Is it not somewhat disingenuous for you to make such charges, given your track record towards others?
You and you colleagues continually lash-out by cursing, degrading, name-calling, and ridiculing those whom you disagree with. It becomes readily apparent that your indignation here is somewhat, if not wholly, contrived. Certainly your demonstrated ability to dish it out, contradicts the sudden “sensitivity” that you now claim.
Are there false accusations?
YOU made the claim that new species could come from human races, if isolated long enough. No proof, no evidence, just mere blather. I simply underscored this ridiculous claim to illustrate your blather. Nothing false on my part here.
YOU further complicated your theory with the homo-sapien-martialus example. Again, not based on proof or evidence, mere blather. All I did was to hold up a mirror to your claim to show you how foolish it was. Nothing false on my part here.
Perhaps you would do well to renounce such ridiculous races-to-species claims, rather than lash-out at those who disagree. It is you who looks foolish here. Moreover, isn’t it you and your colleagues who attempt to discredit me at every turn because of “no proof”. If you were scientists of true merit, you would provide proof for your races-to-species and Martian race claims, instead of merely speculating upon them. We’re waiting, hmmm?
It is not twisted or false to say that Darwinism spawned races-to-species claims as well. Darwin himself was horrified by the “racial weeding” adaptation of his theory by Haeckel. It was one reason why he had a deathbed conversion.
It is not false or twisted to say that eugenicist doctrines formed when Darwinists’ thinking was applied to the human race. Eugenicism exported to Germany resulted in the untermensch concept. Exported to America it became the Planned Parenthood “more from the fit, less from the unfit” movement. Again, nothing false here on my part.
Darwinism is NOT non-judgmental as you and your colleagues claim. It is perhaps THE MOST judgmental of philosophies. “Survival of the fittest”, “racial weeding”, “Ubermenschen versus untermenschen”, “more from the fit, less from the unfit” all sound pretty judgmental to me, especially when adherents claim that it is possible to rise races-to-species. Who is fittest? Who is to be weeded? Who is uber? Who is unter? Simply astounding.
You have bought a psuedo-science without evidence or proof, this is most obvious. I suspect that you will continue to struggle in vain with your races-to-species and homo-sapien-matialus philosophies, absurd as they may be. I understand the psychological pressures that you are under in the university world to toe-the-line or you will walk-the-plank. But please understand this, when you accept these Darwinsitic notions you inherently accept the contradiction:
MAN IS BEAST.
Such a contradiction is so dehumanising, that perhaps you will never be able to think for yourself again once you accept it as “truth”.
I would hope that you would rise above that degraded level by renouncing it. If what I say disturbs you, perhaps it will give you a start. Cheers and no animosity withheld.