Evolution's hall of shame.

Page updated: Wednesday, February 13, 2008

First to start off this section of this website, we need to find where exactly was evolution first thought up. You can read more about this here: Science to replace religion.  What this section of this website is going do is: show you what the mind set of that era was. What really brought on evolution and what some of the results were of those who took this meaning way beyond what Darwin intended. This section will show the dangers of evolution on society and how it separates and indoctrinates hate and we don't even realize it. How you have to be brainwashed in order to believe it. How many people have died and even been killed to promote this theory, both women and children. How even groups like the kkk and white supremacists groups use this theory to further their hatred towards others.

What you will find here will shock some people and make some people mad. The truth needs to be told, and this site will tell it. This is not a personal attack on anyone, or any group of people. These will be historic facts that are not mentioned in the same context with evolution, but are very much a part of it. For if I could connect the dots to the mindset of racism, of that time, for evolution's start, would not you be interested?

Let's get down to some facts of those who supported Evolution.

"The philosophies of Karl Marx and Friedrich Nietzsche--the forerunners of Stalin and Hitler, both were dedicated evolutionists." Hitler's goal was the "purification" of the "Aryan race" through the elimination of "subhumans", which included Jews, gypsies, Asians, black Africans, and everyone else who was not a white Aryan (white skin, blonde hair with blue eyes). Charles Darwin's book: "The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection or The Preservation of "Favoured Race" In the Struggle for Life". Yes, Darwin was a racist and his evolution theory was based on this. The second title (in blue) was removed from later reprints of Darwin's book. The original still has it. If Darwin was not making a racist comment when this was said, why was this comment removed later? This was the mindset of that era, and should be a part of what evolution is. For if it were to come out, in today's education, that the theory of evolution had a racist background, foundation, and was used to exterminate those who were not considered a superior race. How long would it survive?

Note from website owner and writer of this page: I do fit all of the examples of an Aryan person (what Hitler wanted), but even I know that racism is wrong. This is not a hate the races website. God made all men in His image. And everyone was a descendant from Adam and Eve. For it was not God who started racism (the hate of what is different between one person and another), for if He truly wanted one type of person to roam the earth, one type would have been all that you see. For God makes no mistakes.

 Darwinism, and the importance of racism.

The theory of evolution is based on individuals acquiring unique traits that enable those possessing the new traits to better survive adverse conditions compared to those who don"t possess them. Superior individuals will be more likely to survive and pass on these traits to their offspring so such traits will increase in number, while the "weaker" individuals will eventually die off. If every member of a species were fully equal, natural selection would have nothing to select from, and evolution would cease for that species.

These differences gradually produce new groups, some of which have an advantage in terms of survival. These new groups became the superior, or the more evolved races. When a trait eventually spreads throughout the entire race because of the survival advantage it confers on those that possess it, a higher, more evolved form of animal will result. Hitler and the Nazi party claimed that one of their major goals was to apply this accepted science to society. And the core idea of Darwinism was not evolution, but selection. Evolution  describes the results of selection.Hitler stressed that to produce a better society we [the Nazis] must understand, and cooperate with science.

As the one race above all others, Aryans believed that their evolutionary superiority gave them not only the right, but the duty to subjugate all other peoples. Race was a major plank of the Nazi philosophy; Tenenbaum concluded that they incorporated Darwinism:
 in their political system, with nothing left out. Their political dictionary was replete with words like space, struggle, selection, and extinction (Ausmerzen). The syllogism of their logic was clearly stated: The world is a jungle in which different nations struggle for space. The stronger win, the weaker die or are killed.  

Darwinist thinkers in Germany had developed an amoral attitude to human society by the time of the First World War, in which the supposed good of the race was applied as the sole criterion of public policy and 'racial hygiene'. How policies such as infanticide, assisted suicide, marriage prohibitions (sounds like where evolution is taking us today, did we learn from past mistakes? Does not look like it if we repeat them) and much else were being proposed for those considered racially or eugenically inferior by a variety of Darwinist writers and scientists, providing Hitler and the Nazis with a scientific justification for the policies they pursued once they came to power." Dr. Richard Evans, Professor of Modern History, University of Cambridge, and author of The Coming of the Third Reich.

(Hitler) was a firm believer and preacher of evolution. Whatever the deeper, profound, complexities of his psychosis, it is certain that [the concept of struggle was important because] his book, Mein Kampf, clearly set forth a number of evolutionary ideas, particularly those emphasizing struggle, survival of the fittest and the extermination of the weak to produce a better society. While fascists are found on the right wing of Social Darwinism, the left wing is occupied by communists. Communists have always been among the fiercest defenders of Darwin's theory. 'Darwinist education' had a major role in the formation of communist cadres. For instance, historians note the fact that Stalin was religious in his youth, but became an atheist primarily because of Darwin's books. http://www.evolutiondeceit.com/special.php

""With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed." Source: "The Descent of Man" by Charles Darwin.

not very distant as measured by centuries, the civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the savage races throughout the world. At the same time the anthropomorphous apes ... will no doubt be exterminated. The break between man and his nearest Allies will then be wider, for it will intervene between man in a more civilized state, as we may hope, even than the Caucasian, and some ape as low as the baboon, instead of as now between the Negro or Australian and the gorilla."  (Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man 2nd ed (New York:  A. L. Burt Co., I 874), p. 178). 

A half century later, Darwin follower Henry Fairfield Osborn writes:  "The Negroid stock is even more ancient than the Caucasian and Mongolian, as may be proved by an examination not only of the brain, of the hair, of the bodily characters. such as the teeth, the genitalia, the sense organs, but of the instincts, the intelligence. The standard of intelligence of the average Negro is similar to that of the eleven-year-old youth of the species Homo sapiens.  (Henry Fairfield Osborn, "The Evolution of the Human Races," Natural History, Jan./Feb. 1926. Reprinted in Natural History 89 (April 1980): 129.). 

   If evolution is not about racism, why is man always evolving into a white person in their pictures? I have never see a evolution pic of man where the final outcome was a black person. Or any other race for that matter.

Leading Nazis, and early 1900 influential German biologists, revealed in their writings that Darwin's theory and publications had a major influence upon Nazi race policies. Hitler believed that the human gene pool could be improved by using selective breeding similar to how farmers breed superior cattle strains. In the formulation of their racial policies, Hitler's government relied heavily upon Darwinism, especially the elaborations by Spencer and Haeckel*. As a result, a central policy of Hitler's administration was the development and implementation of policies designed to protect the superior race. This required at the very least preventing the inferior races from mixing with those judged superior, in order to reduce contamination of the latter's gene pool. The superior race belief was based on the theory of group inequality within each species, a major presumption and requirement of Darwin's original survival of the fittest theory. This philosophy culminated in the final solution, the extermination of approximately six million Jews and four million other people who belonged to what German scientists judged as inferior races.

In the video below. There is an example of how evolutionist condone things being frauded, even today, to prove the evolution theory. Eugene Scott makes this clear as she defends what Haeckel did. She more or less says: As long as the general idea can be proven, then it does not matter if Haeckel lied. This is the exact response I get when I ask any evolutionist. They claim their theory is a true fact, but allow frauded evidence to support it.

Hitler said: Give me control over the text books, and "I" will control the next generation... And who's got control over all science books and theories? And what is not allowed in those books?

(This is an example of Haeckel's drawings. He admitted to falsifying these drawings at a later date)

A disastrous union of embryology and evolutionary biology was forged in the last half of the nineteenth century by the German embryologist and philosopher Ernst Haeckel. Based on the assumption that the laws by which species arose on this planet (phylogeny) were identical to the laws by which the individuals of the species developed (ontogeny), he viewed adult organisms as the embryonic stages of more advanced organisms. This view was summarized by his "Bio-genetic Law": Ontogeny Recapitulates Phylogeny. In other words, development of advanced species was seen to pass through stages represented by adult organisms of more primitive species. In this view, the creation of new phyla is a step towards the completion of human development. In earlier epochs, only the initial stages of this development occurred, producing protists and cnidarians. Later, more stages are added sequentially until a human being has evolved. According to Haeckel, three rules sufficed to explain how this advancing ontogeny could generate new species. First, there was the law of correspondence The human zygote, for instance, was represented by the "adult" stage of the protists; the colonial protists represented the advancement of development to the blastula stage; the gill slit stage of human embryos was represented by adult fish. Haeckel even postulated an extinct organism, Gastraea, a two-layered sac corresponding to the gastrula, which he considered the ancestor of all metazoan species (Haeckel, 1867, 1879; see Gould, 1977a) .

