New Documentary “Human Zoos” Shows How African People Were Brought to the U.S. and Displayed in Cages as Less Than Human

When one thinks of the concept of "eugenics" most people think back to the atrocities of Nazi Germany and the genocide of ethnic cleansing during the Hitler regime. What most Americans do not realize is that the "scientific" field of study known as "eugenics" originated in the United States, being inspired by Darwinian evolution, and is responsible for terrible social and racial injustices here in the U.S. before Hitler's atrocities that occurred during WWII. And the "scientific" field of eugenics is still alive and well today, even though the term "eugenics" is no longer popular. Part of America's dark eugenics past is the story of how indigenous African people were kidnapped from their villages in the early 1900s and brought to America as "freaks," displayed as "missing links" to Darwin's theory of human evolution, and displayed to the public in cages at Public Fairs and Zoos. The Discovery Institute has produced a new documentary about this dark period of America's past called "Human Zoos." Here is a synopsis: "In September 1906, nearly a quarter of a million people flocked to the Bronx Zoo in New York City. Many came for a startling new exhibit in the Zoo’s Monkey House. But it wasn’t a monkey they came to see. It was a man. His name was Ota Benga. A pygmy from the African Congo, Ota Benga was exhibited in a cage along with monkeys. Benga was not alone. He was one of literally thousands of indigenous peoples who were put on public display throughout America in the early twentieth century. Often touted as “missing links” between man and apes and as examples of the “lower” stages of human evolution, these native peoples were harassed, demeaned, and jeered at. Their public display was arranged with the enthusiastic support of the most elite members of the scientific community, and it was promoted uncritically by America’s leading newspapers. Human Zoos tells the horrifying story of this effort to dehumanize entire classes of people in the name of science."

Darwinism: the Meaninglessness of Life and of Death

In a video on YouTube, University of Chicago evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne states that science has demonstrated that "the universe and life are pointless....Pointless in the sense that there is no externally imposed purpose or point in the universe. As atheists this is something that is manifestly true to us. We make our own meaning and purpose." He went on to say: "Evolution is the greatest killer of belief that has ever happened on this planet because it showed that some of the best evidence for God, which was the design of animals and plants that so wonderfully matched their environment could be the result of this naturalistic, blind materialistic process of natural selection." Coyne is by no means alone in claiming Darwinism, with its insistence that all organisms have arisen through chance events (mutations) without plan or purpose, leads logically to the position that human life has no meaning or purpose. In my book The Death of Humanity: And the Case for Life, I provide many examples of evolutionary biologists and other intellectuals who argue Darwinism sweeps away the benighted notion that human life has meaning.

What Should Politicians Say When Asked About Evolution?

In my talk, I not only gave an answer to the question "What Should Politicians Say When Asked About Evolution?" but I first explained why it is a difficult question for many politicians, especially conservative ones, to answer. There are three main reasons. First, the term "evolution" can mean several different things, ranging from (1) the scientifically uncontroversial idea of "change over time" (think of small-scale variations in the shape and size of Galapagos finch beaks) to (2) the more controversial notion of universal common ancestry (think of Darwin's tree of life) to (3) the increasingly controversial idea that the mechanism of natural selection and random mutation have produced all the forms of life we see today without any guidance or design. The last meaning of "evolution" is what Richard Dawkins calls the "Blind Watchmaker" thesis.

What Can We Responsibly Believe About Human Evolution?

The evolution of consciousness is presently inexplicable: Can we really understand a transition from the excrement-throwing ape to the early cave paintings as a long, slow series?

Arguments Evolutionists Should Not Use

We have a popular article titled, Arguments we think creationists should not use. Indeed, even many misotheistic evolutionists, including Richard Dawkins, have commended the existence of such a page. Well, as the saying goes, ‘What is good for the goose is also good for the gander.’ Here are 21 bad arguments that evolutionists should not use to help further their stance on evolution. Clearly, evolution is about keeping out God, not an open approach to the actual evidence.

Is the Way You Think About God Healthy?

If we want a healthy life today, we must believe and have proper thinking about God so we can know him and have a relationship with him, finding meaning and purpose in our life.

How a Scientific Field Can Collapse: The Case of Psychiatry

Are psychiatrists just giving excuses for irresponsible behavior? Psychiatry lacks scientific footing, and instead evolves according to cultural norms.

If Psychology Isn’t “Science,” Neither is Darwinian Evolution

So, if “Psychology Isn’t Science”…
by Bruce Chapman
Evolution News and Views

Every so often an article appears taking psychologists to task for claiming the purple mantle of “science.” As Alex B. Berezow explains in the Los Angeles Times, in the latest of such articles, the rules of science are strict.

“Psychology isn’t science,” he contends, “because psychology often […]