The cure for cults that want to deny others
their freedom of speech is more freedom of speech
-- Fredric Rice

---

Creationist Cults

This one's also interesting in that it starts out making all kinds of rather bizarre claims. The idea that evolution has something to do with atheism is a fairly common absurdity which creationists come up with on a regular basis. The endless use of the fallacy known as "begging the question" that's evidenced in this propaganda piece is quite heavy. See how many logic fallacies you can count before giving up on this propaganda piece. - flr


SOCIAL DARWINISM IN AMERICAN THOUGHT AND CONTROVERSY
By Lisa Menton
July 24, 1986

(C) copyright 1991 Missouri Association for Creation, Inc.

I.   Introduction
     A.	  Justification through reason and nature.
     B.	  Darwin's explanation for evolution.
II.  Social Darwinism and the American industrial revolution.
     A.   Abuses of capitalism and the "work ethic".
     B.	  An excuse for not helping the poor and the weak.
111. The influence of Social Darwinism on racism and sexism.
     A.	  Comparison of man and apes.
     B.	  Brain size and intelligence.
     C.	  The American Eugenics movement.
     D.	  The evolutionary justification for sexism.
IV.  The influence of Social Darwinism on fascism and militarism.
     A.   Justification of war as "survival of the fittest."
     B.	  Hitler and Darwinism.
     C.	  Mussolini based fascism on Darwinism.
V.   The influence of Social Darwinism on Marxism and Communism.
     A.	  Correspondence between Engels and Marx.
     B.	  Class struggle and survival of the fittest.
     C.	  The relationship of Marxism and punctuated equilibrium.
VI.  Conclusion
     A.	  Darwin's awarness of the social implications of his theory.
     B.	  Evolutionism in the schools.
     C.	  The relationship of atheism to evolutionism.
     D.	  The scientific case against evolutionism.

When people no longer accept God as their Creator, or God's Word as the standard for morality, they try to justify their behavior and thoughts in some other way.

Unfortunately there are more people who believe in gods and goddesses today than there has ever been -- and the state of the planet has never been in a more sorry state now than it has ever been.

Because few Christians actually believe creationist crap, creationists like to pretend that everyone else is some how "denying" their "e;words of gods." The picture the unsalted nut is trying to paint is one of a world "turning away" from the Christian gods and, presumably, adopting the Christian god "Satan" some how.

The author "forgot" to mention the fact that Christianity -- and religion in general -- has been the cause of humanity's worse woes and as such has no right to suppose any opinions as to morality. The history of Christianity is one of bloody tyranny which exceeds any other religious cult ever contrived. Sadly, with George Dubya Bush's latest Christians vs. Muslims religious war, maybe Islam will shortly be able to match Christianity's body count.

Now watch as the unsalted nut says not one word about Christianity's history: - flr

Appeals to reason or to the assumed nature of the universe have been used throughout history to justify changing man-made values and morals. It has been said that no book, other than the Bible, has had a greater affect on human society than Darwin's 'The Origin of Species.' The evolutionary ideas of Darwin have been used to justify some of the most dreadful attitudes and activities in the past 125 years in the name of "science." The Harvard Evolutionist Steven Jay Gould, says that following the publication of Darwin's 'Origin of Species' in 1859:

Subsequent arguments for slavery, colonialism, racial differences, class structures, and sex roles would go forth primarily under the banner of science.(1)

Whether Darwinism is actually science or not is a much debated matter but Darwin certainly had no body of experimental evidence on which to base his evolutionary ideas. Darwin observed that there could be great variation among the individuals of a species and that in any generation of animals or plants, some are better suited to their environment and survive while others die. According to Darwin, the evolution of a new species occurs by three principles:

The feature of Darwinism used most by those who attempt to justify their political and social views with "science" is "survival of the fittest." In their text book, 'Civilization Past and Present,' authors Wallbank and Taylor said that Darwin's theory of the survival of the fittest:

became a vogue that swept western thought in the late nineteenth century. It also became a convenient doctrine for justifying various economic and political theories.(3)

This application of Darwin's principle of the "survival of the fittest" to human affairs and values is known as Social Darwinism.

