Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Creation/Evolution
 There's no lie like an old lie!
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  

filthy
SFN Die Hard

USA
14408 Posts

Posted - 07/29/2008 :  06:14:28  Show Profile Send filthy a Private Message  Reply with Quote
I swear to Hypnotoad, AiG just can't stop with the idiotcy! Dig it:
Darwin Taught Male SuperiorityLaymanby Jerry Bergman, Ph.D.January 1, 2007

Keywordsauthor-jerry-bergman charles-darwin human-evolution
Featured In

Browse this issue

Buy this issue

According to Charles Darwin, the central mechanism of evolution is survival of the fittest. In this concept, inferior animals are more likely to become extinct while the superior ones are more likely to thrive.1 The racism that this idea has produced has now been both well-documented and widely publicized.2 Less widely known is the fact that many evolutionists, including Darwin, taught that women were both biologically and intellectually inferior to men.
It is less widly known because it is one of Kent Hovind's favorite droolings.
Hovind: "Thats what destroyed Charles Darwin, his own theory of evolution. It was his own undoing. Darwin thought that women were inferior. He said, A married man would be a poor slave, worse than a Negro."

Lie #115. That's why Darwin married, I guess.... I have no idea where Hovind digs up these monstrous lies since he never offers any references, but again, Darwin himself refutes Hovind. Here is another excerpt from "Descent":


"With women, marriage at too early an age is highly injurious; for it has been found in France that, "Twice as many wives under twenty die in the year, as died out of the same number of the unmarried." The mortality, also, of husbands under twenty is "excessively high," but what the cause of this may be, seems doubtful. Lastly, if the men who prudently delay marrying until they can bring up their families in comfort, were to select, as they often do, women in the prime of life, the rate of increase in the better class would be only slightly lessened."

How about this one: "The advancement of the welfare of mankind is a most intricate problem: all ought to refrain from marriage who cannot avoid abject poverty for their children."?
For anyone who wants to dig around checking credentials, Here's some of Bergman's:

"Dr. Jerry Bergman has published over 700 articles and books and has earned nine degrees. He has served as a consultant for CBS News, ABC News, and Reader's Digest. Dr. Bergman has also taught biology, genetics, chemistry, biochemistry, anthropology, geology, and microbiology at Northwest State College in Archbold, Ohio (USA) for 20 years."

It turns out that Northwest State College is an accredited community college with a 2 year course of study. Nothing out of line with that, but the good doctor seems to have taught so many pretty specialized subjects that one wonders if he's the only staff member.

I was going to dig a little deeper, but got bored with it. Maybe later...




"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)

"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres


"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude

Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,

and Crypto-Communist!

HalfMooner
Dingaling

Philippines
15831 Posts

Posted - 07/29/2008 :  21:03:54   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send HalfMooner a Private Message  Reply with Quote
"Jerry Bergman, Ph.D."? Looks like Bergman's PhD is a "correspondence" degree from yet another phony diploma mill.

According to Wiki, when Bergman appealed an unfavorable ruling in a suit over his being denied professorial tenure at Bowling Green State University, a judge ruled that the real reason for the denial wasn't "religious discrimination" as Bergman had charged, rather "the reason he was let go was because of ethics, namely that he claimed to have credentials in psychology when, in fact, he 'had no psychological credentials.'" So Bergman's on the official record as a liar.

Another Creo con-man. What a shock.


Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive.
Edited by - HalfMooner on 07/29/2008 21:07:54
Go to Top of Page

portaadonai
New Member

USA
2 Posts

Posted - 07/16/2015 :  22:39:45   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send portaadonai a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Darwin, taught that women were both biologically and intellectually inferior to men.
It is less widly known because it is one of Kent Hovind's favorite droolings.
Hovind: "Thats what destroyed Charles Darwin, his own theory of evolution. It was his own undoing. Darwin thought that women were inferior. He said, A married man would be a poor slave, worse than a Negro."

Lie #115. That's why Darwin married, I guess.... I have no idea where Hovind digs up these monstrous lies since he never offers any references, but again


Just saw a Hovind video with this quote. It was very clearly referenced. Here you go.

"The Autobiography of Charles Darwin p234 Impact #249 from ICR 619-448-0900"
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26020 Posts

Posted - 07/17/2015 :  19:08:19   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by portaadonai

Just saw a Hovind video with this quote. It was very clearly referenced. Here you go.

"The Autobiography of Charles Darwin p234 Impact #249 from ICR 619-448-0900"
Of course, to get the context, one needs to start at page 231. Darwin was facing "The Question" and actually penned two columns of notes, on the consequences of marrying or not, and concluded, "It being proved necessary to marry..." And after the comparison of marriage to slavery, he ended with the following:
—Never mind my boy—Cheer up—One cannot live this solitary life, with groggy old age, friendless and cold and childless staring one in one's face, already beginning to wrinkle. Never mind, trust to chance—keep a sharp look out.—There is many a happy slave—
He married less than two years after scribbling these notes.

But so what of it? One can be a complete asshat and still be scientifically correct, so why does Hovind think Darwin's views on marriage and/or slavery and/or "Negroes" matter? Because Hovind can't assail Darwin's science, and so must resort to attempts at character assassination.

Darwin was just about as sexist and racist as other learned men of his day (though he was an abolitionist before it became trendy), but nobody celebrates him for it. Hovind, however, only need to look to the authors of his Bible to see racism and sexism and slavery on proud parade, so he might want to avoid calling the kettle black.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

The Rat
SFN Regular

Canada
1370 Posts

Posted - 07/18/2015 :  18:49:16   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit The Rat's Homepage Send The Rat a Private Message  Reply with Quote
'Survival of the fittest' was not coined by Darwin, but by Herbert Spencer, a sociologist. And it has nothing to do with 'fittest' as we commonly use the term. Spencer was referring to reproductive success: those who left the most descendants were the 'fittest'.

But the cretinists and IDiots wouldn't know that.


Bailey's second law; There is no relationship between the three virtues of intelligence, education, and wisdom.

You fiend! Never have I encountered such corrupt and foul-minded perversity! Have you ever considered a career in the Church? - The Bishop of Bath and Wells, Blackadder II

Baculum's page: http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=3947338590
Edited by - The Rat on 07/18/2015 18:50:05
Go to Top of Page

sailingsoul
SFN Addict

2830 Posts

Posted - 07/18/2015 :  19:09:17   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send sailingsoul a Private Message  Reply with Quote
Originally posted by The Rat

But the cretinists and IDiots wouldn't know that.



There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS
Go to Top of Page
  Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
 New Topic  Reply to Topic
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.08 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000