind it was not what perpetuated it, but a lot of well-known scientists definitely got behind the idea when it was proposed. So yes, in a sense, the science of eugenics was used as a motivator for the soon to come genocide.

 

[Modred189]

Wrong. Favoring similar groups within a species is evidenced within ALL mammal species and the vast majority of invertebrates as well (returning to an earlier thread of the conversation, such was the basis for my thesis). It's a genetic device most eloquently described in Richard Dawkins' "The Selfish Gene." Essentially, animals behave in such a way as to favor those with similar genes to their own. External physical features and chemical signals are the two most prominent methods of identification.

That said, the eugenics programs of the Nazis was a real thing, and not inherently evil, just became so in the implementation. There's nothing inherently bad in managing the human gene pool. Doing so via genocide does, however, raise some ethical issues.

 

[SRTie4k]

Nothing to do with religion? Come out from under that rock and look, even the shit war Bush started was about religion.



Religion is right there behind just about every war. Whether it's all justifications our not does not change this fact and goes right back to the reality of religion. It exists to control the masses keep them ignorant and keep the power away from the people.

Go around commanding people to do things and you'll get told to Fuck off. Go around saying good commands you to do these things and you'll get followers.

You're blind to the actual cause of human suffering. Very blind if you blame religion. Look inward and you'll find who is responsible.

 

[DeathFromBelow]

There was never any scientific 'evidence' for racial supremacy. People certainly tried to make those beliefs work in the framework of science.

Even if we say it took people some 400 years from the beginning of the scientific revolution to modern science figuring this out we're talking about a tiny fraction of human history. Thats incredible, a million years of ignorance overturned in a few centuries.

Science is the process of testing ideas against observations. No reasonable evidence for the idea of racial supremacy has ever been found, thus the claim that 'science was responsible for the holocaust' is nonsensical.

 

[Stiletto]

That said, the eugenics programs of the Nazis was a real thing, and not inherently evil, just became so in the implementation. There's nothing inherently bad in managing the human gene pool.

If you're an elitist, of course not. If you're a fan of free will and individual rights, it is. Eugenics is nothing more than a buzzword for attempting to kill off people you find undesirable. Some do it through mass executions or concentration camps, others do it through compulsory sterilization laws and environmental initiatives that punish the poor. Either way, it's a sickening prospect that whittles away at the value of human life.

 

[SRTie4k]

There was never any scientific 'evidence' for racial supremacy. People certainly tried to make those beliefs work in the framework of science.

Even if we say it took people some 400 years from the beginning of the scientific revolution to modern science figuring this out we're talking about a tiny fraction of human history. Thats incredible, a million years of ignorance overturned in a few centuries.

Science is the process of testing ideas against observations. No reasonable evidence for the idea of racial supremacy has ever been found, thus the claim that 'science was responsible for the holocaust' is nonsensical.

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007062

 

[mope54]

There was never any scientific 'evidence' for racial supremacy. People certainly tried to make those beliefs work in the framework of science.

Even if we say it took people some 400 years from the beginning of the scientific revolution to modern science figuring this out we're talking about a tiny fraction of human history. Thats incredible, a million years of ignorance overturned in a few centuries.

Science is the process of testing ideas against observations. No reasonable evidence for the idea of racial supremacy has ever been found, thus the claim that 'science was responsible for the holocaust' is nonsensical.

To be clear I'm certainly not arguing that science is responsible for the holocaust.

I am claiming, however, that religion and science are both equally powerful paradigms. It's willful ignorance to dispute that science has been used to pursue ethically/morally repugnant causes as well as dispute religion has been used to pursue noble causes.

*Both* have been used to pursue deplorable as well as noble causes at various times throughout human history.

 

[SRTie4k]

You do realize that it wasn't only Jews who were killed during the Holocaust, right? There were tens of thousands of handicapped people that were also killed, simply because they were handicapped. It was all part of the Eugenics ideology, which was co-opted by well-known scientists of the day and perpetuated by politicians.

Science having a part in the holocaust is far from nonsensical. It's well documented in fact, as shown by the previous link to a very well established group of history scholars, doctors and...scientists.

 

[SRTie4k]

Oh and let's be clear - Eugenics was considered science at the time. It is now considered a bunch of unsubstantiated BS.

And therein lies the problem I'm speaking of.

 

[Modred189]

Oh and let's be clear - Eugenics was considered science at the time. It is now considered a bunch of unsubstantiated BS.

And therein lies the problem I'm speaking of.

That's not true at all. You are confusing eugenics with "superior race."
Eugenics from a non-naziist point of view is simply the idea of taking control of our own gene pool, and making conscious social decisions about how to best manage it. For example, it might be possible, via gene therapy or some other method to prevent most ongenital birth defects (non-FAS related Down's, disfiguring birthmarks, congenital immune deficiency diseases), or at least by managing reproduction on some level, weed them out over time.
Some communities, like the Ashkenazi jewish population already practice eugenics (the irony) in order to prevent very serious birth defects, and at least try to weed out the deleterious alleles from their population (Tey sachs, Niemann-Pick and several others).

