Theory of Evolution anyone ?

Recluse

Peace, huruf.

This is nonsensical. There is a vast amount of evidence to support Darwin's conclusion concerning evolution by natural selection.

That's really not true at all, it's mostly speculation and conjecture. I suggest reading some books by people like Michael Behe and Stephen C. Meyer. I'm going to buy Meyers' newest book that will be published this June or July I believe.

This is also a great site in my view;

http//www.evolutionnews.org/

huruf

Peace, huruf.

Whether Charles Darwin was "racist" or not is of little concern to me. I'm not a 'follower' of Darwin, nor do I take his words to be "divine" in some sense... I'm talking specifically about the theory of evolution by natural selection. Again, all of the modern scientific evidence points to this conclusion. There are thousands of creation stories throughout the world, and there have been millions of them throughout history. In each one, the prescribed god of the people was the one who somehow formed (shaped, created) everything in existence. Yet, not one of these stories can be substantiated by scientific evidence or investigation.

Which creation story are you saying that we should follow - the one written in a 7th century religious book; the one written in the Bible, which predates the Quran by several centuries; the one written on Indian and Mesopotamian sculptures; the one scribed on the walls of ancient Egyptian and Nubian pyramids; or should we accept the rational conclusion that all of the scientific evidence points to?

Peace,

Ahmad

Man you repeat yourself and you simply say again what I have just pointed out a sulliness in your ssumptions about people who do not agree with you.

Also in science, never, never, never, is the last word said, because it develops and what is "the truth" one day, next day or next century or next millenium is not true any more. -and interpetation of religious texts of course has followed the science of the day of the interpreter. So the choice you present either this or that is itself unnecessary, unwarranted and unscientific. But there are in the science camp many things which are far more interesting, that the darwinian "Mr. Natural Selection".
I am so eager to meet that person "natural selection"

Salaam

huruf

I quote from the article cited at the beginning, which, funnily, says that Darwin'S survival of the fittest or its improved version "natural selection", in fact, far from being a refutal of "religious" doctrine, is a roper offshoot of it, its offspring. In fact as I said previously, it is not science, it is ideology.

"Marek Glogoczowski THE SYNDROME OF "BLIND WATCHMAKER"

Abstract Few decades ago the German philosopher Martin Heidegger observed that Wissenshaft denkt nicht - the (staff of) science does not think. To this pertinent remark it is worth adding a more recent opinion of the English sociologist Michael Thompson who claims that in Life Sciences we witness a systematic channeling of enquiry
in order to impel knowledge ever further from the truth. An even more radical
critique of contemporary science was formulated by the well-known American
linguist Noam Chomsky. He observes that present social and scientific theories
are mere tools of pillage and enslavement - both of Nature and Society - by
liberalo-criminal ?elites? who are motivated in their behaviour to a large
extend by social teachings of the Old Testament. The author of the present
dissertation follows the path traced by these researchers who are critically
disposed to the present reality. He demonstrates up to which point the Holy
Scriptures - which especially in Anglosaxon countries are still taken as the
source of wisdom and ethics - have influenced the development of modern concepts
of biology. A precise, methodological analysis shows that subsequent, historical
stages of the evolution of the Darwinian - and than neo-Darwinian and
ultra-Darwinian - thought are ?adaptive mutations? of an antique MEME (Memory
Eradicating and Mind Emptying) virus. This spontaneously self-replicating
?cultural virus?, which postulates an ex nihilo origin of the world and life,
was introduced into the Old Testament already during the Babylonian (about 5
B.C.) period of Bible completion. At present, this inherited from the deep
Antiquity MEME virus is at the origin of a specific cognitive illness of our
life sciences, which illness schould be named the Blind Watchmaker Syndrome
(BWS). In order to liberate our minds from the cognitive cataract provoked by
the (post)modern invasion of class meme (creatio ex nihilo) cultural viruses,
the author proposes a cleaning up of minds by the standard method of logical
reasoning supported by conclusions drawn from elementary physics........"

Salaam

Ahmad_Bilal

Peace, Man of Faith.

Science is not always right and there are many uncertainties regarding creation. Despite this we cannot argue that there has not been an evolution, but spiritualists believe this is controlled by God in one way or another. The direction of evolution is believed to be controlled by the one referred to as God.

