Posted: Jul 31, 2014 10:51 am
by Thomas Eshuis
Jayjay4547 wrote:
I count it as quite an achievement to have reduced you to this frustrated spluttering.

You really love this pathetic pseudo-psychology shit don't you? :naughty:


Jayjay4547 wrote:There’s always a possibility that some members of the English intellectual elite might come here and whatever they think of my mangled sentences they won’t be impressed by your claim of almost papal authority for science.

Where has he done this.
Oh wait this is yet more thinly veiled ad-hominem trash.


Jayjay4547 wrote:The bias that I claim so see in the established human origin narrative is no more radical than they have been educated to accept in the respected discipline of History.

1. It's history not History.
2. There is no bias in how the origin of humanity is discussed in history, other than a bias towards the facts.

Jayjay4547 wrote: Though the natural history bias I’m claiming is particularly interesting. I’m claiming that when Treves and Palmquist said “When considering hominin anti-predator behavior, many scholars looked first to material culture, such as fire or weaponry” they were representing as scientific progress a swerve away from an already biased approach to treating human ancestors as embedded within and "created" by the biome expressed through the trophic pyramid. The ideological background driving that swerve was partly reaction within the Evo/Creo polarity, let’s call it a dialectic. Atheist scientists aren’t looking good here Cali, this is a vulnerability in an unexpected quarter. You need to lift your game.

You need to actually start presenting evidence instead of piling on the assertionist arsewater.
And 'atheist scientists' is just as meaningful a term as bearded scientists.

Jayjay4547 wrote:Anyway, what I mainly wanted to discuss was your long paste purporting to show that Hitler was Christian.

No purporting took place.
It's an established fact as evident from the facts presented by Cali and myself.

Jayjay4547 wrote:that was all quote mining

Just because a quote contradicts what you believe, doesn't make it quotemining Jayjay.
Quotemining refers to quoting part of a text out of the context of the larger text or conversations it originated from.
Not what other people were thinking or doing at the time.

Jayjay4547 wrote:let’s put it in the context of the very bones of 20th century history.

In light of the assertionist bullshit about history you presented earlier in this post, I highly doubt you're qualified to that.

Jayjay4547 wrote:In 1917 Russia took herself out of the Great War in a Bolshevik revolution.

Nope. Already you start with a incorrect statement.
The Bolsheviks seized power in Russia, after a general revolution. And they didn't seize power to get out of the Great War as your statement implies.

Jayjay4547 wrote:The new government was internationalist,

It was anything but. It greatly feared the response of the international community to their revolution.

Jayjay4547 wrote:avowedly anti-Christian and pro-science.

More bollocks, it was anti-religion, not specifically anti-Christian and it sought to replace religion with it's own cult, the cult of Bolshevism and later Stalin.
More-over it wasn't pro-science, if anything it was anti-intellectual.
It only sought to educate people to extent that they could be used to serve the nation and it produced several pseudo-scientific theories.

Jayjay4547 wrote: It sought to extend communism throughout the world.

How is this, or any of the previous pseudo-historic crap relevant to whether Hitler was an Christian or not?
Hitler was neither a Boslhevik nor a Russian.

Jayjay4547 wrote:In 1918 Germany surrendered after a revolution with a communist heart

Seriously, where did you get your historical education? I advise you to get your money back.
The Germans surrendered because they could not longer maintain the war, both financially and morally.

Jayjay4547 wrote:but the communists were beaten by right-wing capitalist reaction, ending with the compromise of the weak but democratic Weimar republic.

Again, what's this got to do with Hitler being a Christian? None of this makes Cali's quotes, quotemines.

Jayjay4547 wrote:In 1933 the Nazis came to power in Germany as an explicitly anti-communist party.

And anti-Jews, anti-capitalist etc.

Jayjay4547 wrote:They made a concordat with the Catholic political party in which, in exchange for withdrawing from politics, the Catholics would be protected and funded by the Reich, as they still are.

You don't find that odd? That a supposedly anti-Christian nation would sign such an alliance with the biggest Christian origanisation in the world?

Jayjay4547 wrote:In 1937 the Pope issued Mit Brennender Sorge, an encyclical smuggled into Germany and to be read to all Germans. He complained about a breach of contract by the Nazis and warned of the evil of the Fuhrer principle, of paying ultimate allegiance to a man and a State rather than to God.

Doesn't change that the Church refuses to outright oppose Hitler.
And it certainly doesn't change that Hitler and the Nazi's were Christians.


Jayjay4547 wrote:Something important had happened to produce that encyclical. In spite of the brutal anti-Christian actions where communists had taken control in Russia, Mexico and Spain, involving the deaths of thousands of Catholic clergy, and in spite of the trial war in Spain between the Nazis and Communists, there had been a falling out between Nazis and Catholics in Germany. That is documented in Richard J Evans’ The Third Reich in Power. In spite of the Nazis having every strategic interest in an anti-communist alliance with the Catholics, Hitler’s government undermined the Catholics at every turn; trapping clergy using prostitutes and closing down schools and seminaries. At the same time the Protestants were undermined by building up a toady Lutheran faction from which the Confessing church broke away. The disaffection between Nazis and organised Christianity is symbolised by the facts that Stauffenberg who tried to blow Hitler up, was a Catholic and Dietrich Bonhoeffer the theologian who was hanged on piano wire for his role in that, was a Lutheran. Hitler reportedly had the plotters' pants pulled down, supposedly to show what sort of men they were, but really telling us something about Hitler.

That he was opposed to the orginized churches. Not that he was not a Christian, unless you want to appeal to the No True Christian fallacy.

Jayjay4547 wrote:There were no shortage of things Hitler said in public speeches, to align Nazism to the Anti-Communist Christian West.

Indeed, proving that he was Christian.

Jayjay4547 wrote:But the Fuhrer was no church-goer nor was his party of thugs.

And? Most Christian today in my country, hardly, if ever attend church.

Jayjay4547 wrote:They were totalitarian.

They were Christian.

Jayjay4547 wrote:They explicitly freed their minds from the moral halters of the Lutheran and Catholic churches of their day, to wreak cruel havoc wherever their power spread.

Bollocks. They explicitly freed themselves from the interference of other religious authorities and interpeted Christianity for themselves, just as the Protestants had done before them.