Science In Need Of Context

[Hollie]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Darwin never claimed that life began in a pond.

 

[Hollie]

I don’t read your posts unless they’re at least 10,000 words long.
This one fell a bit short

Of course you do.


You just can't find any way to disprove them.

Again if you were not so seriously mentally challenged you could understand the concept that no one cares about you enough to even want to disprove you.

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

Darwin owns your brain

Very sad

So there was nothing in the post that you could dispute?


And that's as far as what passes for thinking from your sort, allows?


Very sad.

I know that your delusional mind tells you that people read your nonsense. They and I do not.

PS The last 13 years that you have spent here have achieved nothing, you make the same lame arguments now as you did then

Of course you read,...and are discomforted, by these posts.

I suggest you do not read the next one, as it will put you in your place, and be even more discomforting when you realize you have no way to dispute same.

Again Darwin rules your tormented existence, he always will, and when you are dead he will still be Darwin when no one remembers your name

When the asteroid hits the earth, it will be as if Darwin never existed.

Rather pointless as biological evolution is a fact with or without Darwin.

So, since biological evolution is "a fact" show me the progression of the Tabby cat from amino acid. Better yet, what is the next stage of developement for the Taddy cat? This should be very simple to do given the knowledge that biological evolution is "a fact".

You hold a number of false impressions about biological evolution. It is a fact that biological organisms evolve over time subject to genetic drift and environmental pressures. The progression of simple to more complex life forms is undeniable except to certain religious types. The evidence is overwhelming in spite of the denials from religionists.

On the other hand, we have no evidence, let alone “facts” for a 6,000 year old planet, talking snakes, etc.,

Wher is the evidence for Adam & Eve and a magical garden?

What you term "simple" is actually quite complex. While who we are changes from generation to generation, what we are remains the same. Every living thing is unique but every living thing remains within its kind.

What you term “gods” is actually quite simple. A simple distillation of many gods to the more easily managed three.

Creationists have never been unable to specify what the created ''kinds'' are. If kinds were unique, it should be easy to distinguish between them. Instead, we find a nested hierarchy of similarities with kinds within kinds within kinds. Does the modern day moose closely resemble the ones which Noah put on the magical Ark? How do you account for the diversity of cat "kinds" in just a few thousand years? Consider, the Moose “kind” could be placed in the 4-legged animal kind, the Moose kind, the mammal kind, the horned animal kind, or any of dozens of other kinds of kinds, depending on how inclusive the kind is. No matter how you try an manipulate terms and definitions or what a kind is, there will be many groups just bordering on that cutoff. This pattern exactly matches the pattern expected of evolution. It does not match what creationism want.

So, we can move on to observed instances of speciation if you like. Or, you can provide some testable evidence of a global flood 4,000 years ago, or present evidence of Arks, Gods, talking snakes, men living to be 900 years old, etc., etc.

God will shortly be proven when humanity begins engineering crops for Mars, just as was done here once.

So Dolly just have faith in real science

Your claims to gods are typical for the hyper-religious.

 

[DrLove]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Life created itself in a pond?

Simplistic but correct!

 

[PoliticalChic]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Life created itself in a pond?

Simplistic but correct!

Could you document that, or is that part of the dogma of your religion, Militant Secularism?

 

[Dusty]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Darwin never claimed that life began in a pond.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond and he even described the pond, and a digital copy of the actual letter where he said these things is below.

Look I know that you are having emotional difficulties accepting new information, but it's really not new, perhaps you should have paid more attention in school

 

[Dusty]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Life created itself in a pond?

Simplistic but correct!

Could you document that, or is that part of the dogma of your religion, Militant Secularism?

Great post, you never mentioned Darwin once

 

[Hollie]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Darwin never claimed that life began in a pond.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond and he even described the pond, and a digital copy of the actual letter where he said these things is below.

Look I know that you are having emotional difficulties accepting new information, but it's really not new, perhaps you should have paid more attention in school

You can cut and paste that as many times as you wish but it doesn’t make your fraudulent claim any less fraudulent.

Do your gods approve of your fraud?

 

[Dusty]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Darwin never claimed that life began in a pond.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond and he even described the pond, and a digital copy of the actual letter where he said these things is below.

Look I know that you are having emotional difficulties accepting new information, but it's really not new, perhaps you should have paid more attention in school

You can cut and paste that as many times as you wish but it doesn’t make your fraudulent claim any less fraudulent.

Do your gods approve of your fraud?

Does my God offend you?

 

[Hollie]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Darwin never claimed that life began in a pond.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond and he even described the pond, and a digital copy of the actual letter where he said these things is below.

Look I know that you are having emotional difficulties accepting new information, but it's really not new, perhaps you should have paid more attention in school

You can cut and paste that as many times as you wish but it doesn’t make your fraudulent claim any less fraudulent.

Do your gods approve of your fraud?

Does my God offend you?

Are your gods offended by making them a partner to your fraud.

 

[DrLove]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Life created itself in a pond?

Simplistic but correct!

Could you document that, or is that part of the dogma of your religion, Militant Secularism?

You’re a fucking loon. Discussing science with you is like discussing sanity with Marjorie Taylor Greene.

 

[Dusty]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Darwin never claimed that life began in a pond.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond and he even described the pond, and a digital copy of the actual letter where he said these things is below.

Look I know that you are having emotional difficulties accepting new information, but it's really not new, perhaps you should have paid more attention in school

You can cut and paste that as many times as you wish but it doesn’t make your fraudulent claim any less fraudulent.

Do your gods approve of your fraud?

Does my God offend you?

Are your gods offended by making them a partner to your fraud.

There is only one God, are you offended by this, and if so why?

So do you have any thoughts on when Apple will break out to the up side? Or are you going to spend the rest of your life attacking the all loving Jesus Christ?

 

[Hollie]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Darwin never claimed that life began in a pond.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond and he even described the pond, and a digital copy of the actual letter where he said these things is below.

Look I know that you are having emotional difficulties accepting new information, but it's really not new, perhaps you should have paid more attention in school

You can cut and paste that as many times as you wish but it doesn’t make your fraudulent claim any less fraudulent.

Do your gods approve of your fraud?

Does my God offend you?

Are your gods offended by making them a partner to your fraud.

There is only one God, are you offended by this, and if so why?

So do you have any thoughts on when Apple will break out to the up side? Or are you going to spend the rest of your life attacking the all loving Jesus Christ?

Does this mean you are going to continue your fraud? Very disappointing that the hyper-religious are so dishonest and enlist their gods in perpetrating fraud.

 

[Dusty]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Darwin never claimed that life began in a pond.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond and he even described the pond, and a digital copy of the actual letter where he said these things is below.

Look I know that you are having emotional difficulties accepting new information, but it's really not new, perhaps you should have paid more attention in school

You can cut and paste that as many times as you wish but it doesn’t make your fraudulent claim any less fraudulent.

Do your gods approve of your fraud?

Does my God offend you?

Are your gods offended by making them a partner to your fraud.

There is only one God, are you offended by this, and if so why?

So do you have any thoughts on when Apple will break out to the up side? Or are you going to spend the rest of your life attacking the all loving Jesus Christ?

Does this mean you are going to continue your fraud? Very disappointing that the hyper-religious are so dishonest and enlist their gods in perpetrating fraud.

I believe in the risen Christ which does not make me hyper-religious, except to those like you who can not be tolerant to different beliefs. I also see a need in science for God as science does not allow for spontaneous creation. Sheesh the simplest organism has thousands of genes with billions of code sequences that all have to be exact in order for the organism to exist. The chances of that happening randomly is null.

PS Do you have any preference in cannabis equities? or are you just a smoker?

 

[Hollie]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Darwin never claimed that life began in a pond.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond and he even described the pond, and a digital copy of the actual letter where he said these things is below.

Look I know that you are having emotional difficulties accepting new information, but it's really not new, perhaps you should have paid more attention in school

You can cut and paste that as many times as you wish but it doesn’t make your fraudulent claim any less fraudulent.

Do your gods approve of your fraud?

Does my God offend you?

Are your gods offended by making them a partner to your fraud.

There is only one God, are you offended by this, and if so why?

So do you have any thoughts on when Apple will break out to the up side? Or are you going to spend the rest of your life attacking the all loving Jesus Christ?

Does this mean you are going to continue your fraud? Very disappointing that the hyper-religious are so dishonest and enlist their gods in perpetrating fraud.

I believe in the risen Christ which does not make me hyper-religious, except to those like you who can not be tolerant to different beliefs. I also see a need in science for God as science does not allow for spontaneous creation. Sheesh the simplest organism has thousands of genes with billions of code sequences that all have to be exact in order for the organism to exist. The chances of that happening randomly is null.

PS Do you have any preference in cannabis equities? or are you just a smoker?

Ah, yes. The old classic ID'iot creationer ''it's too complicated', meme.

With all the gods that have been invented by humans, the chances that your gods ever existed are nonexistent.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1.In light of the Wuhan/Mask/Lockdown Hoax being exposed, this appears to be an opportune time to remind all of one simple rule: Experts, 'scientists,' bureaucrats ...don't make the mistake of assigning a higher level of integrity and honesty to any of them, than anyone else. Not politicians, bureaucrats, economists, pastors....whatever. ..you should know that they have been forced to embrace the collective, oppose the separation of powers, and or checks and balances, and the result is a tyranny of the elites .
You should have learned from the finest President in a hundred years:
Trust, but verify.


View attachment 491570



2. I admit to a certain....frisson...in being barraged by Darwin-believers who claim science as their cause, but fail to see that Darwinism fails as science. It remains unproven, even its popularizers pretend it isn't what it, and any criticism is met with emotion rather than discussion....hardly a scientific method.

Just like that mask thing.



3. Today is the anniversary of sorts of the most famous popularizer of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, Stephen Jay Gould, the day he passed on.

Stephen Jay Gould, (born September 10, 1941, New York, New York, U.S.—died May 20, 2002, New York), American paleontologist, evolutionary biologist, and science writer.
…Gould became widely known as a writer, polemicist, and popularizer of evolutionary theory.
Britannica.com

No where in the article is the most important aspect of Gould’s views mentioned: Marxism.
If you are a government school grad, you were taught to ignore it, too.




3. Marxism is the context. Suddenly, it become clear why certain individuals push Darwin’s Theory and abjure any religious view.

" The Socialist Worker Online mentions that Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School.
... Gould was on the advisory boards of the journal Rethinking Marxism and the Brecht Forum, sponsor of the New York Marxist School, which was dedicated to using "Marx's uniquely valuable contributions…to study conditions today and possibilities for transcending capitalism and building an emancipatory society."
Gasper, Phil, ‘A scientist of the people’, Socialist Worker Online, 7 June 2002, p8



4. A famous quote made by Gould is that within his Jewish-Marxist family subculture he learned his Marxism ‘at his daddy's knee’. He has said that his politics were very different from his father’s, but never explained exactly how. Some have speculated that this referred to a rejection of Stalinism. Whatever the meaning, it is clear from Gould’s work that he was strongly influenced by Marxist beliefs. In his book The Culture of Critique, evolutionist author Kevin MacDonald writes that Gould has ‘acknowledged that his theory of evolution as punctuated equilibria was attractive to him as a Marxist because it posited periodic revolutionary upheavals in evolution rather than conservative, gradualist change’
MacDonald, Kevin, ‘The Culture of Critique’



5. Stephen Jay Gould ultimately may not have been an atheist or a Marxist, but nearly his whole life argues in favor of both positions.

One an only conjecture as to why mention of his Marxist views never seem to get mentioned.

Could it be ‘context’?

This thread does not belong in the science section. Conspiracy Theory or Rubber R

“He [Darwin] prophesied that future generations of paleontologists would fill in these gaps by diligent search….It has become abundantly clear that the fossil record will not confirm this part of Darwin’s predictions. Nor is the problem a miserably poor record. The fossil record simply shows that this prediction was wrong.” (Eldridge, Niles, The Myths of Human Evolution, 1984, pp.45-46.)


And this thread proves the explanation for the reason teaches Darwinism as though it had been proven.

That's context.

There you go again expressing your Darwin compulsion.

Darwin rules your world

Darwin is dead ------ do you really think he cares at this point?

Darwin is the only thing living in chic's mind

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


You don't know, do you?

Darwin's greatest accomplishment is turning people like you into paranoid schizzos, constantly babbling for decades the same krap.

You do know that there is nothing to win here right?

What is it that Darwin accomplished that caused your infatuation?


I won by proving that your sort, the indoctrinated, doesn't have a clue.

What did you win? I mean other than another bottle of pills from one of your doctors

I proved that you know nothing about Darwin, but have been taught to bow the neck and bend the knee in obedience to your masters.

OK Hollie, you proved something. Submit the proof for peer review.

Just remember to take all your pills as directed

Wrong poster, sweetie.

You both need the same meds.

A rather embarrassing retreat on your part.

Don’t bring a knife bible to a gun science fight.

First of all Hollie there is no "we" that you referred too, because most of humanity believes in one God or another. Now your argument is actually that we know that life created itself in Darwins pond because life is here.

Hollie, please pay attention to the real news, because aliens are here in some form, looping around F-18's, and they did not come from Darwins pond. How is this relevant? because there is no way to say that they were not here first, and or that we are not actually them, or that they did not engineer life for the Earth as humanity will soon be doing on Mars.

Next

You’re simply stuttering and mumbling about “Darwin’s pond” when there is no such thing.

Your alien conspiracy theory is fascinating. Do you spend a great deal of time reading supermarket tabloids?

Darwin referenced a pond, so you are quite wrong. In fact your ignorance pretty much demonstrates well, your ignorance.

That said you clearly need a lesson in Darwinism

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL now who is the stupid one Dolly

You cut and pasted what I provided for you earlier.

That’s odd because Darwin never suggested life emerged from a pond as you tried to suggest.

Name-calling won’t help you.

So, in connection with your space alien conspiracy theory, have you ever been abducted and maybe, you know, probed or anything?

Again Dolly Darwin believed that life was conceived in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

LOL you had no clue as to what Darwin actually believed, and when confronted with what Darwin said all you can claim is that he never said it.

He did say it and believed that life concieved itself in a pond.

So have you concieved anything yet Dolly? other than ignorance I mean

Darwin never claimed life began in a pond. Try paying attention.

Yes Darwin did claim that life began in a pond kid, your ignorance is shining brightly

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

Charles Darwin's quotations and quotes​

In 1871 Charles Darwin wrote a now famous letter to Joseph Hooker which included some of his speculations on the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond.

The letter was mailed to Hooker on February 1st, 1871.

Down,Beckenham, Kent, S.E.
My dear Hooker,

... It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present.

But if (and oh what a big if) we could conceive in some warm little pond with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, - light, heat, electricity &c. present, that a protein compound was chemically formed, ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter wd be instantly devoured, or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.

“It is often said that all the conditions for the first production of a living organism are now present, which could ever have been present. But if (and oh! what a big if!) we could conceive some warm little pond, with all sorts of ammonia and phosphoric salts, light, heat, electricity, &c. present, that a proteine [sic] compound was chemically formed ready to undergo still more complex changes, at the present day such matter would be instantly devoured or absorbed, which would not have been the case before living creatures were formed.” [quoted from Janet Browne's The Power of Place, New York, Knopf, 2002, 392f]”

You should learn to read. Darwin never stated life began In a pond as you fraudulently claim.

Don’t be a fraud.

LOL you are the doofus that did not even know what the pond referred too earlier. So again to repeat, those who believe in Darwinism all must accept that life created itself in a warm little brainless pond. You know like you do Sargent Agarn

CIAO

130

I’m glad you finally admitted to perpetrating a fraud.

I merely posted what Darwin said Gilligan. And you argued senselessly that Darwin never wrote what he did. You are clearly rolling in your own denial

It's ok, everyone ends up where you are now

Charles Darwin - the spontaneous generation of life in some - warm little pond

You wrote you were done. This is your second fraud. Your first fraud was fraudulently representing Darwin said life began in a warm pond. That is a fraud.

Are you done making fraudulent claims?

Look little grasshopper, I quoted Darwin letters that you did not learn in schooly.

The fraud is you for claiming that you knew what Darwin wrote when you never read anything on the subject.

It's ok I know that you are embarrassed, you will accept it soon enough

Nothing you “quoted” represents what you claim.

That’s fraud.

Says the kid who never even heard of Darwins warm little pond letter to Hooker.

The turds handwriting was scribble like his grooming, but what is to be expected from a doof who believed that life created itself in a pond

Life created itself in a pond?

Simplistic but correct!

Could you document that, or is that part of the dogma of your religion, Militant Secularism?

You’re a fucking loon. Discussing science with you is like discussing sanity with Marjorie Taylor Greene.

I've always found, and you prove, that the truth forces your sort to devolve into fits of vulgarity.

 

[surada]

6. There is a reason that the Left doesn’t advertise that Gould was a Marxist, and his theses reflect it: without Darwin’s Theory, there is neither historic nor scientific proof of Marxism. And, even worse, religion gets as boost.

If they can get you to alter your focus, your attention, they can win the game.
That applies to sports, and to politics, and to science.

Be sharp, and recognize that everything......everything.....is connected.


“Indra's net : Buddhist concepts of interpenetration hold that all phenomena are intimately connected; for the Huayan school, Indra's net symbolizes a universe where infinitely repeated mutual relations exist between all members of the universe.[5] This idea is communicated in the image of the interconnectedness of the universe as seen in the net of the Vedic god Indra, whose net hangs over his palace on Mount Meru, the axis mundi of Vedic cosmology and Vedic mythology. Indra's net has a multifaceted jewel at each vertex, and each jewel is reflected in all of the other jewels:[6] Indra's net - Wikipedia

If you fail to look for connections, the Left, for whom there is no morality or tradition, well then, you won't see that getting you to accept transgenderism opens the door to pedophilia.

Prehistoric skull unearthed in Israel may be evolution's 'missing link'

Researchers are calling the discovery "one of the most important anthropological findings of the last century."

www.studyfinds.org

 

[PoliticalChic]

Prehistoric skull unearthed in Israel may be evolution's 'missing link'

Researchers are calling the discovery "one of the most important anthropological findings of the last century."

www.studyfinds.org

"May be...."


Maybe one day you will develop an intellect.....I'm not countin' on it.