1

---- I am irreligious --- I am no flat / globe earther

Darwin reversed is NIMRAD = NIMROD = SATAN – flip W to get M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0841yVf0w8k
Nimrod was a great hunter . Darwin was into hunting heavily . Nimrod
rebelled against god . Darwin rebelled against god .
http://www.icr.org/article/darwins-passion-for-hunting-killing/
The Dark Side of Charles Darwin: A Critical Analysis of an Icon of Science ----
----- Mar 2011 by Dr Jerry Bergman
http://www.ldolphin.org/Nimrod.html
http://www.exposingsatanism.org/Temple-of-Baal/temple-of-baal-part-1.html
According to Babylonian history / mythology , Nimrod was being pursued by a
bounty hunt of men who were commissioned by Shem (the son of Noah) to find
him and kill him for his many crimes against children.
Nimrod = Valentine
http://doubleportioninheritance.blogspot.in/2012/01/valentines-day-nimrod-
original-cupid.html
https://lastcountdown.org/behind-enemy-lines/francis-romanus/satan-unmasked
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mYRTpd7UZvA

DARWINISM IS KABBALAH . scientists are the modern kabbalists .

darwinism is ultimate racism / imperialism / colonialism . Darwinism is
white supremacism . Darwinism is NON science . not a bit is proven
science . darwinism is depopulation . everyone at the top , involved in
promoting Darwinism , is freemason . Darwinism is a death cult .
CONTROLLED oppositions are created and run by same
freemasonry . THEORY of evolution science is as unproven as
RELIGIONS . 22 year old Darwin , went on voyage , assisted by 10 year old
boy . ---- IGNORE the “religious” factors . look for evidences against
Darwinism . Darwinism is AESOP fables , biologicalised .

EVOLUTION (Part1) - The Creation/Darwinism Hoax

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyklwLvy31I
EVOLUTION (Part2) - Solar Day Creationism's Origin in Pagan Sun-Worship
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWPI-ZlqRpo
EVOLUTION (Part3) - The Invisible Dialectic & the Bohemian
Grovehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_cepd28l_Y
The occult story behind the Royal Society.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=av9_cQcAz0k
Royal Society Freemasonry Darwinism
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMrLkzVtsis
http://harunyahya.com/en/Articles/13787/the-origins-of-superstitious-religion
harun yahya = real name adnan okthar = 33 degree freemason
 2

Darwinism's Voyage to China - TIME - 6.12 YET MOST OF THOSE WHO SO HAPPILY CHEERED MAO
SOON BECAME THE VICTIMS OF HIS SAVEGERY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p26ekoj_HL4

Genuine fossils can be equally deceiving. Evolutionists called the coelacanth

- a fossil fish claimed to be extinct for millions of years - a transitional form
between fish and amphibians, its fins said to be "limb-like." Then people
started catching live coelacanths, and they were 100 percent fish - no amphibian
characteristics. Why are fossils tricky? Because, as molecular biologist
Michael Denton notes in Evolution: A Theory in Crisis, 99 percent of an
animal's biology resides in its soft anatomy, which is inaccessible through
fossils. This disposes them to subjective interpretations.

https://www.muslim-
library.com/dl/books/English_THE_EVOLUTION_DECEIT.pdf
https://archive.org/details/ChinaAndCharlesDarwin433PageNotFull

Charles Darwin & The Forgotten Indian Holocaust

http://gginews.in/charles-darwin-the-forgotten-indian-holocaust/
What India gave Darwin
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/What-India-gave-
Darwin/articleshow/5279041.cms
Charles Darwin was a Fraud!
http://cecaust.com.au/pubs/pdfs/cv7n5_Final.pdf
T.H. Huxley’s Hideous Revolution In Science
http://schillerinstitute.org/educ/sci_space/2015/huxley.html
The Humbuggery of Charles Darwin
https://www.larouchepub.com/other/2011/3846humbug_darwin.html

ERASMUS DARWIN (1731- 1802) & SECRET SOCIETIES An important

thing to know about the “theory” of evolution is the origin of the “theory”.
Charles Darwin’s book titled “The Origin of Species” (1859), is not the origin
of the “theory”. Where did this so called “scientific theory” come from and
why? Well a good place to start looking is Erasmus Darwin (1731-1802), the
grandfather of Charles Darwin (1809-1882). Erasmus was from a family of
Masons, both sides. Charles and his father, Robert were also Freemasons.
Erasmus Darwin was a member of the Royal Society; a 33rd degree Mason; and
supported the French Revolution (1789-1799). Erasmus Darwin did most of
his publishing during the French Revolution. You don’t hear much about
Erasmus Darwin when it comes to the topic of Evolution, but that is where
Charles Darwin got his information from. Erasmus Darwin was an outstanding
Medical Doctor, inventor and was well published. Among his publications was
a best seller titled “Zoonomia”; or the Laws of Organic Life (1794) which is a
two-volume medical book dealing with anatomy, psychology, pathology and his
 3

philosophy about evolution and reproduction. Just about every topic and
example used in Zoonomia reappeared in Charles’s Darwin’s Origin of
Species. Charles’s copies of Zoonomia were marked with annotations in every
chapter. Other publications by Erasmus that Charles had copies of , were also
marked and found in the “Origin of Species”. Another famous publication of
Erasmus Darwin was titled “the Botanic Garden” in two parts, 1789 & 1791 and
another, “The Temple of Nature” published the year following his death, in
(1803). There were plenty more. People generally don’t know where Charles
Darwin got his ideas and information from. It came from reading his
grandfather’s books. Most of the work was already done for him by his
grandfather, Erasmus Darwin. The whole point of New Age Evolution seems to
be about changing over to a New Age Morality. Erasmus wrote about this
during the French Revolution . The idea of Natural Selection was refined
somewhat by Charles Darwin but for the most part the ideas of Darwinian
Evolution came from Erasmus before Charles was born and 65 years before
Charles Darwin’s book titled “Origin of Species” was published. (November 24,
1859). The idea of Biological Evolution was to promote his Masonic, New
Age religion and give it a scientific appearance. Erasmus led the fight to
remove God from the morality equation and Evolution is how he justified it.
The French Revolution embraced Erasmus Darwin’s revolutionary idea of
Evolution. The architects of the French Revolution planed on creating a new
morality . Killing large numbers of innocent human beings with no remorse!
They rejected their Creator, his ways and anyone who believed in him. This led
to cultural “cleansing”. They gradually worked on their opposition priority list
following a system of priority targets and easy targets of opportunity which
could be concealed. The French Revolution was a colossal conspiracy involving
assassinations and finally, when the bad guys had control, genocide! With
Evolution comes a new morality . That is some of what Freemasonry and the
French Revolution had in common. Erasmus was the founder of quite a few
organizations, some may have been secret but some were not, including the
famous Lunar Society. He was founder and served as leader from 1655-1665
when the Society met in his home. The membership included Benjamin
Franklin, Thomas Jefferson ( both were members of HELLFIRE CLUB from
where we have preventive vaccination originated ) and a long list of
Freemasons from America, France, England, Europe and probably the East as
well. Another famous member was Josiah Wedgwood I (1730-95) who was a
wealthy industrialist, inventor and grandfather of Charles Darwin’s future wife.
The members called themselves "lunarticks" because they met on every full
moon. Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Jefferson both became leaders of the
American Revolution who were undoubtedly mentored by Erasmus. He was
either the founder, leader or member of quite a large number of organizations
internationally. Erasmus stayed in contact with Masonic Lodges and their front
 4

organizations in England, America, France and other European countries.

Erasmus Darwin was a medical doctor with a successful practice.

Freemasonry is an international Secret Society that is based on Secret

Oaths and Deception about Intent. Freemasonry is based on secrecy. It has its
own secret god/s; its own secret rituals; its own secret emblems with secret
meanings; its own secret philosophies; its own secret morality; its own secret
handshakes; its own secret code words and phrases and its own secret agendas.
That is why it is called a “secret society”.

The Lichfield Botanical Society is another one of many organizations founded

by Erasmus. The “Society” consisted of three men who were committed to
translating the works of Carl Linnaeus (1707 – 1778) the Famous Swedish
botanist into English. The Society accomplished their task and Erasmus would
use the information to compare different species and prepare his arguments for
Evolution. Erasmus used Carolus Linneaus’s work of biological classification,
but he slightly modified it. His grandson Charles used the system in his work as
well. The point being that the system that the Darwins used and is still being
used by scientists today for analyzing, organizing and cataloguing life forms,
did not come from the Darwins, It came from Carl Linnaeus (1707-1778), a
Christian committed to understanding God’s Creation. Carl Linnaeus is the man
who began the task of studying, measuring, and systematically cataloging life
on our planet. Carl Linnaeus received his medical degree in (1735) and began
publishing his works after that. Carl Linnaeus published “The System of
Nature” which first organized the systematic study, classification and
cataloguing of life on our planet.

[[ MASONIC LADDER / JACOB'S LADDER / DNA DOUBLE HELIX -------

- THE GREAT CHAIN OF BEING www.freemasons-
freemasonry.com/masonic_ladder.html
https://www.frimurarorden.se/information-in-english/the-grand-lodge-of-
sweden/ In the 1740s, he was sent on several journeys through Sweden to find
and classify plants and animals. One of a long line of peasants and priests In
August 1735, he met George Clifford III, a director of the Dutch East India
Company . Linnaeus found a patron Count Carl Gustav Tessin . Linnaeus
helped found the Royal Swedish Academy of Science . knight of the Order of
the Polar Star, the first civilian in Sweden to become a knight in this order.
James Edward Smith, founded the Linnean Society of London . Although the
system, now known as binomial nomenclature, was partially developed by the
Bauhin brothers (see Gaspard Bauhin and Johann Bauhin) almost 200 years
earlier, Linnaeus was the first to use it consistently throughout the work .
Linnaeus' applied science was inspired not only by the instrumental
utilitarianism general to the early Enlightenment, but also by his adherence to
 5

the older economic doctrine of Cameralism. Additionally, Linnaeus was a state

interventionist. He supported tariffs, levies, export bounties, quotas, embargoes,
navigation acts, subsidised investment capital, ceilings on wages, cash grants,
state-licensed producer monopolies, and cartels. According to German
biologist Ernst Haeckel, the question of man's origin began with Linnaeus. He
helped future research in the natural history of man by describing humans just
as he described any other plant or animal. Linnaeus classified humans among
the primates (as they were later called) beginning with the first edition of
Systema Naturae. …Thus he placed man and monkeys under the same category,
Anthropomorpha, meaning "manlike. The 10th edition of Systema Naturae
introduced new terms, including Mammalia and Primates, the latter of which
would replace Anthropomorpha as well as giving humans the full binomial
Homo sapiens. For Homo troglodytes he asked the Swedish East India
Company to search for one, but they did not find any signs of its existence.
Four races. In the first edition of Systema Naturae, Linnaeus subdivided the
human species into four varieties. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Linnaeus
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johann_Bauhin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaspard_Bauhin
He was the physician to Jeanne d'Albret, Queen of Navarre.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Bauhin
Smith was a friend of Sir Joseph Banks -- FREEMASON . Smith was elected
Fellow of the Royal Society.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Edward_Smith
The Linnean Society of London is a society dedicated to the study of, and the
dissemination of information concerning, natural history, evolution and
taxonomy. The patron of the society is Queen Elizabeth II. Honorary members
include the present monarchs of Japan, Emperor Akihito, and Sweden, King
Carl XVI Gustaf, both of whom have active interests in natural history, and the
eminent broadcaster, Sir David Attenborough SATANIST . In 1854 Charles
Darwin was elected a fellow .Another famous fellow was biologist Thomas
Huxley. Men notable in other walks of life have also been fellows of the
society, including the physician Edward Jenner, pioneer of vaccination, the
Arctic explorers Sir John Franklin and Sir James Clark Ross, colonial
administrator and founder of Singapore, Sir Thomas Stamford Raffles and
Prime Minister of Britain, Lord Aberdeen. Since 1857 the Society has been
based at Burlington House, Piccadilly, London; an address it shares with a
number of other learned societies: the Geological Society of London, the Royal
Astronomical Society, the Society of Antiquaries of London and the Royal
Society of Chemistry. The first public exposition of the 'Theory of Evolution by
Natural Selection', arguably the greatest single leap of progress made in
biology, was presented to a meeting of the Linnean Society on 1 July 1858. At
this meeting a joint presentation of papers by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel
Wallace was made, sponsored by Joseph Hooker and Charles Lyell . FIRST
 6

women members include : ornithologist and photographer Emma Louisa

Turner, Lilian J. Veley, a microbiologist and Annie Lorrain Smith, a
lichenologist and mycologist, all formally admitted on 19 January 1905. Also
amongst the first women to be elected in 1904 was the paleobotanist, and later
pioneer of family planning, Marie Stopes SATANIST.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linnean_Society_of_London

---- The 'Astronomical Society of London' was conceived on 12 January 1820

when 14 gentlemen sat down to dinner at the Freemason's Tavern, in Lincoln's
Inn Fields, London. After an ... In 1874 the Society moved to specially built
premises in part of Burlington House, Piccadilly, which it has occupied ever
since.
http://www.ugle.org.uk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burlington_House A second building for
Freemasons was built this year in Great Queen Street, next door to the original
Freemasons' Hall. This was the Freemasons' Tavern, used for meetings and
dinners.
https://creation.com/charles-lyell

PATRON SAINT OF MODERN VEGETARIANISM = ILLUMINATI

BRITISH AGENT https://ivu.org/history/williams/linne.html

Enlightenment botany was replete with sexual symbolism―to the extent that
many botanical textbooks were widely considered pornographic. Carl
Linnaeus's controversial new system for classifying plants based on their sexual
characteristics, as well as his use of language resonating with erotic allusions,
provoked intense public debate over the morality of botanical study. And the
renowned Tahitian exploits of Joseph Banks―whose trousers were reportedly
stolen while he was inside the tent of Queen Oberea of Tahiti―reinforced
scandalous associations with the field. Yet Linnaeus and Banks became
powerful political and scientific figures who were able to promote botanical
exploration alongside the exploitation of territories, peoples, and natural
resources. The book - Sex, Botany, and Empire - explores the entwined
destinies of these two men and how their influence served both science and
imperialism. Patricia Fara reveals how Enlightenment botany, under the veil
of rationality, manifested a drive to conquer, subdue, and deflower―all in the
name of British empire. Linnaeus trained his travelling disciples in a double
mission―to bring back specimens for the benefit of the Swedish economy and
to spread the gospel of Linnaean taxonomy. Based in London at the hub of an
international exchange and correspondence network, Banks ensured that
Linnaeus's ideas became established throughout the world. As the president of
the Royal Society for more than forty years, Banks revolutionized British
science, and his innovations placed science at the heart of trade and politics. He
 7

made it a policy to collect and control resources not only for the sake of
knowledge but also for the advancement of the empire. Although Linnaeus is
often celebrated as modern botany's true founder, Banks has had a greater long-
term impact. It was Banks who ensured that science and imperialism flourished
together, and it was he who first forged the interdependent relationship between
scientific inquiry and the state that endures to this day.
https://www.amazon.com/Sex-Botany-Empire-Linnaeus-
Revolutions/dp/0231134266 https://cup.columbia.edu/book/sex-
botany-and-empire/9780231134262

Joseph Banks was an English naturalist and botanist who was the first
Freemason to land in Australia. http://mason33.com/content/australia/masons-
au/images/news/freemason/FreemasonSpr10.pdf
https://www.scribd.com/document/127919917/Emanuel-Swedenborg
Among their members they not only counted high ranking officers, lawyers and
aristocrats, but also many academics, including several prominent disciples of
the renown botanist Carl Linnaeus . https://www.inspiteofitall.se/products/the-
skull-beneath-the-skin/

--- IMP https://skirret.com/papers/schuchard-swedenborg.html ----

http://noliesradio.org/archives/22987
https://issuu.com/freemasonrytoday/docs/fmt_issue_24_winter_2013
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(01)93037-
5/fulltext http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/rita-pal/freemasonry-and-
medicine_b_1017439.html

https://www.amazon.com/Origins-Freemasonry-Scotlands-Century-
1590/dp/0521396549 http://www.popflock.com/learn?s=William_Schaw
https://www.scribd.com/document/66566768/The-Origins-of-Freemasonry-
Scotland-s-Century-1590-1710-David-Stevenson www.contra-
mundum.org/cm/reviews/tw_masonry.pdf
https://chrisczapla.wordpress.com/wake-up-and-smell-the-masons/
https://peuplesobservateursblog.wordpress.com/2017/01/03/gnassingbe-awade-
massina-kadangha-of-togo-are-not-worthy-to-share-grand-lodge-of-illinois-
with-brothers-roosevelt-macarthur-truman-mozart/
https://www.scribd.com/document/355903347/Review-of-the-Origins-of-
Freemasonry

His body is buried in All Saints Church, Breadsall. he promoted vaccinations

Contemporary literature dates the cosmological theories of the Big Bang and
Big Crunch to the 19th and 20th centuries. However Erasmus Darwin had
speculated on these sorts of events in The Botanic Garden, A Poem in Two
 8

Parts: Part 1, The Economy of Vegetation, 1791 His great grandson, Sir George
Darwin, is credited with the "fission hypothesis" theory that the moon was
originally part of the earth, but Erasmus seems to have got their first. This is
from his work, The Temple of Nature. In the work Darwin held that all life
originated in the sea and can be traced back to a single common ancestor. He
also outlined how species diversified in response to environmental factors. and
how one species can give rise to another. Erasmus Darwin based his theories on
David Hartley's psychological theory of associationism. Erasmus' idea that "the
strongest and most active animal should propagate the species, which should
thence become improved" was almost identical to the future theory of survival
of the fittest. http://www.themasons.org.nz/div/johnbg/FF_Erasmus.html

His father, Nils, was a Lutheran pastor . In 1728, he was a student at Uppsala
University. Here the professor of theology was Dr Olof Celsius, who was also a
botanist, and the uncle of the Anders Celsius who invented the temperature
scale we use today, as modified by Linnaeus. In 1753, Linnaeus was knighted
with the Order of the Polar Star by Swedish King Adolf Fredrick, who also
proposed his ennoblement in 1757, which came into effect after approval by the
Privy Council in 1761; from then on he was also known as Carl von Linné.
Note: for all these animals to exist today, then Noah needed to take only a single
pair of the Canisgenus aboard the Ark. The idea of ‘fixity of species’ came from
ancient writers like the Greek philosopher Aristotle. Jonathan Sarfati
comments: “The Bible talks of fixity of kinds, which in the Latin translation
became fixity of species, but then an unwarranted switch took place to fixity of
Linnaean species.” https://creation.com/carl-linnaeus ]]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derby_Philosophical_Society
Another organization that Erasmus founded was the Derby Philosophical
Society in (1783); this private organization consisted primarily of
Freemasons, the “Lunar Ticks” and potential Masonic recruits. Their
philosophy was Masonic/New Age and Erasmus Darwin was their organizer,
founder, leader and chief philosopher. After his death, the society continued to
function and supported Erasmus Darwin’s work and any work that was
consistent with their Masonic agendas. Eventually the Derby would support
Charles Darwin’s work as well. Evolution is the foundational doctrine of the
New Age Religion, they both came from Freemasonry. In America, just prior to
the War of Independence, Erasmus Darwin’s protégés established another
organization that was patterned after the Derby Philosophical Society that
Erasmus founded in England. It was called the American Philosophical society.
It was founded and led by members of the Lunar Tic Society and members of
the Derby Philosophical Society in England. Erasmus Darwin’s protégés Right
after the American Revolution was over, the American Philosophical Society
 9

held a formal election and elected Erasmus Darwin, (an Englishman) as a

member. This is evidence that Erasmus, an Englishmen, was in secret contact
with American Freemasons and Revolutionary Rebels before, during and after
the American Revolutionary War of Independence. If any Englishmen was
suspected of collaborating with the American Rebels during that time, they
would be in big trouble. In the case of Erasmus, at least on one occasion where
others were jailed for the same offense, Erasmus was overlooked. Erasmus
Darwin was English but he also supported the American and French
Revolutions. It is said that the first Masonic Lodge in France was established by
Englishmen. The French Revolution was started by wealthy agitators who
convinced the poor masses that the King was raising taxes on them, but it was a
lie. After stirring up anger against the King which was based on lies, the
wealthy agitators led the poor, misinformed people to capture ? King Louis
XVI. The Freemasons of France were accused of this deception which they
denied. Any accusations against Freemasons were dubbed as “conspiracy
theories”. This event marks the beginning of the “radical time of the
revolution”. Eventually King Louis XVl was beheaded ?? by guillotine. It was a
bloody Revolution, full of violence, murder, terror and guillotines. The last few
years of the French Revolution was called the “Reign of Terror”. The
Committee of Public Safety was formed, Maximilien Robespierre was
inaugurated as the “Supreme Being” and the Reign of Terror began. It was
characterized by summery executions of suspects without trial. I think that it is
important to mention now that Erasmus Darwin was a bit of an international
Revolutionary leader. He and his associates stirred up rebellion in people
against the establishment first, then in the case of the French Revolution, against
Christianity ? next, after that anyone could be next. Erasmus Darwin led a
Rebellion against God with bad information and some very bad ideas. Denying
Creation opened the door to a new morality without God, a new order based on
his view that he called “Reason”. As a result two new revolutionary schools of
thought about morality developed in France. The two religious cults of the
French Revolution were the cult of the Supreme Being and the cult of Reason.
One was Atheistic and one was deism. Maximilien Robespierre murdered his
competition by guillotine and was inaugurated at the Supreme Being. Months
later he was beheaded by guillotine and the cult disappeared but the cult of
Reason continued. Masons claim that there are no atheist Masons but that is
not true. It was generally believed by the contemporaries of that time that the
French Revolution was engineered by the FreeMasons of Europe. The Masons
denied involvement and called it a conspiracy theory. The term “Conspiracy
Theory” may have been a phrase that was thought up and discussed in secret
meetings of secret societies. The term “Conspiracy Theory” when it is used in a
condescending or ridiculing manner seems to silence those who want to expose
Masonic conspiracies. Calling something a conspiracy theory is an easy way to
question the validly of what is uncovered and to maintain Masonic secrecy.
 10

France was to become the Masonic "New Order". Governing bodies were
formed, committees were created such as the National Assembly, the
Committee of Public Safety etc. It is interesting to note the Committee of Public
Safety became dominate by use of murder and terror during the “Reign of
Terror”. The lie about safety and security to gain control is the same tactic
used by the N.W.O. today. The cults of Reason and the cult of the Supreme
Being were formed in France. The two cults represented two different
philosophical views that competed with each other. Erasmus was one of the
most internationally famous and influential writers in Europe during the time of
the French Revolution, (1789-1799) that is when he did most of his publishing.
Erasmus died in 1802, just a couple of years after the French Revolution ended.
All of the denial about the Masonic conspiracy to overthrow the monarchy
doesn’t erase that fact that all of the major players were Masons. Although
much had already been said by many about the Masonic involvement, Abbe
Augustin Barruel (1741 –1820), a French Jesuit priest and publicist was the
first to do a thorough documentation of their involvement. In his book,
originally titled “Mémoires pour servir à l'Histoire du Jacobinisme” he
documents the creation of the Bavarian Illuminati and the Jacobins in his book,
the new title in English is… “Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism”
published in 1797. Barruel documents the involvement of the Bavarian
Illuminati, the Jacobins and other secret societies in the French Revolution. In
his book he meticulously documents the conspirators, their associations,
statements and activities planned and executed by the secret societies. The
conspirators called it conspiracy theories in a most condescending manner.
People became afraid to talk about these things because of fear of being
criticized for it. Now look at how far things have gone because good people
would not speak up or look in to things a little more. The French Revolution
was just getting started when Erasmus Darwin published “Zoonomia”.
Zoonomia was Erasmus Darwins book that included a discussion about his
theory of Evolution. It took the Creator out of their view of everything. Just
after the book was published in 1794, Robespierre was inaugurated as the
“supreme being” and the “reign of terror” began. The “Reign of Terror” began
June 1793 and ended five years later with the fall of Robespierre on July 1794.
There were 16,594 official death sentences in France, but the death toll was
much higher. The French Revolution was supposed to be based on science and
reason. Darwinian Evolution was also supposed to be based on science, but
neither one was. They were both the result of Free Masonry, Pantheistic
Paganism, occultism and lies! They cooked up their own religion to justify
doing anything for personal gain. It did not work! There was persecution,
beheadings, bloodshed terror and genocide! It was a time known as the “Reign
of Terror”. Erasmus Darwin and the Freemasons of Europe planned it. The
number one reason for the French Revolution was the Ideas of the
“enlightenment” . The printing press made it all possible. You don’t hear much
 11

about Erasmus when it comes to Evolution or the French Revolution, but he

seems to be a key figure who has concealed his involvement in many things.
When you consider all of the violent revolutions by groups who have embraced
the New Age Religion and its main doctrine of Darwinian Evolution, at some
point you must realize the connection. Evolution leads to Atheism which is an
open door to psychopathic behavior. They believe that everything is an
accident so they have made up their own rules, to suit themselves life no longer
has any meaning for them. Just think of the millions of people who were
slaughtered during the Russian Communist Revolution, 20-60,000,000; The
Chinese Communist Revolution slaughtered 60,000,000; The Nazis slaughtered
about 17,000,000 in war crimes that involved the systematic extermination of
entire races, cultures, religions anyone they didn’t like; Nazis embraced New
Age Occult religions. They believed in Evolution, they all believe that life is the
result of a whole lot of accidents happening at the right time and place. They
don’t want to know about God and they don’t want anyone else to know either!
Darwinian Evolution is part of a New Age Mystical Religion called
Freemasonry, there is nothing scientific about it. The Piltdown Man was a hoax
that had everyone fooled for 41 years from 1912-1953. Erasmus Darwin
influenced a lot of people, his minions have carried on his work in every
country of the world . It seems like Charles Darwin got credit for his
grandfathers work even though he did not know much about biology or
genetics. Charles Darwin married his mother’s brother’s daughter, or his 1st
cousin on his mother’s side. Her name was Emma Wedgwood (1808-1896). It is
interesting and ironic that Charles Darwin married into a family that was known
for inbreeding. The Wedgwood family thought nothing of marrying first
cousins. Nevertheless, out of the 10 children that Charles and Emma had
together, 3 died as children. Of the 7 that reached adulthood, 3 were infertile
and could not have children. In his later years, Charles began to realize that
inbreeding was a bad idea . Biological evolution is not a scientific theory at
all. It is based in New Age Religion and politics for a New World Order. An
order that calls Satan by his pre-fallen name which was Lucifer. Pantheism,
Free Masonry, Secret societies and the occult make up the New Age Religion of
the New World Order! A history of deceit, fraud, perjury and occultism follows
the origin and promotion of the “Theory” of Evolution. Since the French
Revolution, countries that have embraced evolution and new age religion also
tend to commit acts of terror and genocide. EVOLUTION IS BASED ON LIES
& NEW AGE FANTASY. Erasmus Darwin’s pseudoscience is a fraud! First
“Evidence”, Piltdown Man, A FRAUD!

Darwin suspected that these things happened by the animals adapting to their
new environment.
 12

Darwin’s Theory Darwin hypothesized that new species could appear

gradually through small changes in ancestral species
Darwin thought, if this can happen by human then nature could do this as well
to adapt to a new environment over a period of time.
Darwin read a column from an ecologist stating that, the human population will
become so overpopulated that it will compete for food. – He thought that this
most happen within nature with species. – He thought that the most well
adapted species will be able to exist better then species that weren’t The less
equipped would die – This was known as Natural Selection.

The origin of Species . From Natural Selection he hypothesized that if

organisms showed variations within the same species, that they could of
originated from a common ancestor. . After reading an article from another
scientist that proposed the same theory, Darwin published his book “the origin
of species”..Darwin used the term Evolution only once in the book, and it was
on the last page of the book.

The Beagle spent 5 weeks in the Galapagos charting the archipelago. Fitz Roy's
chart was remarkably accurate ?? and remainded in use until the U.S.S.
Bowditch recharted the area in 1942.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_voyage_of_HMS_Beagle first captain
committed suicide. . the publication of his journal which became known
as The Voyage of the Beagle gave him wide renown as a writer. . after having
circumnavigated the Earth??. While the expedition was originally planned to
last two years, it lasted almost five.. Darwin spent most of this time exploring
on land: three years and three months on land, 18 months at sea. 33 & 1+8 = 9 .
he showed a gift for theorising. . He ably?? collected and made detailed
observations?? of plants and animals, provided the basis for ideas which came
to him when back in England, and led?? to his theory of evolution by natural
selection. The previous survey expedition to South
America involved HMS Adventure and HMS Beagle under the overall
command of the Australian Commander Phillip Parker King. During the
survey Beagle's captain, Pringle Stokes, committed suicide and command of the
ship was given to the young aristocrat Robert FitzRoy, a nephew of George
FitzRoy, 4th Duke of Grafton. On 27 June 1831 FitzRoy was commissioned
as commander of the voyage, and Lieutenants John Clements
Wickham and Bartholomew James Sulivan were appointed.
John Stevens Henslow & Leonard Jenyns. recommended the 22-year-
old Charles Darwin
John Stevens Henslow (1796 – 1861) was a British priest, botanist and
geologist. He is best remembered as friend and mentor to his pupil Charles
Darwin. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stevens_Henslow . Henslow
 13

married Harriet Jenyns (1797–1857), daughter of George Leonard Jenyns and

sister of Leonard Jenyns on 16 December 1823. Their eldest daughter Frances
Harriet married Joseph Dalton Hooker . Their sons included George
Henslow (1835–1925) .
http://www.indiana.edu/~wadel111/Discussion/What%20Henslow%20taug
ht%20Darwin.pdf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Jenyns
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hutton_Balfour
Hooker -His first botanical expedition—at the suggestion of Sir Joseph Banks—
1809. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Jackson_Hooker The specimens
he collected, along with his notes and drawings, were destroyed by fire on the
homeward voyagen. His good memory???, however, aided him to publish an
account of the island, and of its inhabitants and flora; his Tour in Iceland, 1809,
was privately circulated in 1811 and reprinted in 1813. he married Maria
Dawson Turner, the eldest daughter of Dawson Turner, banker, of Great
Yarmouth, and sister-in-law of Francis Palgrave. . Knight of the Royal
Guelphic Order and a Knight Bachelor .

Joseph Banks .FREEMASON. He held the position of President of the Royal

Society for over 41 years. He advised King George III
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Banks Knight of the Order of the Bath
(KB) on 1 July 1795, which became Knight Grand Cross (GCB) when the order
was restructured in 1815
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Freemasons
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Edward_Smith

He was baptized as a baby in the Lutheran faith, with the Duke of Brunswick
serving as godfather.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_von_Humboldt

Darwin fitted well the expectations of a gentleman natural philosopher, and was
well trained as a naturalist.[21] ---------- AT THE AGE OF 22 ??

Knight of the Royal Guelphic Order / served as President of the Royal

Astronomical Society three times https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Herschel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Herschel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Peacock

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_voyage_of_HMS_Beagle

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Babbage
 14

Influenced Karl Marx, John Stuart Mill, Ada Lovelace . His father was a
banking partner of William Praed in founding Praed's & Co. of Fleet Street,
London, in 1801. The foundation of the Statistical Society -- Babbage was its
public face, backed by Richard Jones and Robert Malthus. Mary Everest
Boole argues that Babbage was introduced to Indian thought in the 1820s by
her uncle George Everest . ( indian or vedic ) .

David Hume influenced utilitarianism, logical positivism, Immanuel Kant,

the philosophy of science, early analytic philosophy, cognitive
science, theology, and other movements and thinkers. Kant himself credited
Hume as the spur to his philosophical thought who had awakened him from his
"dogmatic slumbers".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Hume . Adam Smith, his personal
friend . His nephew and namesake, David Hume of Ninewells (1757–1838)
was a co-founder of the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 1783.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Sedgwick . one of the founders of

modern geology. Though he had guided the young Charles Darwin in his early
study of geology and continued to be on friendly terms, Sedgwick was an
opponent of Darwin's theory of evolution by means of natural selection.

The Church of England, by no means a fundamentalist or evangelical church,

encloses a wide range of beliefs.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_James_Audubon
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Beagle
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Voyage_of_the_Beagle

http://darwinsracism.blogspot.in
The racism in Darwin's anthropology is fairly obvious. It's there in The
Descent of Man, and in his letters. There's no doubt he believed some
human races were inferior to others and were consequently destined for
extinction.

Survival of the fittest' is as Darwinian a term as you can find, even if

Herbert Spencer was the one who came up with it. Darwin fully approved
it, incorporated it into the fifth edition of The Origin of Species, and wrote
(a couple of paragraphs into Chapter III), "But the expression used by Mr.
Herbert Spencer of the Survival of the Fittest is more accurate [than Natural
Selection], and is sometimes equally convenient." Stephen Jay Gould, who did
not relish acknowledging the dark side of Darwin (the competition and death in
his work), fully admitted that Darwin approved of survival of the fittest.
 15

Occasionally there is a writer who thinks Darwin rejected 'survival of the fittest'
because it is too brutal or too political. Adam Gopnik, in his book on Lincoln
and Darwin (105), thinks this. He mentions the letter that Alfred Wallace wrote
to Darwin to convince him to adopt this term, without telling his readers that
Wallace thought the term personified nature too much, and then gives the
impression Darwin rejected his suggestion. Gopnik writes, "Darwin calmly
explained that the virtue of natural selection was that it was a sister phrase to
'artificial selection' ... whereas 'survival of the fittest' was awkward and might
raise political specters." What Darwin actually replied to Wallace was: "I fully
agree with all that you say on the advantages of H. Spencer's excellent
expression of 'the survival of the fittest' ... I wish I had received your letter two
months ago, for I would have worked in 'the survival,' etc., often in the new
edition [the fourth] of the 'Origin,' which is now almost printed off ..." As it
was, Darwin had to wait until the fifth edition to work it in.

'survival of the fittest' is circular reasoning. All it says is that those that survive
are the best at surviving. Fitness is measured by the ability to survive. Those
that are good at surviving (the fittest) are good at surviving. It does not tell us a
lot about nature (other than the obvious), but it does tell us a lot about those
who believe in this criterion and their values. It may be circular, but it is not an
empty expression in as much as it tells us so much about the values our society
holds dear. That means it is not an objective truth. It is loaded with subjective
assumptions. If 'survival of the fittest' and 'natural selection' are equivalent
terms, as Darwin himself believed (the title of Chapter IV in the fifth edition
was changed to read "Natural Selection; or Survival of the Fittest"), does this
mean 'natural selection' is circular too? 'Survival of the fittest' is the purest
kind of circularity. 'Natural selection' makes a causal statement about the
modifications or mutations which are beneficial to survival and get passed down
from generation to generation, and then these accumulated variations lead
gradually to the creation of new species. Survivability is not just circular, it is
the cause of species transmutation. Darwin continued to apply it to man. He
uses it a few times in The Descent of Man. He wanted to apply natural selection
to the intellect of man.

'survival of the fittest' may not be inherently racist, but it is worrisome that no
one before the 20th century (except perhaps Wallace) sensed its potential
danger when applied to humanity.
It means making a judgment about which human races or cultures are fitted to
survive. Who makes that judgment?
The very idea of which race is fit to survive is loaded with a preordained,
western conclusion. It is always that way when the winners are making the
judgment. In a July 3, 1881 letter to W. Graham, Darwin wrote, "The more
civilised so-called Caucasian races have beaten the Turkish hollow in the
 16

struggle for existence." (Of course, in The Descent of Man, Darwin would
admit that such victories may only be temporary as natural selection always acts
tentatively.)

Fitness might make some sense in the world of animals. But among humans,
survival belongs to those who have seized power and the ones with power are
not necessarily the most fit.

Darwin's racism is so simple and obvious, it can easily be explained without

beating around the bush. Natural selection acts not only on corporeal structures,
as Darwin would put it, but on the mental faculties as well. There is a
continuum of intelligence from the lowest animals up through man. Darwin was
not the first to make this point. Notably, before Darwin, Robert Chambers in
1844 in Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation also saw gradations of
intelligence from animals to mankind. We are bound up, said Chambers, "by an
identity in the character of our mental organization with the lower animals ..."
Man is different in degree, not in kind. Are all human beings on the same level
of intelligence and moral or social values? Darwin didn't think so. He believed
the savage races were less intelligent and less moral than Europeans, and, as a
direct result of this, they would soon become extinct. That's what happens to
inferior groups. He used 'extinct' and 'exterminated' interchangeably. Darwin
was not vicious about it. He did not exult in the white man's superiority
(actually, there is one slight exception to that in one of his letters). He did not
use nasty epithets to describe savages, though he made his revulsion at their
way of life quite plain. He simply used, or misused, his science to claim they
were inferior in the struggle for survival. Their extermination was inevitable and
he expressed no qualms about it. It cannot be stressed enough that Darwin was
convinced this extinction was the result of a biological process, namely, natural
selection, and not injustice. Darwin did believe all human beings had a lot in
common (like emotions) and he thought many differences were trivial (like skin
color and hair texture). But intelligence was not a trivial difference. It had
serious consequences. It also has to be remembered that even though Darwin
believed we were all evolved or descended from a common ancestor, this did
not confer any kind of equality in his view. Natural selection may proceed from
shared origins, but it goes in the direction of incredible diversity. Apes and
human beings were related too, but Darwin in no way believed they had the
same degree of intelligence (he thought apes would become extinct too).

Darwin was opposed to slavery??—. He opposed it because it was cruel and he

hated all forms of cruelty.?? Wasn't colonialism also cruel? Yes, but here he
was prepared to look the other way. He seems to have accepted imperialist
cruelties the way he accepted the many harsher aspects of nature (like the wasp
paralyzing its prey so that it could be used as live food for the wasp larvae).
 17

Alfred R. Wallace = FREEMASON . In 1865, Alfred Wallace published an

essay “How to Civilize Savages”.

The whole point of Darwin’s theory was to explain how species originated, not
individuals. The title of his book tells us it was about The Origin of Species, not
the unreality of species. And how do new species come into existence? The rest
of the title tells us: By Means of Natural Selection. The sub-title adds that this is
also about the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. The idea
that natural selection was intended to explain only the development of
individuals is nonsense. Throughout Origin, Darwin returns again and again to
this main theme: Natural selection gives us both the birth and extinction of
species. Those species or races that survive are superior.

Racism is a more accurate designation for Darwin's views. It was mainly

Stephen Gould who argued that Darwin was a paternalist, not a racist.

Moral failures and harm caused by Christian missionaries had been known for a
long time. In fact, about thirty years earlier, Christian missionaries had been
severely criticized for being destructive of native cultures, but Darwin leapt to
defend them. It was his first public piece of writing, co-authored with Captain
Robert FitzRoy of the Beagle, and printed in a South African Christian
newspaper. They defended the job missionaries were doing and adopted the
usual attitude of the superiority of Christian values to that of savages who were
much inferior. One might say that Darwin’s first public expression of racism
was of the cultural kind and not biological.

What Bergman does not discuss is that at the same time that Darwin was
indulging his fondness for destroying animals, he was also an orthodox
Christian believer. - Jerry Bergman -- his book --The Dark Side of Charles
Darwin. In the first three pages, he uses the terms ‘racist’ or ‘racism’ 15 times
(including chapter and section headings); 9 times on the first page alone!

Darwin was consistent in stating that the intelligence of the lowest savages was
far above that of the highest apes. In fact, if you look on the prior page in
Descent (85), Darwin says, “… the difference in this respect [mental power] is
enormous, even if we compare the mind of one of the lowest savages … with
that of the most highly organised ape.” He also says the same in some of his
letters. What is true about Darwin is that he sometimes unattractively compared
savages and animals and could make it seem that savages were lower than
animals. He was expressing his disgust with what he thought was the culture of
natives (often taking his ideas from the reports of others). This was cultural
racism, not biological racism, though this too can be found in Darwin’s work.
 18

Cultural racism (and all racism, even the biological kind, is essentially cultural)
is not something Bergman wants to discuss because it would raise the question
of how much Christianity contributed to this.

Bergman does present some authentic evidence for Darwin’s opinions of

savages, their inferiority and eventual extermination. But he misses a lot more.
Why would he fail to make the best case that could be made? Because the full
case would explore Darwin’s cultural and biological racism (if you think one
should even make such a distinction) and discuss the relationship between
scientific and religious racism. That is not something right-wing Christians want
to get into. Understanding racism is not their goal. Interestingly, Darwinists, in
their attempts to make Darwin look better than he was, use some of the same
methods Bergman uses—quoting out of context, half-quoting, ignoring some
important issues. Conservative Christians and Darwinists well deserve each
other. You won’t get an accurate and fair picture of Darwin from either group.

In Origin of Species, Darwin is pretty blunt describing the violence in nature.

He does not try to soften it or make it look pretty. He uses some very strong
metaphorical language—beat, dominate, battle, and much more. But he resorts
to euphemisms in The Descent of Man when he talks about Europeans and
savages. He doesn’t mind telling us that savages make war on other savages,
but he has a lot of difficulty saying the same for Europeans and savages.

Rather famously, in fact, he regards the disappearance of natives as something

of a mystery. “Wherever the European has trod, death seems to pursue the
aboriginal,” he wrote in his Beagle journal (The Voyage of the Beagle, 375; a
few pages into Chapter 19, if you have an edition with different pagination). He
believes there is “some more mysterious agency” in addition to some obvious
causes of destruction. In a letter to his sister Caroline (May 19-June 16, 1837),
he writes, “I am very much inclined to suspect that there is some such
mysterious law connected with the destruction of the Aborigines in both
Americas.”

This is admittedly early in his career. By the time of Descent, he sees some
causes (shrouded in euphemism), but he never emphasizes that there was simply
a lot of killing or that dispossessing the natives of their land and culture was an
act of silent violence. He does his best to make it invisible. There is an irony
here. Darwin is famous for supposedly making man a part of nature. But he is
really a part of an older tradition in western culture of setting man apart. He
seeks to make violence as visible as possible in the natural world, while making
it invisible in civilization.
 19

ROBERT CHAMBERS = FREEMASON

http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/history/chambers.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Chambers_(publisher,_born_1802)
http://www.historyofphrenology.org.uk/vestigesintro.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vestiges_of_the_Natural_History_of_Creation

Robert Chambers, author of Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation (1844).

Fifteen years before Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species, Chambers
proved a theory of evolution, as it is called now, but known as development in
his time, of species descending from previous species. He proved it is more
probable than the theory of independent or special creation (each species being
created separately and apart from each other).

Darwin made his essential case in two early essays (1842 and 1844) that were
never published in his lifetime and were completed before Vestiges appeared.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Philip_(missionary) He made it his business

?? to expose the oppression of colonialism and the attempted extermination of
natives. -- from Patrick Brantlinger’s Dark Vanishings: Discourse on the
Extinction of Primitive Races, 1800-1930 (2003; see 77-80)
Darwin reflected it as well as some impatience, when he wrote in his Notebook
D 111, around September 1838, “How long will the wretched inhabitants of
NW. Australia, go on blinking their eyes. without extermination, & change of
structure.” I believe that last conjunction should be ‘or’. Darwin was saying that
it is not natural for any species or race to live long in misery, so that it either
will improve in structure or go extinct. As he says earlier in the same Notebook
at 49, on August 27, “animals must tend to improve;” yet fish, he says, are same
or lower, and so he adds “for a very old variety will be harder to vary, &
therefore more apt to be extinguished.

Darwin once pointed out that there was a high proportion of speculation to facts
in his grandfather’s work. He never noticed, however, that he himself was doing
the same thing with the extinction of human beings. That betokens an effort to
make it true rather than an objective fact that was discovered and believed. Nor
was Darwin interested in the myriad ways a people employ to survive.

RACISM BY ANY OTHER NAME One of the defenses made on Darwin’s

behalf is that to accuse him of any racism is an anachronism. It is claimed that
just about everybody in Europe at that time had prejudices against the darker
races (as they were sometimes referred to). Darwin was no different. To judge
him severely for this is to use a standard from a later time. Stephen Gould
defended him in this manner. This defense does not hold up. It is not quite true
that everyone was a racist back then. There were anti-racists. What is an
 20

anachronism is the term ‘racist’. That was not in use. That does not mean that
the attitudes which we designate as racist and anti-racist did not exist in the 19th
century.

Mainstream science, of which Darwin was a representative, was mostly on the

wrong side. The historical study of science, with a few exceptions, has generally
covered this up.
It is not clear if Darwin supported even a limited humanitarianism towards
colonized peoples. He certainly did not protest their gradual extermination. That
was acceptable to him.

The British Aborigines’ Protection Society (APS), 1836-1909, they were never
big advocates of rights or self-determination. Darwin may have attended one
early meeting for the purpose of having input for a questionnaire that would be
used to gather information about various tribes before they disappeared from the
earth forever. But his interest in the Society did not extend beyond this. Darwin
can’t be counted among even the moderate opponents of racism. Many of the
Society’s original members came over from the anti-slavery movement (which
had reached one of its major goals of banning slavery in the colonies in 1833).
Darwin did not make that move. APS = FOUNDED AND RUN BY
FREEMASONS
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aborigines%27_Protection_Society In Paris
Hodgkin met Benjamin Thorpe, a banker for Rothschild's at the time, who was
suffering from tuberculosis. Hodgkin became his physician for a while, and
Thorpe was cured.[11] This contact led to another appointment as physician to
Abraham Montefiore, married to Henriette, daughter of Mayer Amschel
Rothschild. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hodgkin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hodgkin_(tutor) ----------FREEMASON
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Allen_(Quaker)

FREEMASONRY OUTFITS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-

Slavery_Society https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Wilberforce
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Clarkson
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Slavery_International

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriette_Colenso
https://www.oliveschreiner.org/vre?view=personae&entry=321

Darwin once wrote to Charles Lyell that he did not care whether present-day
man (i.e., European man) will one day be regarded as a savage. That says it all.
And he didn’t even have to wait for a remote future, as he put it, to hear this
charge. It was being made in his very own time.
 21

The evidence for his belief in racial differences which would lead to the
inevitable extermination of inferior races is just too strong . Darwin never
raised his voice in protest over the imperialist exploitation of natives.

Over the last several hundred years, we have become quite good at criticizing
religious institutions and their representatives for not living up to the precepts of
their religion. It is safe to say that religion no longer has the authority it once
had. This is sensible. Religion deserves the criticisms aimed at it. But we give a
free pass to scientists and academics. They have inherited the mantle of
authority and power from religious officials. We have somehow granted
them the weird right to tell the most extraordinary lies about history. We do not
hold them to account. We do not ask them to live up to the precepts of science
and its main duty of honoring the evidence. Whatever they say goes even if it is
in defiance of all the known evidence. We love to create gods just as much as
the ancients did. Charles Darwin is a case in point. We have made him stand
for everything holy and good and liberal, as Gopnik and Gould have. Who gave
academics the right to create new gods? Who gave them the right to lie about
the evidence? And why is there so little challenge to this?

The best humanitarians of the time did not oppose colonialism itself, only the
way it was being carried out. They assumed that western civilization was a good
thing. They had no illusions that savage cultures would have to disappear, but
not through murder, torture, heart-rending destruction of families. One
humanitarian in 1841use the expression “the … Euthanasia of savage
communities.” He considered this inevitable, as did Darwin.

They assumed that “the encroaching tide of European population” was

irresistible. Native cultures would have to give way. It was individuals devoid
of any connection to their culture who might be saved. It was an idealized
conception of individuals who would hopefully be enticed by an idealized
conception of Europe.

Darwin was in line with the idea that European culture was superior and would
remain dominant. He remained committed to the colonial enterprise, but
whereas others denounced the way colonialism was being carried out, he would
not. In the end, it was all fine with him. One Australian newspaper produced a
series of editorials called “The Way We Civilize” and detailed some of the
atrocities. Darwin never joined in on this effort to denounce and reform the
extreme violence which colonists perpetrated on indigenous peoples. This is not
judging him by a later standard.

Darwin preferred not to look too closely at what was happening in the colonial
empire. We know he read books that reported some of the same cruelties that
 22

had been committed against slaves. In fact, some people argued that
dispossessing native peoples turned them into de facto slaves, but Darwin paid
no attention to this. If anything, he used his science to buttress colonialism, not
criticize it.

In The Descent of Man and in some of his letters, he reiterated that there was a
huge gap between the highest apes and the lowest humans. That gap is a big part
of Darwin’s system. And he did believe there were lowest humans. There is
another gap between them and the highest humans, not as big as the first one but
still it is there. There are many places in Descent where he looks for signs that
certain groups of humans are closer to the animal world than white people or
Europeans are.

Darwin believed most native peoples were doomed to extinction precisely

because they were intellectually inferior to Europeans. McGregor says Darwin
“was dismayed by the racial views of polygenists.” That is technically true in a
sense, but it is misleading and partially false. The polygenists believed there
were separate, distinct lines of human development, so that the various human
races were not related. The monogenists believed all human beings were
descended from a common ancestor. Darwin of course was in the latter group.
So was Alfred Wallace, Robert Chambers, and many more. So, yes, Darwin
disagreed with those who argued there were separate lines of humanity. On that
one, very specific point, Darwin objected to the polygenists.

As to other racial views of polygenists concerning the intellectual and moral

qualities of various peoples, Darwin did not disagree. Common ancestry did not
confer equality or brotherhood. Not in Darwin’s view. Too many scholars
constantly forget that evolution for Darwin not only meant development from
an ancient source, but also incredible diversity in that subsequent development.
Humans and apes also share a common ancestor, but Darwin did not believe
they were intellectual equals. In The Descent of Man and in some of his letters,
he reiterated that there was a huge gap between the highest apes and the lowest
humans. That gap is a big part of Darwin’s system. And he did believe there
were lowest humans. There is another gap between them and the highest
humans, not as big as the first one but still it is there. There are many places in
Descent where he looks for signs that certain groups of humans are closer to the
animal world than white people or Europeans are. Darwin disagreed with
polygenists on one particular point, but otherwise backed their ideas on racial
differences that exist now.

In his comments on women in Descent (in Chapter 19), Darwin sees women’s
faculties (such as intuition and rapid perception) as indicative of the lower races
 23

and a lower state of civilization. This is much more than paternalism, as

Stephen Gould claimed. This was Darwin’s version of biological inferiority.

We like to think that the ancients were prone to inventing gods and myths, and
were far less intelligent than us. We are not really any different. We often hold
ideologies to be superior to any intelligent solution of a problem. We love
mythmaking and we have no compunctions about playing fast and loose with
the evidence to get there. Historical study of Charles Darwin is a case in point.
There of course was a real, historical Darwin, but scholars have manipulated the
evidence to create a myth. The Darwin so many people believe in is quite a
fiction.

Before it was known as the theory of evolution, it was known as the theory of
development or the development hypothesis. It went by other names too (like
the transmutation of species), but development was the most popular. Benjamin
Disraeli wrote a hilarious satire of it which served as a scene in his 1847 novel
Tancred. The satire was based on the theory as expounded by Robert Chambers,
but it also reads like a send-up of Origin of Species a dozen years before it was
published.

One of the interesting things about this theory in its early days is that atheists
and atheist publications did a lot to promote the development hypothesis. No
one did as much as Chambers (who was not an atheist), with the publication of
Vestiges (1844), but atheists were instrumental in getting everyone used to the
idea that species have developed from a common ancestor (or ancestors) and
that this was a sensible suggestion. Emma Martin, an atheist and active
feminist, distributed 4,000 copies of her pamphlet First Conversation on the
Being of a God just a few months before Chambers’ book appeared. Part of it
argued for the development of species. Her friend Henry Hetherington wrote
an article a couple of years earlier affirming the validity of the development of
species, noting that the only mystery was how it happens.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Martin_(socialist) . The Esoteric Origins

of the American Renaissance By Arthur Versluis .

Actually, this was not so much about God as it was about challenging religious
authorities’ control of society. Today the prison is academic ideology and it
takes just as much effort to challenge it as any old-time theology. By the time
Origin was published in 1859, probably a majority of people (except for the die-
hard professional scientists) believed evolution was plausible. Darwin did not
start a revolution, he joined one in progress. Since atheists were instrumental
in bringing this about, you would think that atheists today would celebrate this.
Atheists, like many academics, have erased this part of history. Why would they
 24

do that? Why would atheists ignore an accomplishment in their own history that
they have every right to be proud of? One obvious answer is that they need to
glorify Darwin as a unique revolutionary who had no equals—a lone, saintly
hero battling reactionary forces. In short, a god. A god cannot have any
competition. This may not be the only reason for the peculiar attitude atheists
have towards their own past, but it does demonstrate a tendency to glamorize
Darwin beyond human dimensions. It is an intriguing irony that atheists would
delete some important predecessors for the sake of making one man larger than
life. It also illustrates the dangers of modern mythmaking. When the desire to
create myths is so strong that it can cause people to alter and suppress parts of
their own story, it is a force to be reckoned with. The drive to mythologize is
alive and well in the 21st century, even among people who consider themselves
perfect rationalists. Good science and scholarship require constant vigilance.

There is a moment in one letter where he crows that “The more civilized so-
called Caucasians have beaten the Turkish hollow in the struggle for existence,”
which is followed by a comment he makes even in The Descent of Man,
“Looking to the world at no very distant date, what an endless number of the
lower races will have been eliminated by the higher civilized races throughout
the world.” While it is true that, most of the time, he is low-key and prefers to
insidiously promote ideas of inferiority, we should remember that ‘beat’ is a
word he loved and used frequently in The Origin of Species — as when he
speaks of dominant species beating the less dominant — so that even in his
more subdued moments, the quality of his racism does not change.

What Darwin did in his quiet way was to make scientific racism more
respectable. He did not invent scientific racism. And whatever he did, he did not
do it alone. But because of his created / manufactured status, he helped to
advance this way of thinking. What the cutting edge of evolutionary scientists,
like Darwin and Huxley, did was that they “picked up the pre-existing
prejudices and stereotypical attitudes of European and white colonial societies,
repackaged them as scientific theory, and then mirrored them back to a literate
public.” That’s the way Neil MacMaster puts it in Racism in Europe, 1870-
2000. He does not specifically refer to Darwin and Huxley here. He makes
some scattered references to Darwin throughout his book, while preferring to
talk more about Social Darwinists, but his comment about repackaging
prejudice as scientific theory applies just as well to what Darwin did (
MacMaster himself did not explicitly refer to Darwin in this remark).

Anthropological racism not only became acceptable, it was considered top-

notch science. Again, it’s worth quoting MacMaster: “What distinguished the
late nineteenth century was not so much the elaboration of a new science of
race, in spite of all the talk of a Darwinian Revolution, but rather the sheer
 25

speed with which a discourse of radical biological difference was diffused

within European science and became an almost universally accepted way of
thinking about history, contemporary politics and national identity.” One of the
items that became so well-accepted was the talk of extermination and extinction
of native peoples. It had come to seem natural and obvious, even objective.
Europeans were not making this happen. This was nature’s doing. Natural
selection, not injustice, gives us extermination.

This cultural attitude was not limited to science. The Catholic Church did its fair
share of talking about extermination. Many Christian writers spoke of
exterminating Jews as a possible solution to their Jewish problem, and were
usually quick to add that they could not pursue this option because they were
Christian after all, but the key point is that they made extermination a thinkable
idea. There is no need to accuse any of these nineteenth century thinkers and
writers of being Nazis. They weren’t that. But it is equally false to say that the
Nazis did the unthinkable. Europe had made the elimination of so-called inferior
races a very thinkable idea. And Darwin made a contribution. He helped
everyone to think of inferiority and lower races and extermination as normal
ideas, and he never qualified any of this as having potentially dangerous
consequences, just as the Church did not see the danger in bringing up
extermination.

https://digitalis-dsp.uc.pt/bitstream/10316.2/31294/1/19-%20darwin.pdf
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/social-darwinism
http://dc37.dawsoncollege.qc.ca/humanities/gabriel/DTP/James%20BurkeVDO
2.htm
http://www.whathathdarwinwrought.com/pdf/What%20Hath%20Darwin%20W
rought-Study%20Guide.pdf https://pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/10/from-
darwin-to-2.html https://www.bartleby.com/essay/Nazi-Use-of-Darwinism-
FKCB3L6ZTC
https://sites.google.com/site/thechristiandelusion/Home/darwinism-and-nazi-
ideology https://coelsblog.wordpress.com/2011/11/08/nazi-racial-ideology-
was-religious-creationist-and-opposed-to-darwinism/
http://crossexaminedblog.com/2011/09/24/nazi-soldiers-indoctrinated-with-
darwin-how-convenient/ http://people.com/celebrity/kirk-cameron-stands-
behind-controversial-darwin-statements/ http://evolution.freehostia.com/wp-
content/uploads/2008/07/2006_tallman_prize_peterson.pdf
http://creation.mobi/the-darwinian-roots-of-the-nazi-tree-weikart-review
http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Stein2.htm https://io9.gizmodo.com/how-the-
pseudoscience-of-social-darwinism-nearly-destro-1308329496
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/crossexamined/2012/09/nazi-soldiers-
indoctrinated-with-darwin-yeah-right/
http://www.naturalselectionanddarwinism.com/nazism.html
 26

https://digitalcommons.hamline.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1066&context
=dhp https://darwintohitler.com/hitlers-ethic/
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-klinghoffer/the-dark-side-of-
darwinis_b_630627.html
http://scienceblogs.com/primatediaries/2009/07/14/darwins-connection-to-nazi-
eug/ http://www.faithandevolution.org/debates/did-darwinism-influence-the-
nazis.php https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Hitler_and_evolution
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/evolution/Severing-the-link-between-
Darwin-and-Nazism.html https://evolutionnews.org/2016/11/was_darwinism_b/
https://creation.com/refutation-of-new-scientists-evolution-24-myths-and-
misconceptions-nazi-darwin-link https://answersingenesis.org/charles-
darwin/racism/darwinism-and-the-nazi-race-holocaust/
https://www.csustan.edu/sites/default/files/History/Faculty/Weikart/Darwinism-
in-Nazi-Racial-Thought.pdf http://home.uchicago.edu/~rjr6/articles/Myth.pdf
http://home.uchicago.edu/~rjr6/articles/Was%20Hitler%20a%20Darwinian.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/From_Darwin_to_Hitler

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_5EwYpLD6A
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Anq6SAo1ue4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0VnuhHq5m0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCOc7Xqj-kQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RoJcfnZYCQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SV-zEzj0Dd0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46DFBqg1Vos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IaH0Ws8RtSc&t=150s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xA4qfSlPtgI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjermDZ1qfI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BHOX6xBzVa8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQp2lFcDEbw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mxXICZ9mXo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zS1UexfnLA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtLhENMsdNs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Qx0doX8eXE

https://creation.com/darwin-slavery-and-abolition

Darwin’s biographers, Adrian Desmond and James Moore, have produced

another book, Darwin’s Sacred Cause: Race, Slavery and the Quest for Human
Origins, which they claim “is the untold story of how Darwin’s abhorrence of
slavery led to our modern understanding of evolution”.1 So what did Darwin
think of slavery? Did it have anything to do with his theory of evolution? And
 27

was he trying to counter those in the pro-slavery lobby who said that the black
races originated from a different source than the white, and were therefore
somehow sub-human?

A family against slavery Charles Darwin (1809–1882) was born into a family
which vigorously opposed slavery. His grandfathers – FREEMASONS , the
humanist and evolutionist Erasmus Darwin2 and the Unitarian pottery magnate
Josiah Wedgwood I,3 provided finance and helped form an anti-slavery lobby
group in support of the work of the evangelical Christian William Wilberforce
in parliament. This resulted in the passing of the Slave Trade Act of 1807
(which made it illegal for British ships to carry slaves),4 and the Slavery
Abolition Act of 1833 (which made slavery illegal throughout the British
Empire).5
[[ history - Wilberforce Lodge No.2134
www.2134.org.uk/history.htm ]]
www.araratshrine.com/history/famous/wilberforce/ William Wilberforce is
perhaps the best known of the abolitionists. He came from a prosperous
merchant family of Kingston-upon-Hull
Clapham Sect, a group of social reformers which included William
Wilberforce and the later Lord Shaftsbury. John Shore, 1st Baron Teignmouth
(1751-1834) and Governor of India from 1793 to 1797
https://www.fraternalsecrets.org/rise-fall-english-freemasonry/

William Wilberforce was born in the High Street, Hull, on 24 August 1759,
was the only son of Robert Wilberforce by his wife Elizabeth, daughter of
Thomas ..... On 17 June a meeting was held inFreemasons' Hall, when
Wilberforce, as 'the great father of our cause,' was entrusted with a petition to
the House of Commons. www.historyhome.co.uk/people/wilberf.htm

The meeting was held at the Freemason's Hall, where two thousand people
crowded inside and hundreds had to be turned away at the door. Thomas
Clarkson, now one of the few surviving early champions of abolition, made a
gracious speech nominating Wilberforce as chairman of the meeting . ---------
-- William Wilberforce ..By Kevin Belmonte

Robert Isaac Wilberforce, Samuel Wilberforce. 1814. GERMAN

SUFFERERS. 157 obtain relief, was greatly aggravated by ... 5 When he
reached Freemason's Hall, upon the 25th, he found " the Arch bishop already
there, and the Duke of York soon after. ---------- The Life of William
Wilberforce, Volume 4 By Robert Isaac Wilberforce, Samuel Wilberforce
 28

https://www.history.ac.uk/1807commemorated/exhibitions/museums/squaring.h
tml http://abolition.e2bn.org/people_24.html

VVVVIIIIMMMPPP http://tamrin.proboards.com/thread/1378/freemasonry-
politics www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread288746/pg1
www.thepeoplesvoice.org/TPV3/Voices.php/2012/05/10/global-control-matrix-
revealed-who-reall https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?t=9716

Alfred RUSSEL WALLACE heard utopian thinker Robert Owen and became a
convert to socialism. Brother John, however, would later find a different
influence--America. John married, Mary Elizabeth Webster. In 1855 Alfred
published an essay entitled “On The Law Which Has Regulated The
Introduction Of New Species,” which essentially laid out the theory of
evolution. Charles Lyell, brought it to the attention of Darwin. Three years later,
Alfred penned an essay entitled “On The Tendency Of Varieties To Depart
Indefinitely From The Original Type,” developing the idea of the survival of the
fittest, and sent it to Darwin directly. When Darwin died in 1882, Alfred was
one of his 10 illustrious pallbearers at the Westminster Abbey funeral. For the
next 30 years, Alfred Russel Wallace would be the most prominent living
champion of Darwin and Darwinism. While Alfred became a well-known
socialist, John was a staunch Republican. He was a vegetarian, believed in
community ownership of all land, women’s suffrage and a minimum wage--all
radical ideas at the time--and was what today we would call an
environmentalist. In 19th century America, his views on that subject were far
more radical than his belief in mesmerism and spiritualism. Alfred’s exploration
of the otherworldly was, in fact, considered scientific. He even pursued it while
in San Francisco, where he and John attended a séance conducted by a medium
named Fred Evans. When a message mysteriously appeared on a slate board and
was signed “Your father, T.V. Wallace,” Alfred was wholly convinced he was
communicating with the spirits of departed relatives. John, a steadfast member
of the Episcopal Church . For the remainder of Alfred’s life, thanks to constant
publishing of his work on subjects from economics to language to the
possibility of life on other planets, Alfred Russel Wallace was one of the
world’s most recognized names. He was a man who never attended university
but received an honorary doctorate from Oxford. He accepted the Order of
Merit from the Crown. Two years after he died at age 90 on November 7, 1913,
a medallion bearing his name was placed in Westminster Abbey. Today, along
with his contributions to the theory of evolution, social economics and political
philosophy, he is considered the father of zoogeography and his 1869 volume
The Malay Archipelago is still the most famous work ever written on that
subject. Alfred Russel Wallace OM FRS = FREEMASON
 29

-------------- https://ambaland.com/satanists-are-everywhere-and-you-ppl-need-
to-admit-it-right-fucking-now/ https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/1144999
http://www.parareligion.ch/bowie.htm
http://www.llewellyn.com/blog/2011/04/110-years-of-llewellyn-part-3/
https://rosecityantifa.org/articles/meet-the-oregon-chapter-of-the-american-
freedom-party-part-one/ https://at37.wordpress.com/2013/12/09/37-and-
horseshoe-magnets/

https://creation.com/darwin-slavery-and-abolition
http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2014/08/charles-darwin-illuminati-family-
member-exposed-the-illuminati-evolution-deception-video-3016576.html
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message803571/pg2
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1508751/pg1

Colonialism would have proceeded apace with or without an underlying

scientific ideology. The ideology made it easier, it made the colonizers / the
executioners feel less guilty, and perhaps it added a measure of ruthlessness
and callousness, since it gave them the confidence that everything they did was
in accord with nature. A racist evolutionary theory did not cause colonialism or
Nazism. Colonialism caused evolutionary theory. Nineteenth century
science, which included Darwin, made the later Nazi ideas about inferiority
and extermination very thinkable. So, by the way, did religion. The best
scientists of the day made racist science and racist colonialism highly
respectable. They claimed to represent the best that Progress had to offer.
When Erasmus Darwin (grandfather of Charles) offered his evolutionary
speculations in the 1790s, the poet Coleridge accused him of promoting a
theology of the orangutan to replace Genesis. Something similar happened to
Robert Chambers in the 1840s when scientists attacked him for trying to
improve the human race with descent from baboons. Chambers boldly argued
(fifteen years before Darwin’s “Origin”) that all human beings sprung from one
stock. He stressed that the scientific evidence supported this. Ironically, neither
Erasmus Darwin nor Chambers were all that interested in descent from apes.
Their big pitch was for development from marine life. “Life has, as it were,
crept out of the sea upon the land,” as Chambers wrote. In response to his
books, Benjamin Disraeli wrote a very funny satire of the idea of humans
coming from fish.

There is a lot more evidence that a heated debate over human ancestry was
going on before gorillas and “Origin of Species”. Monte Reel never mentions
any of this. Erasmus Darwin does not appear at all and Robert Chambers is
mentioned once with an inaccurate summary of his theory. Also not discussed is
 30

the French naturalist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck who made a very precise stab in
1809 at how human beings might have evolved from apes (and one that most
evolutionists today would find essentially correct). All this was in the wind well
before the 1850s.

One other irony: Darwin did not think that descent from apes was all that
interesting or controversial; that is, not in comparison to another problem. His
main concern was our close relation to human savages, the “uncivilized”. The
hairy monkey ancestor was nothing. At the end of The Descent of Man, he tells
us how horrified he still was that we could be related to savages. It was
something he never quite got over. And it has a lot to do with racism.

At the end of the American Civil War, Huxley gave a lecture in which he said
that he was glad slavery was finally over (i.e., in the west), its doom being just,
but he added there were “good grounds for repudiating half the arguments
which have been employed by the winning side.” The main argument he wanted
to reject was the argument for equality: “It may be quite true that some negroes
are better than some white men; but no rational man, cognisant of the facts,
believes that the average negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the average
white man … The highest places in the hierarchy of civilisation will assuredly
not be within the reach of our dusky cousins, though it is by no means necessary
that they should be restricted to the lowest.” It is possible that all that abolition
will have accomplished is that “emancipation may convert the slave from a
well-fed animal into a pauperised man” but that is because “The doctrine of
equal natural rights may be an illogical delusion.” But if so many people felt
like this, why were they against slavery in the first place?
Converted into Debt Slave. And illegal slavery continued . How much
concern was there for what the freed slaves would face in society? Very little.
Goldwin Smith, a professor of history at Oxford, who asked, “How can there be
real political equality without social fusion, and how can there be social fusion
while the difference of colour and the physical antipathy remain?” Another one
concerned was Thomas Huxley – both freemasons / british agents = controlled
oppositions .
His aspiration that colonists and Americans should be attracted to Oxford was
later realised by the will of Cecil Rhodes. CECIL RHODES =
ROTHSCHILDS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goldwin_Smith
Very few actively opposed the continuation of illegal slavery and there isn’t
anything to indicate that Darwin expressed grave concerns about this.

Thomas Fowell Buxton was one of the leading advocates for both slaves and
aborigines. In May, 1830, a crowded meeting assembled in Freemasons' Hall,
with Mr. Wilberforce in the chair.
https://archive.org/stream/memoirsofsirthom00buxtuoft/memoirsofsirthom00bu
 31

xtuoft_djvu.txt Slavery, Abolitionism and Empire in India, 1772-1843 By

Andrea Major . The British India Society (BIS) formally came into being
at a public meeting in Freemasons' Hall, London, on Saturday, 6 July 1839
. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Indian_Association The Nationalism in
India certainly grew after the foundation of Indian national Congress in 1885,
but prior to that there were some secular political organizations that came up
with some primitive ideas about independence. The first among them was
British India Society. https://www.gktoday.in/gk/british-india-society-1839-
43/ https://arts.leeds.ac.uk/britainindianempire/about/child-page-one/
http://en.banglapedia.org/index.php?title=Bengal_British_India_Society

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freemasons%27_Hall,_London
http://www.ugle.org.uk/freemasons-hall/ http://www.ugle.org.uk/freemasons-
hall/the-history-of-freemasons-hall
http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/abs/10.3138/CHR-069-notes?journalCode=chr

HISTORY OF FREEMASONRY
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Freemasonry

https://archive.org/stream/cihm_00329/cihm_00329_djvu.txt
https://is.muni.cz/el/1423/podzim2013/SOC310/crd/itx/Hobsbawm_and_Ranger
_-_The_Invention_of_Tradition.txt
https://helda.helsinki.fi/bitstream/handle/10138/152661/_volume_16.pdf

FREEMASON On 16 June 1824 a meeting was held at Old Slaughter's Coffee

House, St Martin's Lane, London, that created the Society for the Prevention of
Cruelty to Animals. (It became the RSPCA when Queen Victoria gave royal
assent in 1840.) The 22 founding members included William Wilberforce,
Richard Martin, Sir James Mackintosh, Basil Montagu, and Reverend Arthur
Broome. Buxton was appointed chairman for the year 1824.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fowell_Buxton
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurney_family_(Norwich)

FREEMASON https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Livingstone
LMS CHURCH https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mateer_Memorial_Church The
London Missionary Society merged with the Commonwealth Missionary
Society (formerly the Colonial Missionary Society) in 1966 to form the
Congregational Council for World Mission (CCWM). At the formation of the
United Reformed Church in 1972 it underwent another name change, becoming
the Council for World Mission (Congregational and Reformed). The CWM
(Congregational and Reformed) was again restructured in 1977 to create a more
internationalist and global body, the Council for World Mission.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Missionary_Society
 32

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_for_World_Mission

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/new-archbishop-masons-
have-no-place-in-the-church-133469.html
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1427978/Rowan-Williams-apologises-to-
Freemasons.html www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/8514169/Archbishop-
allows-freemason-to-be-bishop.html

In 1823, he published another pamphlet attacking slavery. This pamphlet was

connected with the foundation of The Anti-Slavery Society which led the
campaign to emancipate all slaves in British colonies. Leadership of the
parliamentary campaign, however, was passed from Wilberforce to Thomas
Fowell Buxton. www.araratshrine.com/history/famous/wilberforce/

http://historysheroes.e2bn.org/hero/timeline/4259

Church Missionary Society.—This anniversary took place on Tuesday, May

4th, at Freemason's Hall, which was much thronged before the chair was taken
by Lord Gambier. ... G. Hodson, Bishop of Winchester, Dr. Milner from
America, Bishop of Chester, Thomas Fowell Buxton, Esq. M. P. Rev. J.
Hartley, Sir George Grey …

Treasurer* Thomas Fowell Buxton, esq. M.P. Chairman of the Committee.

Samuel Hoare, jun. esq. At the Anniversary Meeting of the society, held
at Freemasons' Hall, Great Queen-street, on Monday, June 3, 1822, his Royal
Highness the Duke of Gloucester, Patron, in the chair, the following resolutions
were unanimously ...

1 Apr. 1786,1 1st s. of Thomas Fowell Buxton of Earls Colne, Essex and
Anna, da. of Osgood Hanbury of Holfield Grange, Essex. educ. ..... He brought
a new impetus to his favourite campaign, 15 May, when he urged a meeting of
the Anti-Slavery Society at the Freemasons' Tavern to pursue the cause with
unrelenting ...

After the Abolition of the Slave Trade Act was passed in 1807, Clarkson
published 'The History of the Abolition of the Slave Trade' he then
joined Thomas Fowell Buxton to form the Society for the Mitigation and
Gradual Abolition of Slavery in order to try and completely eradicate slavery. It
was not until 1833 ...

https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/portrait/mw00028/The-Anti-Slavery-
Society-Convention-1840
 33

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Page:Dictionary_of_National_Biography_volum
e_61.djvu/221

The sugar plantation economy basically collapsed . Nevertheless, many

abolitionists overlooked the complexity of causes and blamed the ex-slaves for
the collapse. Anthony Trollope in particular was incensed that the freed slaves
preferred their own small peasant holdings to the big capitalist plantations. Like
many others, he saw their refusal to work for rich white people as a sign of
inborn laziness. In 1859, he wrote, “The negro’s idea of emancipation was, and
is, emancipation not from slavery, but from work.” He continued: “To lie in the
sun and eat breadfruit and yams is his idea of being free … Jamaica, as it now
exists, is still under a devil’s ordinance.” He concluded among other things that
“As far as we at present see, the struggle [to end slavery] has produced idleness
and sensuality, rather than prosperity and civilization.” FREEMASON
http://www.masonrytoday.com/index.php?new_month=12&new_day=6&new_
year=2015

Did Darwin blame the freed slaves for the perceived failure of emancipation?
He says little to nothing about most of these issues. And yet based on an almost
total lack of information about these vital matters, scholars declare Darwin a
great humanitarian.

Trollope: “To recede from civilization and become again savage—as savage as
the laws of the community will permit—has been to his [the negro’s] taste. I
believe that he would altogether retrograde if left to himself.”

 a list of names . They were all active in the 19th century: Thomas Fowell
Buxton, James Bonwick, Alfred Rusel Wallace, Lawrence Threlkeld,
Thomas Hodgkin, Robert Menli Lyon, John Savage, Alexander von
Humboldt, Montagu Hawtrey, and George Augustus Robinson. Many of
them were Christian missionaries. ALL FREEMASONS . to civilize
(Christianize).

One newspaper in Australia published a series of editorials in 1880 under the

heading The Way We Civilize. Consider how the Rev. Montagu Hawtrey
begins an 1837 essay with this heading for section 1: “It is possible to oppress
and destroy under a show of justice.” He goes on to explain, “Where one of
the parties is immeasurably inferior to the other, the only consequence of
establishing the same rights and the same obligations for both will be to destroy
the weaker under a show of justice.”

The problem cannot be solved by making sure that everyone is equal in rights.
The real problem is that Europeans are competing the natives to death. Britain
 34

in particular had become a highly competitive society where “every individual

is more or less in a state of competition with every other individual.” When that
is carried over to a colony like New Zealand, it will “never cease till it ended in
the degradation and destruction of the New Zealanders [i.e., the Maoris].”

== He was elected Price Professor of International Economics in the Royal

Institute for International Affairs a post which he held from 1947-1952.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_George_Hawtrey
Bertrand Russell and G. E. Moore joined as students, as did John Maynard
Keynes, who invited Ludwig Wittgenstein to join. The Apostles came to public
attention again following the exposure of the Cambridge spy ring in 1951.
Three Cambridge graduates with access to the top levels of government in
Britain, one of them a former Apostle, were eventually found to have passed
information to the KGB. The three known agents were Apostle Guy Burgess, an
MI6 officer and secretary to the deputy foreign minister; Donald MacLean,
foreign office secretary; and Kim Philby, MI6 officer and journalist. In 1963,
American writer Michael Straight, also an Apostle, and later publisher of The
New Republic magazine, admitted to a covert relationship with the Soviets, and
he named Anthony Blunt, MI5 officer, director of the Courtauld Institute, and
art adviser to the Queen as his recruiter and a Soviet spy. Confronted with
Straight's confession, Blunt acknowledged his own treason and revealed that he
had also drawn into espionage his fellow Apostle Leonard "Leo" Long. Straight
also told investigators that the Apostle John Peter Astbury had been recruited
for Soviet intelligence by either Blunt or Burgess. Leo Long confessed to
delivering classified information to the Soviets from 1940 until 1952. Writers
have accused several other Apostles of being witting Soviet agents. Roland
Perry in his book, The Fifth Man (London: Pan Books, 1994) makes a
circumstantial case against Victor Rothschild, 3rd Baron Rothschild, who
was a friend to both Burgess and Blunt. The espionage historian John Costello
in The Mask of Treachery (London: William Collins & Sons, 1988) points a
finger at the mathematician Alister Watson. Kimberley Cornish, in his
controversial The Jew of Linz (London: Century, 1998), makes the rather
extravagant claim that Ludwig Wittgenstein was the "éminence grise" of the
Cambridge spies. In the 1930s when Guy Burgess and Anthony Blunt were
elected the membership was mainly Marxist. Documents from the Soviet
archives included in the book The Crown Jewels (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1999), by Nigel West and Oleg Tsarev, indicate that it was Burgess who
seduced and led Blunt into the Soviet underground. As the Queen's art adviser,
Blunt was knighted in 1956, but was stripped of his knighthood in 1979.
MEMBERS include Amartya Sen, Erasmus Alvey Darwin, brother of Charles
Darwin John Maynard Keynes Victor Rothschild Bertrand Russell Ludwig
Wittgenstein https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Apostles
 35

the best known members of which included Virginia Woolf, John Maynard
Keynes, E. M. Forster and Lytton Strachey. The Bloomsbury Group, mostly
from upper middle-class professional families, formed part of "an intellectual
aristocracy which could trace itself back to the Clapham Sect".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloomsbury_Group Politically the members of
Bloomsbury had liberalism and socialism leanings. Though the war dispersed
Old Bloomsbury, the individuals continued to develop their careers. E. M.
Forster followed his successful novels with Maurice which he could not publish
because it treated homosexuality untragically. In 1915 Virginia Woolf brought
out her first novel, The Voyage Out. And in 1917 the Woolfs founded their
Hogarth Press, which would publish T. S. Eliot, Katherine Mansfield, and many
others including Virginia herself along with the standard English translations of
Freud. Then in 1918 Lytton Strachey published his critique of Victorianism in
the shape of four ironic biographies in Eminent Victorians, which added to the
arguments about Bloomsbury that continue to this day, and "brought him the
triumph he had always longed for ... The book was a sensation". The following
year came J. M. Keynes’s influential attack on the Versailles Peace Treaty: "The
Economic Consequences of the Peace" immediately established Maynard as an
economist of international eminence". The 1920s were in a number of ways the
blooming of Bloomsbury. Virginia Woolf was writing and publishing her most
widely read modernist novels and essays, E. M. Forster completed A Passage to
India, which remains the most highly regarded novel on British imperialism in
India . Virginia Woolf wrote Fry's biography, but with the coming of war
again her mental instability recurred, and she drowned herself in 1941. In the
previous decade she had become one of the century's most famous feminist
writers . More recent criticism comes from American philosopher Martha
Nussbaum, quoted in 1999 as saying "I don't like anything that sets itself up as
an in-group or an elite, whether it is the Bloomsbury group or Derrida".

The Clapham Sect or Clapham Saints were a group of Church of England social
reformers based in Clapham, London, at the beginning of the 19th century
(active 1780s–1840s). Its members were chiefly prominent and wealthy
evangelical Anglicans who shared common political views concerning the
liberation of slaves, the abolition of the slave trade and the reform of the penal
system. The group published a journal, the Christian Observer, edited by
Zachary Macaulay and were also credited with the foundation of several
missionary and tract societies, including the British and Foreign Bible Society
and the Church Missionary Society. They founded Freetown in Sierra Leone,
the first major British colony in Africa, whose purpose in Thomas Clarkson's
words was "the abolition of the slave trade, the civilisation of Africa, and the
introduction of the gospel there". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clapham_Sect
 36

Charles Grant ( 1746 – 1823), was a British politician influential in Indian and
domestic affairs who, motivated by his evangelical Christianity, championed the
causes of social reform and Christian mission, particularly in India. He served
as Chairman of the British East India Company, and as a member of
parliament (MP), and was an energetic member of the Clapham Sect. Grant was
part of an evangelical Anglican movement of close friends which included such
luminaries as the abolitionist Wilberforce, Zachary Macaulay, John Venn,
Henry Thornton, and John Shore He served as a vice-president of the British
and Foreign Bible Society from its establishment in 1804, and also supported
the Church Missionary Society and the Society for the Propagation of the
Gospel.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Grant_(British_East_India_Company)

Grant was born in Kidderpore, Bengal, India, the eldest son of Charles Grant,
chairman of the directors of the British East India Company. His brother, Sir
Robert Grant, was also an MP as well as Governor of Bombay.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Grant,_1st_Baron_Glenelg
https://nzhistory.govt.nz/people/lord-charles-grant-glenelg

Builders of Empire: Freemasons and British Imperialism, 1717-1927

By Jessica L. Harland-Jacobs

Bank of England (of which his elder brother, Samuel Thornton, was a director)
Thornton has been described as the father of the modern central bank. His work
on 19th century monetary theory has won praise from present-day economists
for his forward-thinking ideas, including Friedrich Hayek, and John Maynard
Keynes alike. Thornton was one of the founders of the Clapham Sect of
evangelical reformers and a foremost campaigner for the abolition of the slave
trade. A close friend and cousin of William Wilberforce, he is credited with
being the financial brain behind their many campaigns for social reform and
philanthropic causes which the group supported. For some years Thornton and
Wilberforce shared a house called Battersea Rise which Thornton had bought in
1792. The cousins spent much time here co-coordinating their activities and
entertaining their friends. After their marriages in 1796–97 they continued to
live and work in close proximity for another decade. In 1791 Thornton played a
major part in the establishment of the Sierra Leone Company, which took over
the failed attempt by Granville Sharp to create a colony for the settlement of
freed slaves in Africa. The company sponsored the voyage to London (1791–
93) of the Temne prince John Naimbanna.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Thornton_(reformer)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Institution Historians have often

suggested that Guy Fawkes Day served as a Protestant replacement for the
 37

ancient Celtic festival of Samhain or Calan Gaeaf, pagan events that the church
absorbed and transformed into All Hallow's Eve and All Souls' Day. Another
celebration involving fireworks, the five-day Hindu festival of Diwali (normally
observed between mid-October and November), in 2010 began on 5 November.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guy_Fawkes_Night

great-grandfather of Virginia Woolf. The Stephens were connected to the

Australian legal dynasty of that name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Stephen_(British_politician)
The Bloomsbury Group plays a prominent role in the LGBT history of its day.
While still in the Bloomsbury area, LGBT activity was all very much in a single
group (e.g. Duncan Grant, a homosexual with bisexual leanings,[7] having
affairs with Maynard Keynes, James Strachey, Adrian Stephen, David Garnett
and straight Vanessa Bell). Names of LGBT people outside the Bloomsbury
Group strictly speaking include: Mary Garman Nina Hamnett Jane Ellen
Harrison Rupert Brooke Arthur Hobhouse Later the groups differentiated.
Keynes married Lopokova, and no longer belonged to any of the LGBT groups.
Other groups more or less split according to the location of the members: Lady
Ottoline Morrell provided housing for Aldous Huxley at Garsington where he
was married to Maria Nys after the war. Also Duncan Grant and David Garnett
had to work on the land as conscientious objectors during World War I. They
started living with Vanessa Bell (also her son Julian) in Charleston Farmhouse:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bloomsbury_Group_people

During World War I, Huxley spent much of his time at Garsington Manor near
Oxford, home of Lady Ottoline Morrell, working as a farm labourer.Starting
from this period, Huxley began to write and edit non-fiction works on pacifist
issues, including Ends and Means, An Encyclopedia of Pacifism, and Pacifism
and Philosophy, and was an active member of the Peace Pledge Union. Huxley
earned a substantial income as a Hollywood screenwriter;
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldous_Huxley

The patriarch of the family was the zoologist and comparative anatomist
Thomas Henry Huxley (1825–1895). His grandsons include Aldous Huxley
(author of Brave New World and Doors of Perception) and his brother Julian
Huxley (an evolutionist, and the first director of UNESCO), and Nobel laureate
physiologist Andrew Huxley. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huxley_family

Wootton is a Freemason. In 2007, he served as Senior Grand Warden of the

Metropolitan Grand Lodge of London and was Past Grand Sword Bearer in
2012. Since March 2014, he has been Assistant Grand Master of the United
Grand Lodge of England. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Wootton
 38

CARBON DATING https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6INhRd4MeXI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OX5NQW6pVYY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVuVYnHRuig
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYTiba42-FU&t=517s
MOUNT EVEREST https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZGO4uNqIeU0
GRAVITY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2Cl4QqX85Y&t=4s

A lot of lip service was given to the principle that whites and blacks would be
punished equally when injustices were committed, but it was on the dark-
skinned natives that the brunt of punishment fell. The government had a habit of
winning over natives by telling them what they wanted to hear, with no real
intention to carry it out.

https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/dlps_fac_arw/10/

one colonial newspaper noted in 1836 that “the Government, to its shame be it
recorded, in no one instance, on no single occasion, ever punished, or threatened
to punish, the acknowledged murderers of the aboriginal inhabitants.”

Darwin was in line with the idea that European culture was superior and would
remain dominant. He remained committed to the colonial enterprise, some
denounced the way colonialism was being carried out, he would not. In the end,
it was all fine with him. One Australian newspaper produced a series of
editorials called “The Way We Civilize” . Darwin preferred not to look too
closely at what was happening in the colonial empire. We know he read books
that reported some of the same cruelties that had been committed against slaves.
In fact, some people argued that dispossessing native peoples turned them into
de facto slaves, but Darwin paid no attention to this. If anything, he used his
science to buttress colonialism, not criticize it.

When scholars give examples of the influences of Darwin’s work, especially as

to the extremes his ideas could be taken to, they love to cite Alfred Wallace’s
1864 essay “The Origin of Human Races and the Antiquity of Man Deduced
from the Theory of ‘Natural Selection’”. Wallace states his belief that Darwin’s
law of the struggle for life “leads to the inevitable extinction of all those low
and mentally undeveloped populations” and this results from “the inevitable
effects of an unequal mental and physical struggle” with Europeans who are
superior. The lower races are doomed.

Of course, scholars could have quoted Darwin making the same point, but they
rarely do. Darwin says the same thing as Wallace in The Descent of Man (1871)
and he made this point even earlier in letters. Just before On the Origin of
Species was published in 1859, Darwin informed Charles Lyell that he believes
 39

natural selection is continuing to work on the human intellect with “the less
intellectual races being exterminated.” Three years later, he is telling another
correspondent that when all the lower human races are gone, “in consequence
how much the Human race, viewed as a unit, will have risen in rank.” But many
scholars would prefer to stick it to Wallace or other Darwinists rather than
Darwin himself.

Wallace would grow to have doubts about applying natural selection to

mankind in the same way it is applied to plants and animals, but even in that
early paper, he revealed a tendency to be less severe than Darwin. He
recognized that savages (“the rudest tribes”) are “social and sympathetic” and
take care of their sick and feeble, so that “The action of natural selection is
therefore checked.” Darwin objected to this positive assessment of savages as
social and scribbled in the margin of his copy of this paper, “Does not act …
only civilized man!” Already, despite all they had in common, Wallace was
thinking a little differently about human beings.

In another paper, only a year after “The Origin of Human Races”, Wallace
considered that competition with western civilization was detrimental to
savages and that Europe should draw back from going full tilt at these native
cultures. It is “unwise and unjust,” he said, to “expose them at once to the full
tide of competition with our highly elaborated civilisation …” Such competition
will lead to their extermination.

Near the end of Darwin’s life, Wallace wrote to tell him that he was rethinking
whether the Malthusian population principle (which had inspired both of them,
as Wallace reminded him) can work with human beings in the same way as with
the rest of nature. He said an American socialist had made this suggestion.
Darwin responded to this letter, but not to this point. He did tell Wallace that he
hoped he would not abandon science for politics.

Malthus himself had pointed out that his population principle does not work out
among human beings as it does with nature in the wild. It is purer, severer, more
intense in the natural world than it is in human society. He wrote that “the
right of exterminating, or driving [them] into a corner where they must starve …
will be questioned in a moral view.”

Humans are not like other animals who have no control over their situation.

Darwin could live with it if competition sometimes had devastating effects.

Some form of the word appears about 70 times in Origin. Wallace said the
pressure of limited food production affects human population. It also just so
happens that competition was a major component of British society. We have
 40

three thinkers—Wallace, Darwin, and Malthus—all of whom saw the

importance of the principle “more are yearly bred than can possibly survive” (as
Darwin phrased it) . Malthus has been interpreted as a mean-spirited economist,
indifferent to the fate of the poor. But he was critical of Adam Smith for
devoting too much attention to the wealthy and not enough to poor people.

ALFALFA CLUB = ANOTHER ELITE SECRET CLUB

https://forum.davidicke.com/showthread.php?p=541089
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Alfalfa_Club_members
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfalfa_Club

http://livesmartly.co/15-secret-societies-running-world/ How the Freemasons

Rule the World https://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2008/11/18/how-the-
freemasons-rule-the-world/

http://freemasonsfordummies.blogspot.in/2010/04/hollywoods-most-unusual-
masonic-lodge.html North American Forum: The Secret Cabal of Trinational
Elites www.conspiracyarchive.com/2014/06/15/north-american-forum-the-
secret-cabal-of-trinational-elites/

The Club of Rome: They are a global ‘think tank’ made up of an elite group of
scientists, economists, businessmen, heads of state. They deal with international
political issues. It was founded in 1968 at David Rockefeller’s estate in
Bellagio, Italy. They follow the economic theories of REVEREND Thomas
Robert Malthus who wrote publications on population control back in 1798.
Members include: Al Gore, Javier Solana, Mikhail Gorbachev, Hassan bin Taal,
Kofi Annan, David Rockefeller, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Bill Gates, Queen
of Spain (Dona Sophia), Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, Mirianne
Williamson, Jane Goodall, Juan Carlos, King of Spain, Henry Kissinger, Ted
Turner, George Soros, Tony Blair, Deepak Chopra. The list goes on as there are
at least 100 members in this exclusive club. MANMOHAN SINGH
www.fivedoves.com/letters/feb2012/carolg210-2.htm

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/2014/01/29/illuminati-conspiracy-part-one/
www.conspiracyarchive.com/NWO/Illuminati_Notes.htm

Malthus was not the first to outline the problems he perceived. The original
essay was part of an ongoing intellectual discussion at the end of the 18th
century regarding the origins of poverty. Principle of Population was
specifically written as a rebuttal to thinkers like William Godwin and the
Marquis de Condorcet, and Malthus's own father who believed in the
perfectibility of humanity. Malthus believed humanity's ability to reproduce too
rapidly doomed efforts at perfection and caused various other problems.
 41

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthusianism
http://cgge.aag.org/PopulationandNaturalResources1e/CF_PopNatRes_Jan10/C
F_PopNatRes_Jan108.html

Godwin's parents adhered to a strict form of Calvinism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Godwin

Condorcet worked with Leonhard Euler and Benjamin Franklin. He soon

became an honorary member of many foreign academies and philosophic
societies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marquis_de_Condorcet

The Ruling Elite: A Study in Imperialism, Genocide and Emancipation

https://books.google.co.in/books?isbn=1426960638 Deanna Spingola - 2011 -
History President John Adams, a tool of the Federalist Party, signed the
bills.446 Maximilien Robespierre (1758-1794) was a Freemason, a lawyer and a
member of the Society of the Friends of the ... Reverend Thomas Robert
Malthus, in An Essay of the Principle ofPopulation (1798), formalized the
doctrine of “the inferiority of…

Son of Henrietta Catherine (Graham) and Daniel Malthus, Robert Malthus grew
up in The Rookery, a country house in Westcott, near Dorking in Surrey.
Petersen describes Daniel Malthus as "a gentleman of good family and
independent means... [and] a friend of David Hume FREEMASON and Jean-
Jacques Rousseau FREEMASON ". FREEMASON
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Robert_Malthus Influences David
Ricardo, Jean Charles Léonard de Sismondi .

Daniel Malthus followed the French thinkers conduct and Roussean and the
English Anarchist William Godwin in the conviction that society was on a path
towards ‘Perfection’. www.environmentalpollution.in/population/theory-of-
population-by-daniel-malthus-with-criticisms/1245

ROBERT MALTHUS = DESCENDANT OF http://www.weeting-

history.org.uk/malt_w.html & https://www.geni.com/people/Daniel-
Graham/6000000012518621581 MALT became MALT-HOUSE became
MALTHUS .

Sex, Scandal, Satire, and Population in 1798: Revisiting Malthus's First Essay
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-british-studies/article/sex-
scandal-satire-and-population-in-1798-revisiting-malthuss-first-
essay/0A10355BE57844FB9C41EA4CD11A1DCC#
http://freemasonrywatch.org/conspiracy.archive.dan.brown.a.malthusian.gnostic
 42

.masonic.wannabe.html Dan Brown’s a Malthusian, Gnostic, Masonic wannabe

https://www.fraternalsecrets.org/rise-fall-english-freemasonry/

http://libertyfight.com/freemasonry.html
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/gary-jansen/9-reasons-why-dan-brown-
i_b_3430284.html https://www.cia.gov/library/abbottabad-
compound/FC/FC2F5371043C48FDD95AEDE7B8A49624_Springmeier.-
.Bloodlines.of.the.Illuminati.R.pdf www.dissnation.com/illuminati/freemason/

Full text of "Evolution Hoax Exposed A. N. Field 1941 nwo illuminati

freemasons" (FORMER TITLE: WHY COLLEGES BREED
COMMUNISTS)
https://archive.org/stream/EvolutionHoaxExposedA.N.Field1941/Evolution%20
Hoax%20Exposed%20A.N.%20Field%201941_djvu.txt

http://authorscalendar.info/goethe.htm
www.otvoroci.com/uploads/3/8/0/5/38053843/committee300.pdf IMP

https://truthtalk13.wordpress.com/2014/04/23/the-eliteroyal-rh-negative-
inbreeding-problem-of-producing-genetically-psychotic-retarded-malformed-
crippled-abominations-theyve-kept-hidden-from-public-eye-and-the-burden-
they-have-pu/

Decades before Darwin’s Origin, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, who deserves more

credit for helping to establish evolution than he usually gets, gave what could be
considered a classic statement of holism: “Nature—that immense assemblage of
various existences and bodies … an eternal cycle of movements and changes
controlled by laws—an assemblage that is only immutable so long as it pleases
her sublime Author to continue her existence—should be regarded as a whole
made up of parts, with a purpose that is known to its Author alone, but at any
rate not for the sole benefit of any single part.” He goes on to say that “each part
has an interest which is contrary to that of the whole; and if it reasons, it finds
that the whole is badly made.”

The reasoning of a selfish being (like man, though he does not explicitly say
this) does not really understand the whole and will misconceive what benefits
the big picture. Darwin’s system is not so much about the wholeness of nature
as about those parts, each struggling for its own aims. The reasoning creature
places all things in a hierarchy of groups (which the whole, if it reasons, would
probably not do) and puts a particular emphasis on dominant groups beating the
weaker in the struggle for life. Every organism falls under the rule of
competition. Darwin’s entire thinking is about distinguishing between success
and failure, and banishing the failed groups to non-existence. It is easy to be a
 43

racist in Darwin’s scheme. Or, let’s say his thinking serves racism well because
superior and inferior are constant categories. It is much harder to be a racist in
holistic thinking because superiority, success, and dominance are not key
elements.

One could be holistic and yet believe that inferior and superior groups are a part
of life and that the inferior must suffer the consequences. And one could
embrace the competitiveness of natural selection and still think that the stronger
groups must care for the weaker and not abuse them. These are not
impossibilities. Darwin took the competition embedded in natural selection as
far as it could go—to the detriment of all those “lower races” that he anticipated
would be exterminated by Anglo-Saxons. Even in Descent where he speaks of
the patriotic and brave as sacrificing themselves for their country, it feels tacked
on to the theory. In Origin, he told us that every individual is out for its own
good and that natural selection will never produce a change in one organism for
the exclusive purpose of benefitting another.

Robert Chambers, who was as holistic as Lamarck, believed that man had only
a place in the whole and that this place, even if exalted, did not give him any
superior rights. Animals, for example, had rights and feelings too, which had to
be respected by mankind .

Chambers was preparing the public for mundane thinking.

On January 19, 2014, in the Sunday Times Book Review, there was a review of
a book about how species spread around the globe. The reviewer, Jonathan
Weiner, wrote that in Darwin’s day, “the reigning explanation was supernatural:
God put them there. Darwin’s thinking was more mundane.” Everyone wants to
believe that 1859, when The Origin of Species was published, inaugurated a
revolution in biological thinking. That is about as far from truth as one can get.
Long before Origin, other scientists were thinking mundane, as Weiner might
put it. Robert Chambers made his points in public fifteen years before. He was
as critical of the idea of special creation by God as an explanation of anything
as Darwin was. His book Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation (1844)
was exceedingly popular. Darwin’s book did not overtake Vestiges in sales until
the 20th century. Darwin was not influenced by Chambers. He was making the
same points privately in his unpublished essays of 1842 and 1844. But what has
to be remembered is that Chambers was preparing the public for mundane
thinking. There were ten editions of his book before Origin. The public and
many fledgling scientists were gobbling it up. They were impressed for a good
reason. Chambers did a good job. By the time 1859 rolled around, special
creation was no longer the reigning explanation. Herbert Spencer had also
previously joined in the attack (in an 1852 essay which was republished in an
 44

1858 book). Special creation may not have been quite knocked out of
contention, but there was more doubt and confusion than there had been in
1844. It was more the case that Darwin’s book took advantage of the changing
times than that he started something new. Credit also has to go to Jean-Baptiste
Lamarck, the French naturalist who was arguing for the evolution of human
beings from apes, and the evolution of all living things, in 1809, the year
Darwin was born. Darwin would not talk about human evolution until 1871 in
The Descent of Man.

Chambers drew a conclusion . Because of our close relationship to animals,

“We are bound to respect the rights of animals … even their feelings.”

Mythmaking is usually carried out by people in power. They need to invent lots
of things to hold onto that. A myth or a hero serves both as a symbol of power
and to consolidate power. Even apart from any conflict (real or imagined) with
religion, every field of endeavor—and science is no exception—seems to need
powerful figures that others must be made to worship. Whether science serves
mainly the rich or also the poor and middle class is a question that is trumped by
worship of invented heroes. Professional science turns out to be not much
different from organized religion. Not only do myths create a false reality, they
are also used to obliterate parts of reality that really do exist. They create a
forgetfulness. Heroes are often used to erase some quite genuine heroes we
would rather not know about, or actually, those in power would prefer we not
know about them.

Darwin was not alone in thinking that the native races of the world were bound
for extinction, with a little help from their European friends. The question has
been asked why they were so sure of this, why were they constantly trumpeting
this news. What did it mean to them that they felt compelled to repeat it so
often? It must have made them feel so superior for one thing. Walter Bagehot,
editor of the Economist who also wrote a series of articles that Darwin
favorably referred to in The Descent of Man, noted that savage tribes were not
in danger of being exterminated when confronted with the classical civilizations
of Greece and Rome, but they are facing that danger at the hands of modern
civilization. This was a good observation according to Darwin. It proves,
Bagehot argued, how superior we are not only to savages but to the ancient
world which could not exterminate the people we are capable of eliminating.
For many European intellectuals and scientists, the ability to annihilate other
people was evidence of superiority. As Henry Reynolds has put it, in their
world, there had to be winners and losers in nature’s battleground. The fact of
there being losers confirmed that the winners were all the more so. Bonwick
more sensibly pointed out that it was irrational to suppose that savages could
arrive in a few years at a place it took Europeans thousands of years to reach.
 45

From 1831 to 1836 Stokes served under FitzRoy as assistant surveyor for the
second voyage of the Beagle, and shared his cabin with Charles Darwin who
was on board in a private capacity as a self funded naturalist. ??
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Lort_Stokes

Then there is the matter of greed. If you are going to take everything from a
people—their land, their resources, their freedom of movement—then it
logically follows that the people have to go also. British colonists were very
clear that they wanted it all, especially the land. And how are the people
supposed to live if you take all their land from them? The all consuming nature
of the greed demands that extermination must follow. Human greed makes it
inevitable .

Darwin was fine with the extermination of native tribes. It was only natural as
he saw it. Some called it the law of might makes right. Darwin did not like his
theory being summed up this way (as one letter to Charles Lyell makes clear)
but it was not an unfair summary. He had ended Chapter 7 of Origin with “let
the strongest live and the weakest die.”

http://sofaithfulaheart.blogspot.in/2010/04/18th-century-freemasonry-age-
of.html http://revaugercecile.over-blog.com/article-24706237.html
http://thetrowel.org/2013/freemason-and-rebel.htm
http://freemasoninformation.com/tag/john-locke/ http://www.freemasons-
freemasonry.com/freemasonry_enlightenment.html www.freemasons-
freemasonry.com/Davidson.html
https://www.jstor.org/stable/43315324?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
https://www.scribd.com/document/321483955/freemason-history

Some of the evolutionists before Charles Darwin—his own grandfather

Erasmus, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck, Constantine Rafinesque, and Robert
Chambers.

Heinrich Georg Bronn (1800-1862), a German geologist and palaeontologist .

He had a doctoral degree from the University of Heidelberg, where he then
taught as a professor of natural history until his death. He had some pre-
Darwinian ideas about life’s history. He didn’t fully accept “Darwinism” at the
end of his life, but he made the first translation of On The Origin of Species into
German.

He founded the Mesopotamia Female Seminary in Eutaw, Alabama, and

became president (briefly) of Masonic University in Selma.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Winchell
 46

Rafinesque was one of the first to use the term "evolution" in the context of
biological speciation. Rafinesque proposed a theory of evolution before Charles
Darwin. In a letter in 1832 . In the third edition of On the Origin of Species
published in 1861, Charles Darwin added a Historical Sketch that
acknowledged the ideas of Rafine. sque. ------------ Rafinesque claimed the
original tablets and transcription were later lost, leaving his notes and
transcribed copy as the only record of evidence. --------Since the late 20th
century, studies especially since the 1980s in linguistic, ethnohistorical,
archaeological and textual analyses, suggest that the Walam Olum account was
largely or entirely a fabrication. Scholars have described its record of "authentic
Lenape traditional migration stories" as spurious.[38] After the publication in
1995 of David Oestreicher's thesis, The Anatomy of the Walam Olum: A 19th
Century Anthropological Hoax, many scholars concurred with his analysis.
They concluded that Rafinesque had been either the perpetrator, or perhaps the
victim, of a hoax. -----
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_Samuel_Rafinesque

When we find racism in Darwin’s scientific thoughts about savages, it feels

systemic. He builds it right into the system of nature as he saw it. Racism has a
kind of ideological permanency in Charles Darwin. There are scholars who try
to portray Darwin’s science as kinder and gentler than it really was, but there is
some harshness there, so who to blame that on? They will pin it on Thomas
Robert Malthus or Herbert Spencer. There has been some good work on the fact
that Social Darwinism can be found in Darwin himself. It is more likely Spencer
came by his stern views because of Darwin’s influence than the other way
around. Darwin’s theory is presented as one that makes the whole world a
web of organic creatures, binding us all together. Darwin did not really do that.
He emphasized a hierarchy of species in which some are dominant and others
subordinate. Ranking groups was his thing. The living web of creatures was
really the point of evolutionists like Erasmus Darwin and Chambers.

We have almost completely forgotten that a few months before Robert

Chambers’ book came out in 1844, Emma Martin was in the streets, passing out
one of her pamphlets (4,000 copies) arguing for evolution, and after the
Chambers book appeared, she was going around giving lectures on it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Martin_(socialist) ??
The Dead Do Not Die: "Exterminate All the Brutes" and Terra Nullius By Sven
Lindqvist https://www.amazon.com/Dead-Do-Not-Die-
Exterminate/dp/1595589899 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodor_Waitz
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georg_Gerland
 47

Darwin's Racism. The Definitive Case, Along With a Close Look at Some of
the Forgotten, Genuine Humanitarians of That Time By Leon Zitzer

Overly clumsy attempts to construct an evolutionary model, such as

those Georg Gerland thought he saw in the works of John Lubbock and
especially Friedrich Hellwald (Hellwald 1875), were criticized repeatedly,
though, not only by Gerland, but by other German ethnologists (Peschel 1874,
Gerland 1875, 1878). -- The Reception of Charles Darwin in Europe: The
Reception of British Authors ... edited by Eve-Marie Engels

IIIMMMPPP http://klemkaan.com/what-will-happen-to-the-people-who-will-
not-awaken-will-they-die/ http://www.ascertainthetruth.com/att/index.php/al-
islam/al-islam-and-science/871-evolution-was-an-islamic-theory-before-darwin-
was-even-born https://www.henrymakow.com/2013/08/Darwinism-is-an-
Illuminati-Scam.html https://forums.marokko.nl/archive/index.php/t-
4177853-darwin-a-freemason-a-agent-with-a-zionist-agenda-to-destroy-
religion.html www.jesusisprecious.org/evolution_hoax/charles_darwin.htm
https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/05/18/evolution-is-a-jewish-
conspira/
https://www.jstor.org/stable/41393742?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
https://truthtellers.org/alerts/JewishSupremacistsUseEvolution%20.html
www.manchesterjewishstudies.org/darwinsjews/
www.yakovrabkin.ca/english/articles/judaism-zionism-and-israel/darwin-and-
the-jews/ www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/religious-zionist-rabbis-
welcome-evolution-into-school-curriculum/2014/06/02/
https://justice4poland.com/2016/03/10/jewish-eugenics-pre-dates-hitlers-
master-race/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/why-is-this-darwin-
different-from-all-other-darwins/
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/09/how-charles-darwins-
theories-influenced-growth-welfare-state
https://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/11/25/the-politically-incorrect-guide-to-
zionist-ideology/

https://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evolution%20Hoax/The_Evolution_Deceit/2-
1.htm https://www.jesus-is-
savior.com/Evolution%20Hoax/The_Evolution_Deceit/2-2.htm
https://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Evolution%20Hoax/The_Evolution_Deceit/2-
3.htm https://www.jesus-is-
savior.com/Evolution%20Hoax/The_Evolution_Deceit/2-4.htm
https://www.jesus-is-
savior.com/Evolution%20Hoax/The_Evolution_Deceit/toc.htm
http://harunyahyablog.blogspot.in/2011/07/committee-of-antichrist-darwin-
 48

marx.html http://truthprevailsalways.blogspot.in/2008/08/evolution-pioneered-
by-darwins.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OvDJiak6G0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOw9KahAi28
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-hVLYTFKl0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkeMs10P9dI
http://www.tomatobubble.com/id647.html

https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2018/01/st-charles-darwin
https://www.nuttyhistory.com/social-darwinism.html https://www.activist-
news.com/evolution-debunked/

IIMMPP http://www.discoverylifediy.com/430259250
www.atlanteanconspiracy.com/2015/12/ape-men-never-existed.html
www.tomatobubble.com/id647.html
www.harunyahya.com/en/Books/677/global-freemasonry/chapter/1909

http://canadianpatriot.org/the-hideous-revolution-the-x-clubs-malthusian-
revolution-of-science/ http://britishdeepstate.com/darwinism/ Darwinism
Plan of the British Deep State http://harunyahya.com/en/Articles/17199/the-
real-face-of-charles Quotes from Darwin and Huxley That Might Shake
Atheism's Foundation
https://fundamentalbaptistchristian.blogspot.in/2015/11/quotes-from-darwin-
and-huxley-that.html https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BeAJMDhCuv8
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/lincoln-vs-darwin-part-4-of-4-
4132916/ https://www.slideshare.net/HarunyahyaEnglish/the-religion-of-
darwinism-evolution-english
https://www.slideshare.net/HarunyahyaEnglish/the-cambrian-evidence-that-
charles-darwin-failed-to-comprehend-english

Ten-year-old Henry has just gotten the job of his life—assistant to Charles
Darwin on a voyage of the HMS Beagle.
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/6251702-charles-darwin
http://harunyahya.com/en/Articles/17199/the-real-face-of-charles
www.ericdubay.com/?p=2352
https://dublinsmickdotcom.wordpress.com/2014/08/25/men-in-power-boy-
down-the-lane/

The "primitive man" of Herbert Spencer and Lord Lubbock turned out to be a
myth. It is dangerous to generalize about ceremonies, rites, symbols, etc., of
 49

socalled "primitive rites," and impossible to argue that identical rites presuppose
the same origin. -- Encyclopedia Of Freemasonry (Annotated Edition):
https://books.google.co.in/books?isbn=3849631567 - Albert G. Mackey – 2013

Encyclopedia Of Freemasonry And Its Kindred Sciences Albert G. Mackey

http://www.themasonictrowel.com/books/lexicon_of_freemasonry_by_Albert_
Mackey/files/PMAP1/Pmac-17.htm At the beginning of the century American
colleges and universities began everywhere to install departments of
anthropology; the literature which a half century before had begun with a few
simple books by Herbert Spencer (not an anthropologist) and Lord Avebury
began so rapidly to increase that it now defies a life-time of ...
https://freemasonrymatters.co.uk/famous-freemasons/freemason-bishop-percy-
mark-herbert/ https://evidencesofcreation.wordpress.com/tag/that-organisation-
is-freemasonry/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herbert_Spencer
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_George_Spencer

The defenders of western imperialism take one of two approaches: Either they
refuse to discuss its deep faults (such as excessive greed, violence, arrogance)
and refuse to consider whether and how much this contributed to the success of
the west, à la Nicholas Wade in A Troublesome Inheritance, or they
acknowledge but understate the harm inflicted and claim that whatever the
injuries, the benefits outweighed them, à la Niall Ferguson in Civilization: The
West and the Rest. Both approaches play up the benefits, hoping to blind us to
anything that might detract from a story of unparalleled good.

What was the cost of colonialism to indigenous peoples? Forsake the glib
answer that, oh yes, well, of course, there were some bad things, but the benefits
were greater than the injuries. How could anyone know this without a full
investigation? It might be more difficult to come up with numerical answers in
some colonies. How many Aborigines in Australia died for every ton of wool
produced?

The trouble with the celebration of western imperialism is not just that it is
dishonest about the full truth of the subject, but that it is dishonest about what it
really wants, about its own greed to have it all. Granted that there are some
benefits to imperialism that we can hold onto, the celebrants of it seem to be
saying that it is not enough that we have invaded, we conquered, we stole, and
we killed—we were the outright victors—we must also win in history. We must
take over your history too, or else our victory is incomplete. We must be
vindicated. We must be seen and remembered as good and beneficent. We gave
more than we took. We need total control of history to hammer home that point
and ensure the final victory. We must show either that we did nothing wrong or
 50

that the benefits we brought far exceeded the harm, and that these benefits were
unquestionably the result of the good things and not the bad stuff like rapacity
and bloodthirsty violence. The need to make such an argument may be very
great, but this is not objective history. This is loaded history. This is greed
raised to the nth degree. This is history made to serve a complete takeover by
the powerful. The defenders of western colonialism are making large claims,
but in another way, there is a smallness to their vision. It is like saying we have
a right to defend our way of life but you don’t have a right to defend yours. The
hypocrisy of this is heightened by the fact that the western way of life contains a
lot of aggression, whereas the indigenous way is relatively passive—certainly
less grasping and more content to enjoy the given—and yet we think they have
less right to form their homeland security and defend their quieter lives. We
have shrunk our sense of right and wrong.

The imperial success of the west was achieved at what cost to the indigenous
populations? The ultimate question for western civilization is whether
humanitarianism can become as strong a force as our hunger for continual
material improvements. Can it make an equal claim on our desires?

We say it so easily and we mean it as high praise. He was ahead of his time,
what a genius! We choose not to think about how painful and frustrating it was
to be in that condition. No one who’s been through it will tell you it was a good
thing. Wake them all up from the dead. They’ll tell you it was a raw deal.
Ahead of your time? The shame of it is that so many decided we don’t want it,
and then later, they cover up by saying that other guy was ahead of his time, so
it’s not our fault we didn’t see it. We saw it, we weren’t blind. We rejected it
because we had other needs. Its also the intelligence , sensitivity ,perception
and hard work .

Charles Darwin offered natural selection to establish that the dominant species
will become ever more dominant . Darwin saw that everything was potentially
temporary. Natural selection, he said, acts only tentatively. But he never made
that the mainspring of his system. He put his emphasis on the success of the
strongest or most dominant species. It was a theory that was well-suited to his
colonial age. It is still ahead of what we perceive to be our needs.

Even when it comes to natural selection, Darwin’s version of evolution, there is

more than one way to pursue it. Evolutionary theory has a history that goes
back well before Charles Darwin entered the picture. By the time Darwin’s The
Origin of Species appeared in 1859, probably a majority, or at least something
close to a majority, of the general population in England believed that the birth
of new species, in descent from older species, made sense. Chambers ‘ book,
Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation, caught the people’s fancy . Almost
 51

half a century earlier, Darwin’s grandfather, Erasmus Darwin, enthusiastically

promoted evolution . Erasmus Darwin (1731 – 1802) Robert Chambers FRSE
FGS ( 1802 – 1871 ). A common argument made by many was that the
generation of new species was very much like the generation, or birth, of new
individuals, and that the birth of a new species was as normal as the birth of a
baby.

The Secret History of Ancient Egypt -- Herbie Brennan – 2013

IIMMPP https://creation.com/evolution-ancient-pagan-idea
http://harunyahya.com/en/Articles/13787/the-origins-of-superstitious-religion
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_evolutionary_thought

What Chambers, E. Darwin, Rafinesque, and Lamarck argued was that all life is
netted into one great whole which is more important than any one part,
including humankind. Scholars have taken this teaching and claim it is one of
the essential lessons of evolutionary theory, and further claim that it comes from
Charles Darwin, but he never declared this as much as the others did. He rather
gave himself to almost the opposite idea. What Darwin saw was a hierarchy of
life, an order and ranking, not an interconnectedness into a whole. Over and
over in The Origin of Species, he told his readers that life gives us groups
subordinate to groups, yielding dominant groups that beat feebler groups in the
struggle for life. What is revolutionary about “let the strongest live and the
weakest die”, the last words of Chapter VII of Origin? He made the dominant
more worthy of life than the weak and small. He stressed the subordination of
groups and ranked groups from lowest to highest. He applied medieval
theology to biology and gave comfort to the ruling classes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism

At the end of the American Civil War, Thomas Huxley gave a brief lecture
entitled “Emancipation—Black and White” (the white part referred to women).
He was glad that slavery was finally at an end in the west, but he emphasized
that half the arguments brought in favor of abolition were wrong. In particular,
the argument of equality between the races was dead wrong, as far as he was
concerned: “no rational man, cognisant of the facts, believes that the average
negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the average white man … The
highest places in the hierarchy of civilisation will assuredly not be within the
reach of our dusky cousins …”

Montgomery and Chirot also play down Darwin’s connection to later

developments of Social Darwinism and eugenics. . They say Darwin’s cousin
Francis Galton initiated eugenics thinking, but they leave out two crucial points.
 52

First, Darwin liked his cousin’s book on this. Second, when Galton argued that
nature does not care for individuals, but only uses them to make superior races,
Darwin only slightly disagreed. He pointed out that there are many extinct
species which shows that nature may not care much for species either. But
Darwin added that may be the right way to express all this was that “Nature
cares only for the superior individuals and then makes her new and better races”

Darwin turned his back on what colonization and the idea of savage inferiority
were doing to natives. Gould never addressed this. He brought his usual
historical curiosity to a full stop. There is evidence in The Descent of Man that
Darwin considered signs of savage inferiority in their biological make-up, for
example in their having a better sense of smell than white people, which put
savages closer to the world of animals. His most serious biological assessment
of them was that they had smaller brains, which would indicate lower intellects.
Gould ignored this direct evidence of Darwin’s biological determinism.

Paternalism is a misdirection that Gould gave himself so that he wouldn’t see

the evidence of Darwin’s support for the colonial enterprise and its stunting of
life. Gould also missed that Darwin linked natural selection to the colonial
enterprise and in doing so, he made a biological theory (natural selection)
supportive of colonialism. Gould quotes a famous passage from Descent in
which Darwin says that over the next few centuries, “the civilised races of man
will almost certainly exterminate, and replace, the savage races throughout the
world” (Darwin also states here that anthropomorphous apes will be
exterminated too). Gould actually quotes a longer portion of it. He cites the
passage to show that Darwin did believe certain human races were inferior and
that Darwin ranked savages between apes and white people, which in Gould's
view makes Darwin a paternalist. But Gould completely ignores the part about
extermination! There is nothing more stunting of life than extermination. How
that can be called paternalism. And its mindboggling that Gould could
completely miss that.

Throughout the 19th century in the British Empire, parallel developments in

science and the law were squeezing Aborigines everywhere into nonexistence.
Charles Darwin took part in this. Again and again, he expressed his approval of
the extermination of the native “lower races.” Europeans, they said, were
becoming polished savages and dehumanizing the Other. Darwin was very
aware of this criticism and cared not one whit. As he said in a letter to Charles
Lyell, “I … care not much whether we are looked at as mere savages in a
remotely distant future.” But he well knew it was not a remote future. He had
read several writers who accused Europeans of being the real savages. For a
brief moment in his youth in his Diary, he himself dabbled in such criticism,
even though he already believed in the inferiority of indigenous peoples. That
 53

belief grew firmer as he matured. Racism was a systemic part of Darwin’s

anthropology; this includes evidence from his published writings, Notebooks,
and correspondence .

--- In testimony before the House of Commons Select Committee on

Aborigines in the mid-1830s, one minister thought the best compensation we
could offer would be to bring them Christianity and the benefits of western
civilization. This would be a fair recompense for the land we took. One member
of the Committee pointed out that this was the only compensation we could
afford. --?

The dominant culture from the beginning has wanted it all and has been
unwilling to share or give up even a small piece of the wealth to be had. Most
19th century abolitionists ever thought about reparations. They conceived that
once slavery was abolished, freedom was the only reparation necessary and
white people could wash their hands of it, as Thomas Huxley once put it . His
answer was basically nothing. Like Darwin and their friend Joseph Hooker,
Huxley was an abolitionist. But all three held strong racist beliefs. He was not
hopeful about the future for former slaves. Their own inferiority would keep
them down. In a lecture, he stated that there were “good grounds for repudiating
half the arguments which have been employed by the “winning” side,” that is,
by those fighting to end slavery. What bothered him most was the argument of
equality between the races: “no rational man, cognisant of the facts, believes
that the average negro is the equal, still less the superior, of the average white
man.” Whatever happens to the Negro from here on in, “all responsibility for
the result will henceforward lie between nature and him. The white man may
wash his hands of it, and the Caucasian conscience be void of reproach forever
more.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Dalton_Hooker
FREEMASON . British priest, botanist and geologist. He is best remembered as
friend and mentor to his pupil Charles Darwin.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Stevens_Henslow Thomas Henry Huxley
was the initiator . After Charles Darwin's On the Origin of Species was
published in 1859, the men began working together to aid the cause for
naturalism and natural history. They backed the liberal Anglican movement that
emerged in the early 1860s, and both privately and publicly supported the
leaders of the movement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/X_Club

Charles Darwin never thought about a continuing need to address injustice. One
slight exception is from his Beagle Diary where he commented, “The Chilean
authorities are now performing an act of justice by making retribution to these
poor Indians, by giving to each Cacique twelve quadras of land …” This is not
at all typical of Darwin’s sentiments, not to mention that it seems almost
 54

perverse that he would pick out one case of some justice being attempted, while
ignoring the innumerable instances of dispossessing natives without any attempt
at compensation. More typical of Darwin are the following comments from his
Diary. Just a couple of months after the above remark, Darwin notes how poor
one group of Indians is and writes, “I really think a boats crew with the Spanish
flag might take the island of Chiloe.” He can make this observation despite the
notorious reputation the Spanish empire had. In the same month, he
indifferently observes that many islands in South America are unpopulated: “I
should suppose the tribe has become extinct; one step to the final extermination
of the Indian race in S. America.” Then there is this: In Argentina, as General
Rosas led a campaign of genocidal slaughter, Darwin opines, “If this warfare is
successful, that is if all the Indians are butchered, a grand extent of country will
be gained for the production of cattle: & the vallies [of various rivers] will be
most productive in corn.” A month earlier, he had written, “The war of
extermination, although carried on with the most shocking barbarity, will
certainly produce great benefits.” Sad to say, it is thoughts like these which
Darwin expresses most often.

--- These remarks were eliminated from the published version of his Diary. But
in the published Journal, he made the same point in a more sophisticated way.
On the removal of all the Tasmanian Aborigines from their land, Darwin said,
“Van Diemen’s Land enjoys the great advantage of being free from a native
population.” He called it a “most cruel step” but “quite unavoidable.” ---

We don’t celebrate humanitarians of the past the way we celebrate Bach or

Einstein. We would rather forget.

http://freemasoninformation.com/2014/07/the-moral-law/
http://sofaithfulaheart.blogspot.in/2010/04/18th-century-freemasonry-age-
of.html http://www.freemasons-
freemasonry.com/freemasonry_enlightenment.html www.freemasons-
freemasonry.com/Davidson.html
https://www.scribd.com/document/321483955/freemason-history

Everywhere you look, you can find more examples of incredibly shocking
deletions. In The Descent of Man, Darwin expressed his firm belief in the moral
and intellectual inferiority of savages. He was convinced that savages would
never help a stranger, whereas Europeans would, (“humanity is an unknown
virtue” in savages, he would write) and gave his full assent to a Spanish maxim
“Never, never trust an Indian.” Darwin had completely forgotten that, in his
younger days, in the Diary he kept while on board the Beagle, he had given
examples of South American Indians helping strangers, often shipwrecked
European sailors. Of the Patagonian Indians, he noted “their usual disinterested
 55

noble hospitality.” (In later published editions of his journal, the word ‘noble’
was dropped.) None of this made it into Descent. It is one good sign of how
hardened Darwin’s racism became in his later years. He chose not to remember
some of the good qualities in native peoples that he himself had some
acquaintance with. Darwin erased hospitable savages from the world just as
surely as those textbooks erased a black man from a painting, and for the same
reason: So he could create his own painting which bore no resemblance to the
real world. This was selective memory in the service of bad anthropology.

---- How many people know that the 13th Amendment to the Constitution of the
United States did not quite abolish all slavery as we are usually told? It
contained an important exception: “except as punishment for crime whereof the
party shall have been duly convicted.” It was used in the years following the
Civil War, in the South, especially in Texas, to re-enslave many black men by
arresting and convicting them on some charge and then putting them to work
without pay.

Did you know that the Declaration of Independence contains an implied

approval of greed for Indian land? One of the complaints made against the King
of England in that document is that the King has imposed restrictions on “the
conditions of new appropriations of lands.” The Declaration of Independence
was, in this one small way, also a declaration to steal all the Indian land, if they
could not get Indians to legitimately sell it.

Most people, including scholars, know much less than they pretend to
know.

In the 19th century, it was entirely possible to be an abolitionist and at the same
time an extreme racist. Thomas Huxley, Joseph Hooker, and Anthony Trollope
are just three examples, in addition to Darwin. Hundreds more could be listed.

The fictional Darwin created by so many scholars is another bad dream we may
never wake up from. In his published work and in letters, the real Darwin had
no trouble proclaiming that the Anglo-Saxon race would triumph throughout the
world and that all the lower races would be exterminated. In one letter, he added
that when the lower races are all gone, humanity as a whole will rise. Yet
Darwin is most often remembered as a great humanitarian.

Since the earliest colonial days, there was constant talk of exterminating the
Indians. In 1881 in her magnificent “A Century of Dishonor,” Helen Hunt
wrote, “The word ‘extermination’ is as ready on the frontiersman’s tongue to-
day as it was a hundred years ago.” A British pamphlet published in 1816 stated
that it was certain that “American policy is directed towards the total
 56

extermination of the Indians.” Though this talk may never have been officially
sanctioned, its advocates influenced other policies. Indian tribes were not just
placed on reservations once. They were moved again and again whenever
American settlers coveted the new lands placed aside for the Indians. One tribe
was moved 8 times in 16 years. They could hardly establish a good life before
they were moved again. This kind of harassment does not encourage a long life.
The government also controlled the legal system which was rigged against the
Indians. It often failed to make payments for land supposedly purchased from
Indians, keeping them in dire poverty. And the government frequently failed to
punish people who murdered Indians. All this stress on natives can have a
negative impact on the birth rate, which is one factor in genocide. You can
choke a people to death by such means.

About Darwin, in the 19th century, they knew all about stress on a tribe or
group. Darwin called it changed conditions of life and he knew it was bringing
down the birth rate. He expressed no regrets about this. Hardly anyone did.
European countries kept doing it, despite their knowledge that stress was
contributing to extermination. Constant stress lowers the birth rate,
another genocidal factor. They knew this in the 19th century, though they
used other terms. Darwin called stress ‘changed conditions of life.’ He was
quite aware that it negatively affected the fertility of Native peoples and
expressed no regrets about it. Europeans and Americans understood what
they were doing and kept doing it.

Here is a good example of how popular writing about Darwin constantly

mythologizes him. They give us a fictional Darwin who never existed. In a New
York Times review of a book on the causes of World War I (Sunday Book
Review, Dec. 11, 2016, p. 16), Margaret MacMillan, a professor at Oxford,
writes, “Struggle, so Darwin could be twisted to say, was a natural part of
human existence.” I suppose she means to imply that Darwin was more humane
than that. She wants to distinguish Darwin from “social Darwinism and the
racialist theories it spawned.” But you don’t have to twist Darwin to make him
elevate struggle as the primary feature of all life or to make him espouse racist
ideas of inferiority and superiority. He says these things himself.

Chapter III of The Origin of Species is entitled “Struggle for Existence”. The
last words of Chapter VII are “let the strongest live and the weakest die.” Those
words remained in place through all six editions (in the sixth edition, this was at
the end of Chapter VIII). For the first ten pages or so of “Struggle for
Existence”, Darwin is reminding the reader of the great destruction of life in
nature, and using plants as an example, states that “the more vigorous …
gradually kill the less vigorous.” No one has to make Darwin say any of this. He
is quite clear about it and never tries to pretend that he sees life as anything less
 57

than a struggle to the death. “Fatal competition” as he says at the end of Chapter
IV on natural selection. Extinction itself, which is the subject of one of the
sections of Chapter IV, plays a large role in Darwin’s thinking. And lest we
forget , the struggle for life was so important to Darwin that he put it in the
subtitle of his book: The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for
Life.

The reason writers have felt enabled to so shamefully misrepresent Darwin’s

views is that Darwin (the fictional Darwin) has been encapsulated into one
sentence. This is the last sentence of Origin, which in truncated form reads as
follows: “There is grandeur in this view of life … from so simple a beginning,
endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being,
evolved.” This is the romantic Darwin and it is the chief source of the idealistic
vision of him. But the real Darwin also wrote a sentence immediately before
that, in which he explained how this evolution comes about. It results “from the
war of nature, from famine and death.” This gives us, says Darwin, “the
production of the higher animals.” And in the sentence immediately before that,
he references “a Struggle for Life” and “the Extinction of less-improved forms.”
These sentences, the second and third from the end of Origin, express and
capture what most of The Origin of Species is about. The last sentence is a
romantic departure from the main thrust of Origin.

That last sentence, quoted probably more often than any other from Darwin, has
been used to create the fictional Darwin. No one ever bothers to tell you how
atypical it is for the historical Darwin. The real Darwin can be found in the
sentences leading up to the uncharacteristic last one. That Darwin would go on
to make clear twelve years later in The Descent of Man that he believed
Indigenous peoples all over the world were among the forms of life that would
soon be exterminated by Europeans and particularly by Anglo-Saxons. He
regarded this extermination of human beings as a natural process of extinction
of the less improved forms of life. This historically real Darwin has been erased
by the majority of writers and scholars who continue to present to the public
their romanticized, dream-like image of him. That image may be attractive to
many people, but he never existed.

A.N. Wilson’s biography Charles Darwin: Victorian Mythmaker -- he passes

over Darwin’s two biggest faults: his racist ideas about Indigenous peoples and
his commitment to genocide.

Another demoralizing factor was the constant talk of extermination. In 1881, in

America, Helen Hunt wrote, “The word ‘extermination’ is as ready on the
frontiersman’s tongue to-day as it was a hundred years ago.” A British
pamphlet published in 1816 stated that it was certain that “American policy is
 58

directed towards the total extermination of the Indians.” Washington Irving

made more or less the same point in 1813.

Many historians write about Native American history as if it were a series of

battles between Indians and whites, or a progression of social forces against an
inferior culture that could not withstand the innocent pressure of another
culture. The larger picture of genocide is simply shoved aside.

it is quite common for books and articles about 19th century scientific racism to
be published which never mention Darwin as an example or mention him
briefly in a sentence or two and then pass over him. The latest case of this is
Siep Stuurman’s The Invention of Humanity: Equality and Cultural Difference
in World History (2017). the silence about Darwin is stunning. Stuurman
devotes one chapter to 19th century scientific racism in Europe and America.
Darwin does not appear, not even once, not even in a brief aside. Yet he
mentions others who espoused the very same ideas as Darwin. He quotes Robert
Knox (whom Stephen Gould also dealt with in The Mismeasure of Man),
“Already in a few years, we have cleared Van Diemen’s Land of every human
aboriginal; Australia, of course, will follow, and New Zealand next.” Stuurman
calls this “Knox’s genocidal vision.” Darwin said the same in more polished
language in his published journal: “All the aborigines have been removed … so
that Van Diemen’s Land enjoys the great advantage of being free from a native
population.”

Stuurman describes a social Darwinist theory of history as “permitting, and at

times demanding, the extermination of peoples deemed ‘inferior’ …” But this
kind of thinking comes directly from Darwin, which Stuurman neglects to
mention. In one of his letters, Darwin said “… the Human race, viewed as a
unit, will have risen in rank” when all the lower races have been exterminated.
Almost every racist thought discussed by Stuurman can be found in Darwin.

How can one leave out the major biological scientist of the 19th century from a
discussion of scientific racism? Scholars have created a safe haven for racism in
Darwin’s writings. Darwin gets away with it because academia is committed to
letting him get away with it.

Perhaps the best known document produced by the United Nations is The
Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Not far behind is the Genocide
Convention. Much less well-known is that from 1950 to 1967, the UN through
Unesco put out four statements on race and, in 1952, a very short book, The
Race Concept: The Results of an Inquiry. These statements were framed by a
committee of scientists and signed on to by many more. These were the postwar
years.
 59

The first statement (1950) disputed the value of the term ‘race’ and suggested
that it would be better to talk about ethnic groups. The history of groups is more
important than genetic differences. This first statement considered race more a
myth than a biological fact. “For all practical purposes ‘race’ is not so much a
biological phenomenon as a social myth. The myth of ‘race’ has created an
enormous amount of human and social damage … and caused untold suffering”
(§14). The social and biological unity of mankind was stressed.

UNITED NATIONS = ROTHSCHILDS / ROCKEFELLER , FREEMASONIC

OUTFIT .

Unesco got a fair amount of pushback from scientists who argued that race may
indeed be a valuable concept and that they should be allowed to study racial
differences without any ideological constraints. This resulted in a second
statement on race in 1951 (discussed below). Then in 1952, in The Race
Concept, they explained why they had made certain changes. Unesco
acknowledged the criticisms made of the first statement and quoted at length
from various remarks made by scientists who agreed and disagreed with various
parts of the first statement. The two biggest criticisms that were made were of
the opinion that “there are no mental differences between racial groups,” urging
the need to keep an open mind about this, and the opinion that biology supports
the idea that “man is born with drives towards co-operation.”

In 1951, Unesco published its second statement on race to accommodate the

criticisms it had received. There is some controversy as to whether this second
statement caved into scientific racism. In The Race Concept, Unesco
acknowledged that this charge had been made and that some people regarded
the criticisms of the first statement “as representing a victory for racism and the
defeat of a naive humanitarianism.”

It is interesting that the second one stressed two points about how terrible
racism is, which it had failed to do in the first statement. In order to strike an
even greater blow against Nazism, the 1951 statement flatly declared that there
is no such thing as a pure race (§7) and that popular ideas of superior and
inferior races are not supported by science (§4).

The 1950 statement dragged Darwin in as support for an idea it wished to

promote, namely, that “a co-operative spirit is not only natural to men, but more
deeply rooted than any self-seeking tendencies” (§14). That is quite a stretch
concerning Darwin. The statement quoted the following from The Descent of
Man (this is near the end of Chapter 4): “As man advances in civilisation, and
small tribes are united into larger communities, the simplest reason would tell
 60

each individual that he ought to extend his social instincts and sympathies to all
the members of the same nation, though personally unknown to him. This point
being once reached, there is only an artificial barrier to prevent his sympathies
extending to the men of all nations and races.”

This is one of the worst cases of quoting out of context .

Even in the paragraph Unesco quoted from, Darwin went on to state that we
should extend our sympathies to the lower animals, but offered his opinion that
this was an unknown feeling in savages, except towards their pets. Darwin
himself extended very little sympathy “to the men of all nations and races.” He
insisted that the civilized races would exterminate the lower races and expressed
no regrets about it. Nowhere in his system of thought did Darwin make
cooperation among all human beings a centerpiece. In one letter, he openly
stated his dislike of cooperative schemes and his belief that anything opposed to
the principle of competition would be very bad for society.

Interestingly, one scientist implicitly objected to Unesco’s misuse of Darwin by

pointing out what Darwin really believed. The Race Concept provides a lengthy
quotation from Dr. C.D. Darlington of Britain. In it, Darlington quotes from a
more representative part of Descent where Darwin states of human races, “Their
mental characteristics are likewise very distinct; chiefly as it would appear in
their emotional, but partly in their intellectual faculties” (near the beginning of
Chapter 7 of Descent). Darlington says, “Fortunately genetics has given us
every reason to agree with him [Darwin]” and also adds, “By trying to prove
that races do not differ in these respects we do no service to mankind.” In
another statement in this Unesco book, Dr. A.E. Mirsky from NewYork,
addressing an article by Darlington, disparagingly refers to “the guesses and
prejudices of Darlington.” Mirsky was correct about Darlington’s scientific
work, but as to quoting Darwin accurately in context, Darlington was right.

The Unesco statements on race were not without controversy. Still, Unesco tried
to do the right thing and raised awareness of the dangers of scientific racism.
Too bad it took a misstep in misrepresenting what Darwin believed. If we really
want to defeat scientific racism, we should be honest about Darwin as one of its
proponents.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Influences_on_Karl_Marx DAVID URQUHART

, MOSES HESS , JOSEPH MASSINI / Giuseppe Mazzini .

Darwin’s premise on survival and struggle in nature paralleled Karl Marx

premise on class struggle. Marx summarized the importanc e of “struggle” in
the first line of chapter one of The Communist Manifesto, published in 1848 –
 61

“The history of all hitherto existing society is the history of class struggles.”
At Karl Marx’s funeral in Highgate Cemetery in London, Engels spoke at
Marx’s graveside March 1883 – “Just as Darwin discovered the law of
evolution in organic nature, so Marx discovered the law of evolution in human
history” The American researcher Conway Zirckle explains why the founders of
Communism immediately accepted Darwin’s theory – “Marx and Engels
accepted evolution almost immediately after Darwin published The Origin of
Species. Evolution, of course, was just what the founders of communism needed
to explain how mankind could have come into being without the intervention of
any supernatural force, and consequently it could be used to bolster the
foundations of their materialistic philosophy.”
www.darwinthenandnow.com/2010/04/darwin-on-marx/

http://friendsofdarwin.com/articles/marx-capital/ So, it wasn’t Karl

Marx’s Das Kapital that Darwin politely declined the dedication of; it was
Edward Aveling’s The Students’ Darwin. ???

https://www.quora.com/Did-Charles-Darwin-ever-read-any-of-Karl-Marxs-
works

Marx sent a personally inscribed copy of the second edition of Das

Kapital to Darwin and wanted to dedicate it to him, but Darwin wrote a letter
politely declining. www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA002_2.html

However, as Gould stated in the revised Ever Since Darwin, “A common bit of
folklore—that Marx offered to dedicate volume 2 of Das
Kapital to Darwin (and that Darwin refused)—turns out to be false. But Marx
and Darwin did correspond, and Marx held Darwin in very high regard.”
www.icl-fi.org/english/wv/1009/darwin-ltr.html
As the author of The Communist Manifesto, Marx found the struggle-to-the-
death principle in natural selection a perfect confirmation of his own view of
man's class struggle. In appreciation, Marx sentDarwin a copy of his Das
Kapital in 1873. Six years later, Marx wrote to Darwin, requesting permission
to dedicate his next ... www.creationmoments.com/radio/transcripts/charles-
darwin-and-karl-marx
http://www.vuletic.com/hume/cefec/6-13.html
https://jasoncollins.org/2011/07/06/darwin-and-marx/
Just get rid of the evidence you don’t like. If it does not fit the theory you favor,
it must go.
 62

Unfortunately, this latter method is the one so many writers and scholars use
when studying the question of whether or not Darwin brought racism into his
work. Of course he did.
The evidence is overwhelming. Darwin was committed to seeing life as a
hierarchy of groups subordinate to groups, a phrase that occurs throughout
Origin, and insisted that in evolution, the dominant groups would become ever
more dominant. He also insisted that the more intellectual or civilized races
would gradually exterminate the lower races and that when the lower races are
all gone, humanity as a whole will rise in rank.
There is much more but even a brief glance at Darwin’s work makes the racism
obvious. The next to last paragraph of The Descent of Man reveals his disgust
with savages, and Chapter 7, “On the Races of Man”, in the same book, presents
his racism in full bloom. His words are imperishable. No amount of stomping or
spinning can get rid of them. It is long past time to pay attention and reject
scientific racism, even when, or especially when, an icon commits it.
Most of us have a misconception of what natural selection is. We think it is
primarily just one thing, the strong versus the weak, the fit versus the unfit
(which is what Darwin often reduced it to). That is a simplification. In reality, it
is a whole combination of things, which are subject to change, including
climate, food sources, and possible invasion by other species giving the strong
or the fit unexpected competition and unexpected help to the weak. So if any of
these circumstances change, then when the weak resist the strong, their
resistance might suddenly become successful, even though they are still weak
(they are weak but in a new environment now). Under natural selection, with all
the circumstances which make it up, nothing is guaranteed to the strong—or to
the weak. There is no final determination of fitness. The weak defeating the
strong is a possibility in natural selection. Antiracism is natural selection
asserting itself against the artificial selection of racism, colonialism, and
genocide (artificial in part because they seek rapid change and in part because
they are the product of human irrationality and a lust for a kind of power that
has nothing to do with survival).
We should always keep in mind that ideas of hierarchy and racism developed in
Europe long before anyone thought of evolution. Evolutionary theory and even
natural selection are not inherently racist. They can be interpreted another way.
Darwin did not find racism in evolution and that is because it isn’t there. He
rather brought racist ideas to evolution and incorporated them into a biological
process where they do not belong.
he was elected a fellow of the Geological Society of London in 1844. Prior to
this, he was elected a member of the Royal Society of Edinburgh in 1840 -- In
 63

1844, Chambers published Vestiges of the Natural History of Creation

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Chambers_(publisher,_born_1802)
‘genetic’ was used over and over by Chambers in one edition of Vestiges
Throughout his life, in letters and in publications, Darwin made it clear that
ultimately he was too confused (in “thick mud,” as he said) to settle on whether
or not there was a God who designed nature. If anything, he was inclined
towards design, but in the end, he adopted agnosticism, never atheism (as he
explained in one letter). At one point, Wilson admits that Darwin’s Origin is
“not essentially atheistic in texture,” but for most of his book he tries to make
the opposite case, and not successfully.
Wilson has a better case when he contends that natural selection is not a proven
theory. He contends that 1) Darwin was wrong to link evolution to the struggle
for survival, while ignoring how much cooperation there is in nature (though
here too Wilson misses the best evidentiary case he could make; there is at least
one letter where Darwin condemns any cooperation, especially among humans,
because it is opposed to the principle of competition, and then there is the fact
of how often he uses ‘competition’ in Origin, demonstrating how heavily he
relied on it), and 2) Darwin was equally wrong to insist that change in nature
always happens gradually because as modern “genetics” now shows, nature
does sometimes make leaps, which Darwin denied.
Wilson is also right to point out that Darwin frequently relied on speculation to
make his case for natural selection. Darwin used such phrases as ‘we may
imagine’, ‘we can understand’, ‘I can see no great difficulty’, ‘we may believe’
and the like, in Origin. At most, he could prove in this way that something is
conceivable or possible, but this certainly does not prove probability. He used ‘I
can see no difficulty’ when he speculated that whales might have developed
from a race of aquatic bears. Scientists mocking this claim forced him to
remove it from later editions, but he was not happy about doing it. What was so
unscientific about this claim is that Darwin made no attempt to compare the
anatomy of a whale and a bear. He just simply imagined their relationship. =
A.N. WILSON’S "Charles Darwin: Victorian Mythmaker"
There is so much that is wrongly slanted in the essay “Apes, Essences, and
Races” by Brendan O’Flaherty and Jill S. Shapiro in the collection Race,
Liberalism, and Economics (2004; edited by David Colander and others). The
part of the article that deals with Charles Darwin. They acknowledge Darwin’s
racism, but do everything they can to soften it. They blame other scientists and
even Darwinists for promoting racism, but in Darwin’s case, they make his
racism seem like an accident that went against what his theory really stood for.
 64

The authors write, “Darwin unintentionally bolstered the idea of fixed types,
reinforcing, instead of undermining, essentialistic thinking.” There was nothing
unintentional about it. Darwin was devoted to identifying superior and inferior
groups. But these authors think “it was all too easy to misinterpret his meaning
to see races as forming an evolutionary scale,” completely missing that this is
exactly what Darwin was striving for. Darwin suggested to his cousin Francis
Galton that Nature uses superior individuals to create new and better races.
These authors fail to confront how deeply embedded racism was in his view of
nature. Even in Origin, he constantly promotes the view that nature is a scheme
of groups subordinate to groups. Higher and lower figure in Origin as much as
in his later work in Descent.
Breaking up humanity into separate species was relatively new. Darwin did
nothing to reverse that. He rather encouraged it. He hardly united humankind
when he insisted how divided the races were in intelligence and moral values.
These authors call racist essentialism “the direct antithesis of Darwin's focus on
populational variability.” But Darwin’s ideas about variability did not affect his
greater stress on the differences from group to group. In Descent, he would
argue that disparity in brain size cannot tell us anything about the relative
intelligence of two individuals, but when averages are taken, it can tell us a lot
about the differences between human groups, and then he went on to cite
statistics that put Australian Aborigines at the low end of cranial capacity.
When these authors discuss 19th century scientific racism in the study of the
brain and cranium, they leave out Darwin’s embrace of this.
Racism worked itself deeply into Darwin’s thinking. That is the Darwin no one
wants to remember. The authors list (on p. 36) eight European scientists who
advocated the belief that non-Europeans were biologically inferior. They do not
include Darwin, yet he belongs there as much as anyone (he even argued in
Descent that moral qualities were inheritable and that this would explain the
differences between human races).
The authors are certainly right when they say, “Darwin did not provide any new
facts about humans or refute any old ones.” But that was the point for Darwin.
He wanted to justify what Europeans already believed about race. He did not
want to overturn anything. O’Flaherty and Shapiro miss this. They still think of
Darwin as revolutionary and later Darwinists as regressive: “Darwinism was
thus compatible with the idea that each race has its own essence, so the idea of
racial essence survived the Darwinian revolution intact.” In fact, Darwin
performed no revolution. He was as stuck with and firmly believed in racial
categories as many other scientists of his day.
These two authors call later Darwinism with its emphasis on inequality of the
races a “skewed take on Darwinian theory.” There was nothing skewed about
 65

for Darwin. Darwin believed that producing inequality was one of the major
results of evolution.
With respect to animals too, they try to make Darwin seem like a great
revolutionary. “In regard to apes, Darwin's ideas served to provide a natural, not
merely a conventional and nominal, tie between them and humans.” The truth is
that for Darwin, the tie was more nominal than real. In Descent, Darwin
imagines that if an ape could talk, it would have to admit that it was inferior to
human beings in every way. Inferior-superior, or lower-higher, was an
important category to Darwin. It was always on his mind, whether he was
considering animals or humans.
One interesting trend the authors spot makes their exemption of Darwin
especially odd. At the very beginning of their article, the authors point out that,
as evidence about races accumulated in the 19th century, the science of races
became worse and worse. Knowledge did not help to dispel a wrongheaded
racism, it just more deeply entrenched it. What they miss is that this was as true
for Darwin as for other scientists of the day. In Descent, he was eager to latch
onto any reports of evidence that put darker skinned people closer to animals
than white Europeans. We may all be descended from lower animals, according
to Darwin, but he also believed that some human groups retained that close
connection more than others. From almost every angle, Darwin introduced a
racist perspective into evolutionary thinking.
The authors conclude that while some scientists were discovering that
distinguishing human races was a futile exercise, racist thinking went on:
“There was still faith in the reality of racial distinctions that were innate,
biologically based, and, through their relative worth, indicative of evolutionary
success.” What they refuse to admit is that Darwin contributed to this. Every
word of their conclusion (innate, etc.) applies just as much to Darwin’s science.
Darwin’s work, especially The Descent of Man, we can see how obvious his
racism is and then they go to their professors who either deny it or dismiss it.
What’s up with that? There are no good lessons to be drawn from this dishonest
treatment of what Darwin said.
In 1796, when Judge St. George Tucker of Virginia published and submitted his
gradual emancipation plan to the legislature of his state, he made it clear that the
ultimate goal was to get rid of all blacks from Virginia. He knew emancipation
in the northern states had not worked out to the benefit of slaves who were still
subjected to an onerous system of what he called civil slavery. His
emancipation plan specifically called for civil slavery in the hope that this
would be so bad that blacks would voluntarily remove themselves from
Virginia. Tucker was by no means a liberal, despite his abolition plan.
Integration of blacks into society was the last thing he wanted.
 66

When Darwin looks into the causes of what he believes is the inevitable
extermination of savages tribes throughout the world (the darker skinned
people), he lays it all on the inferiorities or inadequacies of Native peoples. His
favorite cause of extermination is the infertility of Native women. He never
asks himself if white people are doing anything to keep the birth rate down.
Lessened fertility is a fault in savages. They are biologically inferior. Darwin
always stresses biology. Even what he regards as the inferior morality of
savages is an issue of biological inheritance for him. Nature made them that
way.
Darwin was the supposed expert on survival. Darwin’s essential racism was that
he was looking for what is wrong in dark skinned people to explain their failure
to adjust to European colonialism. Injustice was never the issue for him. He
could never see that imperialism had made white people unfit for equality and
humane treatment of the Other. http://darwinsracism.blogspot.in

KABBALAH . Kabbalah Doesn't Believe in God

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_lvvVMh-Is
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4f0U3p5cGI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaK1skWQpDw \ time = 6.00
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adfRkiF-dDg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zc_J2k4Cdp8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9AdtSF-TpB0
http://www.kabbalahblog.info/2014/05/the-hidden-link-between-evolution-and-
kabbalah/
http://www.revealingscienceofgod.com/index.php?page=anticipations
http://laitman.com/2009/04/the-difference-between-the-darwinian-theory-and-
kabbalah/ https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/abraham-isaac-kook-on-
evolution/ https://www.huffingtonpost.com/rabbi-adam-jacobs/a-kabbalistic-
view-of-evo_b_846334.html
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/112083/jewish/Theories-of-
Evolution.htm
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcwX-rW2ElI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvCDSoZidWY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mhlm_PK7Uw4
 67

http://kabbalahstudent.com/evolution-debate-solved/
https://sites.google.com/a/nyu.edu/avi-rabinowitz/creation-big-bang-evolution-
the-retroactive-universe/quantum-kabbalah_andthe_instant-universe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O_rCZG4u8LQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvCDSoZidWY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVosVmaB9aQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-hVLYTFKl0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-kWeo0o-Jw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46DFBqg1Vos
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOw9KahAi28
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMrLkzVtsis
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf0LoBUQMmc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cie60CLlUFs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EyklwLvy31I
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWPI-ZlqRpo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_cepd28l_Y
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xL7TVSRGft8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhG4ddVyk54
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XV7Z3Qo6wjU&list=PLxAJnHVF-
qs1m6qnVz6JYxN-GheKhkM-m
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9FtQCtlyJU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlUNJzU9Mdw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E66409i-yn4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J7drcTvx0v0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jo-CSMhqx08
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c61NvVAfJWQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CzyQbOQ0dv0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E66409i-yn4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uo_5GkgpGGk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JVnsCRK_qA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucqRW6kSFOk
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6TBzgl6O2I
 68

http://kabbalahstudent.com/the-pope-kabblah-and-the-big-bang/
https://seeker401.wordpress.com/2016/10/27/the-black-stone-at-mecca/
http://illuminati-zeitgeist.com/index.php/category/masonic/
https://fitzinfo.wordpress.com/2014/04/08/dirty-secrets-of-the-jewish-kabbalah/
http://christianobserver.net/kabbalistic-seeds-of-astrophysics-evolution-and-
quantum-theory/ https://michaelakay.wordpress.com/2012/03/19/darwin-and-
the-rabbis/ http://christianobserver.net/category/the-compromised-
church/discern/kabbalah/https://weseeasthroughaglassdarkly.wordpress.com/20
16/02/24/kabbalistic-origins-of-modern-astrophysics-evolution-and-quantum-
theory/https://www.escholar.manchester.ac.uk/api/datastream?publicationPid=u
k-ac-man-scw:259363&datastreamId=POST-PEER-REVIEW-NON-
PUBLISHERS.PDF

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33kO_J4X5NI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5K-Q6mbEMYc

http://thinktheology.co.uk/blog/article/what_your_biology_teacher_didnt_tell_y
ou_about_charles_darwin http://theconversation.com/the-ape-insult-a-short-
history-of-a-racist-idea-14808
http://ap.lanexdev.com/APContent.aspx?category=7&article=2654
http://uh.edu/engines/epi617.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_racism
https://answersingenesis.org/charles-darwin/racism/did-darwin-promote-racism/
https://biologos.org/blogs/ted-davis-reading-the-book-of-nature/did-darwin-
promote-genocide www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p05f74r6
www.creationstudies.org/articles/races/390-darwins-theory-racist
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin#Darwin_and_racism
www.sahistory.org.za/article/pseudo-scientific-racism-and-social-darwinism-
grade-11 https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/09/was-charles-darwin-the-true-
father-of-eugenics/ https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13689-evolution-
myths-evolutionary-theory-leads-to-racism-and-genocide/
www.patheos.com/blogs/warrenthrockmorton/2018/01/11/wallbuilders-asks-
was-charles-darwin-racist/ https://www.theodysseyonline.com/was-darwin-
racist https://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-w-whitehead/what-did-charles-
darwin-r_b_166521.html https://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-
victorians/articles/post-darwin-social-darwinism-degeneration-eugenics
www.icr.org/article/evolution-modern-racism/ https://sites.williams.edu/engl-
209-fall16/uncategorized/the-dark-side-of-darwinism/
www.fossilizedcustoms.com/darwin.html www.godofevolution.com/no-ken-
 69

ham-darwin-was-not-a-racist/ www.skeptical-science.com/people/darwin-
racist-evolution-promote-racism-darwinday2015/

http://creationwiki.org/Darwin_himself_was_racist_(Talk.Origins)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u-hVLYTFKl0
www.ccu.edu/centennial/2010/11/darwin-as-racist-read-him-and-decide-for-
yourself/ www.victorianweb.org/science/darwin/depaolo.html
www.racismreview.com/blog/2013/10/03/charles-darwins-racist-framing/
www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/darwin_nazism.htm
https://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2009/06/21/racism-eugenics-and-
darwin/ www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/darwin_nazism.htm
https://www.quora.com/Was-Charles-Darwin-racist
www.naturalselectionanddarwinism.com/racism.html
https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/darwin-reader-darwins-racism/
https://www.worldviewweekend.com/news/article/was-darwin-racist
https://neurophilosophy.wordpress.com/2007/02/09/charles-darwin-was-a-
racist/ https://www.religiousforums.com/threads/was-darwin-racist-and-
homophobic-at-the-same-time.197072/
https://hipandthigh.wordpress.com/2009/07/16/charles-darwin-racist/
The Descent of Darwin: The Popularization of Darwinism in Germany,
1860-1914
By Alfred Kelly

A Short but Full Book on Darwin’S Racism

By Leon Zitzer
Darwin’S Racism: The Definitive Case, Along with a Close Look at Some
of the ... By Leon Zitzer

https://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j18_1/j18_1_65-70.pdf
www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA005_1.html
https://darwinaia.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/was-darwin-racist/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_England_£10_note

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Sedgwick -------- In 1835, 22-year-old

Charles Darwin boarded the HMS Beagle .

http://www.zephyrus.co.uk/charlesdarwin.html Darwin took with him a copy of

the bible and books by Milton, Humboldt as well as a copy of Lyell's first
volume on Principles Of Geology.

The Beagle was embarking upon a charting voyage around South America. On
the return trip, the Beagle stayed in the Galapagos for 5 weeks. Darwin spent 19
 70

days on the islands of San Cristobal, Isabela, Floreana and Santiago collecting
geological and biological specimens and taking detailed notes.
www.livinggalapagos.org/static/iframes/darwin/darwin.html

Darwin also took his collection to botanist Joseph Dalton Hooker . He found
that of the 217 species collected, 109 were unique to the Galapagos Islands and
85 were unique to a single island.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Dalton_Hooker
https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/joseph-dalton-hooker

SSSSSSSSEEEEEEEE
http://bertie.ccsu.edu/darwinevol/DarwinTimeLine.html
http://sciencenordic.com/norwegian-who-inspired-darwin
https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/59/9/800/248702
http://www.encyclopedia.com/people/science-and-technology/biology-
biographies/charles-robert-darwin

http://nmhum.org/pdfs/CharlesDarwinLPerkins.pdf
http://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/hum100/Beagle17.html
https://www2.palomar.edu/anthro/evolve/default.htm
https://anguscarroll.wordpress.com/2010/06/09/charles-darwin-a-life-of-
discovery/
https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/darwin/textonly/darwin_essay2.jsp

====== Freemasonry: Freemasonry is a fraternal organisation that traces its

origins in the loose organisation of late medieval Stonemasonry. ...
Wedgwood: Josiah Wedgwood and Sons, commonly known as Wedgwood, is a
pottery firm owned by KPS Capital Partners, a private equity company based in
New York City, USA. [[ The Enlightenment: Civilizations, Western culture
By CTI Reviews ]]

http://www.josiahwedgwoodlodge.org.uk

Among such societies could be mentioned the Manchester Literary and

Philosophical Society, founded in 1785 and still in existence, or the 'Lunar
Society', a Birmingham-based group including the industrialist Josiah
Wedgwood, the poet and doctor Erasmus Darwin, grandfather of the naturalist,
and the inventor Richard ... The Enlightenment By Dorinda Outram

IIIIMMMMPPPP
https://publishing.cdlib.org/ucpressebooks/view?docId=ft2h4nb1h9&chunk.id=
d0e216&toc.depth=1&brand=eschol https://www.counter-
 71

currents.com/2012/11/freemasons-against-the-modern-world/
www.rosenfels.org/The_Age_Of_Enlightenment_Anthology.pdf
https://www.fraternalsecrets.org/they-call-each-other-brother/
www.campaigner-
unbound.0catch.com/how_britains_biggest_racists_created_zionism.htm
https://libsa.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/encyclopedia-of-libertarianism.pdf
https://uniteyouthdublin.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/forging-democracy-the-
history-of-the-left-in-europe-1850-2000.pdf

http://www.phoenixmasonry.org/conversations_on_freemasonry.htm

http://konstantynowicz.info/Bogdan/Angela_Merkel_Bronislaw_Komorowski/J
ohn_Fitzgerald_Kennedy_George_von_Mohrenschildt/Templars_Illuminati_Fr
eemasons/index.html https://www.barruel.com/architects-of-deception.pdf

https://monoskop.org/images/5/5a/Mumford_Lewis_The_Culture_of_Cities.pdf

http://nationalheritagemuseum.typepad.com/library_and_archives/marks_in_bo
oks/ http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/nonfiction/history/durant/rousseau.html
http://www.themasonictrowel.com/new_files_to_file/chronology_of_freemason
ry_1390_1989.htm http://www.rollitup.org/t/the-forbidden-truth.825771/page-
92 https://tetratrinitychronicles.wordpress.com/the-illuminati-news-awareness-
page/ https://codex4.wordpress.com/2013/02/18/137-96-
mayafreemasonevangelists-code-key-to-holy-graildna/

https://translate.google.co.in/translate?hl=en&sl=nl&u=http://forum.politics.be/
showthread.php%3Ft%3D57209%26page%3D52&prev=search
https://www.erudit.org/en/journals/ron/2002-n25-ron437/006010ar/
www.jar2.com/Topics/Illuminati.html
https://www.pinterest.nz/pin/387591111657411610/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lunar_Society_of_Birmingham
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josiah_Wedgwood

http://mentalfloss.com/article/54633/born-same-day-6-things-lincoln-and-
darwin-had-common
https://school.bighistoryproject.com/media/khan/articles/U5_Charles_Darwin_2
014_930L.pdf www.history.com/news/10-things-you-may-not-know-about-
charles-darwin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_and_Darwin
https://www.amazon.com/Rebel-Giants-Revolutionary-Abraham-
Lincoln/dp/1591026105
 72

http://mentalfloss.com/article/54633/born-same-day-6-things-lincoln-and-
darwin-had-common
https://school.bighistoryproject.com/media/khan/articles/U5_Charles_Darwin_2
014_930L.pdf www.history.com/news/10-things-you-may-not-know-about-
charles-darwin https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/darwin-on-lincoln-
and-vice-versa-48151291/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_and_Darwin
https://www.amazon.com/Rebel-Giants-Revolutionary-Abraham-
Lincoln/dp/1591026105

https://www.nsf.gov/news/special_reports/darwin/textonly/timeline.jsp SSEEE

www.whale.to/b/eye_s.html

Natural Selection remains a central theme in Evolution, but it is not the only
theorized mechanism for it. – Another is from studies of population genetics
and molecular biology. One is the Hardy-Weinberg princple. – States when
allelic frequencies remain constant, population is in genetic equilibrium. These
are two scientist that came up with this theory. A mathematician, Godfrey
Hardy and German physician Wilhelm Weinberg.

Natural Selection theory has 4 principles: 1) There had to be variations within

populations over time. 2) These variations can be inherited – Passed from
generation to generations. 3) Organisms have more offspring than can survive
on available resources. 4)Organisms with variation can reproduce more
offspring that can survive better than other organisms offspring.

Most scientist think that evolution proceeds in small, gradual steps. – This is
called Gradualism. – A great deal of evidence ??? supports this theory. – The
fossil records ??? do contains instances of abrupt transitions. Ex. Snails in the
fossil records look the same for millions ??? of years, and then the shell shape
changed dramatically in only a few thousand years – proof ???. The theory of
punctuated equilibrium attempts to explain such abrupt transitions in the fossil
record???. – According to this theory, rapid spurts of genetic change cause
species to diverge quickly.

Darwin filled notebooks with his ideas about species diversity and the evolution
process. He shelved his manuscript for years and told his wife to publish it in
case he died. . In 1858, Darwin received a short essay from naturalist Alfred
Russel Wallace . The essay summarized Darwin’s thoughts on evolutionary
change. Later that year, Wallace’s essay was presented with some of Darwin’s
work. In 1859, Darwin published his book, On the Origin of Species..
https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/history_14
https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=92059646
 73

https://www.npr.org/2013/04/30/177781424/he-helped-discover-evolution-and-
then-became-extinct https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Russel_Wallace ---
----------- https://adbscience.com/2012/12/20/darwin-and-wallace-and-lamarck/
https://pulse.embs.org/september-2016/lamarck-darwin-wallace-and-ameghino/
https://prezi.com/ju6xnoxm1lkq/darwin-vs-wallace-vs-lamarck/

http://illuminazi.blogspot.in/2010/07/ahmadinejad-advocating-rothschilds.html

https://futurism.media/the-theory-of-evolution-is-a-communist-lie

www.truthandlife.us/The_Rothschild_Cartel.html
https://www.gnosticmedia.com/how-darwin-huxley-and-the-esalen-institute-
launched-the-2012-and-psychedelic-revolutions-and-began-one-of-the-largest-
mind-control-operations-in-history/

http://darwins-god.blogspot.in/2016/06/a-new-theory-explains-how-
consciousness.html 5.09 -- 5.11
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PxK2UQpbJ7E
https://evolutionnews.org/2009/06/new_book_uncovers_the_life_and/
https://pumpkinperson.com/2016/04/07/darwins-terrifying-prediction/
www.rationalskepticism.org/creationism/pregnancy-evolution-charles-darwin-
t12532.html?start=60 www.biblelife.org/evolution.htm
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2017/09/10/steve-jones-reviews-
wilsons-book-on-darwin-in-the-times/
www.forums.bcseweb.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=3153&p=51786
https://dogmaandgeopolitics.wordpress.com/2013/01/21/dinosaurs-rednecks-
and-charles-darwins-evolution-theory/
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4832mc

http://goodjesuitbadjesuit.blogspot.in/2008/11/scientific-jesuit-and-charles-
darwin.html www.reformation.org/five-deadly-jesuits.html
www.evilyoshida.com/thread-4720.html
www.thinkingfaith.org/articles/book_20100422_1.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_of_Charles_Darwin
https://www.aboutdarwin.com/people/people_01.html
www.catholicherald.co.uk/news/2013/06/13/descendant-of-darwin-becomes-a-
catholic-apologist/ www.answers.com/Q/Was_Darwin_a_Jesuit
https://metode.org/issues/monographs/a-reconciliation-with-darwin.html
https://www.worldslastchance.com/end-time-prophecy/the-jesuits-the-globe-
earth-the-mother-of-all-conspiracies.html https://www.quora.com/Why-didnt-
the-Catholic-Church-have-the-guts-to-kill-Charles-Darwin-and-silence-him
 74

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOw9KahAi28
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tm6thH1Z2UM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8gnBxplea4w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RLcfwAYCjQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-YObQwO_4o

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5PKukgkEbU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NkpF_tj9J9M
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbxQrg4uokQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhG4ddVyk54
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tOPJXCDsMLI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gjvuwne0RrE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hvCDSoZidWY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jck4naOUGQo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eweKhVe68cQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmenIE0Dpxs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H85QzFpTS6U
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xBK3qorYZnU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agu7YG_fmGI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOqpvrWoYF0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4PaBaJP8u0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ln7NC2zvmjE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cie60CLlUFs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MN9u9hc9FQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p26ekoj_HL4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38VngsfvMOs

http://harunyahyablog.blogspot.in/2011/07/committee-of-antichrist-darwin-
marx.html https://www.activist-news.com/evolution-debunked/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0hSZ670m08
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOw9KahAi28
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMrLkzVtsis
https://www.activist-news.com/evolution-debunked/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0hSZ670m08
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uOw9KahAi28
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMrLkzVtsis
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/lincoln-vs-darwin-part-2-of-4-
4055322/ https://fitzinfo.wordpress.com/2013/01/27/illuminati-agents-series-v/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-4Gs4PlJu0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtXmPQ9zvMY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p26ekoj_HL4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12XDGeB4zZs
 75

http://humansarefree.com/2013/12/9-scienctific-facts-prove-theory-of.html
http://harunyahya.com/en/Articles/17199/the-real-face-of-charles
http://yorgum.com/Biography/charles-darwin-illuminati
https://creationsciencestudy.wordpress.com/tag/charles-darwin/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZ2nLAoC9H4
www.jesusisprecious.org/evolution_hoax/charles_darwin.htm
https://mindcontrolblackassassins.com/tag/charles-darwin/
https://nwokillers.weebly.com/the-evolution-delusion.html
https://creationsciencestudy.wordpress.com/tag/evolution/
www.lepantoinstitute.org/faith-and-life/marxists-in-the-pontifical-academy-of-
social-sciences/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gjvuwne0RrE
www.discoverylifediy.com/430259250
https://socioecohistory.wordpress.com/2016/06/24/satan-encouraged-charles-
darwin-to-conceive-evolution-theory-ben-carson-presidential-candidate/

https://article.wn.com/view/2014/04/22/Erasmus_Darwin_The_Leonardo_da_V
inci_of_the_Midlands/ https://www.jamiiforums.com/threads/charles-darwin-
3rd-degree-mm-aliefanikiwa-kuupotosha-ulimwengu-kwa-illuminati-
agenda.1111018/page-4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_XXJlbC-kU
https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/lyell-lubbock-dispute
http://www2.gsu.edu/~mstjrh/evan/take_a_look/darwin_his_friends_j_hooker.ht
ml
http://johnnycirucci.com/the-jesuit-created-freemasonic-frauds-of-religion/
https://www.worldslastchance.com/end-time-prophecy/the-jesuits-the-globe-
earth-the-mother-of-all-conspiracies.html
https://gematriacodes.wordpress.com/2015/08/01/top-15-illuminati-signs-and-
symbols/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_FitzRoy
https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/robert-fitzroy
http://www.icr.org/article/fitzroy-captain-beagle-fierce-critic-darwinism/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24053072
http://qi.com/infocloud/robert-fitzroy
http://roughguidetoevolution.blogspot.in/2011/07/darwins-captain-robert-
fitzroy.html https://www.geni.com/people/Vice-Admiral-Robert-FitzRoy-
Captain-of-HMS-Beagle/6000000002188479778
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Navy
http://slideplayer.com/slide/9276534/
http://friendsofdarwin.com
 76

https://macleanhistory.org/chiefs/sir-fitzroy-jeffreys-grafton-maclean-24th-
chief/ ??

https://timetostartcaring.com/a-list-of-british-public-officials-who-are-
freemasons-or-bilderberg-attendees/

========
http://www.creationism.org/books/TaylorInMindsMen/TaylorIMMe05.htm
http://blogs.nature.com/london/2008/02/12/darwin-s-london
https://comingworldwar3.wordpress.com/2010/08/01/charles-darwin-theory-of-
evolution-eugenics-freemasonry-connection-the-triumph-of-political-agendas-
over-scientific-truth/ England was well endowed with coal and, in 1799,
several wealthy young men met in the back rooms of the Freemason's tavern to
establish the Geological Society of London.
www.creationmoments.com/content/geology-and-genesis https://www.jesus-
is-savior.com/Evolution%20Hoax/The_Evolution_Deceit/2-2.htm
IIIMMMPPP ============

http://professing.proboards.com/thread/23815/where-come?page=10
https://nullens.org http://www.theosociety.org/pasadena/sd/sd2-3-09.htm
http://preraphaelitesisterhood.com/shades-dante/
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/evolution-communist-nation-paul-boggs/
https://www.thoughtco.com/about-charles-lyell-1224835
www.kouroo.info/kouroo/thumbnails/L/SirCharlesLyell.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geological_Society_of_London
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Owen

http://futureshock2050.com/essays/adapt-and-die/
http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0038-
23532009000600014 https://www.wired.com/2011/04/how-charles-darwin-
seduced-asa-gray/
https://www.geolsoc.org.uk/~/media/shared/documents/specialist%20and%20re
gional%20groups/hogg/hogg%20newsletters/hogg_n_29.pdf?la=en
https://paleonerdish.wordpress.com/tag/mary-anning/
https://publicdomainreview.org/2013/10/30/alfred-russel-wallace-a-heretics-
heretic/
https://www.academia.edu/3171238/Gabriel_Rossetti_and_the_Secret_History_
of_Europe
https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmXoypizjW3WknFiJnKLwHCnL72vedxjQkDDP1mXWo6
uco/wiki/Bernard_Germain_de_Lacépède.html
www.cprf.co.uk/articles/calvinvsdarwin.htm#.WmUHIvmWbIU
 77

http://www.isprambiente.gov.it/en/environmental-services/the-geological-
survey-of-italy/corsi_igs.pdf
https://www.revolvy.com/main/index.php?s=Adam%20Sedgwick

https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-00002891/document
https://mysteryoftheiniquity.com/2012/page/53/
www.bobforrestweb.co.uk/The_Rubaiyat/main_essay.htm
https://okinawau.blogspot.in/2013/09/
https://undergroundhistories.wordpress.com/bretheren-in-the-temple-of-science-
natural-history-across-the-class-divide-huddersfield-c1848-1865/
www.theresnothingnew.org/index/Charlottsville
https://blogs4brownback.wordpress.com/2007/05/18/heliocentrism-is-an-
atheist-doctrine/ www.conspiracyarchive.com/2014/09/07/from-seance-to-
science-a-brief-history-of-social-control/

http://historum.com/general-history/75609-colorful-characters-throughout-
history.html
https://www.bestthinking.com/articles/society_and_humanities/folklore/myths/s
utton-s-a-z-of-big-data-busted-myths
www.preciousheart.net/fm/000_275_INDEX_to_PDFs.pdfhttps://www.gutenbe
rg.org/files/52387/52387-h/52387-h.htm

Returning to England and wearied by the long and perilous journey, he vowed
never to sail again. He would spend most of his life within the confines of his
rural home in Downe and in London, some 15 miles away.

At 29, he married his first cousin, Emma, and it looked like he would become
another British squire, living comfortably off his father’s money and surrounded
by a cohort of cooks, maids, butlers and gardeners. He was never duly
employed by anyone and had all the wealth and free time he needed to seek
whatever interests suited him.

Conflicting ideas on natural selection

While reading Thomas Malthus’ book Essay on the Principle of Population, he

was struck by the similarity between man’s competitive struggle for limited
resources and the constant fight for survival in nature, providing a possible basis
for evolution—natural selection, the survival of the fittest. “Here then I had at
last got a theory by which to work,” he wrote.
 78

In Darwin’s conception, random genetic mutations would give some offspring

physical advantages over others. These fitter creatures would outlive their
companions in struggles with environmental conditions and with one another,
enabling them to reproduce in greater numbers, passing the genetic advantages
on to the next generation. Darwin imagined that over many generations this
would give rise to whole new species—thus explaining all the kinds of plant
and animal life we see.

As he mused over evolution, then called transmutation, Darwin started to

question the need for a Creator God. He began to write some secret notebooks
on the subject, afraid to divulge his radical ideas. For a country gentleman with
a Christian wife and many Christian friends, he wanted to keep his heretical
thoughts to himself. He said they made him feel like “confessing a murder.”

So he cleverly disguised his ideas and used many euphemisms. “He began
devising ways of camouflaging his materialism,” say Desmond and Moore.
“Don’t mention it, he admonished himself, talk only of inherited mental
behavior: ‘To avoid stating how far, I believe, in Materialism,’ he scrawled in a
rush, ‘say only the emotions[,] instincts[,] degrees of talent, which are
heredetary [sic] …’ He was learning to guard his words” (p. 259).

Yet in his secret notebooks he was candid enough to say to himself, “Oh, you
Materialist!” In the terminology of the day, this meant one who believed that
only matter exists in the universe and that this strictly material universe is
governed by physical laws without the need for a Creator.

Sadly, as he tried to live a respectable life that outwardly appeared very normal,
his conscience was being torn by his shocking beliefs. “But now, deep into his
clandestine work,” continue Desmond and Moore, “compiling notes that would
shock his geological compatriots, his health was breaking. He was living a
double life with double standards, unable to broach his species work with
anyone . . . for fear he be branded irresponsible, irreligious, or worse” (p. 233).

Two devastating deaths in the family

Next, he received two devastating blows to his young family. According to

biographer Janet Browne, the death of his beloved daughter Annie at age 10,
followed a year later by the death of his firstborn son William, caused great
bitterness toward God. “This death was the formal beginning of Darwin’s
conscious dissociation from believing in the traditional figure of God . . .
Bleakness swept in. The gradual numbing of his religious feelings . . . and the
 79

godless world of natural selection he was even then still creating came
implacably face to face with the emptiness of bereavement” (p. 503).

Yet, ironically, some might say Darwin was a victim of his own theory of
natural selection because of the genetic dangers of inbreeding.

In 1839, he married Emma, his first cousin. Both families had intermarried
through first cousins for some time, a dangerous trend for heredity. Twenty—
six children were born from these first—cousin marriages; 19 were sterile and
five died prematurely, including Darwin’s daughter and first son. Many suffered
from mental retardation or other hereditary illnesses, as was the case with his
last son. All these effects engendered great hostility toward the idea of a
personal, intervening God.

“A Devil’s Chaplain”

Darwin wrestled at this time with publishing his theory, fearing ostracism.
Moore writes: “The strain showed … In a letter, Darwin … blurted, ‘What a
book a Devil’s Chaplain might write on the clumsy, wasteful, blundering low
and horridly cruel works of nature!’ It was a book that Darwin feared he might
be accused of writing, a book that would reveal him as an unbeliever and open
him to punishment—like the original Devil’s Chaplain, Rev. Robert Taylor—
the Cambridge graduate and apostate priest, who was twice imprisoned for
blasphemy” (“Darwin—A Devil’s Chaplain?” online edition).

He finally did write what he called his “accursed book,” but most of the
writings were hidden away for 20 years. Only after a colleague, Alfred Russel
Wallace, sent him a paper with essentially the same theory was his hand forced.
Fearing Wallace might get credit for the theory, Darwin first read his own paper
and then Wallace’s at a scientific meeting.
From the time he began to write his secret notebooks on evolution and
materialism, he started to suffer terrible psychosomatic disorders for most of his
long life. He experienced some 40 years of generally poor health.

Not only was he suffering from what seemed to be psychologically induced

illnesses, but he was also racked with doubts about his own book. He confessed
to some fellow scientists: “It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaws
& holes as sound parts . . . [but] I can carry in it my fruit to market . . . A poor
rag is better than nothing to carry one’s fruit to market in.” To another colleague
he wrote, “I . . . have devoted my life to a phantasy [sic]” (quoted by Desmond
and Moore, pp. 475—477).
 80

The fruit he wanted to market was his theory of evolution—which included a

direct attack on the prevailing notions of God, Christianity and the Bible. And
what deadly fruit it turned out to be!

As Desmond and Moore explain: “Plumbing the radical depths Darwin saw the
cataclysmic consequences. ‘Once grant that species . . . may pass into each
other . . . & the whole fabric totters & falls.’ The Creationist ‘fabric’ and all it
entailed was his target. He peered into the future and saw the old miraculous
edifice collapsing” (p. 243).

A man for the times

Although torn with doubt, Darwin’s ideas came at an opportune moment for
him. It was a period deeply affected by the French Revolution and the
overthrow of many European monarchies and clerical power. In his
autobiography Darwin wrote, “Nothing is more remarkable than the spread of
skepticism or rationalism during the latter half of my life.” He was able to take
advantage of the radical political and social winds that were blowing his way.

The age of positivism had arrived, promising science would lead to an epoch of
constant scientific and material progress, ultimately answering all of man’s
questions and solving his problems without the help of religion. It was also a
time when the churches of Britain were viewed by many radicals like Darwin as
corrupt and outdated.

Darwin proposed a theory that essentially displaced the Creator God, with only
physical and undirected mechanisms such as natural selection and adaptation
doing the creating. “His vision,” state Desmond and Moore, “was no longer of a
world personally sustained by a patrician God, but self—generated. From
echinoderms [marine creatures such as starfish] to Englishmen, all had arisen
through a lawful redistribution of living matter in response to an orderly
changing geological environment” (p. 237).

It should be noted that in later editions of The Origin of Species , Darwin did
add the term “Creator” in a few places and in his conclusion, in one place
stating: “There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having
been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one.” Yet he
later confessed to his outraged colleagues that this impression of theistic or
deistic evolution was to soothe the feelings of his Christian wife and of a
likeminded public.
 81

Even so, Darwin admitted to wavering views and claimed to be an agnostic. In

an 1879 letter he wrote: “I have never been an Atheist in the sense of denying
the existence of a God … Agnostic would be the more correct description of my
state of mind” (Darwin to J. Fordyce, published by him in Aspects of
Scepticism, 1883).

Consequences of the theory

The results of Darwin’s theory of—evolution were dramatic. Atheism and

secularism became widely popular. As one of today’s most ardent modern
supporters of Darwin and atheism, Richard Dawkins, has famously said,
“Darwin made it possible to become an intellectually fulfilled atheist” ( The
Blind Watchmaker , 1986, p. 6).

So scientific materialism spread like wildfire. Karl Marx, the father of

communism, out of gratitude to Darwin, sent him Das Kapital, his principal
book on com—munism. “Although developed in the crude English fashion,” he
wrote to his communist colleague Friedrich Engels, “this [Darwin’s The Origin
of Species ] is the book which in the field of natural history, provides the basis
for our views.” To another he wrote that Darwin’s work “suits my purpose in
that it provides a basis in natural science for the historical class struggle”
(Browne, p. 188).

This evolutionary backing eventually helped establish the philosophical

framework for the twin scourges of communism and atheism in Russia, China
and many other nations.

As Darwin’s ideas gained respectability, moral absolutes were increasingly

questioned. If there is no Creator, then it seemed all things are permissible. If
there is no God, then there are no ultimate consequences. If there is no greater
authority than yourself, then the rules of survival of the fittest are in effect and
back the idea that you can succeed by any means by applying the law of the
jungle—only the strong survive.

To cap it off, Darwin wrote in 1871 his Descent of Man, describing human
descent from apes, a book with considerable baseless speculation and even
racist claims—including that of white supremacy (as whites were reckoned as
further from apes along the evolutionary advancement chain than blacks).

Hitler later used some of these ideas, called “social Darwinism,” in World War
II to eradicate millions of Jews and others he thought were racially inferior. He
 82

said: “Nature is cruel, therefore we, too, may be cruel . . . I have the right to
remove millions of an inferior race that breeds like vermin! . . . Natural instincts
bid all living beings not merely conquer their enemies, but also destroy them”
(quoted by Hermann Rauschning, The Voice of Destruction, 1940, pp. 137—
138).

In effect, Hitler could say he was applying the theory of evolution and only
quickening the inevitable end of the weak. This was necessary to make room for
a fitter, superior race. It gave him what he thought was a scientific and moral
validity for his warped views—and some 65 million people died in World War
II largely because of those warped views.

Flaws in Darwin’s theory

As we near the 150th anniversary of The Origin of Species, we find a world

deeply divided over Darwin’s ideas. The belief in God, creation and the Bible
has not disappeared, although admittedly it has been greatly weakened.

Yet as more scientific discoveries are made, the mind boggling complexity of
the cell ( if at all ) and the millions of missing transitional forms between
different animal and plant types, Darwin’s theory truly is in trouble.

“As recently as twenty—five years ago,” noted Patrick Glynn, a former atheist
and a Ph.D. from Harvard, in 1997, “a reasonable person weighing the purely
scientific evidence on the issue would likely have come down on the side of
skepticism. That is no longer the case. Today the concrete data point strongly in
the direction of the God hypothesis” ( God: The Evidence, 1997, pp. 55—56).

But many scientists are unwilling to give up evolution because of the

theological and philosophical implications.

“We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its
constructs,” Harvard biologist Richard Lewontin once candidly admitted, “in
spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just—so—
stories, because we have a prior commitment . . . to materialism . . . We cannot
allow a Divine Foot in the door” (“Billions and Billions of Demons,” New York
Review of Books, Jan. 9, 1997, p. 31).

Where’s the evidence?

Of course, what Darwin always lacked was the evidence of transitional forms
 83

between one—celled and multi—celled organisms, between reptiles and

mammals, and between apes and men, just to name a few. He even asked: “Why
then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such
intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated
organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection
which can be urged against the theory” ( The Origin of Species, 1958, Mentor
edition, pp. 293—294).

So what did he do? He explained away the missing fossil evidence—saying the
geologic record was sparsely excavated and imperfect. Yet, today, according to
biochemist Michael Denton, of the 44 orders of living terrestrial vertebrates, 43
have been found as fossils (a 97 percent recovery rate!). And no transitional
forms have been found among these groups. Not even, for instance, anything in
between reptile scales and bird feathers—and these are groups of creatures
supposedly related.

Paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould admitted, “The extreme rarity of transitional

forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology” ( The
Panda’s Thumb, 1980, p. 181).

If Darwin’s theory is correct, there should be millions of transitional forms—

animals and plants in different stages of transformation into other kinds through
mutation and natural selection. In fact, if evolution were true, we should see far
more transitional forms than fully complete, fully functioning species. In
addition, we should expect to clearly see gradually changing creatures in the
more than one million species on earth and the even more numerous fossil
types. Yet none have been found.

There are some reports that Darwin had a shift in thinking near the end of his
life—perhaps regretting how far his ideas had been taken and even accepting
the idea of salvation through Christ (though still believing in evolution). While
possible, as Darwin considered personal beliefs to be private, none of his family
ever admitted to such a change in his thinking, including his believing wife.
And for society it wouldn’t have really mattered, as his disciples would not have
turned back.

Biographers Desmond and Moore conclude on page 677 with the following
scene as Darwin is solemnly laid to rest in Westminster Abbey: “It marked the
accession to power of the traders in nature’s marketplace, the scientists and their
minions in politics and religion. Such men, on the up—and—up, were paying
their dues, for Darwin had naturalized Creation and delivered human nature and
human destiny into their hands. Society would never be the same. The ‘ Devil’s
chaplain’ had done his work.”
 84

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9F9x_ZxLQ0

The Rise of Evolutionary Thinking

The question of origins has always fascinated the human mind. From the
earliest times, the existence of life has mostly been attributed to supernatural
intervention. However, naturalistic models of origins based on logic and
philosophy can be traced to about the fifth century BC in Greece. Plato (428-
348 BC)? and Aristotle (384-322 BC)? were the philosophers that probably had
the greatest impact on western thought. Their idealistic view of striving for
perfection laid the foundations for a naturalistic view of origins.
Plato's idealistic views had a profound effect on biology. To him, the
structure and form of organisms could be understood from their function which
in turn was designed to achieve ultimate goodness and harmony imposed by an
external creator.

Aristotle, the father of biology, expanded this idea to include the development
of organisms and the origins of groups of organisms. To Aristotle, the adult
form represented the final goal or telos, and the changes occurring during
embryological development represented a striving towards the telos and is
dictated by the telos.

Aristotle used this idea to develop a "scale of nature," in which he arranged the
natural world on a ladder commencing with inanimate matter to plants,
invertebrates, and vertebrates. Among the vertebrates, he placed the fish at the
lowest rung of the ladder and humans on the highest rung. This "scale of
nature" represents a progression from the most imperfect to the most perfect.
The concepts developed by the Greek philosophers retained their influence
well into the 18th century and were nurtured by prominent thinkers such as
Goethe (1749-1832) FREEMASON , who believed that the origin of each level
of organism was based on a fundamental primitive plan—an archetype—from
which the more complex features and organisms developed.
Although these naturalistic models of origins have existed for many centuries,
only since the work of Charles Darwin (1809-1882) has biological evolution
become socially accepted.

CONTROLLED OPPOSITION -- The ideas propagated by Darwin were totally

in conflict with the Christian worldview of his time. The Biblical account
of Genesis was considered by Church authorities to be the only correct version
of origins and the age of the earth was measured by the number of generations
since Adam. In contrast, the Darwinian concept of evolution required millions
 85

of years for the gradual change of form and structure required for the transition
of one species into another.
The conflict between Christianity and Darwinism centered largely on time and
fixity of species. Ironically, Aristotle believed in the fixity of species, and
Augustine (AD 345-430) had incorporated this concept into Christian
thought. The European worldview in Darwin's time was that God had created
unchangeable fixed species in the not-too-distant past.

Earth's History: Conflicting Paradigms

There are two main conflicting paradigms concerning the origins of life.

Defining the Terms

The concept that the present is the key to the past is called uniformitarianism.
The term means that the processes in the world today existed in the past, and a
study of present events can be used to create models of past events.
Uniformitarianism has become basic to scientific thinking. It forms the
cornerstone for current dating techniques.

Before 1780, uniformitarianism was not readily accepted. The dominant

doctrine was catastrophism. According to this view, the earth's features and
the fossil record were the consequence of a series of global catastrophes, each of
which had wrought extensive changes, both in the physical features of the earth
and in all living things.

The History of Uniformitarianism

James Hutton (1726-1797) FREEMASON first championed the idea of slow
gradual change to account for changes in the earth's topography, but it was not
until about 1830 that Charles Lyell (1797-1875) FREEMASON, an Englishman
sympathetic to the views of Hutton, documented uniformitarianism in his
interpretation of the origin of the rocks and landforms of western Europe. Lyell
argued that the earth must be very old for its many geological changes to have
taken place by such gradual processes. What does the earth tell us about its age?
Charles Darwin was much influenced by the work of Lyell. During his voyage
of the Beagle, he carried with him Lyell's Principles of Geology and noted all
the geological features of the terrain he covered. The concepts of evolution were
not entirely new to Charles Darwin, as his grandfather, Erasmus Darwin (1731-
1802), had been an early popularizer of evolution. Charles Darwin's ideas on
this issue only really crystallized during the voyage of the Beagle, and his
experiences and observations on the lava-ridden Galapagos Islands off the coast
of Ecuador probably had the most profound influence on his thinking.
On these islands, he found the most unusual collection of organisms—giant
tortoises and iguanas, unusual plants, insects, reptiles, and many varieties of
 86

finches. The finches in particular interested him, as these normally seed-eating

birds adapted the insect-eating habits of other bird species, such as warblers,
that did not exist in the Galapagos islands. The subtle changes in form,
structure, and habit of the finches stirred the evolutionary thought in Darwin,
leading him to begin his first notebook on the Transmutation of Species in 1837.
It seemed reasonable to Darwin that the organisms on the islands had been
transformed over time and that the new structures and habits had developed
over time. However, the mechanism for the transformation of species was not
nearly as easy to explain as the assumption that such transformation had indeed
occurred. It must be noted that the world at that time had no knowledge of the
science of genetics. Gregor Mendel (1822-1884), the father of genetics, was a
contemporary of Darwin, but his work was unknown to the world at large and
unavailable to Darwin.
Read about evolutionist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck in Lamarck Proposes Natural
Selection, or Aristotle and Plato's thoughts on life's origins in The Rise of
Evolutionary Thinking.

https://creation.com/james-hutton https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hutton
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.slack/tJdDbM0PTaI

Lamarck Proposes Natural Selection

Lamarck was the first biologist to propose a mechanism for evolution. He

proposed that organisms acquired features as they needed them. A giraffe would
require a long neck because it strove to eat leaves high up in the trees, and birds
that did not like swimming, but collected food in shallow water, would
develop long legs and become waders. Lamarck, at times, ascribed the process
of evolution to some inner mystical property of life.
Darwin, on the other hand, proposed the mechanism of natural selection as an
evolutionary mechanism more acceptable to biologists. He defined the principle
as follows:
As many more individuals of each species are born than can possibly
survive, and as, consequently, there is a frequently recurring struggle for
existence, it follows that any being, if it vary, however slightly, in any
manner profitable to itself under the complex and sometimes varying
conditions of life, will have a better chance of surviving and thus be
naturally selected. From the strong principle of inheritance, any selected
variety will tend to propagate its new and modified form.

This theory provided a mechanism for change over time, but it was not until the
“science” of genetics had developed and the concept of mutations was thought
to be understood and that the concept could be developed into its present-day
 87

form, in which “mutations” provide the material for variation and variation
becomes the substance upon which natural selection could feed.
GENETICS = ANOTHER UNPROVEN CONSPIRACY.

The basic difference between Lamarckism and Darwinism is that Lamarck

proposed that adaptations were acquired because organisms needed them,
whereas Darwinism states that the adaptations developed by chance through
mutations and selection takes place by natural selection. In a sense, natural
selection becomes the driving force for change.

The basic Darwinistic view of origin by natural selection is upheld by most

biologists today. They might vary on the mechanism of change, but the basic
principles of Darwinism are deeply entrenched in current scientific thinking.
Science today leaves little room for a literal interpretation of the Genesis
account, or the short chronology associated with it. At best, scientists might
ascribe to some form of theistic evolution where God is seen as the originator of
life and the mechanisms of evolution as the "creator" of the varied life forms in
existence today. This theory proposes that God used evolution to create people
and all the other living organisms on Earth. A basic problem with this theory,
however, is that the Bible declares that death is a consequence of sin, whereas
natural selection sees death as an underlying principle for change. In essence,
the two worldviews of origin by evolution or special Creation seem mutually
exclusive.
Creation: Evolution:
God spoke living organisms into Life originated from non-living
existence a few thousand years ago. material under primitive atmospheric
conditions in a chemically rich ocean
millions of years ago.
God created basic life forms which All life forms originate from a
He called "kinds." common ancestor.
Change is limited by the boundaries Organisms change because of
defined by God. mutations, thus giving rise to new
species.
Since the fall there has been a By natural selection better adapted
deterioration. Development is organisms are selected for survival of
regressive. The modern world is a the fittest. Development is
distorted remnant of the perfect world progressive.
which existed after Creation.

In light of these differences, it is evident that it would take quite a degree of

distortion to reconcile the two concepts. Indeed, the modern concept of
scientific creationism is largely frowned upon, and even ridiculed, by the
scientific community. Nevertheless, some new evidence strongly supports at
 88

least some of the arguments put forward by propagators of the Creation model,
and there have been some major modifications in the thinking of even the
uniformitarians. Even many geologists have come full circle in the past few
years, accepting the possibility that some of the catastrophic events in our
geological past may have had more than local significance.

Since scientist Luis W. Alvarez FREEMASON ,proposed in 1980 that an

asteroid had collided with the earth and caused widespread destruction and
extinction of species, there has been a greater acceptance of catastrophism as a
causative agent in the shaping of geological features. Although the concept of a
worldwide flood on the scale described in Genesis is still taboo, post-
catastrophic floods are being regarded more and more as shapers of geological
features that were previously considered to have developed as a consequence of
uniformitarian principles over thousands or millions of years. One example of
such a change of position is the story of the Columbia River Dry Falls which are
now considered to have been shaped by catastrophic floods at the end of the last
ice age.
Alvarez was a member of the JASON Defense Advisory Group, the Bohemian
Club, and the Republican Party.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Walter_Alvarez
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JASON_(advisory_group)

The Fossil Record

Since ancient times, people have noticed that fossils existed of animals that did
not resemble living species. Also, seashells could be found in the strangest
places, even on the tops of the highest mountain ranges. Even the ancient
Greeks were aware of these fossilized remains of creatures. Heredotus (484-
425 BC) suggested that they came about as a consequence of changes in the
positions of the sea and land.

Many theories regarding fossils have been propagated. Fossils were

recognized as extinct species whose place has been filled by the creatures living
today. The catastrophic model was also accepted by Bible-believing scholars,
who attributed the fossils to the destruction of animals during the Flood
described in Genesis.
But as more and more people accepted the idea of long ages of time as an
explanation for what we see in the world, numerous questions also grew
concerning the validity of the Biblical account.
How did all the animals get into the ark? Why is there a particular order in
the fossil record? How did the animals get to the various continents from the
ark? Why do the animals found in the fossil record look so different from ones
we see today?
 89

These questions led to a search for naturalistic explanations for the fossil record
and the origin of life. Before Darwin, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-
1829)CHAVALIER / FREEMASON , proposed that the geological
discontinuities in the record represented gradual changes in the environment and
climate to which the species were exposed, and through their effects on
organisms, these changes led to the transformation of species. Geologists
Hutton and Lyell expanded this concept, and Charles Darwin added the
biological arm. The fossil record is today considered to be the severest blow to
all anti-evolutionary ideas. But is it?

Male members of the Lamarck family had traditionally served in the French
army. Georges-Louis Leclerc, Comte de Buffon, one of the top French
scientists of the day, mentored Lamarck, and helped him gain membership to
the French Academy of Sciences in 1779 and a commission as a Royal Botanist
in 1781 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Baptiste_Lamarck
https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/history_09
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges-Louis_Leclerc,_Comte_de_Buffon

Ironically, the scientific views on the question of origins have a tendency to go

full circle. Although catastrophism was rejected by evolutionists, many
scientists are today returning to catastrophism and even to the Biblical account
of the Flood to explain many of the features of the geological column and the
fossil record.
The universality of the Flood is the one feature that is still often discarded by
the modern scientific mind. The idea is often scoffed at that God would have
destroyed the whole world, and that the life forms existing today are the
descendants of the sea creatures that survived the catastrophe and land creatures
that entered the ark. However, the Bible is not ?the only source that speaks
about the worldwide Flood. Virtually every society on every continent has the
story of a global deluge in its folklore.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inception_of_Darwin%27s_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_of_Darwin%27s_theory

What Your Biology Teacher Didn’t Tell You About Charles Darwin
Charles Darwin is a great British hero. That’s hardly surprising, since he was
one of the most influential thinkers of the past 200 years. I happened to live
opposite Darwin’s former lodgings when I was a student at Cambridge
University, so I looked out each morning on a blue plaque hailing him as one of
the greatest Britons who ever lived. I’m not saying he didn’t deserve that
commemorative plaque, but I should point out that he wasn’t a British hero
but a British villain. You don’t need to be a Bible-thumping evangelical to
question whether Darwin’s thinking deserves to be given a bit more thought.
 90

Whatever your views on origins and evolution, we can hopefully all agree that,
at present, we give far too much honor to the British thinker who justified
genocide.

DEVALUATION OF HUMANS

Darwin didn’t hide his view that his evolutionary thinking applied to human
races as well as to animal species. The full title of his seminal 1859 book
was On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the
Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life. He followed up more
explicitly in The Descent of Man, where he spelled out his racial theory:

The Western nations of Europe . . . now so immeasurably surpass their former

savage progenitors [that they] stand at the summit of civilization. . . . The
civilized races of man will almost certainly exterminate and replace the
savage races through the world.

Thankfully, most British people today are embarrassed by the racist rhetoric that
undergirded the late-Victorian British Empire. What’s astonishing is how little
they understand that Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution provided the
doctrine behind its white supremacism. Whereas the British Empire of the
early 19th century had been dominated by Christian reformers such as William
Wilberforce FREEMASON , who sold slave badges that proclaimed, “Am I not
a man and a brother?”, Darwin’s writings converted an empire with a
conscience into an empire with a scientific philosophy. Four years after Darwin
published The Origin of Species, James Hunt turned it into a justification
for slavery. In his 1863 paper, “On the Negro’s Place in Nature,” he asserted:
“Our Bristol and Liverpool merchants, perhaps, helped to benefit the race when
they transported some of them to America.”

The Anthropological Society of London was founded in 1863 by Richard

Francis Burton FREEMASON and Dr. James Hunt FREEMASON. It broke
away from the existing Ethnological Society of London, founded in 1843 .

In 1854 he joined the Ethnological Society of London because of his interest in

racial differences and from 1859 to 1862 was the honorary secretary. However
many members of this society disliked his attacks on humanitarian and
missionary societies and the anti-slavery movement. So in 1863 with the help of
the explorer Richard Burton he set up the Anthropological Society of London,
becoming its first president. His paper The Negro's place in nature was greeted
with boos and hisses when given at the British Association meeting in 1863
because of its defence of slavery in the Confederate States of America . -- He
bought a doctorate from the University of Giessen in Germany and set up a
practice in 1856 in Regent Street, London.
 91

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Hunt_(speech_therapist)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hunt_(speech_therapist) .

In 1864, Hunt attempted to persuade the British Association to rename Section

E (Geography and Ethnology) to include Anthropology and in 1865 his
attempt create a new Anthropology sub-section devoted to the study of man.
However with the support of T. H. Huxley it was created under Biology . In
1863, Richard Burton and others founded a breakaway London Anthropological
Society which for several years published a journal "Anthropologia". There
was also an Anthropological Society of London founded in 1836 by John Isaac
Hawkins which had more to do with phrenology.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropological_Society_of_London .

The Institute's fellows are lineal successors to the founding fellows of

the Ethnological Society of London, who in February 1843 formed a breakaway
group of the Aborigines' Protection Society, which had been founded in 1837.
The Huxley Memorial Medal and Lecture was established in 1900 in memory
of Thomas Henry Huxley .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Anthropological_Institute_of_Great_Britai
n_and_Ireland .

The Ethnological Society of London (ESL) was a learned society founded in

1843 as an offshoot of the Aborigines' Protection Society (APS). James
Hunt joined the ESL in 1854, and became a divisive figure because of his
attacks on humanitarian attitudes of missionaries and abolitionists. He served as
secretary from 1859 to 1862. He found an ally in John Crawfurd
FREEMASON, who had retired from service as colonial diplomat and
administrator for the East India Company. Thomas Henry Huxley, Augustus
Lane Fox, Edward Tylor, Henry Christy, John Lubbock, and Augustus
Wollaston Franks all figured prominently in the society's affairs after 1860. In
the years after the publication of the Origin of Species in 1859, the
"Ethnologicals" generally supported Charles Darwin against his critics, and
rejected the more extreme forms of scientific racism. The movement towards
Darwinism was not one way, however, as evidenced by the Honorary
Fellowship given to Robert Knox FREEMASON in 1860. Ethnological Society
retained views descending from Johann Friedrich Blumenbach FREEMASON ,
who had a five-race theory but was a monogenist, and from Prichard.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnological_Society_of_London

Burton was a captain in the army of the East India Company, serving in India
(and later, briefly, in the Crimean War). He wrote a number of travel books in
this period that were not particularly well received. His best-known
contributions to literature were those considered risqué or even pornographic at
 92

the time and which were published under the auspices of the Kama Shastra
society. These books include The Kama Sutra of Vatsyayana (1883) (popularly
known as the Kama Sutra), The Book of the Thousand Nights and a Night
(1885) (popularly known as The Arabian Nights), The Perfumed Garden of the
Shaykh Nefzawi (1886) and The Supplemental Nights to the Thousand Nights
and a Night (seventeen volumes 1886–98). In 1863 Burton co-founded
the Anthropological Society of London with Dr. James Hunt. Published in this
period, but composed on his return journey from Mecca, The Kasidah has been
cited as evidence of Burton's status as a Bektashi Sufi. Deliberately presented
by Burton as a translation, the poem and his notes and commentary on it contain
layers of Sufic meaning, that seem to have been designed to project Sufi
teaching in the West. "Do what thy manhood bids thee do/ from none but self
expect applause;/ He noblest lives and noblest dies/ who makes and keeps his
self-made laws" is The Kasidah's most often-quoted passage. Other works of
note include a collection of Hindu tales, Vikram and the Vampire (1870); ….
The book The Jew, the Gipsy and el Islam was published posthumously in 1898
and was controversial for its criticism of Jews and for its assertion of the
existence of Jewish human sacrifices. Burton called himself an atheist,
stating he was raised in the Church of Englandwhich he said was "officially
(his) church". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Francis_Burton

It later absorbed the older African Association, which had been founded by Sir
Joseph Banks FREEMASON in 1788, as well as the Raleigh Club and the
Palestine Association. Founding members of the Society included Sir John
Barrow, Sir John Franklin and Sir Francis Beaufort. Under the patronage of
King William IV it later became known as The Royal Geographical Society
(RGS) and was granted its Royal Charter under Queen Victoria in 1859. From
1830 – 1840 the RGS met in the rooms of the Horticultural Society in Regent
Street, London A new impetus was given to the Society's affairs in 1911, with
the election of Earl Curzon FREEMASON , the former Viceroy of India, as
the Society's President (1911–1914). The premises in Savile Row were sold and
the present site, Lowther Lodge in Kensington Gore, was purchased . It has
been a key associate and supporter of many notable explorers and expeditions,
including those
of Darwin, Livingstone, Stanley, Scott, Shackleton, Hunt and Hillary. The
most prestigious of these awards are the Gold Medals (Founder's Medal 1830
and the Patron's Medal 1838). The award is given for "the encouragement and
promotion of geographical science and discovery", and are approved by Queen
Elizabeth II. The awards originated as an annual gift of fifty guineas from King
William IV, first made in 1831
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Geographical_Society
 93

The extension was formally opened by HRH the Duke of York (later King
George VI) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lowther_Lodge

The Association was founded in 1831 and modelled on the German Gesellschaft
Deutscher Naturforscher und Ärzte. The prime mover (who is regarded as the
main founder) was Reverend William Vernon Harcourt FREEMASON ,
following a suggestion by Sir David Brewster FREEMASON . Charles Babbage
, William Whewell and J. F. W. Johnston FREEMASONS , are also considered
to be founding members. The first meeting was held in York (at the Yorkshire
Museum) on Tuesday 27 September 1831 with various scientific papers being
presented on the following days. It was chaired by Viscount Milton
FREEMASON , President of the Yorkshire Philosophical Society, and
"upwards of 300 gentlemen" attended the meeting. One of the most famous
events linked to the Association Meeting was an exchange between Thomas
Henry Huxley and Bishop Samuel Wilberforce in 1860
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Science_Association

He was born at Sudbury, Derbyshire, a younger son of Edward Vernon-

Harcourt, Archbishop of York and his wife Lady Anne Leveson-Gower, who
was a daughter of Granville Leveson-Gower, 1st Marquess of Stafford and his
second wife Lady Louisa Egerton. Her maternal grandparents were Scroop
Egerton, 1st Duke of Bridgewater and his second wife Rachel Russell. Rachel
was a daughter of Wriothesley Russell, 2nd Duke of Bedford and the rich
heiress Elizabeth Howland, daughter of John Howland of Streatham.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Vernon_Harcourt_(scientist)
HTTP://EZINEARTICLES.COM/?THE-KAMA-SHASTRA-SOCIETY-AND-THE-KAMA-
SUTRA&ID=799506

ENABLING GENOCIDE

Victorian Britain was too willing to accept Darwinian evolution as its gospel of
overseas expansion. Darwin is still ? celebrated on the back of the British £10
note for his discovery of many new species on his visit to Australia; what’s been
forgotten, though, is his contemptible attitude—due to his beliefs about natural
selection—toward the Aborigines he found there. When The Melbourne
Review used Darwin’s teachings to justify the genocide of indigenous
Australians in 1876, he didn’t try and stop them. When the Australian
newspaper argued that “the inexorable law of natural selection [justifies]
exterminating the inferior Australian and Maori races”—that “the world is
better for it” since failure to do so would be “promoting the non-survival of the
fittest, protecting the propagation of the imprudent, the diseased, the defective,
and the criminal” . Darwin simply commented, “I do not know of a more
 94

striking instance of the comparative rate of increase of a civilized over a savage

race.”

Meanwhile, several thousand miles away, Cecil Rhodes was gleefully

embracing Darwin’s thinking as justification for white expansion across
southern Africa. He was so inspired by Darwinian evolutionist Winwood
Reade’s The Martyrdom of Man that he later confessed, “That book has made
me what I am.”CECIL RHODES = ROTHSCHILDS AGENT & PARTNER WITH NELSON
MANDELA .

What it made him was the architect of one of the most brutal and immoral acts
of European expansion and genocide in history. Rhodes wrote in 1877:

I contend that we are the finest race in the world and that the more of the
world we inhabit the better it is for the human race. . . . It is our duty to seize
every opportunity of acquiring more territory and we should keep this one idea
steadily before our eyes that more territory simply means more of the Anglo-
Saxon race, more of the best, the most human, most honorable race the world
possesses.

Rhodes was simply stating what he drew from the works of both Darwin and
Francis Galton, Charles Darwin’s cousin, who extrapolated his cousin’s
thinking to pioneer racial eugenics.

Hitler and his Nazi philosophers used it to justify wars of expansion and horrific
holocaust. Communist Russia used Darwinian evolution to justify its liquidation
of non-Russian people groups within the Soviet empire. Serbs used it to justify
their genocide against Croatians and Kosovans.

http://www.reformation.org/3-deadly-darwins.html
http://www.reformation.org/galileo-unmasked.html

http://www.reformation.org/tycho-brahe.html

http://www.reformation.org/nicolaus-copernicus.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Darwin

The Culling by Jay Weidner

Author’s note: This is an updated essay that first appeared in the book , Secrets
and Suppressed II from Feral House Publishing. Copyright 2008.
There is a plan.
 95

The Plan has been in effect for 35 years, at least, possibly over a hundred years.
The final stages of the Plan, The Culling, are about to occur.
The idea for the Plan isn’t all that new. It was born long ago with the writings of
Thomas Malthus. His ideas were taken up eagerly by the British aristocratic
class.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malthus .
Malthus worked for the East India Trading Company in the early 1800’s
and he had traveled the world. One of his hobbies was examining populations
and understanding population growth. Malthus had done the figures and things
just didn’t add up. Eventually, according to his figures, there would be too many
people. This fact would trigger massive famines that would wipe out most of the
Earth’s population.
This wasn’t prophecy, it was science.
Everyone over the age of 50 remembers the best selling book The Population
Bomb by Paul Elrich. Elrich was a follower of Malthus and he managed to
scare the hell out of the entire Baby Boomer generation. Due mostly to Elrich’s
influence many of the people, who came of age in the 1970’s, voluntarily
agreed to cut their numbers by having less, or in many cases, no children.
In that book from the 1970’s Elrich predicted that overpopulation would bring
on a famine that would destroy most of the world’s populations. This famine
would start, he said, sometimes in the late 1970’s, and by the late 1980’s, there
would be hardly anyone left.
Population reduction appears to have been a major preoccupation of all the
ruling elite for quite a while.
Many pf these elite groups have been pursuing the “problem” of over-
population for decades. The Club of Rome, The Trilateralists, the Crown.
George Soros, Karl Popper and others were part of a research group devoted to
examining methods of depopulation.
The Rockefellers were also heavily involved with financing the eugenics
movements of the early twentieth century. The Bush family has always been
interested in population control, abortion and even eugenics.
The elites have a long and well known history of race based eugenics, abortion
freedom, funding of depopulation thinkers and other such think tanks.
It is as if the elites, sometime after Darwin published his book on evolution,
began designing philosophies based on their own warped version of Darwinism.
 96

Possibly this is why one sees the emergence of Nazism, Communism, Fascism,
Zionism and a hundred other “isms” after Darwin published his famous Origin
of Species.
Once the rules of Darwinian evolution were properly understood, the real
truth of Nature is that only one group can be at the top. This emerging new
philosophy believed that survival of the fittest is the only rule of nature.
Darwin and his scientific viewpoint inadvertently gave rise to a self centered
philosophy which basically, in the end, said that it was better to wipe out
everyone who is not of your kind. Perhaps more importantly this new
philosophy was saying that if you and your race are not pursuing this line of
logic, you will lose, because there is surely another race, or culture, that is
thinking this way.
Whomever gets there first wins. But what is there? In the sense of these
emerging post-Darwinist philosophies, these newly discovered “rules” of nature
would dictate that all other competitors will have to be killed. The ‘there’ that
the elites were seeking was a world where your kind, your race, succeeded only
at the cost of all the other races, who would have to fail.
It is in and from this idea of racial and cultural superiority, carried out with
technology, that the idea for The Culling was born.
In a Darwinist sense, moral values and ethics were now useless and
antiquated artifacts that served to inhibit the natural racial desire to conquer
and be the dominant species, culture or race.
It is true that the idea of racial superiority had been around a long time before
Darwin but now the difference with those old slave masters and stuffy European
aristocrats was palatable. Darwin gave, to all the intelligent, but racist, people of
the elites, an intellectual reason to spring into action.
The beginnings of the eugenics movement, the large world wars, the spread of
disease, the destruction of the environment, it is argued by many theorists, is
merely a long term plan by the elites to attempt to curtail population
growth.

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/2014/01/29/illuminati-conspiracy-part-one/

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/2015/02/08/illuminati-conspiracy-part-two-
sniffing-out-jesuits/

http://www.conspiracyarchive.com/NWO/Illuminati_Notes.htm
 97

http://www.overlordsofchaos.com/html/nwo_quotes.html

The Club of Rome: They are a global ‘think tank’ made up of an elite group of
scientists, economists, businessmen, heads of state. They deal with international
political issues. It was founded in 1968 at David Rockefeller’s estate in
Bellagio, Italy. They follow the economic theories of Thomas Robert Malthus
who wrote publications on population control back in 1798. The ‘reverend’
Thomas Robert Malthus was born February 14, 1766 and died December 29
1834. They have founded 2 subgroups: The Club of Budapest and The Club of
Madrid The Club of Budapest’s agenda focused on social and cultural aspects.
The Club of Madrid’s agenda focuses on political aspects Members include: Al
Gore, Javier Solana, Mikhail Gorbachev, Hassan bin Taal, Kofi Annan, David
Rockefeller, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, Bill Gates, Queen of Spain (Dona
Sophia), Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, Mirianne Williamson, Jane
Goodall, Juan Carlos, King of Spain, Henry Kissinger, Ted Turner, George
Soros, Tony Blair, Deepak Chopra. The list goes on as there are at least 100
members in this exclusive club. In a nutshell, the major goals of the Club of
Rome is to reduce the world’s population by 2 billion people through war,
famine, disease and any other means necessary. They describe themselves as ‘a
group of world citizens, sharing a common concern for the future of humanity.”
Source: www.green-agenda.com/globalrevolution.html The Bilderbergers,
whose goal is to set up a World Government by 2012 and a global army through
the UN. The Trilateral Commission are comprised of elitists from the USA,
Japan and Western Europe. Their purpose is to give the Bilderbergers a broader
political basis. The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) made up exclusively of
Americans and Canadians. They control the Western world with the help of
Britain’s “Royal Institute of International affairs”. The inner core of the CFR is
the Skull & Bones group. It was founded in 1833 at Yale University. While
senior skull and bone members, they are called ‘knights’. Upon graduating and
for the rest of their lives, these members are known as ‘patriarchs’. They are
guaranteed success, including financial success and power.

http://www.kabbalahblog.info/tag/charles-darwin-evolution/
https://atheistfallacies.wordpress.com/tag/scientism/
http://freudquotes.blogspot.in/2015/12/the-hidden-freud-his-hassidic-
roots.html http://phylonetworks.blogspot.in/2015/01/the-kabbalistic-
tree-of-life-is-network.html

OCCLT & DARWIN http://forum.prisonplanet.com/index.php?topic=27258.0

https://christianjournal.net/turning-point/science/science-evilution-evolution-
luciferian-spiritual-hoax/ http://patriotsandliberty.com/lindas-
 98

latest/2013/12/10/the-ancient-myth-of-evolution-sumeria-to-darwin-and-occult-
new-age
http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/kingdomofpriests/2010/03/darwin-at-the-
mountains-of-madness-evolution-the-occult.html https://io9.gizmodo.com/10-
famous-scientists-who-held-surprising-supernatural-b-1689425142
https://www.jashow.org/articles/guests-and-authors/dave-hunt/the-link-
between-evolution-and-the-occult/
https://www.adullamfilms.com/DarwinDebunked.html
https://sensuouscurmudgeon.wordpress.com/2010/03/05/klinghoffer-darwin-
occultism-terrorism/
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/talk.origins/74Of4mUmuGc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41feuT1LfyQ
https://occultthirdreich.wordpress.com/2011/07/17/the-third-reich-richard-
wagner/

https://www.theosophical.org/publications/quest-magazine/42-
publications/quest-magazine/1250-science-and-the-occult-where-the-twain-
meet https://www.thebereancall.org/content/occult-invasion-revisit-part-
three-evolution-demonic

http://slideplayer.com/slide/269578/
http://safeguardyoursoul.com/atheistic-evolution/
http://thedailyjournalist.com/theinvestigative/the-greatest-cover-up-in-the-
history-of-science-exposed-by-unique-discovery-of-new-hard-independently-
verifiable-data/ https://www.excatholicsforchrist.com/mobile/freud-marx-
darwin.html www.beliefnet.com/columnists/kingdomofpriests/2010/03/darwin-
at-the-mountains-of-madness-evolution-the-occult.html
https://creationsciencestudy.wordpress.com/2015/01/25/the-hms-beagle-satans-
ship/ www.discernlife.com/eugenics-true-methodology-evolution/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYLNOpx6WUY

Birding and Mysticism: Enlightenment Through Bird Watching --- George E.

Lowe - 2009
http://mysticaldarwinism.blogspot.in/2016/09/the-origin-of-darwinism-from-
mysticism.html Darwin: German mystic or French rationalist? The
notion that Charles Darwin embraced the German Romantic tradition seems
plausible, given the early influence of Alexander von Humboldt. But this view
fails to do justice to other scientific traditions. Darwin was a protégé of the
Englishman John Stevens Henslow and was a follower of the Scott Charles
 99

Lyell. He had important debts to French scientists, notably Henri Milne-

Edwards, Etienne and Isidore Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, and Alphonse de
Candolle. Many Germans were quite supportive of Darwin, but not all of these
were encumbered by idealistic metaphysical baggage. Both Darwin and Anton
Dohrn treated science as very much a cosmopolitan enterprise.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25515143
www.rapturenotes.com/evolution-to-mysticism.html
https://www.slideshare.net/einsteinrelativity/darwinism-a https://mystic-
craft.com/talk-5-classical-mysticism-and-darwin-questions-of-consciousness-a-
mystic-perspective/
Darwin’s application of mystical powers to natural selection was immediately
spotted and severely criticized. Darwin and his followers have all been forced to
concede that selection is a false term when applied to interactions at the
organism-environment interface—but they always justify metaphorical usages.
Selection was resisted for decades precisely because there was no empirical
evidence for a selector—evidence that still remains non-existent.
www.icr.org/article/darwins-sacred-imposter-natural-selections/
http://slideplayer.com/slide/9865316/
http://www.creationstudies.org/Education/darwins_racists.html
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Evilution
http://advindicate.com/articles/2986
https://translate.google.co.in/translate?hl=en&sl=fr&u=https://www.info-
sectes.org/satan/darwin-satan.htm&prev=search www.satanicsf.com/darwin-
satan-evolution/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p26ekoj_HL4
https://answersingenesis.org/charles-darwin/biography/the-pursuit-of-darwin/

In 1912, the announcement of "Piltdown Man" led the New York Times to
exclaim in a headline: "Darwin Theory Proved True." For four decades the
British Museum displayed this supposedly 500,000-year old "apeman" - until it
was exposed as a hoax: an orangutan jaw and human skull had been planted
together, stained to look old, with their teeth filed down.
Freemason Erasmus Darwin the founder of the Lunar society in Birmingham
England was pushing evolution in Masonic temples across England over 100
years before his grandson Charles claimed to come up with the process in his
book "origin of species" after his trip to the Galápagos Islands.
Charles lied about where he came up with his ideas and work plus left out the
pagan masonic occult roots of the esoteric mystery school philosophy of
evolution , in fear it would be rejected for its occult roots.

Evolutionary influences are especially visible in Marxist legal theory. Because

 100

Marx rejected the God of Creation. In order to better understand Marxism, it is

necessary to explore its religious dimensions. In many respects Marxism is no
less religious or dogmatic than the traditional religions of Judaism, Christianity
and Islam. As a matter of fact, Marxism contains in itself a complete worldview
that includes an explanation of the origin of the universe and an eschatological
theory concerning the final destiny of humankind.

Theologically, Marxism declares that God does not, cannot, and must not exist.
Instead, Marxism is based on the conviction (a genuine opiate of the people?)
that history is constantly evolving towards a certain direction and that the
proletariat is the redemptive force of humanity. Thus Marx declared: “History is
the judge, its executioner the proletariat.”

Since Marx believed he had discovered the secret of perfecting the human
condition, politics became for him a form of secular religion, whereby the ideal
of human salvation would be accomplished by the proletariat’s revolutionary
actions in history. History was interpreted progressively by Marx, moving by
means of social struggle. He believed that the final stage of human evolution
actually transcends class struggle, when the eschatological consummation of
global communism is at last achieved.

Comparing such Marxist eschatology with that contained in the Bible in the
Book of Revelation, David Koyzis comments:
“Much as the scriptures teaches the ultimate victory of Jesus Christ over his
enemies and the reign of the righteous over the new earth in the kingdom of
God, so also does Marxism promises an eschatological consummation of
human history. This does not, of course, mean that there is not a battle to be
waged or work to be done. Indeed, there is much of both. But in fighting for the
classless society, the proletariat does so fully confident that it is fighting not
against history but with it.”

There is a close relation between Charles Darwin’s theory of biological

evolution and Karl Marx’s theory of revolutionary communism. Darwin’s
attempt to demonstrate how humans would have evolved from animals by a
blind process of natural selection was deeply inspirational for Marx, who
actually believed that the primacy of social classes somehow paralleled the
alleged supremacy of the human races.

Whether viewed as the struggle of races or as the struggle of classes,

Darwinism was the predominant form of socio-political thinking in the late
nineteenth-century. As a philosopher of his time, Marx believed that the
existence of God had been disproved by the inexorable forces of science, reason
and progress. As such, Darwinism became an important element of Marxist
 101

theory.
As his close friend and co-writer Friedrich Engels pointed out,
“just as Darwin discovered the law of evolution in organic nature, so Marx
discovered the law of evolution in human history.
”In a personal letter to him, Marx actually reveals that Darwin’s Origin of
Species was indeed very important, as it had provided him “with the basis in
natural science for the class struggle in history”.
As a sign of gratitude, Marx sent Darwin the second German edition of Capital.
On the title page he inscribed, “Mr. Charles Darwin/On the part of his sincere
admirer/[signed] Karl Marx, London 16 June 1873.”
Curiously, Marx adopted Darwinism not just to support his own racist theories,
including his undeniable anti-Semitism (although he was ethnically Jewish
himself). For instance, Marx argued that it was not so difficult to establish
unions in barbarous Russia, a country where, as he put it, anybody could easily
“build up successful unions with stupid young men and apostles”. Marx quite
often resorted to phrases like “dirty Jew” and “Jewish N*gger” in order to
describe his political enemies.
About the famous German socialist Ferdinand Lassalle he wrote:
“It is not perfectly clear to me that, as the shape of his head and the growth of
his hair indicates, he is descended from the Negroes who joined in Moses’ flight
from Egypt (unless his mother or grandmother on the father’s side was crossed
with a n*gger). This union of Jew and German on a Negro base was bound to
produce an extraordinary hybrid.”
In his work On the Jewish Questions, Marx shared and endorsed the anti-
Semitism of Bruno Bauer, the anti-Semitic leader of the Hegelian left who had
published an essay demanding that the Jews abandon Judaism completely. In
Marx’s opinion, the “money-Jew” had become “the universal anti-social
element of the present time”. To make the Jew impossible, he argued, it was
necessary to abolish the preconditions, the very possibility of the kind of money
activities which produced him. Thus, he concluded that both the Jew and his
religion should disappear if the world were finally able to abolish “the Jewish
attitude to money”. As Marx put it, “in emancipating itself from hucksterism
and money, and thus from real and practical Judaism, our age would emancipate
itself.”
http://creation.com/marxism-law-and-evolution
MARX , COUSIN TO ROTHSCHILDS & PHILLIPS – THE LEADERS
OF JEWS -, NEVER CRITICISED THEM .
Also click here to learn more about Erasmus Darwin-->
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOTlNNsBqbA
https://www.facebook.com/TheRealTruthMovement/photos/a.28570460158371
2.1073741828.285680061586166/393263477494490/?type=1&theater
 102

"Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the
progress of science. It is useless." (Prof. Louis Bounoure, Director of Research,
National Center of Scientific Research.)

"You will be greatly disappointed (by the forthcoming book); it will be

grievously too hypothetical. It will very likely be of no other service than
collocating some facts; though I myself think I see my way approximately on
the origin of the species. But, alas, how frequent, how almost universal it is in
an author to persuade himself of the truth of his own dogmas."

What's that mean, His theory had, in essence, preceded his knowledge-that is,
he had hit upon a novel and evocative theory of evolution with limited
knowledge at hand to satisfy either himself or others that the theory was true.
He could neither accept it himself nor prove it to others. He simply did not
know enough concerning the several natural history fields upon which his
theory would have to be based.' Dr. Barry Gale (Science Historian, Darwin
College, UK) in his book, Evolution Without Evidence.

"It is easy enough to make up stories of how one form gave rise to another, and
to find reasons why the stages should be favored by natural selection. But such
stories are not part of science, for there is no way of putting them to the test."
Personal letter from Dr Collin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist at the British
Museum of Natural History in London, to Luther D. Sunderland

"Biologists are simply naive when they talk about experiments designed to test
the theory of evolution. It is not testable. They may happen to stumble across
facts which would seem to conflict with its predictions. These facts will
invariably be ignored and their discoverers will undoubtedly be deprived of
continuing research grants." Professor Whitten (Professor of Genetics,
University of Melbourne, Australia)

"One of the reasons I started taking this anti-evolutionary view, was ... it struck
me that I had been working on this stuff for twenty years and there was not one
thing I knew about it. That's quite a shock to learn that one can be so misled so
long. ...so for the last few weeks I've tried putting a simple question to various
people and groups of people. Question is: Can you tell me anything you know
about evolution, any one thing that is true? I tried that question on the geology
staff at the Field Museum of Natural History and the only answer I got was
silence. I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar in
the University of Chicago, a very prestigious body of evolutionists, and all I got
there was silence for a long time and eventually one person said, 'I do know one
thing -- it ought not to be taught in high school'." Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior
 103

Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History, London Keynote address at

the American Museum of Natural History, New York City

"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-
men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever! In explaining
evolution we do not have one iota of fact."
(Dr. Newton Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission.)

The brainwashed do not know they are brainwashed!

"I, myself, am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially to the extent to
which it's been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the
future. Posterity will marvel that so flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be
accepted with the credulity that it has."
Malcom Muggeridge, Pascal Lectures, Ontario Canada, University of Waterloo.

"Modern apes, for instance, seem to have sprung out of nowhere. They have no
yesterday, no fossil record. And the true origin of modern humans - of upright,
naked, tool-making, big-brained beings - is, if we are to be honest with
ourselves, an equally mysterious matter."
Dr. Lyall Watson, Anthropologist

''We're not just evolving slowly,'' Gould says, ''for all practical purposes we're
not evolving. There's no reason to think we're going to get bigger brains or
smaller toes or whatever - we are what we are.''
Stephen Jay Gould ( Professor of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard
University )

"...not being a paleontologist, I don't want to pour too much scorn on

paleontologists, but if you were to spend your life picking up bones and finding
little fragments of head and little fragments of jaw, there's a very strong desire
to exaggerate the importance of those fragments..."
Dr. Greg Kirby (Senior Lecturer in Population Biology at Flinders University )
in an address given at a meeting of the Biology Teachers Association of South
Australia.

"the incident on a par with two other embarrassing faux pas by fossil hunters:
Hesperopithecus, the fossil pig's tooth that was cited as evidence of very early
man in North America, and Eoanthropus or 'Piltdown Man', the jaw of an
orangutan and the skull of a modern human that were claimed to be the 'earliest
Englishman'."
 104

"The problem with a lot of anthropologists is that they want so much to find a
hominid, that any scrap of bone becomes a hominid bone."
(Dr. Tim White, anthropologist, University of California,

They make it up as they go.

I mean the stories, the narratives about change over time. How the dinosaurs
became extinct, how the mammals evolved, where man came from. These seem
to me to be little more than story-telling.

We have access to the tips of a tree, the tree itself is a theory and people who
pretended to know about the tree and to describe what went on with it, how the
branches came off and the twigs came off are, I think, telling stories.
Dr. Colin Patterson,( Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History,
London ) in an interview on British broadcasting Corporation ( BBC ) television

The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade
secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have
data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however
reasonable, not the evidence of fossils.
Stephen Jay Gould, Former Professor of Geology and Paleontology at Harvard
University

To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the
focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the
correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by
natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.
Charles Darwin in The Origin of Species

"Nine-tenths of the talk of evolutionists is sheer nonsense, not founded on

observation and wholly unsupported by facts. This museum is full of proofs of
the utter falsity of their views. In all this great museum, there is not a particle of
evidence of the transmutation of species."
Dr. Etheridge, senior paleontologist of the British Museum of Natural History,
cited in Dr. Scott Huse, The Collapse of Evolution.

"The more statistically improbable a thing is, the less can we believe that it just
happened by blind chance. Superficially the obvious alternative to chance is an
intelligent Designer."
- Dr. Richard Dawkins (Department of Zoology, Oxford University, UK)

It is an impossible belief.
 105

"The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is
comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might
assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein".'
Sir Fred Hoyle (English astronomer, Professor of Astronomy at Cambridge
University)

"The opportune appearance of mutations permitting animals and plants to meet

their needs seems hard to believe. Yet the Darwinian theory is even more
demanding: a single plant, a single animal would require thousands and
thousands of lucky, appropriate events. Thus, miracles would become the rule:
events with an infinitesimal probability could not fail to occur .... There is no
law against day dreaming, but science must not indulge in it."
Grasse, Pierre-Paul (1977) Evolution of Living Organism Academic Press, New
York, N.Y., p. 103

Radiocarbon dating is a joke as well.

"When the blood of a seal, freshly killed at McMurdo Sound in the Antarctic
was tested by carbon-14, it showed the seal had died 1,300 years ago."
From W. Dort Jr., Ph.D. -- Geology, Professor, University of Kansas

A lake Bonney seal known to have died only a few weeks before was carbon
dated. The results stated that the seal had died between 515 and 715 years ago.
(Antarctic Journal, Washington)

"The hair on the Chekurovka mammoth was found to have a carbon-14 age of
26,000 years but the peaty soil in which is was preserved was found to have a
carbon-14 dating of only 5,600 years."
("Dry bones and other fossils" by Dr. Gary Parker)

"Scientists got dates of 164 million and 3 billion years for two Hawaiian
lava flows. But these lava flows happened only about 200 years ago in 1800
and 1801.
(Radiocarbon Journal, Vol. 8, 1966.)

"The Carbon-14 contents of the shells of the snails of Melanoides tuberculatus

living today in artesian springs in southern Nevada indicate an apparent age of
27,000 years."
Alan C. Riggs, Science, vol 224 (1984) 58-61

"In the light what is known about the radiocarbon method and the way it is used,
it is truly astonishing that many authors will cite agreeable determinations as a
"proof" for their beliefs. The implications of pervasive contamination and
 106

ancient variations in carbon-14 levels are steadfastly ignored by those who

based their argument upon the dates. The radiocarbon method is still not
capable of yielding accurate and reliable results. There are gross discrepancies,
the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates are actually
selected dates.
’This whole blessed thing is nothing but 13th-century alchemy, and it all
depends upon which funny paper you read’."
Robert E. Lee, Radiocarbon: Ages in Error, Anthropological Journal of Canada

' I know the question in the minds of many of you who have followed me to this
point: "Does not science prove that there is no Creator?" Emphatically, science
does not prove that!'
Paul A Moody, Ph.D. (zoology) (Emeritus Professor of Natural History and
Zoology, University of Vermont)

So why do most people believe it?

"Evolution is unproved and improvable, we believe it because the only

alternative is special creation, which is unthinkable."
(Sir Arthur Keith, a militant anti-Christian physical anthropologist)

Charles Darwin’s family suffered from the deleterious effects of inbreeding,

suggests a new study that serves as ironic punctuation to the evolutionary
theorist’s life work. Pioneer of the theory that genetic traits affect survival of
both individual organisms and species, Darwin wondered in his own lifetime if
his marriage to first cousin Emma Wedgwood was having "the evil effects of
close ...

Truth is certainly stranger than fiction. The Hellfire Club was no ordinary club.
Located deep beneath the disguise of an innocent looking church in England,
members of the Hellfire Club descended hundreds of feet deep into the earth;
into a series of excavated tunnels, rooms and caverns; where members
fornicated with prostitutes; and occult sacrifices were offered to Satan. The
same type of wickedness is common today at Bohemian Grove and Skull and
Bones island. Just as Ben Franklin & Thomas Jefferson were occultists devoted
to Satan, so also are George Bush Sr. and Jr. who are both members of
Bohemian Grove.

The very term "Hellfire Club" is equivalent to the reprobates who nicknamed
Las Vegas, "Sin City."
 107

The elaborate labyrinth of passages in Franklin's secret society were fashioned

in such a manner that it appeared as if one were descending into Hell; hence the
term, "Hellfire Club." The members of the Hellfire Club were evil and are no
doubt burning in the very flames that they scorned and sinfully made light of.

Authorities were shocked on February 11, 1998 when workmen restoring

Benjamin Franklin's London home dug up the remains of six children and four
adults hidden below the home.

The Hellfire Club was the popular name for an exclusive English club that met
irregularly from 1746 to around 1763, run by Sir Francis Dashwood. During the
time of the club's operation, they were commonly thought to hold notorious,
orgiastic and Satanic meetings at Medmenham Abbey, beside the Thames and
later at West Wycombe Caves.

The term was not invented by the 1750 club; they first met to celebrate an
earlier club founded in 1720 by Charles Edward. Other clubs using the name
were set up throughout the 18th century.

The club was founded by Sir Francis Dashwood after he returned from his
Grand Tour of Europe. According to the 1779 book Nocturnal Revels, on the
Grand Tour he had visited various religious seminaries, "founded, as it were, in
direct contradiction to Nature and Reason; on his return to England, [he]
thought that a burlesque Institution in the name of St Francis, would mark the
absurdity of such Societies; and in lieu of the austerities and abstemiousness
there practised, substitute convivial gaiety, unrestrained hilarity, and social
felicity."

At the first gathering in May 1746, they met at the George and Vulture public
house in Lombard Street, London, the meeting place of the 1720s group. The
initial membership was limited to twelve but it soon increased. Of the original
twelve, seven have been almost certainly identified: Dashwood, Robert
Vansittart, William Hogarth, Thomas Potter, Francis Duffield, Edward
Thompson, and Paul Whitehead. Though not a member, Benjamin Franklin
occasionally attended the club's meetings. The later membership is potentially
immense, including John Wilkes and John Montagu, 4th Earl of Sandwich.

They did not call themselves the Hellfire Club, but used a number of mockingly
religious titles, initially the Brotherhood of St. Francis of Wycombe. Other titles
used included the Order of Knights of West Wycombe and later the Monks of
Medmenham. The members called each other brothers and referred to
Dashwood as abbot; female guests were nuns. Unlike the more determined
 108

Satanists of the 1720s the club motto was Fay ce que vouldras (Do what thou
wilt) from François Rabelais, later used by Aleister Crowley. Although
indulging in pseudo-Satanic rites the 'monks' were keener devotaries of Bacchus
and Venus.

The George and Vulture burned down in 1749, possibly owing to a club
meeting. However, it was rebuilt shortly afterwards and survives as a City chop
house off Cornhill. Dickens lived and wrote here for some while and the
Pickwick Club still meets there to this day. After a hiatus meetings were
resumed at members' homes. Dashwood built a temple in the grounds of his
West Wycombe home and nearby 'catacombs' were excavated. The first meeting
at Wycombe was held on Walpurgis Night, 1752; a much larger meeting, it was
something of a failure and no large-scale meetings were held there again.
Despite this and the fictionalizing of the club Dashwood acquired the ruins of
Medmenham Abbey in 1755, which was rebuilt by the architect Nicholas Revett
in the style of the 18th century Gothic revival. In 1762 factional stresses and
political rivalries turned the affairs of the club into public clashes and under
heavy pressure the club finally disbanded.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hellfire_Club

LADY MARY WORTLEY MONTAGUE – CLOSELY ASSOCIATED WITH HELL FIRE

CLUB , WAS THE MAIN PROMOTER OF PREVENTIVE VACCINATION .

Ben Franklin was a very wicked man, that history has been kind to, by omitting
his sins.
Franklin was a drunk. He had weekly meetings at a tavern, where he got drunk
with several of his associates. Franklin wrote, in a piece called, "The
Antediluvians Were All Very Sober," that "Virtue and Safety in Wine Drinking
is found, while all that drink water deserve to be drowned." Proverb 20:1 states,
"Wine is a mocker, strong drink is raging: and whosoever is deceived thereby is
not wise."

Franklin was a whoremonger. Of course, all that drinking can lead to

fornication, which Franklin was also very fond of. Not only did Franklin write a
letter to a friend on "How to Choose A Mistress," but he had an illegitimate son.
This is strange behavior for a God-fearing "deist." While in France, he
attempted to seduce a married woman who was 40 years younger than himself.

Franklin was an occultist, Satanist and indulged in child sacrifice. Franklin

attended the drunken, ritual orgies of a secret society called, among other
things, the Hellfire Club. They would get drunk, dress prostitutes up like Nuns
and have orgies in underground caves, which resembled Black Masses
(although they "worshipped" pagan deities Bacchus and Venus). While not
 109

actual professed Satanists, their motto Fait ce que vouldras (Do what thou wilt)
was later used by Satanist Aleister Crowley.

What is most disturbing is that on February 11, 1998 The London Times
reported that workmen restoring Benjamin Franklin's London home dug up the
remains of six children and four adults hidden below the home. "Initial
estimates are that the bones are about 200 years old and were buried at the time
Franklin was living in the house, which was his home from 1757 to 1762, and
from 1764 to 1775. Most of the bones show signs of having been dissected,
sawn or cut. One skull has been drilled with several holes. Paul Knapman, the
Westminster Coroner, said: "I cannot totally discount the possibility of a crime.
There is still a possibility that I may have to hold an inquest."

"One of the most influential figures in the American Revolution was the writer,
philosopher and scientist Benjamin Franklin. He was a Quaker but had become
a Freemason in 1731 when he joined the Lodge of St. John in Philadelphia,
which was the first recognized Masonic lodge in America. At the time he was
inducted Franklin was working as a journalist and he wrote several pro-Masonic
articles which were published in The Pennsylvania Gazette. In 1732 he helped
draft the by laws of his lodge and in 1734 he printed the Constitutions which
was the first Masonic book ever issued in America. He eventually rose to Grand
Master of the St. John's lodge and in 1749 was elected Grand Master of the
Province. While in France in the 1770s, as a diplomat for the American
colonies, Franklin was made Grand Master of the Nine Sisters Lodge in Paris.
Members of the Lodge included Danton, who was to play a crucial role in the
French Revolution, the Marquis de Lafayette and Paul Jones, both of whom
fought in the American War of Independence. While in Paris Franklin used his
Masonic contacts to raise funds to buy arms for the American rebels."

Michael Howard, The Occult Conspiracy - Secret Societies - Their Influence

and Power in World History

Franklin, was also a Rosicrucian Grand Master, who was at the heart of the
Illuminati operations to take over America and replace the visible control of the
British Empire with the invisible control of the secret brotherhood, the most
effective and ongoing form of mastering the underclass. It is said the Illuminati,
via the Freemasons, controlled and manipulated both sides in the American War
of Independence and were also deeply connected with the French Revolution
(1789).

Franklin was Agent 72 of the British intelligence agency created by Dr. John
Dee and Francis Bacon during the rein of Elizabeth I. During their time in
London, Franklin and the Professor were brought into contact with those in
 110

positions of power who shared their Masonic and occult interests. One of these
was Sir Francis Dashwood, the English Chancellor of the Exchequer who was
also the founder of a secret society called the Friars of St. Francis of
Wycombe, more popularly known in the parlors of London as the Hell Fire
Club.
PROMINENT NASI – HITLER SUPPORTER HENRY FORD WAS AGENT OF PROMINENT
JEW ROCKEFELLER . http://www.reformation.org/henry-ford.html

https://thetempletrail.com/hell-fire-caves/
https://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Hell+Fire+Club
http://beforeitsnews.com/alternative/2013/05/hell-fire-club-secret-society-sex-
satanism-and-secret-societies-2662198.html
http://freemasonry.bcy.ca/history/hellfire/hellfire.html
http://outlander.wikia.com/wiki/Hellfire_Club
http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2016/06/not-good-order-friars-st-
francis-wycombe/ www.hellfirecaves.co.uk/history/hellfire-club/
https://hellfiresecrets.wordpress.com
https://hauntedpalaceblog.wordpress.com/2016/06/12/naughty-nuns-and-frisky-
friars-sir-francis-dashwoods-hell-fire-club/ www.bbc.com/news/uk-northern-
ireland-37609835 https://www.jesus-is-
savior.com/False%20Religions/Illuminati/hellfire_club.htm
https://www.thedailybeast.com/how-debauched-was-the-hellfire-club
https://www.geni.com/projects/Hellfire-Club/11901
https://www.historicmysteries.com/hellfire-club/
www.slate.com/articles/life/welltraveled/features/2009/hellfire_holidays/damnat
ion_members_only.html www.evilarchy.com/bios/order-friars-st-francis-
wycombe-hellfire-club https://www.aquiziam.com/the-hellfire-club-caves/

IBM and the Holocaust is the stunning story of IBM's strategic alliance with
Nazi Germany -- beginning in 1933 in the first weeks that Hitler came to power
and continuing well into World War II. As the Third Reich embarked upon its
plan of conquest and genocide, IBM and its subsidiaries helped create enabling
technologies, step-by-step, from the identification and cataloging programs of
the 1930s to the selections of the 1940s.

Only after “Jews” were identified -- a massive and complex task that Hitler
wanted done immediately -- could they be targeted for efficient asset
confiscation, ghettoization, deportation, enslaved labor, and, ultimately,
annihilation. It was a cross-tabulation and organizational challenge so
monumental, it called for a computer.
 111

But IBM's Hollerith punch card technology did exist. Aided by the company's
custom-designed and constantly updated Hollerith systems, Hitler was able to
automate his persecution of the Jews. Historians have always been amazed at
the speed and accuracy with which the “Nazis” were able to identify and locate
European “Jewry”. Until now, the pieces of this puzzle have never been fully
assembled. The fact is, IBM technology was used to organize nearly everything
in Germany and then “Nazi” Europe, from the identification of the “Jews” in
censuses, registrations, and ancestral tracing programs to the running of
railroads and organizing of concentration camp slave labor.

IBM and its German subsidiary custom-designed complex solutions, one by

one, anticipating the Reich's needs. They did not merely sell the machines and
walk away. Instead, IBM leased these machines for high fees and became the
sole source of the billions of punch cards Hitler needed.

IBM and the Holocaust -- takes you through the carefully crafted corporate
collusion with the Third Reich, as well as the structured deniability of oral
agreements, undated letters, and the Geneva intermediaries -- all undertaken as
the newspapers blazed with accounts of persecution and destruction.
Just as compelling is the human drama of one of our century's greatest minds,
IBM founder Thomas Watson, who cooperated with the Nazis for the sake of
profit.

Only with IBM's technologic assistance was Hitler able to achieve the
staggering numbers of the Holocaust. Edwin Black has now uncovered one of
the last great mysteries of Germany's war against the “Jews” -- how did Hitler
get the names?

Malthus, the World Bank and population control

It should be conceded that the history of population control in the annals of

history is very old, and very pagan. Henry Kissinger´s National Security
Study Memorandum 200 on Implications of Worldwide population growth on
the US interests is a plagiarised version of Thomas Malthus´own plagiarism of
Giammaria Ortes. During the recent 2,000 years of European history, the first
“Malthusian” law similar to what is proposed for the U.N. 1994 Cairo
Population Conference, was the “socialist” decrees of the Roman Emperor
Diocletian. Since the beginning of modern European history cerca 1439, the
center of population-control policies has consistently been Venice.
 112

Thomas Malthus´ famous 1798 On Population, was nothing more than a

plagiarised version of Giammaria Ortes’ 1790 publication, Riflessioni sulla
popolazione delle nazioni.

A key character in the whole population equation is a Venetian monk

Giammaria Ortes (1713-1790), unknown to most, but quite an evil character.
Reference to him in the Camaldolensian monastery of Murano, to the nort-east
of Venice, where he enetered as a novice in 1727. There is a further reference to
him as a “brilliant economist” in Karl Marx´s Capital, Vol. I, chap. XXV, sec.
4; However, he will be remembered, amongst other things, as the intellectual
author of the 1790 Riflessioni upon which the genocidal 1994 U.N. Cairo
Population Conference draft is based.

Malthusianism was imported into Britain from 16th century Venice, in the
form of the 1606 English translation of Venetian Giovanni Botero’s “Delle
cause della grandezza e magnificenze della città.” (1588).

Incidentally, Malthusianism is a theory in demography regarding population

growth developed during the industrial revolution on the basis of the writings of
Thomas Malthus. According to this theory, population expands faster than food
supplies.

Botero (1544-1617) was a Venetian agent closely tied to Paolo Sarpi, today´s
David Rockefeller and the man most likely behind the assassination of a
brilliant English playwrite, Christopher Marlowe. At the National Library of
Florence, there is a 1590 letter written by Sarpi instructing his henchmen to get
rid of Marlowe. Marlowe was murdered in 1593. The significance of Botero in
introducing Malthusianism into 17th Century England is emphasized in Joseph
A. Schumpete´s -- A History of Economic Analysis.

Schumpete wrote that Botero’s population policy was adopted by William

Petty, in his 1682 Essay Concerning the Multiplication of Mankind. He is the
Venice-linked grandfather of Jeremy Bentham’s [first head of the British
foreign intelligence service] and Thomas Malthus’ Shelburne.

Why was Ortes´role so significant for the annals of history? Because his role in
modern Malthusianism [ie. Human genocide] came about as a continuation of
the war against Leibniz and Classical culture he represented , by Venetian
Abbot Paolo Conti. Think of Conti as James Bond´s nemesis “Goldfinger.”
 113

Has anyone wondered why such a disproportionate number of homosexual

monks and nuns throughout history have come from Venice? Because Venetian
nobility practiced what they preached. In the last 200 years of Venice’s political
independence, the oligarchy imposed increasingly strict celibacy upon a
growing majority of its people. By the late 17th Century, a typical Venetian
oligarch travelling abroad, practiced more or less perpetual abeyance —like
Ortes. This lifestyle caused a proliferation of homosexuality among both male
and female members of the Venetian oligarchy. If we are to take this logic one
step further and super impose it on the XXI century world of depleted natural
resources, the following assertions can be concluded. If the majority of people
[who die] were African and thus unskilled and resources were not taken from
savings to fund provision of care, then in pure economic terms the survivors
could be better off and per capita income could rise!

Covert aspects of the Family Planning, specifically if harsh economic reality is

forcing the hand of Western nations is to forcibly reduce African population.
This then tantamount to ‘indirect population reduction’ or, more precisely,
genocide.

Socialism, Fascism, Social Darwinism

The current war on capitalism is nothing new. Its origins lie in the European
Enlightenment before there was a United States of America. Enlightenment
ideals informed the Founders and, to a great extent, shaped the nation’s
beginnings. The struggle between those ideals and the practical reality of free
men in a rough and tumble land have shaped the nation’s history. The Founder’s
fingerprints were all over the Federalist period but, what has become of the
capitalism – forged in reality and hardened in blood and sweat – that they
designed with those hands? It is in peril from the PLDC – the political
decendents of Enlightenment idealists.
“Fast forward to the 21st Century. What if the federal stimulus program were
designed to facilitate the wealth transferal, not to the downtrodden but to
modern, exploitive, morally bankrupt corporate interests? Given the ideological
pedigree of several of the significant parties involved, establishing the motive
for such a radical agenda is not so difficult.

Novus Ordo Seclorum. This phrase, translated from the Latin as “new world
order”, was also invoked by the adherents of the so-called “Promethean faith”.
These adherents, who endeavored to create a “new reality,” included “early
romantics, the young Marx and the Russians of Lenin’s time”.
 114

“The new reality these socialist revolutionaries sought was radically secular and
stridently simple. The ideal was not the balanced complexity of the new
American federation, but the occult simplicity of its great seal: an all-seeing eye
atop a pyramid over the words Novus Ordo Seclorum.
In search of primal, natural truths, revolutionaries looked back to pre-Christian
antiquity – adopting pagan names like “Anaxagoras” Chaumette and
“Anacharsis” Cloots, idealizing above all the semi-mythic ? Pythagoras as the
model intellect-turned-revolutionary and the Pythagorean belief in prime
numbers, geometric forms, and the higher harmonies of music.

To understand this “radically secular and stridently simple” reality sought by

the early socialist revolutionaries, one must first understand the “Promethean
faith” that underpinned their crusade. The Promethean faith held that science
was the new lantern of salvation that would “lead men out of darkness into
light”. Such a religious conviction constituted a form of secular Gnosticism, as
is evidenced by its parallels with traditional Gnosticism’s doctrine of self-
salvation.

Moreover, it also constituted vintage scientism, the belief that science should
be universally imposed upon all fields of inquiry. For the socialist
revolutionaries, the universal imposition of science included the realm of
governance. Hence, the emergence of scientific totalitarianism, exemplified by
Marx’s “scientific socialism.”

In the scientifically regimented state, the citizen becomes little more than an
amalgam of behavioral repertoires, whose every thought, feeling, and idea is the
product of external stimuli. From the scientific vantage point, the populace’s
motivations can be calculated and systematized, thereby allowing those few
self-identified conditioners who are accountable to no moral master to develop
economic and technological stimuli that can produce the desired patterns of
mass behavior. Hence, the PLDC!

Such a societal model is known as a Technocracy, which Frank Fischer defines

as follows: “Technocracy, in classical political terms, refers to a system of
governance in which technically trained experts rule by virtue of their
specialized knowledge and position in dominant political and economic
institutions”. According to Fischer, the Marxist concept of a planned economy
has been strongly influenced by technocratic theory.

And where would these new American elites practice their social-science
alchemy? In the academy, of course. Especially in the elite, private, eastern,
ivy-covered universities – where Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt and a
large percentage of their principal advisors all matriculated and learned at the
 115

feet of the masters – and still do. [And, how could today’s students not become
inculcated into this scientific philosophy of mass behavior controlled by big
government with almost a 30:1 ratio of liberal to conservative faculty members
in these institutions. That’s right. Thirty to one!]

“In practice, the technocratic concept of the administrative state has been most
influential in the socialist world of planned economies. Given their emphasis on
comprehensive economic and social planning, the technocratic theory is ready-
made both to guide and to legitimate the centralized bureaucratic decision-
making systems that direct most socialist regimes. Easily aligned with the ideas
and techniques of scientific planning, particularly those shaped by Marxist
economists, technocratic concepts have played an important role in the
evolution of socialist theory and practice.

Thus, one could reasonably argue that the economic ideas of Marxist
theoreticians have been heavily informed by the technocratic paradigm. In
particular, a variation of the technocratically-inspired Marxist planned economy
became entrenched in the United States during the 1930s under Franklin
Roosevelt. [One could even say] that semiotic (the study of signs and symbols)
indications of this entrenchment are discernible with the placement of the Great
Seal on the one-dollar bill in 1935.

Such a socio-political Utopian vision was popularized and codified as

revolutionary doctrine during the 18th Century Enlightenment. Several secret
societies, chiefly Freemasonry, provided the incubators for this socio-political
Utopian vision. Reiterating this contention, atheist scholar Conrad Goeringer
states:
“Secret societies and salons, lodges of the Freemasons and private reading clubs
would become the focal points for the seditious and “impious” activists of the
Enlightenment. Masonry required that novitiates pass through a series of
degrees, accompanied by symbolic ritual, whereupon the secrets of the craft
were gradually unfolded; the metaphors of masonry, the remaking of humanity
as early masons had remade rough stone, soon served as a revolutionary
allegory.”

This became the new model of revolutionary organization — lodges of brothers,

all seeking to reconstruct within their own circle an “inner light” to radiate forth
wisdom into the world, to “illuminate” the sagacity of the Enlightenment. So
pervasive and appealing was this notion that even relatively conservative and
respected members of society could entertain the prospect of a new Utopia, “or
at least a social alternative to the ancient regime….”
 116

Many of the [American] Founders were Freemasons, which motivated them to

attempt to design a utopia in the newly freed United States.

After the Enlightenment reached its nadir with the bloody French Revolution,
Masonic political activism seemed to decline and most lodges became relatively
benign organizations. However, Dostoevsky’s “fire in the minds of men” still
pervaded some strains of Freemasonry, as is evidenced by more subversive
enclaves like the P2 Lodge in Italy. The Knights of the Golden Circle, which
played a significant role in agitating the Civil War, could be another case in
point.

Some vestiges of the revolutionary faith are also discernible with the addition of
the Great Seal to the dollar by 32nd degree Freemason Henry Wallace –
Franklin Roosevelt’s Vice-President in his third term . Researcher Michael
Howard articulates the rationale underpinning Wallace’s introduction of the
Great Seal:

“Wallace’s reasons for wanting to introduce the Great Seal onto the American
currency were based on his belief that America was reaching a turning point in
her history and that great spiritual changes were imminent. He believed that the
1930s represented a time when a great spiritual awakening was going to take
place which would precede the creation of the one-world state.”

Step one would be for the United States to become more like Europe.

Again, the concept of a Technocracy originated with the socio-political

Utopians of the Enlightenment, which, in turn, spawned all modern socialist
revolutionary movements.
On yet another front, “Adrian Desmond and James Moore reveal that Darwin’s
notions of progressive biological development cannot be so easily separated
from social Darwinism:

“Social Darwinism is often taken to be something extraneous, an ugly

concretion added to the pure Darwinian corpus after the event, tarnishing
Darwin’s image. But his notebooks make plain that , competition, free trade,
imperialism, racial extermination and sexual inequality were written into the
equation from the start – ‘Darwinism’ was always intended to explain human
society.”
Thus, Darwin’s theory of evolution was not formulated in a vacuum. As is
evidenced by the contents of his notebooks, Darwin already harbored a pre-
existing Weltanschauung (German for “world view”) that he was attempting to
scientifically dignify. This Weltanschauung embraced savage, unregulated
 117

competition and free trade, which are two pillars of modern monopolistic
capitalism.
The contention that Darwin’s theory of progressive biological development was
based entirely on unbiased observations is flatly bogus. Evolutionary theory
was merely Darwin’s biological rationale for “competition, free trade,
imperialism, racial extermination, and sexual inequality.”

Of equal interest are those parties that seem to have shaped

Darwin’s Weltanschauung. One of Darwin’s frequent dinner guests was
Harriet Martineau, a sociologist and Comtean (the philosophy of August
Comte – positivism – Comte developed the positive philosophy in an attempt to
remedy the social malaise of the French Revolution, calling for a new social
doctrine based on the sciences). Her Poor Laws and Paupers Illustrated was
recommended to Darwin by his sisters.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harriet_Martineau PERFECT BRITISH AGENT
http://martineausociety.co.uk/the-martineaus/harriet-martineau/

Martineau characterized the poor as the “gangrene of the state” and endorsed
the genocidal Poor Law Amendment! Secret commission reports concerning
this unpopular law were made available to Martineau by Lord Chancellor Henry
Brougham. Poor Laws and Paupers Illustrated also did “… more to pave the
way for the new Poor Law than all of the government propaganda”.
Martineau was a “darling of the Whigs,” a political party that promoted the Poor
Law Amendment Bill. Martineau reiterated the Whigs’ platform, contending
that the reforms being proffered by the bill would encourage self-sufficiency
among the poor. This contention was patently bogus. Thus, one could
convincingly argue that Martineau was merely the whore for corporate interests
while dressed in Progressive clothes.

That Martineau’s corporate apologia influenced Darwin is highly likely. Her

work drew the attention of Freemason Erasmus Darwin, Charles’ grandfather.
Writing to Darwin during his Beagle voyage, his sisters revealed that: “Erasmus
knows her [Martineau] & is a great admirer & everybody reads her little books
& if you have a dull hour you can, and then throw them overboard, that they
may not take up your precious room”. Erasmus Darwin would develop “every
important idea that has since appeared in evolutionary theory”.

Moreover, Martineau subscribed to Malthus’ concept of carrying capacity, a

myth that was central to Darwinian evolution. Astride Martineau’s “edifying
homilies,” Malthus’ theoretical eschatology (the study of “end-things”) enjoyed
widespread exposure. Martineau’s proselytizing was very effective. One pundit
insisted that credence to Malthus’ demographic prognostications promised to do
 118

“more for the country (France) than all the Administrations since the
Revolution”.

In fact, Darwinism and Malthusianism are still actively promulgated within

orthodox academia because of the political and social capital that they afford for
an elite few.

L. Fletcher Prouty elaborates: “We’re still operating under the principles of

Haileybury College — Malthus and Darwin — even though both of them are
ridiculous. It’s been proved today that our ability to produce food is 70 times
greater per farmer than it was in the time of Malthus. It’s been proved
that Darwin never did discover the origin of the species — no scientist has ever
described the origin of any species. But those two doctrines were implanted by
the East India Company’s mind-control techniques so thoroughly that we
still believe them.”

“The logical bankruptcy of Malthusianism and Darwinism has never dissuaded

the ruling class from vigorously promoting these two doctrines.
Malthus’ Essay overlooked the role of human innovation in the enhancement of
subsistence production methods. Still, Malthus concluded that society should
adopt certain social policies to prevent the human population from growing
disproportionately larger than the food supply.

Of course, these social policies were anything but humane. They stipulated the
stultification of industrial and technological development in poor communities.
With the inevitable depreciation of vital infrastructure, society’s “dysgenics”
(dysfunctionals) would eventually be purged by the elements. According to
Malthus, such sacrifice guaranteed a healthy society. Of course, the only parties
that would profit from such a societal configuration were those who occupy the
highest layers of socioeconomic strata [like the PLDC].

Likewise, Darwinism’s logical insolvency betrays the theory’s true function as a

mechanism for social control. Darwinism has never demonstrated one instance
of speciation. Moreover, the theory’s preoccupation with survival as the sole
purpose of existence cannot account for human spitituality. However,
Darwinism provided the pseudo-scientific rationale for genocide and
oppression. These are two practices that elitists have refined and turned
into virtual “arts.”

As the elite’s traditional theocratic power structures were gradually

transmogrified into technocratic power structures, the oligarchs changed as
well. No longer were they simply nobles whose “divine right to rule” was
legitimized by the dominant ecclesiastical authorities. Now, they were
 119

Transnationalists and Internationalists whose primacy was dignified by the

infallible principles of “Science.”

Technocracy became the new theocracy .

Together, the Transnationalists and Internationalists have advanced the cause of

globalism, which Malachi Martin characterizes as “socio-political Darwinism”:
“The thing that seems to bind these two groups [Transnationalists and
Internationalists] most closely in practical terms is that at heart, and
philosophically speaking, both are socio-political Darwinists.”

In this view, the most useful of Darwin’s concepts is that of human existence as
essentially a struggle in which the weakest perish, the fittest survive and the
strongest flourish.

When applied to socio-political arrangements, this Darwinist process seems

almost to dictate the Internationalist and Transnationalist one-world view of
things. According to noted historian Richard Hofstadter: “Sociopolitical
Darwinians of both the Transnationalist and Internationalist ilk make the same
sort of ‘speculative extrapolation’ that Herbert Spencer [English philosopher,
biologist, anthropologist, sociologist, and prominent classical liberal political
theorist of the Victorian era] made, extending the concept of evolution to ‘…
such sociopolitical arrangements as corporations and nations.’

In fact, Spencer was warmly received by many [American] monopolistic

capitalists, who were the precursors to the Transnationalists of today. For
instance, Andrew Carnegie welcomed Spencer to a banquet in America in 1882.
While there, Spencer openly expressed his affinity for the monopolist:

“However imperfect the appreciation of the guests for the niceties of Spencer’s
thought, the banquet showed how popular he had become in the United States.
When Spencer was on the dock, waiting for the ship to carry him back to
England, he seized the hands of Carnegie and Youmans. “Here,” he cried to
the reporters, “are my two best American friends.” For Spencer, it was a rare
gesture of personal warmth; but more than this, it symbolized the harmony of
the new science [Social Darwinism] with the outlook of a business civilization.”

In fact, Darwinian vernacular came to comprise Carnegie’s personal lexicon:

“Not only in his published articles and books but also in his personal letters to
business contemporaries, Carnegie makes frequent and easy allusions to the
Social Darwinist credo. Phrases like “survival of the fittest,” “race
improvement,” and “struggle for existence” came easily from his pen and
presumably from his lips. He did see business as a great competitive struggle.”
 120

The same held true for John D. Rockefeller, who maintained that: “…growth of
a large business is merely a survival of the fittest … the working out of a law of
nature…” Ironically, Rockefeller also declared: “Competition is a sin.”
Evidently, Rockefeller accepted the Darwinian concept of “survival of the
fittest” insofar as it could legitimize his own hegemony in business. Thus,
Rockefeller financed the rise of communism, which eradicated even legitimate
competition under the pretext of egalitarianism. Eustace Mullins, in his The
Rockefeller Syndicate, explains the rationale underpinning Rockefeller’s support
of communism:

“Although Communism, like other `isms,’ had originated with Marx’s

association with the House of Rothschild, it enlisted the reverent support of
John D. Rockefeller because he saw Communism for what it is, the ultimate
monopoly, not only controlling the government, the monetary system and all
property, but also a monopoly which, like the corporations it emulates, is self-
perpetuating and eternal. It was the logical progression from his Standard Oil
monopoly.”

Ultimately, both communism and fascism share a core dialectical commonality:

evolutionary theory. Ian Taylor explains:

“However, Fascism or Marxism, right wing or left – all these are only
ideological roads that lead to Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, while the
foundation for each of these roads is Darwin’s theory of evolution. Fascism is
aligned with biological determinism and tends to emphasize the unequal
struggle by which those inherently fittest [through evolutionary struggle shall
rule. Marxism stresses social progress by stages of revolution, while at the same
time it paradoxically emphasizes peace and equality. There should be no
illusions; Hitler borrowed from Marx. The result is that both Fascism and
Marxism finish at the same destiny – totalitarian rule by the elite.”

“While they were consistently characterized as “anticommunists” and “pro-

Americans,” the neoconservatives supported the idea of the New Deal. Irving
Kristol, the “godfather of neo-conservatism,” states in his book Neo-
conservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea, that neocons: “…accepted the
New Deal in principle…” Later in his book, Kristol writes: “In a way, the
symbol of the influence of neo-conservative thinking on the Republican Party
was the fact that Ronald Reagan could praise Franklin D. Roosevelt as a great
American president –- praise echoed by Newt Gingrich a dozen years later,
when it is no longer so surprising.”

It is interesting to note that “godfather” Kristol was a Trotskyist in his youth.

Kristol makes it clear that he is unrepentant: “I regard myself lucky to have
 121

been a young Trotskyist and I have not a single bitter memory”. The statist
tradition of FDR’s Marxism was also carried on by the neocons, as is evidenced
by Kristol’s own words: “Neocons do not feel that kind of alarm or anxiety
about the growth of the state in the past century, seeing it as natural, indeed
inevitable”, from Kristol’s “The Neo-Conservative Persuasion”.

According to Anisa Abd el Fattah, this doctrine is distinctly Darwinian in

character:

“The idea of preventive wars, which we now call preemptive strikes, became
popular during the rise of Social Darwinism and Eugenics, and led to the mass
killings of those deemed weak, handicapped, poor and of inferior races
throughout Asia, Europe, and the European colonies in Africa. The idea of
perpetual war and disaster as a means by which to accelerate the evolution of
the human species was also popular during that era, as it is now.”

http://freemasonry-devil.blogspot.in
http://freemasonry-devil.blogspot.in/2015/04/freemasonry-devil-disguised-as-
angle-of.html
http://slideplayer.com/slide/3464773/

NWO Eugenics And Population Control Pushed On All Fronts

Malcolm Potts is a Malthusian figure with deep roots in the history of eugenics.
He’s not hiding in the shadows, but in the open as a professor at one of the most
prestigious academic institutions in America, one that has been espousing
eugenic philosophy for almost a century: University of California, Berkeley.
In 1924, another eugenicist was a professor at UC Berkeley: Samuel Jackson
Holmes, who published a 1924 paper titled “A bibliography of eugenics,” at
Berkeley, in 1937 he writing, “The Negros’ Struggle For Survival.”

Malcolm Potts has been a rabid advocate of population reduction for almost 50
years, and was the first physician to promote the main modern method of
abortion today, uterine manual vacuum aspiration, and in 1968 became the
first Medical Director of the International Planned Parenthood Federation, not
many years after Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was openly
calling for the extermination of black people.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcolm_Potts

In 1966, Potts wrote articles in the Eugenics Review, one of the original racist,
eugenic scientific journals that came from the Galton Institute itself, formerly
 122

known as the British Eugenics Society, whose namesake, Francis Galton,

coined the term “eugenics.”

To this day, he teaches classes at Berkeley about how badly the population
needs to be culled, under the guise of “family planning” and other benign, less-
descriptive phrases.

He spreads fear about overpopulation, never focusing on the underlying

problem of wealth disparity and hegemony, but claiming the innocent men born
at the bottom of the bottom class are a threat because they are inherently going
to become terrorists.

Overpopulation Lie Debunked: US Farmland Alone Can Feed the Whole

World

The term “Malthusian” refers to the philosophy of Thomas Malthus, a “chicken

little” of overpopulation fear mongering who openly advocated for spreading
disease to kill the poor. Malthus famously encouraged giving disease, famine,
and increased mortality rates to the poor, in “An Essay on the Principle of
Population, 1826”:

“Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage

contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more
people into the houses, and court the return of the plague.
In the country, we should build our villages near stagnant pools, and particularly
encourage settlements in all marshy and unwholesome situations.*12
But above all, we should reprobate specific remedies for ravaging diseases; and
those benevolent, but much mistaken men, who have thought they were doing a
service to mankind by projecting schemes for the total extirpation of particular
disorders.
If by these and similar means the annual mortality were increased from 1 in 36
or 40, to 1 in 18 or 20, we might probably every one of us marry at the age of
puberty, and yet few be absolutely starved.”

He is affectionately portrayed at Berkeley, and his cries of “overpopulation”

live on today in the work of Malcolm Potts and his ilk.
Today, figures such as Malcolm Potts carry Thomas Malthus’ legacy, and the
legacy of the British family who originated eugenics: the Darwin-Galton-
Wedgewood-Huxley family.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLTS5cv45Cs
 123

A 2013 paper co-authored by Malcolm Potts plots how to “reduce fertility” in

poor populations, encouraging abortions and whatever means necessary to
reduce family size, reduce fertility, and reduce population.
Read close and make no mistake, this is not speaking in favor of birth control: it
is about reducing fertility. It references Darwinian eugenics ideas right off the
bat, like this affectionate publication about Thomas Malthus also from UC
Berkeley.

Advocating not for freedom, it is titled: “The impact of freedom on fertility

decline.” Reading from that paper:
“All societies use a combination of contraception and abortion to limit family
size. In 1975, Tietze and Bongaarts observed that “levels of fertility required for
population stabilization cannot be easily obtained without induced abortion”.

Conversely, we cannot find a country with replacement level fertility that does
not have access to safe abortion, either de jure, as in much of Europe, or de
facto as in the Republic of Ireland where women go to England to obtain safe
abortions.

When safe abortion is accessible in a country, the total fertility rate (TFR) is
likely to be one child lower than if abortion is not accessible.

Forty-five years ago demographer Kingsley Davis observed: “Induced abortion

… is one of the surest means of controlling reproduction, and one that has been
proved capable of reducing birth rates rapidly…
Yet this method is rejected by nearly all national and international…
programmes”.Today, in spite of powerful evidence of the safety of misoprostol
for medical abortion, especially in low-resource settings, this tablet has not been
approved for use by women at home for this purpose.”
“We contend that wherever women have access to a range of contraceptive
methods with correct information and backed up by safe abortion, fertility will
fall. This is the basis of our ‘opportunity model’.

“Conversely, as long as the international community fails to focus on family

planning, the barriers to family planning are allowed to stay in place, and the
shortfall in money and commodities persists, there will be further stalls in
fertility decline (or an actual rise in family size), particularly among the poorest
economic quintiles in low-income countries.”

Malcolm Potts has a feverish obsession with reducing the world’s population of
poor people, working veraciously for almost half a century to do so with a
tenacity only perhaps rivaling Margaret Sanger herself.
 124

He claims men born into impoverished areas (citing Gaza) are inherently a
threat to world stability, essentially saying they are bound to become terrorists,
so they should never have been born.

Reading from an article titled: “U.C. Berkeley’s Malcolm Potts’ Ugly New
Eugenics Blames Dark-Skinned Teenagers for War and Terrorism”:

“The Bixby Center for Population, Health, and Sustainability at the University
of California, Berkeley, features webpages stuffed with noble principles
affirming women’s right to family planning access, global population stability,
universal justice, and environmental sustainability.

“Unfortunately, Bixby’s chair, obstetrician and reproductive scientist Malcolm

Potts,’ chief tactic to advance these liberal goals is with ugly appeals to 19th
century racism and emotional fears toward young, poor people.

In its May-June cover story, Miller-McCune — a new magazine that boasts of

“smart journalism” that “draws on academic research and other definitive
sources to provide reasoned policy options and solutions for today’s pressing
issues” but then delivers the same old anti-youth prejudices long moldering in
mainstream media — Potts and Stanford University Earth Sciences lecturer
Thomas Hayden push the absurdly bigoted notion that “young men are the true
engines of war.”

Tossing out the usual half-baked bio-cliches on “testosterone” and “aggression,”

they argue that “careful statistical studies show that the probability of violent
conflict increases as the ratio of young men in a society rises above that of older
men.”
(Yes, and statistically, the limited notions of “conflict” Potts and Hayden single
out also increase along with the proportion of dark-skinned and poor people of
all ages.)
Therefore, they argue, any excess of young men in a society must be the major
cause of war, violence, and terrorism.”

While they wail about overpopulation as the main threat to the future of our
planet, they purposefully ignore those responsible for creating war and
poverty in the first place: the wealthiest on this planet.

Overpopulation fear-mongerers often belong to the privileged, wealthy class of

people, some of which are the very people starting wars of aggression in the
Middle East, who fund the terrorists they claim are being created by
overpopulation.
 125

They aren’t suggesting their class of people be culled: only the poor. The forces
who keep people in a state of poverty are ignored, and instead the victims are
identified as the causes of poverty and suffering, by Malthusian academics
hungry for the extermination of poor people.

The truth is, the Earth can support many more human beings, if the land and
resources were not hoarded by a very small number of extremely wealthy
individuals.
It would also help if the wealthy would cease to influence the poisoning of our
land with pesticides and toxic chemicals.

These people hungering for reduced population are not hidden, but operating in
plain sight in the most prestigious academic institutions in the West, just as they
did a century ago when the Ivy League institutions pioneered eugenics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pn9285nQXco

https://www.youtube.com/watch?list=PLN6xa7kD9dZ-
WZbGsH0s18UwsjhSKVbY9&v=sq3WlRxfWC0

WHO IN THE WORLD WAS “ALBERT PIKE” ? WHO WAS HELENA BLAVATSKY?

Albert Pike was a 33rd Degree Freemason! He was very high up in what most
people would call the “Illuminati Structure”…, and he wrote a book called:

MORALS AND DOGMA OF THE ANCIENT AND ACCEPTED SCOTTISH RITE OF

FREEMASONRY.

Here is a short bio:

 He was an advocate of Slavery

 Wanted Southern Succession
 Fought in the Civil War as a Confederate

Pike first joined the Independent Order of Odd Fellows in 1840, and he had then
joined a Masonic Lodge, where he became extremely active in the affairs of the
organization, being elected Sovereign Grand Commander of the Scottish Rite‘s
Southern Jurisdiction in 1859. He remained Sovereign Grand Commander for
the remainder of his life (a total of thirty-two years), devoting a large amount of
his time to developing the rituals of the order. Notably, he published a book
 126

called Morals and Dogma of the Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of
Freemasonry in 1871, of which there were several subsequent editions.

Albert Pike believed deeply in SECRECY…, as did another very prominent

FREEMASON who lived at the same time Pike did…, only on the other side of
the world in Russia! This lady went by the name of Helena Petrovna
Blavatsky…, and is a woman who has been “credited” with starting the NEW
AGE MOVEMENT! She wrote a book entitled: THE SECRET DOCTRINE.

Both Pike and Blavatsky (being high level Freemasons) wrote extensively in
their books about LUCIFER or SATAN…, being the “GOD” of this world.Both Pike
and Blavatsky seemed to share a “grand vision” of bringing LUCIFER out into
the common experience of the every man as the GOD OF THIS PLANET!

Like almost ALL Illuminati members who went before him, Albert Pike believed
deeply in the total “IGNORANCE” of the common man…, saying that
they DESERVED to be lied to!

The “connection” between Albert Pike and Helena Blavatsky goes far deeper
than one might think considering that Pike was born in the United States…, and
Blavatsky was born in Russia!

Blavatksy started an organization called: The Theosophical Society, which

became quite well known in Europe. However…, the links between the
Theosophical Society and Pike become apparent when their logo’s are
compared.

You can see that Blavatky’s new Logo still has a Swastika inside of it right at
the top. The original logo of the Theosophical Society, which actually had the
Swastika inside of it right at the top as well. Both logo’s still have the
“Serpent” swallowing it’s tail however.

Helena Blavatsky was a Freemason…, and that she (and her fellow Freemasons)
started the NEW AGE!

Original Name for the Scottish Rite (Freemasonic Magazine) was in fact: THE
NEW AGE MAGAZINE!
 127

Beyond the solid connection between FREEMASONRY and THE NEW AGE, there is a
second connection that most people are not aware of! That is the connection
of Freemasonry to Satanism…, and Freemasonry to Wicca! This connection
becomes apparent when we realize that Aleister Crowley (a known Satanist was
also a high level Freemason!

Most “Wiccan’s” claim that their mystery religion is based in WHITE

MAGIC…, and has nothing to do with Satanism! However…, why then was it
started by a Freemason (Gerald B. Gardner) who had such intimate connections
to Aleister Crowley, and was ALSO a member of the Satanic O.T.O. like
Crowley was ??
SSSEEE https://lovetruthsite.wordpress.com/2016/11/11/who-in-the-world-
was-albert-pike-who-was-helena-blavatsky/

OTHER PARTS ?? https://lovetruthsite.wordpress.com/2016/12/03/how-deep-

does-the-rabbit-hole-go-you-havent-seen-anything-yet-part-five/

https://lovetruthsite.wordpress.com/2016/12/12/the-entire-series-so-far-from-
start-to-present-please-share-links/

https://jcemmanuel.wordpress.com/2013/10/21/yes-lucifer-is-god-apotheosis-
of-george-washingtonlucifer-made-as-a-rule-of-law-in-1865-the-third-world-
war-must-be-fomented-by-taking-advantage-of-the-differences-caused-by-the-
agentur-of/

http://www.libertyforlife.com/military-war/janus_god_of_war.html
“The Secular Humanist tradition is a tradition of defiance, a tradition that dates
back to ancient Greece. One can see, even in Greek mythology, Humanist
themes that are rarely, if ever, manifested in the mythologies of other cultures.
And they certainly have not been repeated by modern religions. The best
example here is the character Prometheus.
“Prometheus stands out because he was idolized by ancient Greeks as the one
who defied Zeus. He stole the fire of the gods and brought it down to earth. For
this he was punished. And yet he continued his defiance amid his tortures. This
is the root of the Humanist challenge to authority…

ZEUS = GOD ------- PROMETHEUS = ANTI GOD = SATAN

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/christianity/28820-zeus-theus.html
https://www.wordsandphrasesfromthepast.com/blog/prome
https://www.behindthename.com/name/prometheus
 128

ZEUS-THEUS-DEUS-DIO-DIOS

http://www.skepticfiles.org/human/humanism.htm

Much of Human progress has been in defiance of religion or of the apparent

natural order. When we deflect lightening or evacuate a town before a tornado
strikes, we lessen the effects of so called ‘acts of God.’
They believe that we humans only have one life to live and that each person
should be free to live it as he or she chooses. They are advocates of
contemporary sexual values determined by humans themselves and support all
modern ideas of humans rights including the right for a woman to have an
abortion if she so chooses.
Secular humanists are proud of their advocacy for a secular state and
wholeheartedly fight for the separation of church and state. They are proud of
the “progress” they have brought .

While modern humanists point to Prometheus in Greek mythology as a hero in

defiance of Zeus, the real origin of humans defying God and thinking for
themselves goes back to Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. Here Satan,
represented by a snake, invited Eve to think for herself about whether to eat the
fruit God had forbidden.

Satan presented the underlying philosophy of self-determination to Eve as

higher-level thinking—something positive and good for her to do. Satan invited
Eve to cast away God’s rules and to think for herself.

The sales pitch for modern humanism is that this philosophy is the one for
educated people who care about other human beings and who want to make this
world a better place to live. Notice the following quotes from modern
humanists:

“Humanists recognize that it is only when people feel free to think for
themselves, using reason as their guide, that they are best capable of developing
values that succeed in satisfying human needs and serving human interests”—
Isaac Asimov FREEMASON, author and past president of the American
Humanist Association.

“When we speak of equality, of women and men, of Blacks and Whites, of all
the world’s people, we are talking about humanism”— Gloria Steinem CIA
AGENT , founder of Ms. magazine, Humanist Pioneer awardee.
 129

“Humanism, in all its simplicity, is the only genuine spirituality”— Albert

Schweitzer FREEMASON, accepting the Nobel Peace Prize.

“Humanism is a philosophy of joyous service for the greater good of all

humanity, of application of new ideas of scientific progress for the benefit of
all”— Linus Pauling FREEMASON, scientist, Humanist of the Year in 1961,
Nobel Prize in chemistry in 1954, Nobel Peace Prize in 1962
(www.americanhumanist.org/humanism/famous.html).

syncretism—a belief system that blindly combines beliefs from many different
faith perspectives .

“Surveys on religious belief in Britain have found 30-40% (and 65% of young
people) declaring themselves atheists or agnostics. A Home Office survey
(2004) found almost 22% of no faith, and that religion played little part in the
lives of most of those calling themselves Christians. Many people, even if they
do not call themselves humanists, live their lives by the [humanist] principles
outlined above, and many thousands use the services of the British Humanist
Association every year; organised Humanism is the tip of a very large iceberg”

CULT OF INFORMATION / EXPERT / GENIUS

Roszak, Theodore. The Cult of Information: The Folklore of Computers and the
True Art of Thinking. www.shkaminski.com/Classes/Readings/Roszak10.htm
On the night of November 20, 1619, Rene Descartes, then an aspiring
philosopher still in his early twenties, had a series of three dreams which
changed the course of his life and of modern thought. He reports that in his
sleep, the Angel of Truth appeared to him and, in a blinding revelation like a
flash of lightning, revealed a secret which would “lay the foundations of a new
method of understanding and a new and marvelous science.” In the light of what
the angel had told him, Descartes fervently set to work on an ambitious treatise
called “Rules for the Direction of the Mind.” The objective of his “new and
marvelous science” was nothing less than to describe how the mind works. For
Descartes, who was to invent analytical geometry, there was no question but
that the model for this task was to be found in mathematics. There would be
axioms (“clear and distinct ideas” that none could doubt) and, connecting the
axioms in logical progressions, a finite number of simple, utterly sensible rules
that were equally self-evident. The result would be an expanding body of
knowledge.

Descartes never finished his treatise; the project was abandoned after the
eighteenth rule—perhaps because it proved more difficult than he had
 130

anticipated. He did, however, eventually do justice to the angel’s inspiration in

the famous Discourse on Method, which is often taken to be the founding
document of modern philosophy. Descartes’ project was the first of many
similar attempts in the modern world to codify the laws of thought; almost all of
them follow his lead in using mathematics as their model. In our day, the fields
of artificial intelligence and cognitive science can be seen as part of this
tradition, but now united with technology and centering upon a physical
mechanism—the computer—which supposedly embodies these laws.

At the same time that Descartes was drafting his rules of thought, the English
philosopher Francis Bacon was also in search of a radical new method of
understanding. Bacon, who was a mathematical illiterate, preferred to stress the
importance of observation and the accumulation of facts.
Rationalism is a philosophical movement which gathered momentum during the
Age of Reason of the 17th Century. It is usually associated with the introduction
of mathematical methods into philosophy during this period by the major
rationalist figures, Descartes, Leibniz and Spinoza. The preponderance of
French Rationalists in the 18th Century Age of Enlightenment, including
Voltaire, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Charles de Secondat (Baron de
Montesquieu) (1689 - 1755), is often known as French Rationalism.

Rationalism is any view appealing to intellectual and deductive reason (as

opposed to sensory experience or any religious teachings) as the source of
knowledge or justification. Thus, it holds that some propositions are knowable
by us by intuition alone, while others are knowable by being deduced through
valid arguments from intuited propositions. It relies on the idea that reality has a
rational structure in that all aspects of it can be grasped through mathematical
and logical principles, and not simply through sensory experience.
http://www.philosophybasics.com/movements_rationalism.html

Baruch Spinoza, 17th-century Dutch philosopher and forerunner to the Age of

Enlightenment, is regarded as one of the most influential rationalists of all time.
The philosopher John Cottingham noted how rationalism, a methodology,
became socially conflated with atheism ------- The use of the label 'rationalist' to
characterize a world outlook which has no place for the supernatural is
becoming less popular today; terms like 'humanist' or 'materialist' seem largely
to have taken its place. But the old usage still survives.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalism

The modern age is not the age of the common man; it is the age of the expert.
There are no wise men any more, but only therapists. When all of life is
dissolved into specialized fields, something is wrong.
http://www.undergroundthomist.org/the-cult-of-the-expert
 131

http://thecultofgenius.tumblr.com/post/42840520308/rené-descartes-regarded-
as-the-father-of-modern
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/René_Descartes
http://phrenes.com/2016/10/16/the-digital-cave-narcissism-and-the-cult-of-the-
individual/

POST-MODERNISM AND ITS SECRETS: Religion without Religion

http://www.crosscurrents.org/Crockettwinter2003.htm

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin–Wedgwood_family
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Darwin-Wedgwood-
Galton_family_tree.png
https://fitzinfo.wordpress.com/tag/erasmus-darwin
https://creation.com/darwinism-it-was-all-in-the-family
https://oblongmedia.net/2017/01/29/social-darwinism-and-the-enlightenment/
https://wakeuptothetruthsite.wordpress.com/2017/04/18/club-of-rome-episode-
eight-the-real-illuminati/
http://darwins-god.blogspot.in