Eugenics does not mean "Make moar Aryans."

 

[DeathFromBelow]

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007062

Again, nobody actually had any real evidence for racial superiority or that eugenics would be beneficial, they just believed they were right. Thats not science, that was people doing what they had been doing for a million years.

To argue that the holocaust was caused by science because the majority of people at the time held racist views is as ridiculous as arguing that the Catholic church murdered Bruno because of science. Scholars of the time mostly agreed with the church's position.

 

[Modred189]

Again, nobody actually had any real evidence for racial superiority or that eugenics would be beneficial, they just believed they were right. Thats not science, that was people doing what they had been doing for a million years.

To argue that the holocaust was caused by science because the majority of people at the time held racist views is as ridiculous as arguing that the Catholic church murdered Bruno because of science. Scholars of the time mostly agreed with the church's position.

THis:
Eugenics was a weapon wielded by the Nazis, just as the V2, or the luftwaffe, not the source of the war.

 

[mope54]

Again, nobody actually had any real evidence for racial superiority or that eugenics would be beneficial, they just believed they were right. Thats not science, that was people doing what they had been doing for a million years.

To argue that the holocaust was caused by science because the majority of people at the time held racist views is as ridiculous as arguing that the Catholic church murdered Bruno because of science. Scholars of the time mostly agreed with the church's position.

But it's also equally ridiculous to argue that the Catholic church murdered Bruno because people believe in God.

That's simply not what happened. The Roman Catholic church built up a political infrastructure on the backs of a particular organized religion. Leaders in the organization then executed people who challenge Papal authority.

The deaths of early scientist at the hands of papists was due to political tensions wrapped in religiosity--just like you claim eugenics and claims of racial superiority were simply wrapped in science at the time.

 

[JaiWebb]

If you're an elitist, of course not. If you're a fan of free will and individual rights, it is. Eugenics is nothing more than a buzzword for attempting to kill off people you find undesirable. Some do it through mass executions or concentration camps, others do it through compulsory sterilization laws and environmental initiatives that punish the poor. Either way, it's a sickening prospect that whittles away at the value of human life.

You're only describing the bad side of it. There is good and bad in humans. If I could prescreen my own genes before having a possibly defective child, I would. Based on the fact that I believe in ones right to quality of life. Just type in 'deformed baby' into Google if you need some possible scenarios that occur regularly. The problem is this same prescreening could also be used by evil people to get rid of normal people they don't like. Like nuclear weapons, wars, sanctions, etc, can do now, to a degree.

An educated well informed direct global democracy would be the only way to prevent such misuse that we've seen, and see now, with every topic, across the board. Concentrated power will always be used advantageously for those that have it and against those that don't have it. Humans are like that, assholes. Like most cats.

However preventing some seriously genetically messed up people to not suffer for a life time is a great thing, IMO.

 

[mope54]

also, your knowledge of the history of science in regards to racial superiority is lacking.

There *was* scientific evidence for differences between races according to our rudimentary understanding of biological traits. If you want to read about some of it cross reference Cesare Lombroso.

Also, cross reference how Darwin's work was used to justify racial discrimination and slavery and materially shaped cultures in what we now know as social darwinism.

 

[beowulf7]

It's a pretty good show, very informative, educational, but don't watch late at night when tired because it will put you to sleep.

And creationalists can go to hell.

 

[Disposed]

You're blind to the actual cause of human suffering. Very blind if you blame religion. Look inward and you'll find who is responsible.

No, it is you who are blind. But I will not argue that point anymore. It's a dead horse and I'm tired of beating it.

 

[KENNYB]

Yes, I have read the bible.

I never said that the things he listed didn't occur. Try reading someone's post for what is written rather than with your lil axe to grind.

I wrote that the same justifications for those kinds of things have *also* been used in the other direction.

While the bible has been used to start wars it has also been used to justify peace.
Some prominent abolitionists were Charles Spurgeon, John Wesley, and Charles Finney. If you knew half of what you think you know on this topic you'd actually already know who these men are.

The early abolitionist movements were started by Quakers, Methodist, Baptist, and Presbyterian denominations. The Roman Catholic popes were outspoken against slavery from the beginning of the 1700's.

The women's suffrage movement in this country was *started* by Christian women. The first mass women's movement was Christian based.

It's amazing how ignorant some of you are on the history of Christianity yet would presume to question anyone else on their knowledge of it. You don't even know our own country's history. It's appalling and pathetic, really.

Some of us are acutely aware of the history of Christianity. Since you want to go back 300 years, let's go back 500 years instead. How about a 1000 years?

 

[Stiletto]

An educated well informed direct global democracy would be the only way to prevent such misuse that we've seen...

Yeahhhhh argue for one-world government some more just to show how reasonable your position is.

 

[JaiWebb]

Yeahhhhh argue for one-world government some more just to show how reasonable your position is.

Yes, because, the world is so much more reasonable today with country fighting country, repeatedly. Lets blow up the world with each countries nukes to prove our point, derp.


Illuminati bitch!



Wake the fuck up peasant....