Interesting quote by anti-Christian Italian Philosopher on the concept of evolution and the possibile psychology behind it.

[Zipporah's Flint]

Evolutionists believe that they are positively sticking to the facts. They ignore that the facts per se are silent, and if interpreted in different ways they can lend support to the most incredible hypotheses. I admit that my repulsion to such ideas is largely based on non-rational factors but I also suspect that in many cases attraction to these concepts is also spurred on by non-rational forces in people's psyches.

As Christmas presents a friend gifted me with two books on the "Nation of Islam" in the USA and something that caught me in one of them is that they believe that apes, monkeys and dogs are descended from human people who devolved down the chain of being into being a subhuman species. Julius Evola from whom the quote below comes from also believed that about the apes and monkeys as did Charles Kingsley the controversial Anglican Minster and Social Reformer of the Victorian era- I myself was convinced for a time of this concept.

"Generally speaking, this advent is reflected in the above mentioned modern ideologies of "Progress" and "Evolution", which have distorted with a "scientific" irresponsibility any superior vision of history, promoted the definitive abandonment of traditional truths, and created the most specious alibis of for the glorification and justification of modern man. The myth of evolutionism is nothing else but the profession of faith of the upstart. If in recent times the West does not believe in a transcendent origin but rather an origin from below; and if the West no longer believes in the nobility of origins but in the notion that civilizations arises out of barbarism, religion from superstition, man from animal, thought from matter, and every spiritual form from the "sublimation" or transposition of that stuff that originates from instinct, libido and the complexes of the "collective unconscious", and so on- we can see all this not so much the results of a deviated quest, but rather, and above all, an alibi, or something that a civilization created by lower beings and the revolution of serfs and pariahs against the ancient Aristocratic society necessarily had to believe in and wish to be true".

Baron Julius Evola "Revolt Against the Modern World" page 333.

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

Do you know what evolution is, Sword?

Is it the origin of life?

Evolution is a kabalistic myth (no material evidence) perpetrated (By Robert Darwin and the Royal society), with the goal to upend God's created order and Western civilization, in order to prepare the way for the Satanic New World Order. They've been quite successful thus far.

And isn't it interesting that science has no clue how abiogenesis could have occurred? Totally baffled, yet it purports to have adequately explained speciation via its various erroneous, data free myths.

My fav is the lightning bolt hitting the primordial puddle story. A real zinger. Punctuated equilibrium is also hilarious hokum with no evidence supporting it.

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

Evolution is a scientific theory,

Based on zero empirical evidence. Mad altogether

 

[Zipporah's Flint]

Evolution is a kabalistic myth (no material evidence) perpetrated (By Robert Darwin and the Royal society), with the goal to upend God's created order and Western civilization, in order to prepare the way for the Satanic New World Order. They've been quite successful thus far.

And isn't it interesting that science has no clue how abiogenesis could have occurred? Totally baffled, yet it purports to have adequately explained speciation via its various erroneous, data free myths.

My fav is the lightning bolt hitting the primordial puddle story. A real zinger. Punctuated equilibrium is also hilarious hokum with no evidence supporting it.

I think it was more a case of Darwin being inspired by the whole ethos of the British robber baron capitalists and Imperialists of his day, who generally held to the "Whig Theory of History" which saw endless progress if not for humanity at large at least for the English and the right type of Scot, and him reading that into nature and natural history than anything Kabbalahistic. The "Big Bang" theory is kind of at least Kabbalahistic I would agree though I am not sure the theory of evolution is.

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

Darwin was a scientist,

what scientific degrees did hold?

Oh, none. He did study divinity tho, but failed the exam.

rofl

 

[Zipporah's Flint]

Darwin was a scientist, why is this in the Religion forum? Stick to your stupid shit

This thread is not about the scientific arguments but rather about the psychological, Spiritual and cultural forces behind people holding certain scientific theories as well as the ethical, etc effects of such beliefs.

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

Evolution is science.

Has the English language ever been more abused than by this phrase?

Evolution is a philosophy. Nothing more. It cannot be analyzed using the scientific method. It is a thought experiment. Nothing more

 

[PlunkettsGhost]

And the Earth is flat

AT least we have a growing body of evidence for flat earth. The more real science progresses technologically, the less likely Darwin's (failed clergyman) world view becomes.

 

[Myles O'Reilly]

And isn't it interesting that science has no clue how abiogenesis could have occurred?

How old is the Earth Sir?

 

[Hermit]

Evolution is a scientific theory

Evolution is science.

No natural phenomena, no hypothesis and no experiments for evolution.

 

[Mad as Fish]

All science is theory, some of it more soundly based than the rest, that is all. How sound is evolution? I think that it has a lot going for it but I am not convinced that we have anything like a full grasp of the mechanism involved, does, for instance, Lamarkiscm have any influence? I think it is too readily dismissed, and if it is not actually involved then there is likely another purely natural force at work, or maybe more.

 

[Mad as Fish]

R u just being a contrarian?

Absoloutly perhaps.

 

[Fishalt]

All science is theory, some of it more soundly based than the rest, that is all. How sound is evolution? I think that it has a lot going for it but I am not convinced that we have anything like a full grasp of the mechanism involved, does, for instance, Lamarkiscm have any influence? I think it is too readily dismissed, and if it is not actually involved then there is likely another purely natural force at work, or maybe more.

Honestly fish, we really do. Engineers use EBNS in their calculus, and algorithmic modelling, it's interdisciplinary. The extent to which lemarckism didn't influence the theory of evolution. The evidence for evolution is about as hard as any we have for any scientific model outside of computer science. It is stronger than the standard model for example.

It's really sad that Plunkett and Flint have never read on the origin of species. Doing so would probably clear up a lot of their misgivings about evolution. They're both trapped in prisons of belief however and will never investigate anything that might challenge those beliefs. Some people need God, that's just how it is. I don't begrudge them for this.

 

[Mad as Fish]

Honestly fish, we really do. Engineers use EBNS in their calculus, and algorithmic modelling, it's interdisciplinary. The extent to which lemarckism didn't influence the theory of evolution. The evidence for evolution is about as hard as any we have for any scientific model outside of computer science. It is stronger than the standard model for example.

It's really sad that Plunkett and Flint have never read on the origin of species. Doing so would probably clear up a lot of their misgivings about evolution. They're both trapped in prisons of belief however and will never investigate anything that might challenge those beliefs. Some people need God, that's just how it is. I don't begrudge them for this.

I take on board all you say but still feel that there are large gaps in our understanding, mimicry is one area where the standard model of trial and error, to my mind falls down.

 

[Mad as Fish]

Honestly fish, we really do. Engineers use EBNS in their calculus, and algorithmic modelling, it's interdisciplinary. The extent to which lemarckism didn't influence the theory of evolution. The evidence for evolution is about as hard as any we have for any scientific model outside of computer science. It is stronger than the standard model for example.

It's really sad that Plunkett and Flint have never read on the origin of species. Doing so would probably clear up a lot of their misgivings about evolution. They're both trapped in prisons of belief however and will never investigate anything that might challenge those beliefs. Some people need God, that's just how it is. I don't begrudge them for this.

It was also noted during discussions on the covid jab that DNA information transfer may not entirely be one way.

 

[Zipporah's Flint]

All science is theory, some of it more soundly based than the rest, that is all. How sound is evolution? I think that it has a lot going for it but I am not convinced that we have anything like a full grasp of the mechanism involved, does, for instance, Lamarkiscm have any influence? I think it is too readily dismissed, and if it is not actually involved then there is likely another purely natural force at work, or maybe more.

Lamarkiscm is something I have been meaning to look into. Can you recommend any reading on it?

 

[Mad as Fish]

Lamarkiscm is something I have been meaning to look into. Can you recommend any reading on it?

Alas, I can't recommend any one particular work as its something I first encountered at school (in a dismissive context) and it has subsequentlly cropped up here and there in my general reading over the years. One of the more distiguishing features of the idea is its refusal to go away.

 

[AUL LAD]

Has the English language ever been more abused than by this phrase?

Evolution is a philosophy. Nothing more. It cannot be analyzed using the scientific method. It is a thought experiment. Nothing more

not so sure .
when innocent professional archeologists stumble on or are asked by for example American coal miners working on 50 million year old strata of coal find a tool in the wall of the mine and bring a professional to look at it before it is removed from the coal seam .
all hell breaks loose ,
their career is over if they try and publish a paper---- and the Smithstonian LOSES IT never to be seen again as the "" donors "" have certain religious views .
and science can go to hell.

 

[Mad as Fish]

not so sure .
when innocent professional archeologists stumble on or are asked by for example American coal miners working on 50 million year old strata of coal find a tool in the wall of the mine and bring a professional to look at it before it is removed from the coal seam .
all hell breaks loose ,
their career is over if they try and publish a paper---- and the Smithstonian LOSES IT never to be seen again as the "" donors "" have certain religious views .
and science can go to hell.

Over the last few years I've come to realise that there is probably as much 'belief' and adherence to a 'truth' in science as there is in religion. It's shattered many illusions.

 

[AUL LAD]

All science is theory, some of it more soundly based than the rest, that is all. How sound is evolution? I think that it has a lot going for it but I am not convinced that we have anything like a full grasp of the mechanism involved, does, for instance, Lamarkiscm have any influence? I think it is too readily dismissed, and if it is not actually involved then there is likely another purely natural force at work, or maybe more.

IF evolution exists then he /it is a mathematician amongst other skills .
why does a tree not grow its branches on one side and self destruct --where is its brain .
a head of cabbage is a engineering miracle where each leaf grows in perfect mechanical sympathy with all other leaves as the cabbage is a tight hard ball of a co op of interlocking leaves all who agree with each other how much to grow and at what speed --where is the brain how do the leaves converse .
chickens reared from an egg and kept in isolation for 6 generations in turn never meeting another to communicate with to receive wisdom.
will scatter only when a shadow comes over them in open sunlight --where does this training come from who is speaking and from where .
after observing my wife for decades i am sure i have married a very powerful animal with very powerful instincts which are powerfully feminine and millions of years old .
i would not survive a week as a woman and the life i have had the things i have done the people i have employed have led people to view me as tough mentally and physically.
the worlds children would not survive if they were looked after by the likes of me --we are not up to it either physically or for sure mentally .
women are much tougher than us while appearing physically weaker .
evolution of the human has stopped it is now owned in the background and powerful people have made plans for how the population they desire will evolve .
therefore for the first time in our history nature --whatever NATURE is will not be in control.
our bodies now for the first time have foreign DNA and technology introduced into our system to modify it to the needs of our masters .
we who own our bodies are not permitted to know how we will evolve --as the science which would tell us is hidden and the people who have changed our evolution have sought and received protection and in-dimity for doing so .
a famous geneticist has stated if you wish to understand this process -- it can be expressed as
COVID WAS INVENTED FOR THE VACCINE/EVOLUTION/INTERVENTION - NOT THE OTHER WAY ROUND --if you understand that you understand everything.