Bengali wrote:It seems that very few people have much understanding of evolution.
Some humans ARE more evolved than others. this is simple fact. it is not Racist, nor offensive in the least. being more evolved than someone else simply means that your genetic code has mutated further from the original sample than theirs has. this does in no way mean that you are better, or at a higher state than any other individual. Evolution DOES NOT MEAN BETTER
That simply isn't true.. When certain scientists say
that one race is more intelligent than another race.. That is RACISM..
Evolution devoid of God CANNOT offer equality. Period. It is simply not possible. All you have is chemicals with some have better ones than others via survival of the fittest. No one is saying that evolution is racism, however, it certainly can influence the value of human life, ethics, and morality.. Case in point modern eugenics..
http://www.godandscience.org/doctrine/m ... enics.html
http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/ ... tions.html
Bengali wrote:Some of us on here have children, our children's genetic code is very very slightly different to our own, our children, are more evolved than us. imagine for instance, one of us on here has a child with Cystic Fibrosis. or Downs Syndrome, Or Sickle cell, this difference is not bacterial, or a virus, it is part of their genetic code, a part which has mutated or simply broken down. this means that their Genetic code is different to yours. significantly different. they are therefore more evolved than you are by some degree. just because the outcome is negative doesn't make it not true.
Evolution becomes easier to spot when the genetic code between one individual and another becomes to different for the codes to join and provide viable, reproducing offspring. a man and a chimp share a code 98% identical, yet cannot breed, both share a common ancestor, but the code has changed too much over the millennia for it to be compatible on the other hand, a Horse and a Donkey, can still produce offspring, but the offspring is infertile, it is unable to reproduce, this is borderline split. the two species have diverged far enough that they cannot combine their DNA into something capable of reproducing. if horses and donkeys were kept apart for an unknown period of time, it's likely that Mules could no longer be born. Neither the Future Donkey or the Future Horse would be better than the other, however one of them, in this case i believe it would be the horse, would have a genetic code closer to that of the ancestor they both share, so the Donkey is more evolved. however it is evolved to be better suited to its personal niche in life, and the horse the same. the only way a species is better than another by way of evolution is that a horse is far better at being a horse than a donkey is, and a donkey is far better at being a donkey.
Don't forget.. Many say that the chimps blueprint is 99% identical to ours. Humans are much more identical to a chimp than a rat, that is true. It sounds close, only 1%, but you also have to remember that our genome is 3 billion base pairs long. So one 1% of 3 billion we are still talking about millions of letters that are different. It’s still a big difference.
Bengali wrote:
this transfers to people too, Black people are far better at being black people. their specific traits give them an advantage in their home countries. and im not talking about city life. if civilisation were wiped out over night and random bunches of stragglers grouped together in the wild trying to survive, the Black people would fair a lot better in hotter, drier climates, Caucasians would fair better in colder wetter environments. i would like to see this "scientist" with a black man in this theorised post-apocalyptic world. should the supposed scientist and his Black friend find themselves stranded and alone in the frozen mountainous wilds of Norway, his argument about being better because he is more evolved may carry some weight, as he is in the environment that his body is adapted to, while his black friend will struggle, however if reversed, and they find themselves in a very hot, very dry place with blinding sun and little shade such as the plains of Africa, the Black friend is going to be better adapted and the "scientist" looses all his arguments as his skin blisters quickly and he dehydrates rapidly as he sweats.
That still doesn't diminish the fact on how blacks and other minorities are perceived via an evolutionary mindset... or their divergence from apes.
“Although anatomically there is a greater difference between the lowest type of monkey and the highest type of ape than there is between the highest type of ape and the lowest savage, yet there is an immense mental gap between monkey and man … . At the present time there exist upon the earth five races or varieties of man, each very different from the others in instincts, social customs, and, to an extent, in structure. These are the Ethiopian or negro type, originating in Africa; the Malay or brown race, from the islands of the Pacific; the American Indian; the Mongolian or yellow race, including the natives of China, Japan and the Eskimos; and finally, the highest type of all, the Caucasians, represented by the civilized white inhabitants of Europe and America.”
George W. Hunter, A Civic Biology, American Book Company, New York, pp. 195–196.
Bengali wrote:like i say, being more, or less evolved, does not mean better or worse, in many MANY ways, being more evolved means more mutations, and most mutations are bad. evolution also tends to lead to specialisation, which means less likely to be able to adapt to change, so in most cases being more evolved is actually a very bad thing.
Don't forget that evolution can't promote equality. It degrades people to meaningless masses of worthless chemicals.. And when those chemicals die, it means absolutely nothing.