Martian Exile
04-26-2008, 08:04 AM
Floating around the internet is this story:
"Study says near extinction threatened people"
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1 (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D908GE800&show_article=1)
This is my take on Dr. Wells drivle:
My anthropology professor made it very clear to us that every society, whether space fairing, or still in the trees, has witch doctors. Our witch doctors profess an ability to use mitochondrial DNA as a crystal ball to “prove” whatever fairytale is fashionable at the moment. Look outside the box. Think about what this clown has clamed he can do with DNA. He would not give the time of day to someone who claims to channel spirits from the past, but what he claims he has done is no different.
Dr. Wells, like many modern academics, suffers from the fear of derision. As the strangle hold of the creed of political correctness permeates every corner of human thought, academia scrambles to find new fables guaranteed to offend no one. Thus is born the preposterous notion called the “out of Africa” or “recent single origin” hypotheses. This hypothesis serves only one purpose for the insecure anthropologist, to prove in his own mind that he is not a racist. For some unfathomable reason, it has become fashionable to believe that the notion that mankind evolved according to regional climatological differences, is racist on its face. Perish the thought that people could look different.
Despite fossil evidence that mankind has been wandering around the globe for a quarter of a million years, Dr. Wells would have us believe that man did not leave Africa until just 50,000 years ago. He and his condescending goons contend that the multiregional school is based on ethnocentric bias. Is it ethnocentric to see that people look different? I think not, but it is certainly ethnocentric to believe that humans were too stupid to leave Africa and wander the earth for over 200,000 years! Look at some of the claptrap put out by the Wells camp: Tomes such as “Multireagionalism and the Origins of Anthropological Racism”. I would imagine that author of that bit of drivel would be terrified to think that he had a Neanderthal in his past, how racist can you get?
Deductive reasoning would conclude that man has been subject to climatic change. You do not need scientific evidence that a bear shits in the woods. Using hocus pocus from a witch doctor to come to that conclusion is not necessary.
Perhaps my Baptist mother is right, reading 4126 pages of J.K. Rowling’s tripe can negatively affect society to the point that the masses will believe anything.
"Study says near extinction threatened people"
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1 (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D908GE800&show_article=1)
This is my take on Dr. Wells drivle:
My anthropology professor made it very clear to us that every society, whether space fairing, or still in the trees, has witch doctors. Our witch doctors profess an ability to use mitochondrial DNA as a crystal ball to “prove” whatever fairytale is fashionable at the moment. Look outside the box. Think about what this clown has clamed he can do with DNA. He would not give the time of day to someone who claims to channel spirits from the past, but what he claims he has done is no different.
Dr. Wells, like many modern academics, suffers from the fear of derision. As the strangle hold of the creed of political correctness permeates every corner of human thought, academia scrambles to find new fables guaranteed to offend no one. Thus is born the preposterous notion called the “out of Africa” or “recent single origin” hypotheses. This hypothesis serves only one purpose for the insecure anthropologist, to prove in his own mind that he is not a racist. For some unfathomable reason, it has become fashionable to believe that the notion that mankind evolved according to regional climatological differences, is racist on its face. Perish the thought that people could look different.
Despite fossil evidence that mankind has been wandering around the globe for a quarter of a million years, Dr. Wells would have us believe that man did not leave Africa until just 50,000 years ago. He and his condescending goons contend that the multiregional school is based on ethnocentric bias. Is it ethnocentric to see that people look different? I think not, but it is certainly ethnocentric to believe that humans were too stupid to leave Africa and wander the earth for over 200,000 years! Look at some of the claptrap put out by the Wells camp: Tomes such as “Multireagionalism and the Origins of Anthropological Racism”. I would imagine that author of that bit of drivel would be terrified to think that he had a Neanderthal in his past, how racist can you get?
Deductive reasoning would conclude that man has been subject to climatic change. You do not need scientific evidence that a bear shits in the woods. Using hocus pocus from a witch doctor to come to that conclusion is not necessary.
Perhaps my Baptist mother is right, reading 4126 pages of J.K. Rowling’s tripe can negatively affect society to the point that the masses will believe anything.