II. Edenic Eugenics and the Darwinian Deception
The Darwins created their theory of Evolution to prove the Torah correct.
Nowadays, it is only Western internet racists who still defend Darwin, and who believe that without Darwinism, that their entire worldview will collapse. This is about as absurd as if transgender activists were found to be supporting Adolf Hitler and basing their worldview on his party platform in 2050. Rightoids believe that Darwinism is a boon to the right-wing cause, when in reality, it was a theory crafted with the exact opposite intention in mind.
The Darwins’ main intention was to defeat racism by refuting the polygenesis theory because at the time, gentile scientists were alleging that Whites and Blacks were racially different. This is made explicitly clear in his own journals that we will touch on later in this essay.
The main stumbling block that we face when trying to understand Darwinism is failing to understand the context of the scientific debate that was raging at the time in Europe.
Last time, we covered how the advanced age of Terra was previously proposed and then accepted; there was hardly any difficulty in doing so once the Pope consulted the Kabbalah and found an alternative way to explain “six days” as either six cycles or six blocks of far larger time.
Next, we have conflicts even within the Bible about polygenesis v monogenesis.
We have conflicting versions of Deuteronomy even, where there is also the same battle over the true meaning of the text on this issue going on:
Dead Sea Scrolls: “When Elyon gave the nations as an inheritance, when he separated the sons of man, he set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God (bene elohim). For Yahweh’s portion was his people; Jacob was the lot of his inheritance”.
Septuagint (LXX): “When the Most High divided the nations, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the boundaries of the nations according to the number of the angels of God (aggelón theou). And his people Jacob became the portion of the Lord, Israel was the line of his inheritance”.
Masoretic Text (MT): “When Elyon gave the nations their inheritance, when he divided all the sons of man, he set the boundaries of the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel (bene yisrael). For Yahweh’s portion was his people, Jacob was the lot of his inheritance”.
The Masoretic is anachronistic, referring to “sons of Israel” before Israel is even created in the story. The Septuagint refers to nations being allotted to angels, or vice-versa. And the most explicit version if the one found in the Dead Sea Scrolls featuring a divine council of deities, with Yahweh just a subordinate of Elyon, a higher god.
If you are a Christian, you use the Septuagint version of the text and its various translations ... unless you are one of the American Protestant sects that use a translation of the medieval Hebraic Masoretic Bible. Darwin comes into the debate with a desire to defend the standard Christian view and narrative on the Bible. The other theories lend themselves more easily to theories of polygenesis. These can be the Judaic interpretation of polygenesis, with all the normal peoples of the world being descendants of beastmen, or the third option of sane people: pagan polygenesis.
Yes, the pagan Greeks and Romans favored polygenesis.
And if one believes in Adamic monogenesis, then this is a form of intolerable pagan science that must be battled, see?
A Brief History of Terran Autochthonism
Take Lucretius, a Roman from the 1st century AD. The text is probably a much later fake, like much of the history of Latin Rome, a Renaissance forgery … but his text De Rerum Natura expressed the view that Terra itself was once biologically productive in a way that it is no longer. In her youth, when it still retained abundant heat and moisture, Terra spontaneously generated plants, animals, and humans. He repeatedly compares Terra to a mother or womb, insisting that it literally “gave birth” to living creatures. This was not a miraculous event but a consequence of matter arranging itself under favorable physical conditions, or rather, autochthonism.
[In another essay, in the distant future, I will present modern science and experiments concerning the spontaneous generation of life from non-living matter, because that’s what I do when analyzing the pagan myths — I always try to explain them with recourse to science, out of respect for these people and the empirical rigorousness of their worldview. The uh … well … uh … the claims I plan to make about life emerging ex nihilo from the earth will definitely surprise, and maybe even infuriate you. We’ll get there when we get there.]
Anyway, once Terra aged and lost its original fertility, this creative power ceased.
Humanity did not begin with one couple, one family, or even one location. Rather, wherever environmental conditions were suitable, the Earth produced human beings out of the ground or out of the groundwater. The first humans in Lucretius’ reconstruction were physically formidable but culturally primitive. He imagines them as larger, stronger, and more resistant to hardship than their descendants because they had emerged directly from the robustness of Terra itself and needed less comfort to get by as a result.
They survived by gathering wild fruits, eating acorns, and hunting animals with stones and clubs. They possessed no agriculture, metallurgy, written language, cities, governments, or organized religion. Their lives resembled those of wild animals, although they retained the rational capacities that would eventually distinguish humanity.
That’s the crucial difference between pagan polygenesis theory and Platonic Abrahamic monogenesi theory. Gentiles weren’t inferior drooling, dribbling and debased beastmen. They were simply more primordial and hardy. Think Conan the Barbarian popping Judeo-Christian skulls between his giant hands as if they were eggs, while they babble about how moral they are and how g_d chose them if you want a mental picture of the debate at hand.
Lucretius did not believe species evolved into other species through accumulated variation, as Charles Darwin later proposed. Instead, he thought the Earth initially produced many different forms, and only the viable ones persisted. Selection occurs, but evolution in the Darwinian sense does not.
As an aside, for nearly fifteen centuries, Lucretius’ work had little influence in Western Europe. It survived in only a handful of manuscripts and was effectively “rediscovered” in 1417 by Poggio Bracciolini in a German monastery. What are the odds, eh? An ancient pagan text chockfull of heresies written in a dead language dutifully preserved and recopied for 1400 years by Christian monks only to be fortuitously rediscovered by a papal agent interested in asserting the supremacy of an Italian Rome …
Of course, when it was brought to light, it went off like a bomb.
But let’s skip to the next big polygenesis heavyweight: Voltaire (François-Marie Arouet). Voltaire hated Christianity and the Bible and he is often quoted by right-wingers in what purports to be a fake quote about not being allowed to criticize those who truly rule. I think, actually, that this is a real quote but that it was reused for the first time in centuries by a nationalist and thereby became “fake” and “evil” because all things that a nationalist says or does automatically become verboten and illegal. But, right-wingers don’t like to quote Voltaire too often, because most of his best bangers are the ones where he relentlessly mocks religionists (mostly Jews and Christians) and modern rightoids love love love! stories of sadistic and wrathful deities burning scores of people alive.
Each bon mot better than the last!
For our purposes, his most important discussions refuting monogenesis as an absurd theory appear in “Essay on the Manners and Spirit of Nations” (1756).
Like, just think about what a single origin for mankind implies. I want to address this next argument to the semi-sentient rightoid hominids that “hale hortler o/” and yet somehow manage to believe in Darwinism and their own “elite human capital” status in that paradigm. Listen up, you dumb apes: Darwinism implies that you are brothers with Africans, and everyone else and that we all came out of Africa, from the apes found there.
It also defends the main thrust of the monogenesis theory found in the Greek version of the Bible, which was written by the … ______ (fill in the blanks). Darwinism also satisfies the 613 ritual purity mitzvahs found in the Torah and the Talmud on which Judaism rests. More on that later.
None of that raises any red flags? No? No wonder they call you apes and beasts.
…
When Voltaire was writing in the 1740s and 1750s, the Christian position in Europe was monogenesis. Whether Catholic or Protestant, theologians accepted that every human being descended from Adam and, after the Flood, from Noah's three sons. Differences among peoples were explained as the result of climate, diet, or degeneration over time. This framework was reinforced by passages such as Acts 17:26, where Paul declares that God "made from one every nation of men."
Our previous theorist, La Peyrere, used an earlier quote of Paul to argue for polygenesis, remember?
So now we have the three camps of evolution theory, broadly defined. Pagan polygenesis (Lucretius and chthonic origin myths), Jewish polygenesis (Kabbalah, Dead Sea Scrolls, La Peyrere) and Christian monogenesis (the Septuagint). This is the context of the debate raging in Europe at the time.
Enter Charles Darwin.
The Revenge of the Monogenesis Dogma
Charles and his family openly declared for the Monogenesis camp a century at least before his famous On the Origins of Species (1859) was published.
Here:
In 1809, the year Charles Darwin was born, no one, with the exception of “religious fanatics,” believed in the common ancestry and evolution of human beings. Enlightenment scientists before Darwin dismissed the notion of a common ancestry for humans as a “backward” and “unscientific” theological doctrine from the Bible. And these scientists also steered clear of the word “evolution”—a religious term whose Latin roots referred to the unrolling of a scroll or the unfolding of a plan. In those days, the concept of “evolution,” first appearing in English in the 17th century, referred to an orderly sequence of events and was synonymous with a Divine plan.
Irony of ironies, is it not?
Most modern day Scientism is just Judeo-Christian dogma shorn of its religious garb and presented as the product of rational and logical inquiry via the scientific method.
The most “Reddit Atheist” type people you either know or have seen on the internet live entirely in the Judeo-Christian matrix. They believe in the Big Bang (Jesuit theory), in black holes (Kabbalah) and dark matter (also Kabbalah) and so on and Monogenesis i.e., Adamic Evolution theory.
