Roger Stanyard writes:

You've not show n that Hitler eiher accepted or rejected avolutionary biology in total - only that he rejects it for humans.

If you accept that I've shown (or gone a long way to showing) that he rejected evolutionary biology with regards to humans, then we are close to agreement. Afterall, that's what creationists care about. It is Hitler's treatment of humans that the religious claim to have been motivated by Darwinism. Showing that it wasn't is 99% of what the argument is about.

So you're right, I didn't discuss other species in my set of quotes, for that reason. But since you ask, here's a chunk of Mein Kampf showing that he applied the same beliefs to animals. As context, Hitler is asserting that Aryans and Jews are seperate creations, and should be kept separate by preventing interbreeding. As part of this he argues that this seperateness of species and fixidity of species is general in nature:

Hilter: "This urge for the maintenance of the unmixed breed, which is a phenomenon that prevails throughout the whole of the natural world, results not only in the sharply defined outward distinction between one species and another but also in the internal similarity of characteristic qualities which are peculiar to each breed or species. The fox remains always a fox, the goose remains a goose, and the tiger will retain the character of a tiger.

Again, Hitler's view is that Aryans and Jews are distinct creations, and his desire is to preserve them in that form by preventing interbreeding, thus preserving the original primordial "master race" as originally created, God's "highest handiwork" in the Garden of Eden, which it would be sinful to allow to be destroyed by interbreeding. The above quote shows that he applies this thinking to other animals also. Note that he does allow some within-species or within-kind change, but then so do creationists.

Note that this view is the exact opposite of the usual accusation, that he was trying to create a future master race by selective breeding, based on Darwinism.

You've provided no evidence what he was taught about evolutionary biology at school. Heck, you've not even provided evidence that his schools taught or pushed religion at all.

So? What I am attempting to show is that Hitler believed that humans had been created in current form (rather than having evolved out of earlier life). And I'm showing that by taking a straightforward reading of what he wrote. Whether he had been taught it in school or not is not the point. Note, though, that he did have a Catholic upbringing in a religious, Catholic family, who at one point wanted him to become a priest. So it is clear that religion played big role in his formative years. See, e.g. the first watercolour by Hitler at http://globalfire.tv/nj/03en/politics/twoartists.htm

You've provided no evidence, for or against, that he even had a basic understanding of evolutionary biology.

Irrelevant. You don't need any understanding of evolutionary biology in order to believe that humans had been created by God in their current form (which is all that I'm asserting Hitler believed). Oodles of Christians managed to believe that before evolution was even invented.

You've provided no cross references to the claims you quote from Mein Kampf.

They all come from http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks02/0200601.txt This is the Murphy translation, generally taken as standard, being authorised by the Third Reich. You can find any of my quotes easily with the "find" function of your browser.

You've completely avoided the counter claims that he accepted "Darwinism".

I am aware of such claims. I am genuinely unaware of any such evidence. I would be happy to address any such evidence if it is presented.

You've provided no recognised definitions of creationism and the one's you have don't stand up to scrutiny.

The belief that I am attributing to Hitler, that he believed that man had been created by God in current form, would be widely accepted as sufficient to label him a "creationist". (In the wide, general sense of that word.)

You've presented Hitler's "opinions" as black and white when we know that they were exceedingly muddled and frequently incosistent.

On the specific issue of whether he believed that man had been created in current form (as opposed to having evolved from primitive life) his opinions do seem fairly consistent. If you're aware of any counter-evidence please present it. Him being confused and inconsistent on other issues is, though, not particularly relevant.

You've used the term "intelligent" in a layman's meaning.

Hardly relevant to the issue of whether or not Hitler believed ditto ditto! That was only a counter to your claim that he was intellectually incapable of distinguishing between a creationist and an evolutionary origin of man. And that claim is not really sensible.

There are no citations given on virtually all of you claims except the obvious quotes from Mein Kampf.

Since the quotes from MK are the main thing I have presented, that's not a large flaw. What other things would you like cites to? Well, if the above is the extent of the holes in my case then I consider that I'm doing pretty well.

I suspect that to put together a coherent argument that stands up, you'll need many man months of work ... People who make big claims need robust arguments to back them up. They don't come cheap. You'd do yourself a big favour in getting involved in the NCSE.

I happily accept that the case can be built upon and developed. And you suggesting that that would be good is a better response than just pooh-poohing the whole thing, as you have done so far. And I've already got vastly better evidence than the religious have produced for their counter-claim. Have you ever seen even a single quote by Hitler where he mentions Darwin or says he is inspired by him?