How did the theory of evolution find such rapid acceptance among naturalists?

Because it wasn't entirely unprecedented. The basic idea of it already had rumblings in the naturalism community, Darwin just managed to pin it down into a form that explained a bunch of shit all at once.

>How did the theory of evolution find such rapid acceptance among naturalists?
Rapid acceptance? The origin of species was still an extremely divisive books decades after Darwin's death.

Marx wrote a bunch of letters praising and thanking Darwin.

Without Darwin's monkey myth, Communism would've never taken off. Neither would Nazism based on eugenics and race politics.

Knowledge of selection was already widely accepted, and is pretty much irrefutable.

Saying that nature also selects, that species also select for themselves, is only logical.

>my dad selected my mother
>muh I solved da mistery of life, god sucks

>Yes, it is.

No it isn't. One's a theory of history and social development, the other is a theory of biological development. They are not the same.

Poe's law in motion
naturalists were converging on a similar explanation for decades before Darwin published On the Origin of Species. Darwin's work was inspired by Charles Lyell who studied geology and advanced the idea of Uniformitarianism (the same natural laws and processes that operate in the universe now have always operated in the universe in the past) which was one of the components of Darwin's evolutionary theory.

Yes he does, but that's beside the point. Shitposting wont disprove science.

>A scientific theory at least 85% of the population doesn't have the intelligence for to understand it on an academic level caused two political ideologies
>Racism never existed before the theory of evolution

(you)

> Paganism

Artificial selection, animal husbandry.

>mistery of life

The mystery of life is not where babies come from, user.

>Marx wrote a bunch of letters praising and thanking Darwin.

And as it turns out, he was wrong.

Marxism is actually far more compatible with creationism. Marxism requires man to be a blank slate whose behavior is determined almost entirely by environment, and capable of altruism that no other creature is capable of. This would make him (just as creationists hold) exceptional among all creatures.

Darwinism on the other hand reveals man to be just another beast driven by competitive biological mandates and prone to extreme violence. With an organism like this, a communist society is impossible.

Marxism flies in the face of reality and the nature of man, just like creationism.

Because it's a religion, OP. I'd say it's a cult based on how Naturalists and Humanists defend it so much.

Evolution is a religion. Yes, evolution is the faith of atheism because it replaces God with man. When you've conned yourself into believing that some kind of ancient slime morphed into progressively complex and directional life forms, you are in the realm of faith, not science.

Most people who believe in evolution don't even understand it.
I have to explain it to them.

Life appearing out of inorganic materials is a mathematical impossibility.

>Evolution Debunked
newgeology.us/presentation32.html

>Errors in Evolutionary Thinking
evidentcreation.com/TRM-Logerr.html

>Evolution is a Great Delusion/Deception
youtube.com/watch?v=jMr278CMAIA

>Kent Hovind debunks Evolution (18 hours, life changing)
youtube.com/watch?v=shyI-aQaXD0

>Hovind destroys an atheist critic
youtube.com/watch?v=9wAxPG4WpN8

>Evolution is a modern fairy tale
youtube.com/watch?v=Gjvuwne0RrE

>The Greatest Lie Ever Told
youtube.com/watch?v=c1ufK04tjOI

>Overwhelming Evidence for a Global Flood
youtube.com/watch?v=lktmmd7YnD8

>Dinosaurs are not "millions" of years old
youtube.com/watch?v=niDCq3TbvOo

>Creation is a Scientific Fact
youtube.com/watch?v=KFWdMf5ALnU

>Refuting the "origins" website
trueorigin.org/

Is there a name for this retarded looking version of Pepe? It just fucking delights me to see it.

Got anything from a credible, non-religious academic institution?

> altruism that no other creature is capable of
You know that insects exist and they literally live under the communism?

>Europe under Christian Libertarian/Monarchy
>America under Constitutional Republic
Good family values, morals, ethics.
People behave civilized, knowing they are made in the image of God.

>Europe under 19th century socialism and atheism
Millions of people die slaughtering eachother.

see the French Revolution
see the Bolshevik Revolution
see WW1
see WW2

I know your post is bait, but there are actually atheists that think that. So just making sure to correct you.

>Unironically using """""""dr""""""" Kent Hovind as a source

Opinion discarded.

> If I post 10 already debunked videos they surely would know that evolution is a fairy tale!

>Unironically believing you came from a rock

Opinion discarded.

>Europe under Christian Libertarian/Monarchy

samefag

notice how atheists can never address the arguments.

its always shitposts and ad hominems.

facts really scare atheists

>evolution doesn't allow for this social behaviour
What is this referring to (2nd article in the pic)?

>You know that insects exist and they literally live under the communism?

No they don't.

The ants who do the work get paid for their work? Or the ants who own the hive get paid for all the work done by the hive?

Appeal to ridicule. Not an argument.

>Europe under socialist, liberal, multicultural, atheism

But that's exactly what you did, retard.

I was simply showing your hypocrisy.

>these naturalists are telling me I evolved from a rock, what should I say?
>what does evolved mean?
>uhh came from
>ha, that is nonsense! rocks dont create people everyone knows that!
>yeah that's what I was saying!
>posts what I replied to

Yeah. Everyone knows that he was created from the dust by magical sky wizard, duh.

I know he's now considered fairly unpopular, but Thunderf00t already addressed a bunch of the commonly posted creationist videos in his series "Why Do People Laugh At Creationists?" pointing out the scientific errors made in each one.

Historical materialism isn't only about society, it has a huge (but wrong) metaphysical background.

>implying metaphysics can ever be correct or incorrect

Take your woowoo elsewhere.

I'm none of those things except atheist.

It's funny that you're against them though since Christianity is basically spiritual socialism.

They both destroy and poison society with their nonsense altruism and damnable love for the weak and unworthy of life.

This

And this.

Evolutionism is a mental illness, we today see the effects of believing in that.

According to the laws of evolution, you only need to help out your relatives. But ant colonies so big that all the ants cannot possibly be related.

wrong board, if you want to "debate" evolution go to Veeky Forums.

>This board is dedicated to the discussion of history and the other humanities such as philosophy, religion, law, classical artwork, archeology, anthropology, ancient languages

>Reminder: Veeky Forums is for discussing topics pertaining to science and mathematics

>internet atheists

Ad hominems, strawmans and attacking a caricature version of creation beliefs.

TrueOrigins has debunked every evolutionist assumption

> Evolutionism is a mental illness,
Yes, like any other religion.

>But ant colonies so big that all the ants cannot possibly be related.

I'm seriously wonder whether you're serious here, because apparently you know neither how ant colonies work nor what evolution theory is about.

Actually, he engages in quite a bit of ridicule but he specifically addresses the scientific errors. He's not a random Dawkinite. He's a STEMlord, but he does know his shit in that regard.

It's weird that you see anti-evolution sorts calling evolutionism a religion as though that's supposed to be insulting. I suspect that on a certain level, they understand that their religious beliefs are fundamentally ridiculous.

But he's not asking about the theory as such, he's asking about the history surrounding it.

> TrueOrigins has debunked every evolutionist assumption
Which was completely debunked by
talkorigins.org/indexcc/list.html

They are literally all brothers and sisters

trueorigins is a response to talkorigins, not the other way around.

I quote the original article here.

there's no replies to actual topic of the thread, and it's obvious this was just meant to argue about evolution on the wrong board. look at the immediate replies and how the OP phrased everything with the accompanying image that tries to make fun of Darwin.

people against naturalism always post this shit on the wrong boards. again if you want to "debate" scientific things is the place to go, not Veeky Forums.

It is actually other way around, did you messed up which one was first?

Propaganda.

How do we stop these fucking ants?!

Darwin lines up perfectly with conservatism?

I don't think you read it the same as me... I think you're a philosophical conservative

There was resistance, but I agree with you in that Victorian britain was rather conservative and it is surprising on a casual appraisal that it gained as much traction as it did. However there were preceeding models for evolution proposed, so natural selection wasn't developed in a vacuum; and Wallace's independent development of natural selection I think gives some indication of a developing zeitgeist.

It is worth noting also that Darwinism fell out of favour towards the end of the 19th century until the development of the modern synthesis of evolution with the rediscovery of Mendel giving a solid model for inheritance to go with selection.

How evolutionists work:
>Start with the answer (evolution must be true)
>Interpret evidence and data to fit the theory
>See! That proves evolution!

How actual science works:
>Start from an unbiased position without any pre-conceived notions or assumptions
>Link the evidence together
>Get a theory based on the evidence

Pic related, "Neanderthal" skulls are a perfect example of this.

The Bible says that man used to live for hundreds of years, in a world which had higher oxygen levels which allowed animals to grow huge and man to live longer.

What evidence would we expect to support this? Skulls of people that show long life.
>refined eyebrow ridges
>strong jawbones
study tells us that the older you are, the more refined your eyebrow ridges become. hence why old people tend to have such ridges.

the more you eat, the stronger your jaw bones become. it is physical exercise for it. people that lived to be hundreds of years would show signs of very strong jaw bones.

Here we have direct empirical evidence for the Bible, without any assumptions.

Evolutionists see this skull and (based on their presuppositions and worldview) think this MUST be a skull of an ancient primitive caveman.

They are fitting the data to fit the theory, this is confirmation bias, dishonest and unscientific.

Are you more related to another person or an ant?

Neanderthal bones show short brutal lives.

> It isn't fitting data into your theory if you start with an answer from Bible!

>They are fitting the data to fit the theory, this is confirmation bias, dishonest and unscientific.

>The Bible says that man used to live for hundreds of years, in a world which had higher oxygen levels which allowed animals to grow huge and man to live longer.

O I am laffin

You don't start with the assumption that selection occurs, you can observe it.

Then you assume that things happened in the past much as they do today; that the laws of nature have not changed.

Then you interpret evidence and data with this assumption in mind, and, so far, find nothing that disproves evolution.

>Here we have direct empirical evidence for the Bible, without any assumptions.

If you haven't read the Bible in the original language, you're full of it.

>physical exercise
>for bones
Fucking brilliant. I love creationists.

The word "dinosaur" didn't exist until 1842.

Before that, they were known as dragons, serpents or giant lizards.

Almost every single culture and civilization throughout history talks about these creatures.

Witnesses and archeological findings say that dinosaurs lived with man.
genesispark.com/exhibits/evidence/historical/dragons/

But ofcourse, evolutionists want you to believe dinosaurs lived MILLIONS of years ago. They completely ignore the thousands of writings and accounts that talk about man interacting with dinosaurs. They base it only on dating methods.

Read this: trueorigin.org/dating.php

Radiometric dating is unreliable and extremely inaccurate.

>Then you assume that things happened in the past much as they do today

> Radiometric dating is unreliable and extremely inaccurate.
I am agree with you here, the only real dating is by comet sightings.

Creationism includes the Fall of Man.

Yes. That's a basic assumption, that the laws of nature do not change when we aren't looking.

I suppose if you don't believe in evolution, you have to assume the laws of nature were different in the past. Or that there are no laws of nature, just gods moods.

Do you have any proof it was not?

>Love of the world presented as a bad thing
holy shit you can't make this up

Do you have any proof that it was?

You're the one making the claim and assumption.

>the world we see today is exactly how it was since the beginning
This is a very juvenile and ignorant idea. Basically what evolutionists are saying is:

"Fuck the thousands of years before us and what people believed, let's start completely new and base our ideas on what we see today"

You know most cultures have stories about shape shifters.

I guess werewolves are real too.

Idea of evolution is natural evolution of ideas of the thousands of people, user.

Satan is the prince/god of this world.

Yes, they are. Why do you think art about half-men half-wolves is that popular in Internet?

We are talking about the laws of nature, thngs like gravity, chemical reactions, etc. And yes, every study we have shows that the only times those were different from today was less than a second after the big bang. since then those laws have operated consistently a

That's some serious slave morality you got going there.

>muh Nietszche

Nice humanist morality you got going there.

You're a slave to Satan because you believe in Luciferian doctrine (man is god).

>Kent Hovind
not this time creation cuck

The ultimate worldly love is love of your children, making the world better for them, giving them a better life than you had.

Not a big deal for Christians, they have nothing to do with your salvation, you can't help them, so who cares, right? Might as well live life like you stole it, then pay the fine by accepting Jesus later in life.

>Ad hominem
>Appeal to ridicule

Not an argument.

Humanists are pseudo-Christian cucks.

So no, I'm not a humanist.

> muh Bible
Better to be slave to Satan than to Jews and their so called "God"

never said anything about this guy that's ad hominem. He isn't a real professor, he got his """"""""diploma"""""""""" from a diploma mill.

> muh Origin of Species
Better to be a slave to God than to Freemasons and their so called "Lucifer"

>Character assassination
>Judging a book by its cover

Still no argument.

The reason why atheists are so furious at Hovind and constantly attack him personally is because you can't refute the arguments he makes.

By resorting to petty insults, you've basically admitted defeat and proven him right.

Hi.

Actual Luciferian here.

I'm not a slave at all, unlike you Christians who proudly describe yourselves as 'slaves of Christ'.

Yes you are.

You are brainwashed, deceived and indoctrinated into the occult.

I remember when I was a New Age hippie, thank God I got saved.

> you can't refute the arguments he makes.
Name one argument that isn't refuted already.

>sucks satan's cock
>proudly goes to hell and be tormented forever

>"Haha you Christians are st00pid for believing in the creator of the universe! Hail saitin!"

kill yourself edgy dumbass

Show me these refutations, and not from some e-celeb youtube atheist.

I've seen his videos, they're complete bullshit.
You're trusting someone with a fake diploma and who sells a fake medicine.

> be a slave to Roman Pope
> cucked in life because of fairy book
> be reborn as poo in the loo because Hinduism is the true religion, anyway.