What is Digg?381 Comments
- orlyfactor, on 05/06/2008, -0/+82Nothing like Wikipedia to help eat up an afternoon's worth of work!
- DariusMonsef, on 05/06/2008, -15/+96Poor guy lived hard and died young, but change one number and I hope that is how I go out... "At the age of 82, he built a ceremonial fire, chipped off the caps on his teeth, performed a final tribal dance, and shot himself in the heart with a stolen pistol."
- Nobi-Wan, on 05/06/2008, -9/+74What do you know? The Christians of the day were more forward-thinking than the scientists.
"Our race, we think, is depressed enough, without exhibiting one of us with the apes," said clergyman James H. Gordon; "We think we are worthy of being considered human beings, with souls." - bodegit, on 05/06/2008, -2/+52this was a test in reading comprehension. and you failed.
- inactive, on 05/06/2008, -2/+49He said "change one number"
- JezusGhoti, on 05/06/2008, -1/+39The sad part is that there are still some people who consider pygmies to somehow be sub-human. According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmy ) both sides in the Congolese Civil war hunt and eat pygmies. Sketchy.
- ZenMojo, on 05/06/2008, -1/+37Suffering. I don't know if his vote would have made a difference.
- chubbybubba, on 05/06/2008, -2/+36As soon as they mentioned relocating to "Lynchburg, Virginia", I knew it would all end in tragedy.
- Dimensio, on 05/06/2008, -0/+31" I wonder how many also don't know the first title of Darwin's book was: On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. This shows the bigotry at the heart of evolution."
"Races", within the context of the title of Darwin's groundbreaking book, referred to subsets within animal species in general. It did not refer to human races. An actual reading of the book makes this evident; Darwin does not discuss human races to any real extent within the book at all. - inactive, on 05/06/2008, -7/+34Albert Einstein Nobel Laureate in Physics Jewish
Max Planck Nobel Laureate in Physics Protestant
Erwin Schrodinger Nobel Laureate in Physics Catholic
Werner Heisenberg Nobel Laureate in Physics Lutheran
Robert Millikan Nobel Laureate in Physics probably Congregationalist
Charles Hard Townes Nobel Laureate in Physics United Church of Christ (raised Baptist)
Arthur Schawlow Nobel Laureate in Physics Methodist
William D. Phillips Nobel Laureate in Physics Methodist
William H. Bragg Nobel Laureate in Physics Anglican
Guglielmo Marconi Nobel Laureate in Physics Catholic and Anglican
Arthur Compton Nobel Laureate in Physics Presbyterian
Arno Penzias Nobel Laureate in Physics Jewish
Nevill Mott Nobel Laureate in Physics Anglican
Isidor Isaac Rabi Nobel Laureate in Physics Jewish
Abdus Salam Nobel Laureate in Physics Muslim
Antony Hewish Nobel Laureate in Physics Christian (denomination?)
Joseph H. Taylor, Jr. Nobel Laureate in Physics Quaker
Alexis Carrel Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Catholic
John Eccles Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Catholic
Joseph Murray Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Catholic
Ernst Chain Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Jewish
George Wald Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Jewish
Ronald Ross Nobel Laureate in Medicine and Physiology Christian (denomination?)
Derek Barton Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Christian (denomination?)
Christian Anfinsen Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Jewish
Walter Kohn Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Jewish
Richard Smalley Nobel Laureate in Chemistry Catholic
Isaac Newton Founder of Classical Physics and Infinitesimal Calculus Anglican (rejected Trinitarianism, i.e., Athanasianism;
Galileo Galilei Founder of Experimental Physics Catholic
Nicolaus Copernicus Founder of Heliocentric Cosmology Catholic (priest)
Johannes Kepler Founder of Physical Astronomy and Modern Optics Lutheran
Francis Bacon Founder of the Scientific Inductive Method Anglican
René Descartes Founder of Analytical Geometry and Modern Philosophy Catholic
Blaise Pascal Founder of Hydrostatics, Hydrodynamics,
and the Theory of Probabilities Jansenist
Michael Faraday Founder of Electronics and Electro-Magnetics Sandemanian
James Clerk Maxwell Founder of Statistical Thermodynamics Presbyterian; Anglican; Baptist
Lord Kelvin Founder of Thermodynamics and Energetics Anglican
Robert Boyle Founder of Modern Chemistry Anglican
William Harvey Founder of Modern Medicine Anglican (nominal)
John Ray Founder of Modern Biology and Natural History Calvinist (denomination?)
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz German Mathematician and Philosopher,
Founder of Infinitesimal Calculus Lutheran
Charles Darwin Founder of the Theory of Evolution Anglican (nominal); Unitarian
Ernst Haeckel German Biologist,
the Most Influential Evolutionist in Continental Europe
Thomas H. Huxley English Biologist and Evolutionist,
Famous As "Darwin's Bulldog"
Joseph J. Thomson Nobel Laureate in Physics, Discoverer of the Electron,
Founder of Atomic Physics Anglican
Louis Pasteur Founder of Microbiology and Immunology Catholic - npowel, on 05/06/2008, -1/+23We also read the page.