Religion does not mean you have to disregard the evolution or the things which can be proved by science. Religion on the other hand cannot be verified by science and has only to do with Faith. You cannot verify God because there are no ways to prove the existence with the instruments or measurements available. It has only to do with believe in the unseen.

Your individual life and experiences can lead to a Faith. But you cannot gauge God's doings because the force is invisible and not of this realm, to a believer.

Even in my religion the world is eternal, energy does not just disappear as you said. The same goes for the energy of a soul in my opinion.

Hope you respect my Faith and understand I am humbly accepting your critical eyes.

Indeed, I do respect your position. My argument was with those who propose that there was no evolutionary process, who propose that a mysterious "god" figure created everything out of nothing. If people want to claim that God guided evolution, then that's their prerogative to embrace that ideology. However, claiming that evolution is nonsensical due to Charles Darwin being "racist" is foolish at best... The ideas you presented with regard to the soul being a form or variation of 'energy' is very interesting, and this same idea has been propagated, in a sense, by the Hindus for a very long time - hence, their traditional view of transmigration (or reincarnation).

Peace,

Ahmad

Ahmad_Bilal

Peace, huruf.

I quote from the article cited at the beginning, which, funnily, says that Darwin'S survival of the fittest or its improved version "natural selection", in fact, far from being a refutal of "religious" doctrine, is a roper offshoot of it, its offspring. In fact as I said previously, it is not science, it is ideology.

"Marek Glogoczowski THE SYNDROME OF "BLIND WATCHMAKER"

Abstract Few decades ago the German philosopher Martin Heidegger observed that Wissenshaft denkt nicht - the (staff of) science does not think. To this pertinent remark it is worth adding a more recent opinion of the English sociologist Michael Thompson who claims that in Life Sciences we witness a systematic channeling of enquiry
in order to impel knowledge ever further from the truth. An even more radical
critique of contemporary science was formulated by the well-known American
linguist Noam Chomsky. He observes that present social and scientific theories
are mere tools of pillage and enslavement - both of Nature and Society - by
liberalo-criminal ?elites? who are motivated in their behaviour to a large
extend by social teachings of the Old Testament. The author of the present
dissertation follows the path traced by these researchers who are critically
disposed to the present reality. He demonstrates up to which point the Holy
Scriptures - which especially in Anglosaxon countries are still taken as the
source of wisdom and ethics - have influenced the development of modern concepts
of biology. A precise, methodological analysis shows that subsequent, historical
stages of the evolution of the Darwinian - and than neo-Darwinian and
ultra-Darwinian - thought are ?adaptive mutations? of an antique MEME (Memory
Eradicating and Mind Emptying) virus. This spontaneously self-replicating
?cultural virus?, which postulates an ex nihilo origin of the world and life,
was introduced into the Old Testament already during the Babylonian (about 5
B.C.) period of Bible completion. At present, this inherited from the deep
Antiquity MEME virus is at the origin of a specific cognitive illness of our
life sciences, which illness schould be named the Blind Watchmaker Syndrome
(BWS). In order to liberate our minds from the cognitive cataract provoked by
the (post)modern invasion of class meme (creatio ex nihilo) cultural viruses,
the author proposes a cleaning up of minds by the standard method of logical
reasoning supported by conclusions drawn from elementary physics........"

You can call the theory of evolution by natural selection an "ideology" if you want. However, ultimately, that does nothing to substantiate your point. The concept of biological organisms coming into existence and development by the works of a "grand designer" can't be proven at all. Yet, all of the modern scientific evidence clearly points to natural selection as being the tool used to develop species. If the author of the article makes the presumption that there is a 'watchmaker' (in the words of Professor Richard Dawkins), then the same conclusion is drawn from a scientific perspective regarding him being 'blind'. If you're asserting that this 'watchmaker' is a living, thinking being, capable of using a vast amount of skill and intellect, then you'll have to prove this using verifiable evidence.

We can start with the question of locality and origination... Where is this god, and where did he come from? If everything must have a beginning, designer and purpose, then describe the facets of this god. How old is he, who designed him, and what is his purpose?

Peace,

Ahmad

huruf

Why7 do you keep answering my messages and quoting me and then go off and talk about things I have not said at all, and invent what I say a answer what you invent and do not answer what I actually write?

If you want to have your way you do not need to go to all that trouble. Have it. I could not care loess about having it my way your way or the cat's way. So have it your way all for yourself. But you are completely missing the point and you seem not to be able to read what is written.

Salaam

Man_of_Faith

Peace Ahmad,

I find both the Buddhist and Hindu Faith to be really interesting actually. However, Buddhism suits my mindset best to be honest, but the fundamental idea of Hinduism is also interesting.

The spiritual approach is more prominent than in traditional Islam and that is more what Islam, or "God's religion", is about. Searching for an inner peace or balance is most important because that will lead you to become more peaceful outwards too.

People should think more deeply what the words of Islam really mean, ie symbolizing what. Islam, Muslim and Salam all come from the same root in Arabic and it suits the traditional Buddhist practices very well. I mean the meditation and focus on your soul development.

People are usually a bit narrow-minded unfortunately. And they preach the religion, but forget proper conduct as according to a mind in a permanent meditative state. Most of us do, and it is why I think few are qualifying for a perfect harmony and to continue to the next world. The Hindus have a good word for it, but I have forgot what it was. It is when you are not reborn again, in their faith.

For example, you annoy the crap out of people here with your provoking remarks and people must restrain themselves. I try to control myself and see objectively on what you have uttered and rationally and logically reply to you to the best of my ability. Still you only say what is on your mind and what is your opinion although very determined words, and you ask intelligent questions for the most part as far as I am concerned.

I see through the clouds, I think, and I can see you as a man who believes in something, but not right knowing what it is. Am I right?

You are very picky and you want absolutely utterly rational and logical answers to your own questions you carry inside of you, right?

You are not satisfied with what the common world religions and their beliefs have to offer. You search for answers beyond them, yes?

Basically, you are right, God's religion is not bound to a religion with an invented name. The present religious groups, including Quran alone / God alone, are too isolated in their spectrum of ideas and do not see beyond the Quran, it has become their idol instead of the Message, a universal one present in several "religions".

Islam is not a religion in that regard, and the Bible does not say what Believers are called, Christian is an invented name and Judaism is not mentioned either. Muslim is a definition which could be used in any religion and it means to meditate and concentrate that you live constantly in a state of prayer and get a soul balance so you have an inner peace within you helping you in your behavior with other human beings (souls).

So there really exists no religion. However, Quran with its Arabic talks about "Deen" or a way of life, which is true, so you can erase religion altogether from the map.

Meditation (or Salat as it is also called) is the way to go. You can contact God's spirit through it, commonly called Holy Spirit in the Ibrahimic "religions". It truly is no hocus pocus. God can reside inside you to some extent, with spirits.

Or you can be an empty soul without God or meditation, living the life as the everyday human.

The "religions" are so severly misunderstood. It is sad actually. It is a huge focus on the individual soul we posses, the one inside your consciousness and you develop it best by becoming "deep" with meditation and reflection on yourself and how you can "increase your Karma".

Righteous deeds are of course bound to this "Karma" and can be all from a sincere smile to giving away all your money to help poor people.

Sorry, I feel this post got pretty much off-topic, I am sorry about that, but I somehow hope you find some of the words valuable for your personal development.

Note When I talk about God I do not exclusively talk about a specific God, just the good spirits which may portray God as one unit. Why do you think God say "We" in the Quran when it clearly is God who is the doer of something?

Perhaps His might is not restricted to one entity or why else would He say "We"? Still he says He does not need any help to accomplish anything, so He must be able to function in plural making it traditionally polytheistic.

If you worship "We" then it is traditionally polytheism, right?

I think, when God refers as "We" He means through spirits. How it works exactly is still beyond me, but I am searching for answers, especially through meditation.

When common religions, usally seen as polytheistic, talk about their spirits, as in the native American (Indian) religion, it may still not be "shirk" if you know what I mean?

Hope you found what I wrote valuable, maybe we should create another thread for this.

God bless you, or May the Force be with You

Ahmad_Bilal

Peace, Man of Faith.

That was an outstanding post, sir. Thanks for your input. I'm going to look more into the ideas you proposed, and perhaps we can start a new thread on that. Thanks again!

Peace,

Ahmad

Student_of_Allah

Shalom Aleikhem,

That's really not true at all, it's mostly speculation and conjecture. I suggest reading some books by people like Michael Behe and Stephen C. Meyer. I'm going to buy Meyers' newest book that will be published this June or July I believe.

