Archive for August 28th, 2005

Reply to H.S.

H.S. disagrees with evolution.

Suits me. The last thing I want is a bunch of commenters who agree with me on everything.

But, as you will see, what bothered me was not the disagreement, but something far more critical.

She misused the term “politically correct.”

Deal with the POINT. But NEVER use “politically correct” as a throwaway expression.

In this war, that is a terrible misstep. And this IS a war.

Misusing that word is more important than anything relating to evolution. It aids the enemy enormously.

Here is the exchange: HS begins by quoting me:

Whales are the only animal for which we have a complete fossil record of its evolution from one species to another.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/prehistoric_life/redesign.shtml
Whales were originally a furry hooved carnivore, no more at home in the water than a tiger. But the shoreline is where the food is. While all other hooved carnivores died out this one apparently ate fish that washedup, then began to go after them in the water.

HS REPLIES:

If adherents to the alternate religion of PC need for whales to have been furry hooved carnivores, you will have a thousand professors line up and swear that they did.

There is less than no scientific fact to back up the article and statements above.

Here is my reply. Bob’s Blog is not a gentle place:

Why does PC need evolution?

Evolution is the antithesis of equality and universality.

I am genuinely interested in your answer to this, since it fits into the kind of thinking I am trying to inculcate.

Evolution is a bone of contention between atheistic forms of wordism and Christian forms of wordism. Karl Marx hated religion so he tried to dedicate Das Kapital to Darwin, and Darwin refused. Marx felt he had an ally against wordist Christianity, which is based on the Old Testament.

But in terms of Bob’s Blog, a fight between two forms of wordism is not important.

Professors rue the day they ever coined the term “political correctness.” It gave a name to their whole campaign of terrorizing everybody who used the wrong words.

Since then they have backpedaled desperately. They say the term political correctness was just a joke. They use it on talk shows to mean saying the right things about religion.

Anything to divert people from the real and limited meaning of the term political correctness. For once their ploys have NOT worked. For once the public knows exactly what the term political correctness means and it is the only word to describe this phenomenon.

Conservatives who use political correctness for anything they don’t approve of help the professors enormously.

If evolution is necessary to political correctness I would certainly agree that a thousand professors would line up to support it before midnight tonight. But I have NEVER heard evolution mentioned as a motivation for ANY human action in ANY social science class. Social science, political correctness, avoids any discussion of heredity whatsoever.

I repeat, what is it about evolution that is politically correct?

Professors hate Old Testament wordism, so they use evolution against it. But that is a battle between two forms of wordism.

When it comes to environment versus heredity, professors avoid evolution like the plague.

And I repeat, if you expand the term politically correct to include anything you do not agree with, you are aiding the enemy.

You may be right on your opinions and facts. But NEVER aid the enemy by your terminology.

Please note that everything I have said here has to do with political strategy, not evolution.

Words are our weapon here. Don’t use them against our own side.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

5 Comments

“Nigger” Is NOT a Southern Word

I was listening to Deac, a very, very black man, while we were working the transfer on the brick plant.

“Deac” was a preacher. That’s why we called him Deacon. We gave his tiny church a bell.

Deac weighed about 120. But that huge iron transfer with a load of wet bricks was something my brother and I both could not move. Deacon could. He could move he whole thing and talk at the same time.

He was talking about “niggahs.” He kept correcting himself by saying “colored people.”

The reason Deacon said “niggahs” was because it was easier for him, for me, for my brother, for everybody in the Deep South. Both “Negro” and “nigger” have hard “r’s” and for a Southern a hard “r” does not come naturally.

Which is why a Southerner who was trying to be as polite as possible without bowing to Yankee pressure would say “Nigrah.” Any Southerner who said Knee-Grow was being obviously unnatural in an attempt to get Yankee approval. Every Southerner could tell that.

Hard consonants and hard vowels simply did not fit in with our speech pattern.

I was endlessly grateful to Stokeley Carmichel, founder of the Black Panthers, when he pointed out that black people have a problem with that ridiculous word KneeGrow, too, and from that moment on it would be “black.”

The civil righters were interested in humiliating Southerners. How blacks spoke bothered them and their paid Negro Leaders not in the least.

For a Southerner, the word “nigger” is not as totally absurd as the word KneeGrow, but the hard “r” is not natural to us.

Of course, the word negro is a Spanish word which means black. It is pronounced nay-gro, with the rolled r. English is the only language which does not roll its r. Nay-gro would be very easy for a Southerner to say is he could roll the r.

The word naygro was the only term known for blacks when the first black people arrived in Jamestown in 1619. John Smith wrote in his diary, “Twenty niggurs arrived today.” So apparently that was the way he pronounced it.

The first twenty blacks to arrive in Jamestown were not slaves. They were indentured. Slavery was legalized in Massachusetts before it was legalized in Virginia. Those twenty blacks arrived in America over a year before the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock.

The first Virginia Legislature, the Virginia House of Burgesses, was also elected in Jamestown in 1619.

America was founded at Plymouth Rock, you know.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

No Comments

Humans May Have Evolved on the Beach

Whales are the only animal for which we have a complete fossil record of its evolution from one species to another.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/prehistoric_life/redesign.shtml

Whales were originally a furry hooved carnivore, no more at home in the water than a tiger. But the shorelineis where the food is. While all other hooved carnivores died out this one apparently ate fish that washedup, then began to go after them in the water.

Ambulocetus, the “walking whale,” looked like a crocodile with fur. That is what the original hooved carnivore evolved into. There are thousands of skeletons of these animals that link them directly to whales. It must have mated and had its offsrping on land and it only swam in fresh water.

Then the ambulacaetus took several evolutionary steps. It adapted to salt water, it adapted to mating and having its offspring on land, and it grew a lot.

Actually later seagoing whales still had their two legs that were useless for anything but holding on while mating. And they all remained hunters long after they became ocean beings.

Eating krill came later, much later.

I have talked about the people who in America long before the Indians. The Indians, of course, killed them and took their lands. My theory of why their travel left few traces is not only time, but also because they probably followed the coastline. A people used to foraging the sea would not care so much about WHICH beach they were traveling across.

The one thing that is always changing historically is the coast. There are towns in England that were there in historical times and are now under sea. They found the dead at Pompeii after they figured out where the seacoast was in 69 BC and looked there for the people who were waiting for ships.

Earlier people had searched the present coaswt because they didn’t know it had changed, even though St. Augustine’s episcopal sea at Hippo is long since under water.

There is enormous evidence that man made a partial transition to sea life. Even the hairs on our backs are positioned for better swimming. Our lack of hair in general is an adaptation to sea life.

There is a very long list of things man has that are obvious adaptations to water.

Also, dolphins have a huge brain, bigger than ours. They too were once furry animals.

We need to look at ancient, very ancient shorelines to find this critical step in our own evolution. Science only accepted continental drift in my lifetime, so we are very backward in that respect.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

4 Comments