- scoetrain, on 05/06/2008, -2/+24Make sure you read the New York Times source article at the bottom of the page.
- elamr, on 05/06/2008, -2/+23pwned
- BryanTravers, on 05/06/2008, -5/+25No, Scientific Racism was an effort in the late 19th and early 20th century to scientifically prove the white race as being superior. The shapes of skulls was an example of how they "proved" white people were smarter and better.
- inactive, on 05/06/2008, -0/+20Hey man, you should re read the post...
- Kypt, on 05/06/2008, -3/+20The accidents occur, then selection takes its pick and that accident becomes the new standard. Selection by itself is useless, first i needs to "select" these accidents for it to do any good.
- jaredcat, on 05/06/2008, -1/+18Certainly true within the past 500 years anyway... but I think that has more to do with Western culture regaining and exploring its early greco-roman roots in logic and philosophy. 2000 years ago most of the great scientists throughout history were sacrificing goats to Zeus and dancing around in the moonlight with Dionysus . (:
- pharmakon, on 05/06/2008, -6/+22***** yourself
- aladrin, on 05/06/2008, -1/+17You're right, it -IS- amazing that you don't understand evolution and yet are so quick to be snide that others don't. She's right in that evolution has an 'environmental' aspect, and you're right that evolution has an 'accidental' aspect. Without both aspects, it doesn't work at all!
To make it clearer for you: Accidents happen (genetic mutations) that the environment helps reinforce or kill out. If the accident is one that makes the organism more likely to survive, it has a better chance of staying in the gene pool. - homercles337, on 05/06/2008, -13/+28Actually, youre wrong too. There is nothing "accidental" about evolution. Its hard to believe you claim to understand evolution, but you really dont. You should look up the word "selection" since it has nothing to do with "accident."
- Asvetic, on 05/06/2008, -10/+25Scientific Racism, is that like the extra leg muscle black men have that allow them to run faster and jump higher?
- jer2eydevil88, on 05/06/2008, -5/+19Yeah! Who cares about history????
Its because of morons like you that we as a society fail to learn from our mistakes. - bradhart2, on 05/06/2008, -4/+18The other detail most people get wrong is they feel evolution is about genetic improvement of the species rather than becoming genetically more efficient.
- gametavern, on 05/06/2008, -2/+16its a zune.
- suttercain, on 05/06/2008, -3/+16Agreed. Sadly though Politicians will almost always put political progress ahead of individual human life.
- LtXenodite, on 05/06/2008, -1/+14*facepalm*
- inactive, on 05/06/2008, -0/+12It doesn't matter if they're religious or atheist, nor does it matter if he's a Nazi/ Communist/ Socialist... etc or what not, if a scientist is brilliant, he's contribution will make a positive impact on the overall scientific community, thats the beauty of science.
- Jashobeam5, on 05/06/2008, -7/+19You can check the religion of most great scientists throughout history. Most were either Jews or Christians.
- kakwakas, on 05/06/2008, -2/+14You do realize that the Neanderthal was an entirely different species than us, right?
- UberNick, on 05/06/2008, -1/+13There's no accident about the mutations that occur. Various mechanisms of DNA have altering frequencies of mutation which are very, very finely tuned to change frequently enough to allow gradual adaptation without destroying the species. This is most apparent, and most differentiated, in rates of virus mutations.
- semeticstallion, on 05/06/2008, -0/+11The Emancipation Proclamation didn't free any slaves -- it was a marketing ploy to the rest of the world to make the south look bad, thereby cutting off their trade with European countries and pretty much guaranteed the win for the North since they couldn't get the supplies they needed to continue.
- ApokalypseNow, on 05/06/2008, -0/+11Ah this old hat. Evolution is not racist, in fact it actually REFUTES racism by showing that we humans are all one species.
Go read more here:
http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA005.html
http://talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA005_1.html - kakwakas, on 05/06/2008, -11/+22No, that's just good slave breeding.
- brstilson, on 05/06/2008, -0/+11*groan*
Try reading a book before you denounce it. In fact, you can for free here: http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?itemI ...
You misunderstand what Darwin meant by "race." He meant species, not human breeds. Eugenics was a pseudoscience that latched onto evolutionary ideas but didn't follow through logically. There was and is no scientific basis to believe that Africans are somehow "less evolved" than any other race. Evolution was used by people who were already racists to feel like their ideas were supported by science, or did you forget that slavery and racism existed long before the days of Darwin?
The white American Christians used the Bible to justify their slavery of blacks, and their extermination of Native Americans. Does that show the "bigotry" at the heart of Christianity?
Blaming Darwin for racism is like blaming Newton for terrorism. - inactive, on 05/06/2008, -2/+13and I thought I had a crazy job.