Social Darwinism and the American Industrial Revolution:

Our text book, 'The Americans,' describes the use of Social Darwinism, at the time of the American industrial revolution, to justify the abuses of capitalism and the protestant work ethic, but nothing is mentioned of its role in the defense of racism, sexism, fascism and communism.(4) Some industrialists did in fact take advantage of certain implications of Darwin's theory to condone their unethical practices. For example, in his autobiography, the great captain of industry, Andrew Carnegie, described his conversion to evolutionism on reading Darwin, and its effect on his own world view:

I remember that light came as in a flood and all was clear. Not only had I got rid of theology and the supernatural, but I had found the truth of evolution. 'All is well since all grows better,' became my motto, my true source of comfort. Man was not created with an instinct for his own degradation, but from the lower he had risen to the higher forms. Nor is there any conceivable end to his march to perfection.(5)

Evolutionism not only soothed the consciences of the big industrialists in their dealings with competitors, it also aided those who took advantage of the poor. Evolutionism discouraged efforts to improve the working and living conditions of the poor, the sick and the children because, after all, it was "natures way" that the strong should prevail over the weak and even eliminate them. Some have argued that such views are an unfortunate use of Darwinism that was never suggested by Darwin himself, but this is not entirely true. Robert E.D. Clark says that:

Darwin often said quite plainly that it was wrong to ameliorate the conditions of the poor, since to do so would hinder the evolutionary struggle for existence.(6)

The Influence of Social Darwinism on Racism and Sexism:

Darwin's idea that man evolved from apes was based on observed similarities in the bodies of man and apes. This naturally invited a comparison between the "lowest" humans and the "highest" apes and for some, even blurred the distinction between man and ape. Blacks in particular were singled out as being inferior to caucasians but eventually indians and jews were also considered to be inferior (not fully human). In his book 'The Mismeasure of Man'(7), Steven Jay Gould points out that nearly every question in American life sciences was reformulated in the light of evolutionism and that some scientists were not above falsifying their data to support their conclusions about the superiority of the white race. Perhaps the greatest abuse in America came from the measurement of the cranial capacity of skulls, both fossil and modern, and the assumption that the size of the brain was directly related to intelligence. Apart from the fact that brain size has nothing to do with intelligence (the brains of women are smaller than those of men), many anthropologists intentionally exaggerated the size of caucasian skulls and underestimated the size of skulls from blacks and indians to fit their preconceived notions about evolution and racial superiority. Darwinism thus came to serve as a "scientific" basis for racism and has been at least partly responsible for racial and ethnic strife, not only in America but in Russia and Germany. Wallbank and Taylor say:

The pseudo-scientific application of biological theory to politics ... constituted possibly the most perverted form of social Darwinism ... It led to racism and anti-semitism and was used to show that only 'superior' nationalities and races were fit to survive. Thus, among the English-speaking peoples were to be found the champions of the 'white man's burden,' an imperial mission carried out by Anglo-Saxons ... Similarly, the Russians preached the doctrine of Pan-Slavism and the Germans that of pan-Germanism.(8)

Again it is often argued that Darwin would never have supported this interpretation of his theory, but in the sixth chapter of his 'Descent of Man,' Darwin predicted that the time would come when the white races of the world would destroy the black race. Darwin wrote that eventually, evolution would increase the gap between the human and the ape by the anticipated extinction of such evolutionary "intermediates" as chimpanzees and blacks:

The break will then be rendered wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, than the caucasian, and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the Gorilla.(9)

Darwin's cousin, Sir Francis Galton, carried his uncles ideas to their logical conclusion and became the father of the American eugenics movement.(10) Eugenics is the socalled "science" which seeks to improve the biological make-up of the human species by selective breeding. Galton even advocated the regulation of mariage and family size according to genetic quaility of the parents. This was a seemingly logical development since Darwin believed that the variation he saw among the individuals of a species was without limit and thus if selective breeding were applied to humans, as it is to farm animals, the perfect human (superman) was sure to develop. This concept of the "master race" was put into actual practice by Adolph Hitler in Germany through his efforts to create a "pure" aryan race while exterminating the jews who he considered to be inferior. This killed the interest in eugenics in America until recent years.

Evolutionism has even served to promote sexism. For example, one of America's most distinguished psychologists, G. Stanley Hall claimed that suicide rates were higher for women than men because women have a more primitive evolutionary status than men:

Woman's body and soul is phyletically older and more primitive, while man is more modern, variable, and less conservative. Women are always inclined to preserve old customs and ways of thinking. Women prefer passive methods; to give themselves up to the power of elemental forces, as gravity, when they throw themselves from heights or take poison ..(11)

Clearly, evolutionism can be used to "explain" almost anything, no matter how outrageous.

