judahxulu;2036249 said:ive never said to anyone" you are the whiteman's bitch because you support evolution" so thats a false premise. also, i dont think you comprehend the point of my posts at all. the fact that a pro-evolution article made a liar out o the pro-evolution dude (chozenwun) is quite ironic to me and pretty fucking humorous to me. moreover, its not wise to jump into the midst of a conversation and assume that you will comprehend whats going on. the people ive addressed in this particular thread make it a point to insist that evolution = hard fact = no Creator and I disagree. There can simultaneously exist a form of creative intelligence and evolution. or it just might be one or the other. its all about whose report you believe, and thats the heart of the conflict here. the same posters mislabel and project the silliest aspects of christian mythology on any mode of spirituality expressed on this board. they tout their rationality and reason over our "primitive" faith and/or belief. Yet when someone like myself destroys their weak arguments they abandon their precious reasoning ans rationality and attempt to make appeals to ridicule. they even out right lie, as in the case of the frozenwun. those who's faith and belief rests in whats what in the realm of eurocentric scholarship, especially in lieu of a spiritual understanding - are essentially the whitemans bitch. its dependent on a worldview, not an opinion on a particular scientific theory.but that description is just an opinion. i understand if it made u feel better to cherrypick that part of my post and the bbc part in order to make yourself feel better. its weird, but i understand. Just remember 2 things :1) Darwins seminal work is fully titled On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (1859). Remember what was going on with africans and the "favoured" races at home and abroad during that epoch in time. 2) however much it may have been pruned and grafted, the "tree" of studying evolution has its roots in the works of Darwin. The biblical axiom "you cannot get a good fruit from a bad tree" holds true here.
All I'm saying is that if you're going to consider that article's rejection of "Ida" as a missing link to be legitimate, you can't pick and choose parts of that article to be factual and parts of it not to be factual based on your own viewpoint. In citing that article as a reference, you are essentially putting your faith in a "eurocentric" media outlet.
Last edited: