Darwinian Poppycock

Darwinian Poppycock
©Lucio Mascarenhas. March 10, 2004.
Recently, I noticed a newsreport in the Times of India, Bombay (March 1, 2004) which I will reproduce later. I had also recently been reading Brian Harrison's �Early Vatican Responses to Evolutionist Theology�.

Brian Harrison is a member of the �Roman Theological Forum�, and the author of a viciously heretical and anti-Catholic tract - �A Heretical Pope Would Govern the Church Illicitly But Validly� which I had occasion to challenge. This tract has been since withdrawn from the �Roman Theological Forum� website, ostensibly for revision, more than 2 years back, and has still not been restored, though some sites still feature this tract.

Harrison is a �priest� of the Roman Modernist sect, but is more definitely a �Neo-Con� - that is a Neo-Conservative, or even more precisely, a High Church member of the schismatic and apostate Roman Modernist sect under the antipope �John-Paul II�.

Recently, I was checking the RTF site to see whether the �Revised� version of this Tract has been published, but instead I found some interesting articles, including on the subject of Evolution.

For those who not in the know, Neo-Cons, as do the High Church parties of every sect, approximate strongly towards the Catholic position, which is hostile to Darwinism and Evolutionism.

The article under present discussion examines the proceedings of the Holy Office in the 19th Century (during the pontificate of His Holiness Pope Leo XIII) to the Evolutionist Theology of a Fr. Leroy.

The first consultor on the question was a Fr. Dominichelli, who while admitting serious concern over Fr. Leroy�s teachings, had, for obviously extraneous reasons, decided that Fr. Leroy ought to be tolerated. Three other consulters were called in, who all found Leroyism incompatible with Catholicism, but it is the third, Fr. Luigi Trepipi, whose condemnation of Leroyism that is outstanding.
Evolution: The Breaking-Out Point?
As I read Trepipi�s critique of Leroyism, an idea struck me, and I noticed with delicious appreciation, that Fr. Trepipi discusses the same ideas latter on.

This is a point of order question on the Theory of Evolution: Evolutionism postulates that innumerable Evolution Events happened. Thus for example, that from a series of Evolutionary Events, taking off from numerous related species evolving in near about the same time, numerous related or similar species evolved. Thus, for example, the Dinosaurs. One can call such a series of events occurring in a relatively short period of time as being the respective Evolutionary �Breaking-Out Point�.

But if this is true, one must ask: Why did not the same happen with Man? Why is there merely one species of Man? If the Evolutionary Hypothesis is true, then there must be, in fact, numerous species of human beings!

As a matter of fact, it is necessary, if the Evolutionary Hypothesis is true, that there should have been a critical time when many different and related species of sub-human species produced evolved human species.

Moreover, given that Evolutionary pressure had built up at that given point, it is natural that not only should multiple versions of Man have evolved, but that the evolution of new species of man should have been an ongoing process even down to our times, so that more and more evolved species of man would have arisen, even in historical times.

That is, it should have been evident, if Evolutionism is true, that even in our time, newer and newer species of human beings are evolving from the sub-human species. But it is precisely that this is not evident.

Again, given the same evolutionary process, it is obvious that not only would the evolution of human beings be diversified and ongoing, but that even so, the next step too should have occurred and be occurring - the evolution of higher men - supermen or men with even higher capabilities and superior to the Homo sapiens species.

But, none of this has happened or is discernible. This absence is telling.
Roots of Evolutionism
When reflecting on the subject, one is obliged to examine the roots of the Evolutionist Dogma. It is received wisdom that Evolutionism is a Scientific Breakthrough, arising out of the progress of scientific inquiry. However, this is a lie, a mere mythology.

The true roots of Evolutionism are in the Protestant Schisms. Men in Europe had worked for long - through the co-related heresies of Regalism, Gallicanism, Conciliarism, Husitism, etc. to break the hold and power of the Church over European Society - the Religio-Socio-Political System or Civilization called �Christendom� - in order to be free from the dictates, restrictions and strictures of Christ and Christianity, and to permit men to be free, absolutely, to go where one desired. This is the �Free Thought� movement, also called the �Anti-Clericalist� movement.

[The first opportunity to these malefactors was unwittingly provided by degenerate Churchmen who sponsored and cultivated a revived though �domesticated� form of the ancient, pre-Christian paganisms of the Graeco-Roman world, in the form of the �Renaissance.�]

With the Protestant Schisms, the power of the Church was successfully destroyed over a vast number of peoples of Europe - mainly those peoples who had seceded to, or had been hijacked, as in Scandinavia, by the Protestants. Again, in France, the Kings there had increasingly, for egoistic reasons, since the King Philip �the Fair�, taken a position contrary to that of the Church, and had gladly aligned itself with the Protestants against Christendom.

The net result of these Events was, more than the ostentatious creation of Protestants, the creation of the �Emancipated� or �Liberals�.

As a result of these events, men cast off the strictures and restraints of Christ and His Church and coursed off into different directions. The Heresy of Liberalism was emancipated and developed into Capitalism on one side and (progressively) Communalism, Collectivism, Socialism, Communism, on the other.

In the Domain of Science, the Liberals or Emancipated began to work overtime to fabricate an alternative cosmogony than that prescribed by Christianity. This was crucial in order to complete the work of destroying Christendom and �liberating� man from Christianity.

It, also, had nothing whatsoever to do with any real science. On the contrary, the desire was the father of the resultant theories.

When one sits down to dispassionately examine the theory of Evolutionism, one sees that there is no scientific basis whatsoever to it. It was only a theory, and a theory that has woefully failed to be proven.

But even as it has failed to be proven, it has been elevated to the position of an uncritical, and uncritizable Dogma of �Modern Civilization�, to question which is to be �obscurantist� and �unscientific.� But it is precisely that such an attitude is not based on Science, pure and simple, but on a Populism based on an Emotionalist hysteria, quite in keeping with that which Ronald Knox cuttingly characterized as the �Funny Inner Feeling� Syndrome - �Fifism�.

This is the modern Dogmaticism that makes a fetish of being virulently opposed to Catholic Dogmaticism as �Dogmaticism�, the modern Fundamentalism that makes a fetish of being virulently opposed to Catholic Fundamentalism as �Fundamentalism�; of the Received and Unquestionable Religion of Materialism, where the �Scientist� (quite precisely portrayed in popular perception as the Mad, or Absent-Minded Scientist) substitutes the Priests of the Church, and are far more authoritative, being, each of them, Infallible Oracles of Wisdom - the Druids of the Reborn Pagan, New Age West!

Like the Mullas and Maulavis and Imams etc. of Islam, who are each of them infallible, these modern Druids too are infallible, uttering grandiose Fatwas that are supposed to be the next highest resolution of scientific questions, despite the fact that they make for a very ridiculous picture in contradicting themselves, one another, and taking opposite and fantastic positions.

Thus one of these modern Ghazis will piously intone and inform all the world and his uncle that eating eggs, for example, is the key to good health and longevity; only to be contradicted shortly thereafter when another of these infallible Ghazis proclaims that eggs are quite poisonous, cancerous or whatever, and absolutely a no-no!

It does not take a genius to see that these modern Druids have given us the monsters of Thalidomide or of DDT which were, in their time, hailed as the next great hope of mankind, only to be denounced in turns as grave dangers to humanity!

Darwinism was not born suddenly, spontaneously out of nothing. On the contrary, he marked the high point of an evolutionary process whereby men worked and were worked and instigated over ideas in order to create a respectably credible mythology of the origin of man which could be positioned as more credible and �scientific� than the account of Christianity.

These men, including Darwin, were cultivated and financed by the new robber barons of Protestantism and Free Thought who amassed their wealth by Rapine and Piracy, more usually than not, targeted at the Catholic States of the World, such as the Spanish and Portuguese Empires spanning the Old and New Worlds, or of the recalcitrant Catholic peoples of Protestant Europe, such as of England and of the Scotch Highlands or of Eire.