The Christian mythologies has been -- and continues to be -- used by the religiously insane to "justify" their endless inhuman tyrannies Christians have inflicted -- and continue to inflict -- upon their intrellectual superiors -- not to mention upon their fellow Christians.

Why didn't this cultist cover the history of Christianity? Here we have a cultist trying to pretend that the misuse of Darwin's theories used to explain the directly observed fact of evolution some how makes the observed fact some kind of ideology -- as if the observed fact of evolution some how disappears.

And yet not one word about Christianity's bloody history. Golly. I wonder why. - flr

The Influence of Social Darwinism on Fascism and Militarism:

Social Darwinism was also used by the Nazis and others to justify the aggressive militarism which plunged America into the Second World War. Friederich von Bernhardi was a German soldier who wrote the book 'Germany and the Next War' which praised the virtues of war in strong evolutionary terms. Of this book, the anthropologist Ashley Montagu says:

'War,' declared Bernhardi, 'is a biological necessity;' it is as necessary as the struggle of the elements of Nature;' it 'gives a biologically just decision, since its decisions rest on the very nature of things. The whole idea of arbitration represents a presumptuous encroachment on the natural laws of development, for what is right is decided by the arbitration of war.' In proof thereof such notions of Darwin's as The Struggle for Existence, Natural Selection, and the Survival of the Fittest are invoked.. According to Bernhardi, it is plainly evident that anyone who makes a study of plant and animal life that 'war is a universal law of nature.' This declaration and fortification of Germany's will to war - for it had the highest official sanction and approval - was published in 1911. Three years later the greatest holocaust the world had ever known was launched...(12)

Hitler based his fascism on evolutionary theory as is evident from his speeches and his book 'Mein Kampf.' Robert E.D. Clark has pointed out, however, that in the great number of books covering every phase of the Hitler regime, there is hardly any mention of the influence of Darwinism, which Clark attributes to the fear of being considered anti- evolutionary(13)

And in fact Adolf Hitler was a staunch Christian who remained a strong Christian until his suicide, enjoying the overwhelming support of his fellow Christian churches all across Europe. Hitler's extermination projects for the mentally disabled and the politically unsound were all highly touted by Hitler as being in keeping with the will of his Christian gods.

And of course the creationist cultist is "sadly mistaken." In fact Adolf Hitler adopted the already debunked occult notions of Lemarkianism, not Darwin. Creationists seem to deliberately confuse the two concepts knowing, it seems that Lemarkianism had been grandly debunked by scientists before Adolf Hitler added the occult notion to his Christianity. - flr

Benito Mussolini, who brought fascism to Italy, was also greatly influenced by Darwinism which he thought supported his belief that violence is basic to social transformation. Clark says that:

Mussolini's attitude was completely dominated by evolution. In public utterances he repeatedly used the Darwinian catchwords while he mocked at perpetual peace, lest it should hinder the evolutionary process.(14)

The Prussian militarist, Heinrich von Treitsche, used the concept of the "survival of the fittest" to actually glorify war and to raise the interest of the state over the individual:

The grandeur of war lies in the utter annihilation of puny man in the great conception of the State, and it brings out the full significance of the sacrifice of fellow countrymen for one another. In war the chaff is winnowed from the wheat.(15)

The intent is not to blame Darwin for all war but if survival of the fittest is to be applied to man and taken literally, even brutal militarism seems a logical consequence.

And exterminating Jews because they don't accept the Jesus deity construct and to keep them from further "sinning" is likewise a good Christian ideology which was evidenced in the past -- and sadly seems to still hold sway in some areas of the United States.

Why didn't this cultist also mention the fact that any race hatred ideology held against Jews within the United States is based in either Christianity or Islam? The KKK, Aryan Nations, Church of Jesus Christ Christian, and any other hate-based anti-Semetic ideology advocated in the United States is almost entirely Christian, the exceptions being Islamic-based hatred.