This is also a great site in my view;

http//www.evolutionnews.org/

Can you please cite the peer reviewed scientific journals where these two individuals published their work destroying evolution via natural selection. I will be happy to see those works and will applaud when these 2 individuals get their nobel prizes for this achievement.

I am waiting for the peer reviewed scientific journals....

Peace
----------------- Student of Allah

Recluse

Shalom Aleikhem,

Can you please cite the peer reviewed scientific journals where these two individuals published their work destroying evolution via natural selection. I will be happy to see those works and will applaud when these 2 individuals get their nobel prizes for this achievement. )

I am waiting for the peer reviewed scientific journals....

Peace
----------------- Student of Allah

Salaam,

Please have a look at the information here;

http//www.discovery.org/a/2640

http//www.evolutionnews.org/2012/02/intelligent_des056221.html

Nazzam

Peace,

I would like to know my the point of view of the members of this site on the subject of Evolution.

By Evolution I mean , Darwinian evolution, evolution by natural selection.

Thanks

Allah guide us

-------------------- Student of Allah

One of the biggest miracles of God.

Recluse

Evolution is not unguided. That is just impossible.

GODsubmitter

Another interesting video where there is a lot of explanation about THE USE of mathematics in science, life and general reasoning. (Not numerology, mind you! - for people who do not know the difference between numerology and mathematics please go and learn)

Evolution or Creation The Final Argument by Dr. Rashad Khalifa
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILaHTACjV1k

In this computer age, we have mathematical laws that tell us whether a certain event is probable or not. If we throw five numbered cubes up in the air and let them fall into a guided straight line, the probability laws tell us the number of possible combinations we can get 1x2x3x4x5=120 combinations. Thus, the probability of obtaining any combination is 1 in 120, or 1/120, or 0.0086. This probability diminishes fast when we increase the number of cubes. Mathematicians, who are very exacting scientists, have agreed that the probability diminishes to "Zero" when we increase the number of cubes to 84. If we work with 84 cubes, the probability diminishes to 209x10 (raised to the power of) -50.
The probability laws tell us that the probability of the haphazard creation of the exacting sequences of nucleotides into DNA is Zero, many times over. We are not talking about 84 nucleotides; we are talking about billions of nucleotides that must be arranged in a specific sequence.
Some evolutionists have stated that the human gene and the monkey's gene are 90% similar. However, even if the similarity was 99%, we are still talking about 300,000,000 nucleotides that must be haphazardly re-arranged to change the monkey into a human. The human gene contains 30,000,000,000 nucleotides; 1% of that is 300,000,000.

But, I suppose a lot of people do not study Dr. R. Khalifa's work, nor watch those informative videos...

Peace

Student_of_Allah

Shalom Aleikhem,

Another interesting video where there is a lot of explanation about THE USE of mathematics in science, life and general reasoning. (Not numerology, mind you! - for people who do not know the difference between numerology and mathematics please go and learn)

Evolution or Creation The Final Argument by Dr. Rashad Khalifa
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILaHTACjV1k

In this computer age, we have mathematical laws that tell us whether a certain event is probable or not. If we throw five numbered cubes up in the air and let them fall into a guided straight line, the probability laws tell us the number of possible combinations we can get 1x2x3x4x5=120 combinations. Thus, the probability of obtaining any combination is 1 in 120, or 1/120, or 0.0086. This probability diminishes fast when we increase the number of cubes. Mathematicians, who are very exacting scientists, have agreed that the probability diminishes to "Zero" when we increase the number of cubes to 84. If we work with 84 cubes, the probability diminishes to 209x10 (raised to the power of) -50.
The probability laws tell us that the probability of the haphazard creation of the exacting sequences of nucleotides into DNA is Zero, many times over. We are not talking about 84 nucleotides; we are talking about billions of nucleotides that must be arranged in a specific sequence.
Some evolutionists have stated that the human gene and the monkey's gene are 90% similar. However, even if the similarity was 99%, we are still talking about 300,000,000 nucleotides that must be haphazardly re-arranged to change the monkey into a human. The human gene contains 30,000,000,000 nucleotides; 1% of that is 300,000,000.

But, I suppose a lot of people do not study Dr. R. Khalifa's work, nor watch those informative videos...

Peace

I just noticed that you copy pasted this same thing in two of my threads on evolution. Here is your post from the other thread

Another interesting video where there is a lot of explanation about THE USE of mathematics in science, life and general reasoning. (Not numerology, mind you! - for people who do not know the difference between numerology and mathematics please go and learn)

Evolution or Creation The Final Argument by Dr. Rashad Khalifa
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILaHTACjV1k

In this computer age, we have mathematical laws that tell us whether a certain event is probable or not. If we throw five numbered cubes up in the air and let them fall into a guided straight line, the probability laws tell us the number of possible combinations we can get 1x2x3x4x5=120 combinations. Thus, the probability of obtaining any combination is 1 in 120, or 1/120, or 0.0086. This probability diminishes fast when we increase the number of cubes. Mathematicians, who are very exacting scientists, have agreed that the probability diminishes to "Zero" when we increase the number of cubes to 84. If we work with 84 cubes, the probability diminishes to 209x10 (raised to the power of) -50.
The probability laws tell us that the probability of the haphazard creation of the exacting sequences of nucleotides into DNA is Zero, many times over. We are not talking about 84 nucleotides; we are talking about billions of nucleotides that must be arranged in a specific sequence.
Some evolutionists have stated that the human gene and the monkey's gene are 90% similar. However, even if the similarity was 99%, we are still talking about 300,000,000 nucleotides that must be haphazardly re-arranged to change the monkey into a human. The human gene contains 30,000,000,000 nucleotides; 1% of that is 300,000,000.

But, I suppose a lot of people do not study Dr. R. Khalifa's work, nor watch those informative videos...

Peace

Peace
------------ Student of Allah

Notexceling

I believe in Devolution.

Most depiction of our ancestral cousins have 2 additions to shape your thought pattern.
http//24.media.tumblr.com/ce42634d242343fac68e61a863f3256e/tumblr_mo8g542FTd1r46foao2_500.jpg

Extensive hair. There is more evidence to suggest our cousins were more like Aborigines and Africans.
Nose shape. Not bone, does not stand the test of time.

Just with these slight changes we can see a more humanoid appearance. I thought I should mention this before beginning.

Its not that I reject the idea of Evolution. It still could have happened.

In the Quran when the angels are asked to prostrate, they respond by ASKING why should we bow to one who causes mischief and shed blood.

Angels don't know the future, Adam has not committed a sin nor has Iblis been removed. More importantly, Angels aren't meant to ask questions.

The question was asked because of previous existence and their behaviour. When Adam appeared roughly around 12-15 thousand years ago, he proved his intelligence to the angels for prostration.

If you ask how do I know the date well homo sapien sapien (meaning modern wise man) appeared at that time.

This new homosapiensapien breed,

(Humans) starting use tools to a much higher degree than any other animal, and are the only extant
evidence of building fires (preparation and maintenance )
cook their food,
Only known species to clothe themselves

Prophet Adam (based on evidence) would have come around at this time in the evolution cycle (all of the above fit Quranically)

Especially point 4 "clothing"

I agree with evolution, substantial evidence to support the claim, I believe however the connection between us and our cousins lies in DEVOLUTION.
Why I believe in devolution?

Quran speaks about those who broke sabbath and how he made them become grotesque apes.

twice we are told BE apes (2.65, 7.166) and once we are told.......

Say Shall I inform you of (him who is) worse than this in retribution from Allah? (Worse is he) whom Allah has cursed and brought His wrath upon, and of whom He made apes and swine, and he who served the Shaitan; these are worse in place and more erring from the straight path.

We have two related cousins.
98%+ match with our DNA.

Bonobo (renown for excessive sex)
http//www.ansci.wisc.edu/jjp1/ansci_repro/misc/project_websites_07/thur07/bonobo%20reproduction/bonobo-sex.gif

And the chimpanzee (famously causing mischief)
http//www.flash-screen.com/free-wallpaper/uploads/201204/icos/animal-funny-facebook-timeline-cover-cover-112.jpg

The only difference between us is a single chromosome, The famous "Chromosome 2"
http//www.genomicron.evolverzone.com/wp-content/uploads/chr1.jpg

Besides this chromosome we are 99.6% related to apes.

All great apes apart from man have 48 chromosomes.

Humans have 46 chromosomes (23 from each of your parents)

Currently science believes a fusion of the chromosome led to the creation of humans. In other words, they managed to perfectly align themselves and connect together at the initial stage of reproduction.
It is

There is only one flaw that science tends to forget.

It is extremely rarity of such a phenomena (fusion of chromosomes) to produce intelligent design

but
the rarity of such a phenomena occurring in 2 chimps (the male and the female) at the EXACT SAME TIME is near impossible.

It is more feasible and plausible (even in the world of genetics) that instead of a precise FUSION (that the possibilities of it occurring are near impossible) to create humans, It all ready came Fused and broke.

i.e We did not come from Apes, it seems they came from us

Hence,
Devolution.

whatever

Lena

! WOW! interesting idea!

good_logic

Peace All.

We did not come from"apes",nor did apes come from humans.

" Be ye as despicable as apes is just an expression in Qoran meaning "lowest of the low".

GOD created each species as its own.

http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5sfHz3xyNc

GOD bless you all.

Peace.

hawk99

Peace,

I agree with good logic "We did not come from"apes",nor did apes come from humans."

I often wondered "why would apes change into humans, where's the benefit?
Why hasn't the missing link ever been found?
Why aren't apes still changing?

We do evolve

He is the One who created you in stages.

Darwinian evolution has been proven to be flawed, but has been used in the past to justify our imperialistic
subjugation of non-Europeans, relieving us of our guilt to enslave, annihilate, and exploit the subhuman races since
we are superior by natural selection and the fittest to survive.

The story of Ota benga "man put in the zoo"

http//onehumanrace.com/docs/ota_benga.asp

Darwinian evolution has been used once again to justify atheism by those who are nonbelievers to assert
that God is not the lord and sustainer of creation, they insist that it is science that is promulgated, but they fail to
understand that God is supernatural, meaning "above" or outside of nature thereby defying the scientific method.

If you obey the majority of people on earth, they will divert you from the path of GOD. They follow only
conjecture; they only guess.

Many atheist use fancy language, and conjecture to convince many people of their positions, but in the end they
are simply nonbelievers like their cohorts.

God bless

peace

Zulf

Yes.

Also, usually we are fed the all too common black and white dichotomy.. "either you're with us or against us"... or in this case, "either evolution or creation". Portraying it as if these are THE only options is just plain silly, and is something that is accepted by simple-minded or uninformed people. Such extremes themselves are usually not depicting anything near reality.

Atheists, often, wants to portray the human being as just another animal... and ascribe the theory of survival of the fittest to us too. Survival of the fittest is not even the general norm in the animal world. It exists, but not as THE guiding force of nature. The animal kingdom is NATURAL and balanced, without excess or real waste. Even in the animal kingdom you'll find cooperation, even when there might not be any apparent purpose for this cooperation.

When the human being is living a life according to the survival of the fittest, we get where we are today.... war, crime, destruction of the planet, unsustainable and a destructive economic model. When reducing the human being to something that operates, by nature, as per the theory of survival of the fittest, we actually become WORSE than animals. I believe the quran mentions this aswell in some context, that people become worse than animals.... i.e. totally unnatural.. "ungodly".

Both the blind, random and purposeless Darwinian creation and evolution, as well as the religious stories of creation, are no more than fantasies disconnected from anything natural, wholesome and sensible. This is entertainment for the human being, fumbling in the dark, guessing and arguing.

Peace.

hawk99

When the human being is living a life according to the survival of the fittest, we get where we are today.... war, crime, destruction of the planet, unsustainable and a destructive economic model. When reducing the human being to something that operates, by nature, as per the theory of survival of the fittest, we actually become WORSE than animals. I believe the quran mentions this aswell in some context, that people become worse than animals.... i.e. totally unnatural.. "ungodly".

Agreed, such doctrines as Darwinian evolution contribute to a poisonous mindset that renders its constituents or
more pointedly "victims" to a state of straying or as you put it "totally unnatural.. "ungodly".

We have committed to Hell multitudes of jinns and humans. They have minds with which they do not
understand, eyes with which they do not see, and ears with which they do not hear. They are like animals; no,
they are far worse?they are totally unaware. (heedless)

I would like for folks to read the article about Ota Benga in my previous post, the article speaks for itself.

God bless

peace