- snagra, on 05/06/2008, -3/+14No
- inactive, on 05/06/2008, -15/+26Scientists will almost always put scientific progress ahead of individual human life.
- Dimensio, on 05/06/2008, -0/+10"Since Darwin and today's evolutionists believe man to be just another 'animal' - "races" does in fact encompass races of the human animal."
Humans are animals by biological classification. Any extra traits beyond those of any other animal species that humans may possess is a property seperate from biology. While "race" does address human species, Darwin also used it in references to varieties of cabbage. Claiming that the title of the book is itself an indication of human racism inherent in the theory, without even addressing the content of the book, is irrational and dishonest.
"Emphasis on the "to any real extent". As I say, since humans are considered just another animal - the entire book also refers to man."
The book addresses the emergence of biodiversity in general. This does not support the previous poster's thesis.
"If you believe in Evolution, at least have the courage of your beliefs - and admit man is just another animal in your textbooks."
I have not denied that ***** sapiens sapiens is, by biological classification, animal. This was established in biology before Charles Darwin was born, and it does not support the previous poster's thesis. - ramunenke, on 05/06/2008, -3/+13no we are not going to give you an excuse for why you were out performed by some black kid
- Dimensio, on 05/06/2008, -0/+10"Where did the DNA code come from?"
Are you referring to DNA structures in general, or are you inquiring about the ultimate origin of DNA? - inactive, on 05/06/2008, -3/+13Thats what he gets for thinking with the right side of his brain!
According to Rev Wright black people think with the right side of their brains and are unable to learn from books or sit still in class.
"Blacks, by contrast, cannot sit still in class or learn from quiet study, and they have difficulty learning from "objects" — books, for example — but instead learn from "subjects," such as rap lyrics on the radio."
-Rev Wright at the NAACP speech a week ago - dcmjzero, on 05/06/2008, -2/+12don't forget that during the middle ages the Muslim cultures retained and advanced scientific knowledge from the Greeks and Romans. it wasn't until the Renaissance that that changed.
- jer2eydevil88, on 05/06/2008, -0/+9http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/06/nyregion/thecity ...
- ritubpant, on 05/06/2008, -8/+17wow is all i can say
- canUdi9it, on 05/06/2008, -4/+13Scientific Racism: oxymoron.
Racism is solely based on ignorance. - spambutcher, on 05/06/2008, -1/+10Sure - but how many of those who identify as christian would actually answer yes to the question "Do you accept Jesus as your lord and savior?"
Einstein may have been Jewish and believed in some kind of higher-power - but he also said "The idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I am unable to take seriously."
I suspect this is representative of a lot of "religious" scientists - especially more recent ones. - hollowex, on 05/06/2008, -1/+10This was also done at the 1904 World's Fair. It was to display the conquered peoples of the Empire of the United States.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Purchase_Ex ...
To further illustrate the indignities heaped upon the Philippine people following their eventual loss to the Americans, the United States made the Philippine campaign the centrepoint of the 1904 World's Fair held that year in St. Louis, MI [sic]. In what was enthusiastically termed a "parade of evolutionary progress," visitors could inspect the "primitives" that represented the counterbalance to "Civilisation" justifying Kipling's poem "The White Man's Burden". Pygmies from New Guinea and Africa, who were later displayed in the Primate section of the Bronx Zoo, were paraded next to American Indians such as Apache warrior Geronimo, who sold his autograph. But the main draw was the Philippine exhibit complete with full size replicas of Indigenous living quarters erected to exhibit the inherent backwardness of the Philippine people. The purpose was to highlight both the "civilising" influence of American rule and the economic potential of the island chains' natural resources on the heels of the Philippine-America War. It was, reportedly, the largest specific Aboriginal exhibit displayed in the exposition. As one pleased visitor commented, the human zoo exhibit displayed "the race narrative of odd peoples who mark time while the world advances, and of savages made, by American methods, into civilized workers." - shitforbrains, on 05/06/2008, -2/+11I wonder what his caps were made of and how they were made. Oh and to the idiot that said Pygmies are modern day Neanderthals, you do know that pygmies are the same species that you are, assuming you're not a chimp with a stolen laptop, don't you?
- Dimensio, on 05/06/2008, -1/+9"Darwin's theory was that dark skinned people were less evolved than lighter skinned people."
Please explain the meaning of "less evolved" within the context of the theory of evolution. Please show that "dark skinned people" being "less evolved" than "lighter skinned people" is a logical conclusion from Darwin's explanation of the process by which extant biodiversity emerged from common ancestry.
"His book was called: On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. This is the very foundation of evolution, and one reason I cannot accept it as truth."
As I have already pointed out that "Races", within the title of Darwin's groundbreaking book, referred to variations within animal species in general, and not to human races which were not addressed to any extent within the book, I do not understand why you continue to attempt to make the false implication. Additionally, you are appealing to consequence, a logical fallacy. -
Show 51 - 100 of 381 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is