Why is it that there are no atheist groups that advocate anti-Semetic ideologies? Why is it also the total venue of Christians? - flr

The Influence of Social Darwinism on Marxism and Communism:

Frederich Engels, one of the founders of Communism, wrote to Karl Marx, December 12, 1859, "Darwin, whom I am just now reading is splendid."(16) Karl Marx wrote back on December 9, 1860, "Although it is developed in a crude English style, this is the book which contains the basis in natural history for our views."(17) Marx again wrote to Engels on January 16, 1861, "Darwin's book is very important and serves me as a basis in natural selection for the class struggle in history...not only is a death blow dealt here for the first time to 'Teleology' in the natural sciences but their rational meaning is emphatically explained."(18) The three things then for which Marx was most indebted to Darwinism was 1) an atheistic "explanation" for the origin of the Cosmos, 2) the struggle for existence and 3) the progressive development and improvement of man. Communism cannot tolerate an allegiance to anything higher than the state so it demands atheism. Marxism also insists that mans well-being is progressively improved through a blind process of class struggle and revolution. Marx had such a high regard for Darwin's contributions to the development of Communism that he wanted to dedicate his book 'Das Capital' to him but Darwin declined the offer.

Today evolutionism is in trouble because the transitional forms that ought to exist in the fossil record, showing us how one animal gradually changed through many intermediate stages into a different animal, simply are not there.

And in fact no, it's not. Evolution is a directly observed phenomena that can be neither "in trouble" nor "out of trouble." Evolution simply is, no in or out about it.

As for the theories which attempt to explain the directly observed facts of evolution, the fact that science has cataloged endless lists of transitional fossils seems to have also escaped this cult's attentions. The fact that contemporary theories also predict gaps in the fossil record also seems to have escaped this cult's attention.

The lack of scholarship is, at least, on a par with the previous nut rants about destructive political ideologies. For some reason creationist cultists want to pretend that evolution has something to do with politics, atheism, and damn near just about everything.

Nobody said these people were remotely sane. - flr

In an effort to get around this difficulty, modern evolutionists are abandoning classical Darwinism and replacing it with "punctuated equilibrium." This idea, popularized by the American evolutionists Niles Eldredge and Steven Jay Gould, simply states that the reason there are no transitional forms in the fossil record is that evolution occurs by great fortunate leaps punctuated by long periods of evolutionary stability (i.e. punctuated equilibrium).

Presumably, since the author hasn't done his or her homework and isn't aware of the mass of documented transitional fossils that have already been cataloged, such samples don't exist. It's a common notion for creationist cultists to have: because the creationist doesn't know about the evidence that's widely available, referenced in the local library, said evidence simply doesn't exist some how.

This is what creationists want taught as fact in our public schools, folks. - flr

This outrageous idea is perceived as being even more consistent with Marxism, and interestingly, both Gould and Eldredge are Marxists who are quite aware of the relationship:

Hegel's dialectical laws, translated into a materialist context, have become the official 'state philosophy' of many socialist nations. These laws of change are explicitly punctuational, as befits a theory of revolutionary transformation in human society. In the light of this official philosophy, it is not at all surprising that a punctuational view of speciation, much like our own, but devoid of references to synthetic evolutionary theory, has long been favored by many Russian paleontologists. It may also not be irrelevant to our personal preferences that one of us learned his Marxism, literally, at his daddy's knee.(19)

Conclusion:

It might be argued that this study blames Darwinism for too many of the great social mistakes and atrocities of our century and that, in any event, Darwin really did not intend for his theory to have social implications. In a letter to H. Thiel in 1869, Darwin seems to indicate that he fully appreciated the social implications of his theory:

You will really believe how much interested I am in observing that you apply to moral and social questions analogous views to those which I have used in regard to the modification of species. It did not occur to me formerly that my views could be extended to such widely different and most important subjects.(20)

Perhaps the most serious impact of Darwinism on our society is its essentially atheistic view of the Cosmos and its origin.

That's kind of neat. "...atheistic view of the cosmos..." As if the author's fellow Christians who accept science all disappear in a puff of creationist illogic and stupidity. As if directly observed facts some how care whether those that observe them have created gods and goddesses for themselves. - flr

This view makes man the sole judge of what is right and wrong which is what I have been taught in many social studies classes. Obviously evolutionism presents a very different view of our origins and values than that presented in the Bible.

Boy howdy, there's an understatement!
Numbers 31:17-18
"Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman who hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves."

There's a little sample of values presented in the classical Christanic mythologies. If you have neighbors who demand that they require deity constructs to behave themselves, fr your safety I would suggest that you move immediately. Cultists that need to pretend they have to behave else their invisibple playmates will punish them shouldn't be trusted against the day they find out their fictrional constructs don't actually exists.

Atheists are grossly under represented in the prison systems of Westernized society (check out Green Pastures available on this web site for details.) That's because atheists recognize the need to be responsible for their own actions; they don't adopt the theist notion that one can "explain" their behavior to a deity construct and, of course, atheists can't use the traditional theist tyranny of claiming that their gods will justify their follower's behavior.

The abject evil depicted in the contemporary versions of the classical Christanic mythologies is some how ignored by creationist cultists -- and by otherwise honest Christians -- because it directly and adversely impacts their notion that their Christian gods are some how benevolent rather than the despotic tyrants that are actually depicted in the myths. This is in keeping with the savages which penned the mythologies and their justification for the evils they visited upon their contemporaries. - flr

Evolution puts mere chance and the natural properties of matter in the place of an all powerful and all knowing Creator who creates by the power of His Word. Some say that belief in Darwinism does not have to destroy ones Christian faith, but it can and the example of Darwin himself is not very encouraging. Darwin was not trained as a scientist but as a clergyman in the Anglican church and claimed that before his voyage on the Beagle, he did not "doubt the strict and literal truth of every word in the Bible," but after he came to accept the gradualistic origin of all life by evolution he said:

I had gradually come by this time to see that the Old Testament from its manifestly false history of the world .. was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindus, or the beliefs of the Barbarian..(21)

In his autobiography, written mainly for the benefit of his children, Darwin said that his study of evolution and the laws of nature made the miracles of the Bible unbelievable. He concluded:

Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted even for a single second that my conclusion was correct. I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true ...(22)

Like most students, I have been taught evolutionism in science and social studies classes since the fourth grade. In lectures, movies and textbooks, I have been given the impression that evolution is a "fact," yet when some student would question evolutionism, the teacher would say that "its only a theory." In preparing this paper I have learned that even theories can have dangerous consequences. I was fortunate enough to learn about our Creator, rather than Marxism, on my Daddy's knee but I feel sorry that other students who have neither a strong religious or scientific background can only look upon evolution as the "truth." While many believe that it is wrong to have prayer and religious instruction in school, I have to ask is it not just as wrong to teach evolution, given its many dangerous religious and philosophical implications? Of course it could be argued that evolution is a "fact" of science and so religious views will simply have to accommodate it, but there is a growing body of scientific evidence that is critical of every aspect of evolutionism,(*) unfortunately, none of this ever reaches the class room. Some insist that evolutionism should be taught no matter how weak the evidence is because the only real alternative, creation, is only a matter of faith and not science. It seems to me that it takes more faith to believe in evolution with its total dependence on chance and unprovable scenarios, than it does to believe in the wise and powerful Creator revealed in the Bible. Social Darwinism has inflicted a great cost on American Society, but it would be all the more dreadful if Darwinism is not true.

____________________________

(*) There are many books and magazines articles by scientists and laymen which are highly critical of all aspects of evolution. The following books should be available in libraries and book stores and will document the scientific case against evolutionism: 'Evolution: A Theory in Crisis' by Michael Denton (Adler & Adler, 1985); 'The Bone Peddlers: Selling Evolution' by Wm. R. Fix (MacMillan Publishing Company N.Y., 1984); 'The Neck of the Giraffe: Where Darwin Went Wrong' by Francis Hitching (Ticknor & Fields, New Haven, 1982); 'Darwin Retried' by Norman Macbeth (A Delta Book, Published by Dell Publishing Co., New York, 1971).

FOOTNOTES:

1. Gould, Stephen Jay, 'The Mismeasure of Man' (W.W. Norton and Company, New York, 1981) p. 72.

2. "Darwinism." 'The Encyclopedia Britanica,' 1964 ed.

3. Wallbank, Walter T. and Alastair M. Taylor, 'Civilization Past and Present,' 4th ed. (Scott, Foresman andCo., 1961), Vol. 2, p. 361.

4. Jordan, Winthrop D., Miriam Greenblatt and John S. Bowes, 'The Americans,' (McDougal, Little and Company, Evanston, IL, 1985) pp. 415-416.

5. Hofstadter, Richard, 'Social Darwinism and American Thought,' (Beacon Press, 1955) p. 45.

6. Clark, Robert E.D., 'Darwin: Before and After,' (Poternoster Press, 1958) p. 120.

7. Gould, chapter 3.

8. Wallbank and Taylor, p.362.

9. Darwin, Charles, 'Descent of Man,' 1871, p.201

10. "Galton, Sir Francis." 'The Encyclopedia Britaica,' 1964 ed.

11. Hall, G.S., 'Adolescence: Its Psychology and its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion, and Education,' (D. Appleton and Company, New York, 1904) Vol. 2, pp. 589 and 784.

12. Montagu, Ashley, 'Man in Process,' (World Pub. Co., 1961), pp. 76-77.

13. Clark, p.117.

14. Clark, p. 115.

15. Von Trietsche, H.G., 'Politics,' Translated by B. Dugdale and T. de Bille (Constable and Co.), Vol. 1, pp. 66-67.

16. Zirkle, Conway, 'Evolution, Marxian Biology, and the Social Scene', (University of Pennsylvania Press, 1959), p. 85.

17. Zirkle, p. 86.

18. Zirkle, p. 86.

19. Eldredge, Niles and Stephen Jay Gould, "Punctuated Equilibria: The Tempo and Mode of Evolution Reconsidered" Paleobiology Vol. 3, Spring 1977, pp. 145-146.

20. Darwin, Francis, editor, 'The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin' (D. Appleton and Co., 1896) Vol. 2, p. 294.

21. Rallings, Christopher, 'The Voyage of Charles Darwin' (Mayflower Books, New York, 1979) pp. 161-163.

22. Darwin, Francis 'The Life and Letters'. pp. 277-278.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Clark, Robert E.D., 'Darwin: Before and After', Poternoster Press, 1958.

Darwin, Charles, 'Descent of Man', 1871.

Darwin, Francis, editor, 'The Life and Letters of Charles Darwin'. D. Appleton and Company, 1896.

"Darwinism." 'The Encyclopedia Britanica', 1964 ed.

Eldredge, Niles and Stephen Jay Gould, "Punctuated Equilibria: The Tempo and Mode of Evolution Reconsidered" Paleobiology (Vol. 3, Spring 1977).

"Galton, Sir Francis." 'The Encyclopedia Britaica', 1964 ed.

Gould, Stephen Jay, 'The Mismeasure of Man', W.W. Norton and Company, New York, 1981.

Hall, G.S., 'Adolescence: Its Psychology and its Relations to Physiology, Anthropology, Sociology, Sex, Crime, Religion, and Education', D. Appleton and Company, New York, 1904.

Himmelfarb, Gertrude, 'Darwin and the Darwinian Revlolution', W.W. Norton and Company, New York, 1959.

Hofstadter, Richard, 'Social Darwinism and American Thought', Beacon Press, 1955.

Jordan, Winthrop D., Miriam Greenblatt and John S. Bowes, 'The Americans', McDougal, Little and Company, Evanston, IL, 1985.

Montagu, Ashley, 'Man in Process', World Pub. Co., 1961.

Rallings, Christopher, 'The Voyage of Charles Darwin', Mayflower Books, New York, 1979.

Sunderland, Luther D., 'Darwin's Enigma'. Master Book Publishers, San Diego, 1984.

Von Trietsche, H.G., 'Politics', Translated by B. Dugdale and T. de Bille Constable and Co.

Wallbank, Walter T. and Alastair M. Taylor, 'Civilization Past and Present', 4th ed. Scott, Foresman and Co., 1961.

Zirkle, Conway, 'Evolution, Marxian Biology, and the Social Scene', University of Pennsylvania Press, 1959.

***************************************

Origins Talk RBBS * (314) 821-1078
FidoNet 1:100/435
Christian Fellowship Net 8:3006/28

Missouri Association for Creation, Inc.
405 North Sappington Road
Saint Louis, Missouri 63122-4729
(314) 821-1234


Any text written by the creationist cult which may be quoted within this criticial examination of the creationist cult is provided according to U. S. Code Title 17 "Fair Use" dictates which may be reviewed at http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html


"You can lie about ICR all you want." -- Jason Daniel Henderson

"Thank you for your permission however there's never any need to.
Creationist propaganda is already self-debunking." -- Fredric L. Rice

---

The views and opinions stated within this web page are those of the author or authors which wrote them and may not reflect the views and opinions of the ISP or account user which hosts the web page. The opinions may or may not be those of the Chairman of The Organized Crime Civilian Response®.

This web site is not affiliated or associated with any creationist cult in any way and neither the web site host, the web site owner, or any of the authors which assisted in debunking creationist nonsense are in any way connected with any creationist cult.

E-Mail Fredric L. Rice / The Skeptic Tank