Haeckel's Lie:

 A guy named Ernst Haeckel made up this whole thing back in 1869. See, Charlie Darwin's book came out in 1859. He said, "We should find evidence for my theory." Ten years later they had none. So Ernst Haeckel in Germany who also hated God Ernst Haeckel said, " I'm going to make some evidence." He took the drawing of a human and a dog embryo at four weeks development and he changed them and made them look exactly alike. He traveled all over Germany with his fake drawings and just about single-handedly converted Germany to being atheistic. Ernst Haeckel was the evangelist for evolution in Germany in 1869. He took his drawings, made huge posters and he went around holding seminars. He held seminars on evolution in Germany. He had these drawings that he made showing the different animals and how their embryonic stage is nearly identical.  
     

Well, somebody a few years ago decided to check out his drawings and see how accurate they were. On top are Ernst Haeckel's drawings; on the bottom are actual photographs. He lied, actually. And it was proven that he lied. He was taken to court at his own university, the University of Jena. And he was convicted of fraud in 1874. One hundred and twenty-five years ago Ernst Haeckel confessed to lying about this embryology thing.... He lied. And he confessed it. But guess what. That concept is still in textbooks today. Holt Biology 94 edition shows the human embryo with gill pouches. Proven wrong 125 years ago. Glenco Biology showing the human embryo with gill pouches. Simply a lie. College textbooks still have it. Proven wrong in 1874. This textbooks shows a five to six week embryo but look what it says: "by seven months the fetus looks from the outside like a tiny normal baby but it is not." It is not a baby at seven months? Well, what is it? Kids are born at less than that and still survive.

Michael Richardson  Embryologist at St. George’s Medical School:

This is one of the worst cases of scientific fraud. It's shocking to find that somebody one thought was a great scientist was deliberately misleading. It makes me angry. What Haeckel did was to take a human embryo and copy it, pretending that the salamander and the pig and all the others looked the same at the same stage of development. They don't. These are fakes.     "An Embryonic Liar"  The London Times  August 11, 1997  p.14 

Why is this important? Hitler saw and believed in these photos that were faked. All from a man who hated God, and hated all who were different (racism). This was what Hitler used to justify all his actions. Evolution, and all the lies behind it. He lied for what reason? To help his dear friend Darwin with his theory, Evolution. How many people died and suffered for this while Darwin, who knew about what Haeckel was doing, stood by and said nothing? 

But, what's even worse, is what this has done to promote abortion. Making people believe that life in the womb is but a blob of tissue. Something that is not human, so killing it is ok. Really? What's really appalling, is that Haeckel's drawings have been used by Planned Parenthood to prove that we are sub-human until birth. And this connects evolution to every abortion ever performed. One Lie that Darwin even knew about. But said nothing. And look what it has done. I find that most people don't even know what partial birth abortion is, or how it's performed. Partial birth abortion is done on the woman in the third trimester. Don't believe me?

First, second, and third trimester abortion and how they are done.

The history of abortion, that connects to Hitler and evolution.

I most give a warning for the link (in yellow) below. It is not for children to see, it is not for those who have night mares. And it is not for those who get sick easily. Clicking on this link means you understand and have read this warning. This website, nor the website owner, will not be responsible if anything should happen. The reason I give this warning is because these pictures are not your normal pro-life pics that are bad, but not that bad. These pics are the worst, and are not edited in anyway to not make it look so bad. These are as is pics, right after a abortion is done. What you see here, you will never forget. But you will understand why there is a prolife movement, and you will also understand that pro-choice, is really about money. For you will also find that the baby body parts are sold for money. Already feeling kinda sick? Wait till you click on that link and see the truth. What makes it worse as you look at each pic, is knowing that one human can do this to another, and not feel bad about. That there are nurses, that help do this, and go home and tend to their kids like nothing is wrong. It's just really sad.

Pictures of aborted babies that are old enough to survive out of the womb.

But not all this information has to be bad. Here's a link that shows a baby reaching out of it's mother's womb to hold the surgeon's finger during an operation. And here you can see several real life sonograms using the new 4d technology which shows the baby in 4d.

Question: If something has no problem with being true, why lie to try and prove it? Unless it was not true to begin with.

Note: I graduated from high school in 1980. I can remember being shown and taught this stuff about haeckel and his lies. If science is so interested in telling only truth and fact, why was this still in the text books in my school? Being taught to me and others in my school as if it were fact? In my opinion, theories or only excuses to allow a lie to seem true. Because to understand how a theory works, you have to be taught that anything is feasible as long as it has a working mechanism. A little truth is added so that anyone who wants to argue it, can be shown some fact of it. But when it comes down to each part of the theory standing up to testing and factual truth. It always falls short.

Worldnet Magazine Published that Haeckel's stuff was a fraud in 2001. They also did a whistle blowers issue on: