Jump to content

Darwin's theory scientifically wrong: Union min Satyapal Singh


sarcastic

Recommended Posts

Quote

Union minister Satyapal Singh has claimed that Charles Darwin's theory of evolution of man was "scientifically wrong" and it needs to be changed in school and college curriculum. Singh, the Minister of State for Human Resource Development, said our ancestors have nowhere mentioned that they saw an ape turning into a man.

"Darwin's theory (of evolution of humans) is scientifically wrong. It needs to change in school and college curriculum. Since the man is seen on Earth he has always been a man," he said while speaking to reporters yesterday here.

The IPS officer-turned-politician was in this central Maharashtra city to attend the 'All India Vaidik Sammelan.'

 

"Nobody, including our ancestors, in written or oral, have said they saw an ape turning into a man," he said.

"No books we have read or the tales told to us by our grandparents had such a mention," the minister added.

 

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/darwins-theory-scientifically-wrong-union-min-satyapal-singh/articleshow/62581675.cms

 

This is worrying!!! The ignorant among common people might as well think this guy is correct and we will start regressing sooner than later. I am not sure where this kind of right-wingers will take this country to.

 

What does a politician/police man know about Science and how can he utter such non-sense being an elected representative of people. 

Edited by sarcastic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pavlov's Dogs got triggered instantly. 

Nevermind the National Herald case or murder spree of communists/jihadis in kerala/karnataka. 

Regardless, his freedom of speech. And this is far less appalling than the history taught to children which has had actual repercussions on the ground both politically and socially over the last century. Besides, this viewpoint is certifiably sickular. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, surajmal said:

Pavlov's Dogs got triggered instantly. 

Nevermind the National Herald case or murder spree of communists/jihadis in kerala/karnataka. 

Regardless, his freedom of speech. And this is far less appalling than the history taught to children which has had actual repercussions on the ground both politically and socially over the last century. Besides, this viewpoint is certifiably sickular. 

Actually freedom of speech does not cover deception or an act of perjury. he can be sued for spreading false information from a position of power, unless he qualifies it as strictly his opinion only.


Your post is an example why all religions are backwards, a ball and chain holding us from moving forward, as we can see your condemnation of such idiotic ideas comes with a caveat. Along with the fact that rise of Hinduvta equals rise of these religious morons who make moronic comments. 


The 'what about-ism' you engage in, is done by all religious people to defend the indefensible. Nobody said stop covering the murders or other cases. But Hindu backwardness also deserves to be exposed for what it is. And this you simply cannot accept because of you being a victim to the decrepit ideology of that particular decrepit religion.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Actually freedom of speech does not cover deception or an act of perjury. he can be sued for spreading false information from a position of power, unless he qualifies it as strictly his opinion only.


Your post is an example why all religions are backwards, a ball and chain holding us from moving forward, as we can see your condemnation of such idiotic ideas comes with a caveat. Along with the fact that rise of Hinduvta equals rise of these religious morons who make moronic comments. 


The 'what about-ism' you engage in, is done by all religious people to defend the indefensible. Nobody said stop covering the murders or other cases. But Hindu backwardness also deserves to be exposed for what it is. And this you simply cannot accept because of you being a victim to the decrepit ideology of that particular decrepit religion.

 

false information ... lolwut?! Prove the "theory" in court. 

I take the lolwut back. because your middle school logic isn't even lolworthy anymore. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, surajmal said:

false information ... lolwut?! Prove the "theory" in court. 

I take the lolwut back. because your middle school logic isn't even lolworthy anymore. 

If you think theory of evolution is not a fact, it simply means you do not understand science enough to know what a scientific term for 'theory' is. 
This is a failing of English, where unscientific laymen (or disingenuous - take your pick) love to confuse the common usage of the word 'theory' in spoken English and the scientific term theory.

I guess that's why people like you think special relativity isn't a fact, because oh look it too is called 'theory of special relativity'. Despite the fact that we've had confirmatory observations of it.

 

Not to mention, the guy you are defending, is speaking complete bakwaas. 'Our buzurgho and purva purshas' didn't know it ?!? LOL WUT. Your ancestors (and mine, and all ours here) were unpar, gawaar, duffers compared to our kids, nevermind us. They didn't know a lot of things because they were uncivilized by modern standards....pretty simple reason, but your ego & upbringing prevents you from connecting to it. 

Edited by Muloghonto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

If you think theory of evolution is not a fact, it simply means you do not understand science enough to know what a scientific term for 'theory' is. 
This is a failing of English, where unscientific laymen (or disingenuous - take your pick) love to confuse the common usage of the word 'theory' in spoken English and the scientific term theory.

I guess that's why people like you think special relativity isn't a fact, because oh look it too is called 'theory of special relativity'. Despite the fact that we've had confirmatory observations of it.

 

Not to mention, the guy you are defending, is speaking complete bakwaas. 'Our buzurgho and purva purshas' didn't know it ?!? LOL WUT. Your ancestors (and mine, and all ours here) were unpar, gawaar, duffers compared to our kids, nevermind us. They didn't know a lot of things because they were uncivilized by modern standards....pretty simple reason, but your ego & upbringing prevents you from connecting to it. 

Stop shadow boxing. If you don't know what the argument/conflict is about, its better to ask than to make a uber-chutiya of yourself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, surajmal said:

Stop shadow boxing. If you don't know what the argument/conflict is about, its better to ask than to make a uber-chutiya of yourself. 

we can all read what you wrote. 

Its a classic case of 'what-about-ism'. You should know by now, that Hinduvta support tactics may be a 'new wave' in India but people like me who've been in the west have seen conservative choots use the same tactics from the time you were a little boy. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

we can all read what you wrote. 

Its a classic case of 'what-about-ism'. You should know by now, that Hinduvta support tactics may be a 'new wave' in India but people like me who've been in the west have seen conservative choots use the same tactics from the time you were a little boy. 

 

Hence the term Pavlov's dogs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, surajmal said:

Hence the term Pavlov's dogs. 

Inapplicable, since you are the one who came defending Hinduvta with what-about-ism first. 
Pavlov's dog is more applicable to you, since yours is a Pavlovian response, idea lacking cogent thought process (as it is due to knee-jerk reaction to values droned into you as a child that you've not had the courage to question). We weren't sitting here back-patting ourselves on how much of a moron that particular Hinduvta fool is. 

 

Edited by Muloghonto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Inapplicable, since you are the one who came defending Hinduvta with what-about-ism first. 
Pavlov's dog is more applicable to you, since yours is a Pavlovian response, idea lacking cogent thought process (as it is due to knee-jerk reaction to values droned into you as a child that you've not had the courage to question). We weren't sitting here back-patting ourselves on how much of a moron that particular Hinduvta fool is. 

 

very applicable. Since your reaction (like the reaction of rest of the liberandu pack on twitter) is entirely based on someone else's experience to a situation vastly different. Like a grade A liberandu unable discern context or meaning. 

Edited by surajmal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, surajmal said:

very applicable. Since your reaction (like the reaction of rest of the liberandu pack on twitter) is entirely based on someone else's experience to a situation vastly different. Like a grade A liberandu unable discern context or meaning. 

Hello, so is your's. Neither one of us has first hand experience with the said content of the article. 

You neo-cons (or should I call u neo-hindu-cons) have much to learn from your western masters in the art of conservatism. But seems like the copy-cat-ism is catching on, hence hinduvtas are starting to sound just like the grade-A cretins from American conservative side and acting like morons denying science in the name of broken jaahil faiths.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, surajmal said:

Thats all I needed. An admission. Now wasnt that easy? Thank You. 

So you needed to know that people will comment about a news article, just like you have, from your own value system.

Brilliant. So since you are dodging the fact that you are disparaging people for using the exact same methodology as you, you are either a moron of the highest order or a disingenuous fool. Either would be perfectly in-line with cons who back religious idiots that deny science. 

Perhaps you forgot your morning dose of gau-mutra. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

So you needed to know that people will comment about a news article, just like you have, from your own value system.

Brilliant. So since you are dodging the fact that you are disparaging people for using the exact same methodology as you, you are either a moron of the highest order or a disingenuous fool. Either would be perfectly in-line with cons who back religious idiots that deny science. 

Perhaps you forgot your morning dose of gau-mutra. 

You just admitted to being a liberandu. All it comes with is a collar. But I can't give you that. That would be your owner. Get off my leg and go bother him/her.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, surajmal said:

You just admitted to being a liberandu. All it comes with is a collar. But I can't give you that. That would be your owner. Get off my leg and go bother him/her.  

Err no, I admitted to judging the person in the article, on the basis of the article- which was the charge you laid. Ironically, you are guilty of the same thing. 

And its pretty rich to call a free thinker as having an owner, when the criticism comes from the organized religious hinduvta elements- the definition of mental slavery. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, surajmal said:

false information ... lolwut?! Prove the "theory" in court. 

I take the lolwut back. because your middle school logic isn't even lolworthy anymore. 

Prove theory in court? 

Dude it has been proven countless times before by some of the leading scientists and academicians in the world. 

What next , Earth is held by Sheshnag and Quran has a detailed treatise on embryology? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...