They were not scientific talents picked off the streets or from Academia, but paid hacks cultivated and fostered with the specific agenda of fabricating the Official Mythology of the new, anti-Christian �Civilisation�, the West, created to Destroy and Supplant Christendom.

What is true of Darwin is true also of Karl Marx, as every historian is acutely aware. Marx was sponsored and financed and commissioned by Capitalists to write and draw up the �ideology� of Communism as a more virulent form of Socialism.

[It may not have escaped observers that �Evolutionism� as the Modern Popular Religion, evolved into UFO-ism on one part, and the New-Age movement on the other.]
Evolutionism Leads Inexorably To Polygenism, Racism and Nazism!
Once one acknowledges Evolution to be true, there is no rational basis for postulating that mankind is one. Polygenism, the idea that the different "races" are in fact, different though related and similar races or "species", is inevitable.

Evolutionism does not have any place for the higher feelings. All that is, from the Evolutionist viewpoint, a lot of nonsense. The only moral virtue is survival, and in order to survive and to propagate oneself, all and every means are legitimate.

Further, considering the Evolutionist hypothesis, it is impossible to reject the idea that some kinds of men are, in fact, inferior or sub-human, and other kinds, supermen or higher species, even a species on the cusp of evolving to the next higher stage...

Germany was the epicenter of the Protestant Schisms. In Germany, following these Schisms, society was no longer monolithic — ordered by one single moral authority, as it was by the Catholic Church before, but came to be split into innumerable religious sects. This produced the spirit of rejection of Christianity in totality, not merely of what the founders of Protestantism denounced as "Romanism" or "Papism".

This culture produced Nietsche, who is the true philosophical parent of Nazism. Nietsche was attracted towards Hinduism, towards its racist and misanthropic ideology as set out by the Manu-Smriti, the Hindu Social Code, and adopted and adapted these ideas, which became rife in Europe.

"Slavery Inspired Darwin's Theory, Says Author"
by William Iredale
London: Charles Darwin's fervent belief in his theory of evolution stemmed from a deep-seated opposition to slavery, two of his biographers have claimed in a new introduction to one of his works.

The academics say that the biologist's work was driven by a desire to prove that, because all races were descended from the same ape ancestors, none could be superior. The theory is outlined in a new Penguin Classics edition of Darwin's The Descent of Man, to be published on Thursday.

Darwin caused a sensation when he published the work which applied to humans the theory of evolution that he had outlined for animals in The Origin of Species twelve years earlier. The new introduction claims that Darwin felt a "moral imperative" to discredit the prevailing opinion that blacks and whites were separate species, thus justifying a slave-master relationship.

"The book originated in Darwin's worries about slavery and ended in an explanation of racial divergence," said Jim Moore, a reader of science and technology history at the Open University, who co-authored the foreword with research fellow Adrian Desmond of the University of London.
Let us now consider the TOI article. [See at right]

The claim being put forward by Moore & Desmond is utterly fantastic and beggars belief. It is also irrational.

Christianity had made several efforts over time to abolish Slavery. Popes had outlawed it several times. However, first the Barbarian invasions and colonisation of the Roman Imperial territories, and then the onslaught of Islam, created situations that fostered slavery.

Once again, in the modern age, it was believing Christians that moved and agitated long and successfully for the ban on slavery by International Conventions. Non-Christians had no part to play in pushing this movement.

Taking again this "claim" made on behalf of Darwin, on examination, it is very evidently irrational and idiotic. If Darwin was moved — solely by opposition to Slavery & Racism — he fabricated a system that, right from its very beginning, justified exactly both of these! If he had been motivated solely by opposition to Slavery & Racism, he would have contrived a system that would have have been fundamentally opposed to both these ideas.

It is evident that Moore & Desmond are merely indulging in an emotialist exercise, in an effort to create a "hagiography" of Charles Darwin, to make a "moral saint" of him.

But it is also evident that they are lying, that their premises are self-evidently false.

Their work is merely an exercise in propagating Darwinian Poppycock!

Lucio Mascarenhas