Re: Evolution Refutes Racism
- From: Chris <chris.linthompson@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 15:55:58 -0700 (PDT)
On Mar 30, 12:46 pm, "Steven L." <sdlit...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
spintronic wrote:
Any of these bozos tell you any different, they are either
1) A Liar.
2) Don't understand their theory.
Standard creationist disinformation.
The science behind evolutionary biology is based on observation, not
value judgements. It's no more "racist" than gravity, germ theory or
the periodic table of the elements.
Quite the contrary, evolution demonstrates that there is no rational
basis for racism. "Genetic studies show that humans are remarkably
homogeneous genetically, so all humans are only one biological race.
Evolution does not teach racism; it teaches the very opposite."
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA005.html
That's a specious argument.
No, it's quite sound. In fact, there is more genetic heterogeneity
among the different so-called races than there is between them.
Bill is referring to races, or subspecies, within Homo Sapiens. Many
species probably started off as a subspecies of some other species, and
eventually became sufficiently different genetically that interbreeding
became impossible.
Subspecies is virtually a biologically meaningless term.
Didn't such factors drive the evolution of genus Homo, from Homo Erectus
to Homo Sapiens?
Unknown.
So in the far future, won't there evolve a Homo Futuristicus someday, a
subspecies of genus Homo that is as advanced beyond Homo Sapiens as Homo
Sapiens is beyond Homo Erectus? And could Homo Futuristicus drive Homo
Sapiens to extinction?
The answer is NO--up till now--because Homo Sapiens proved to be smart
enough to stop evolution in its tracks. We don't allow the sick and
injured to die; we devised medical treatments. If people are starving,
we find ways to feed them rather than let them die. And there are no
more isolated places on Earth where a subpopulation of humans could
evolve free of interference. Our civilization has made a conscious
decision to stop natural selection, and hence to stop evolution.
Balderdash. Humans are still evolving. Look up hemoglobin C for
instance. And you don't need geographic isolation to evolve in
isolation- all you need is assortative mating, and plenty of human
populations practice that- for good or ill.
That could change, if genetic engineering makes it possible to indeed
improve the species. But that would come by artificial selection, not
natural selection.
What's the difference?
Chris
--
Steven L.
Email: sdlit...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Remove the NOSPAM before replying to me.
.
- Prev by Date: News: Pennsylvania Scientists show in demonstration of evolution that size matters for snails
- Next by Date: Re: Evolution Refutes Racism
- Previous by thread: Re: Evolution Refutes Racism
- Next by thread: Re: Evolution Refutes Racism
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
