Sure enough, mass murderer of Muslim students is a Darwin fan

_{Denyse O'Leary

February 11, 2015

Culture, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, News}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Killer of 3 UNC-Chapel Hill Muslim Students Was Hardcore Anti-Religion Atheist Progressive
Craig Stephen Hicks, 46, has been charged in the execution-style murder of newlyweds, bride’s sister.

I looked at his apparent Facebook page, Atheists for Equality, and sure enough, not far down, a Bill Nye “zinger” turned up (January 27, 9:46):

… if you want to deny evolution and live in your world, in your world that’s completely inconsistent with everything we observe in the universe, that’s fine, but don’t make your kids do it because we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future. We need people that can — we need engineers that can build stuff, solve problems.

Quote can be found at ABC News (Hicks’ chosen page format doesn’t let me copy paste.)

No, this isn’t Bill Nye’s fault, of course! But to judge from other massacres, such as the Norway terrorist Anders Breivik (self-described Darwinian), the Finnish school shooter (instrument of natural selection), and the Columbine murderers (acting on Darwinian principles), there is a pattern.

A pattern often denied. See, for example: Jerry Coyne’s Statements Turn Out To Be Uninformed Blithering.

It is not theories about evolution as such that cause this type of thing, but theories about Darwinian evolution in particular. The notion of survival of the fittest and all that …

Creepily, another post, second below (January 27, 7:10) reads,

People say nothing can solve the Middle East problem. Not mediation, not arms, not financial aid. I say there is something. Atheism.~Jr Grover

Well, Hicks is a man who acted on his beliefs, we can sure say that for him.

Stop all teaching of Darwinism in the schools now.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Comments

One can be well versed in evolutionary biology and not be a DarwinistJoe_{February 15, 2015
February
02
Feb
15
15
2015
04:15 PM
4
04
15
PM
PST}

It seems to have escaped some people's attention that Ms. Yusor Mohammad Abu-Salha was a biologist, having graduated cum laude with a B.S. in biological sciences last December, and therefore was well versed in evolutionary biology.kohoutek_{February 15, 2015
February
02
Feb
15
15
2015
04:13 PM
4
04
13
PM
PST}

Diogenes @23 So you’re fascists, right? Not convinced? What about kicking people in the face with jackboots? That’s what skinheads actually do, right?
The only appropriate response should involve some form of righteous fury, much butt-kicking, and the public firing of some teachers, many school board members, and vast numbers of sleazy, far-right politicians...I say, screw the polite words and careful rhetoric. It's time for scientists to break out the steel-toed boots and brass knuckles, and get out there and hammer on the lunatics and idiots. - PZ Myers
This guy runs Pharyngula, a top ranked blog for evolution... Now what? Is he a totalitarian fascist that runs a hate site?Heartlander_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
04:45 PM
4
04
45
PM
PST}

Diogenes
Why do you keep speculating about my motivation? Does it matter? My name is Inigo Montoya and Joe killed my father. You ID proponents sure love to appeal to motive.
I don't usually ask about such things but it just seemed that your condemnation of this blog was pretty extreme. A fascist, totalitarian hate site? I'm obviously biased but I really don't see the vast majority of discussions following that kind of profile.
My motivation, of course, is that I’m infuriated by Joe lying over and over, and glibly believing that he can just deny, issue counter-accusations and get out of everything. So first, I want to show how Joe Gallien will always weasel out of any challenge that requires honesty. I just get my kicks watching him weasel, weasel, weasel. It’s predictable. Now his thing is, I have to drive to his house and shake his hand! Weasel, weasel.
Ok, that's understandable at least. It looks like something personal between you and him - so some bad blood between you. I have no idea about the history on any of that, but I don't like the entire UD group being considered fascist. If you lose the bet, for example, I'd hope you'd back away from that kind of attack.
Second, by challenging other UDites to kick in some cash of their own, I’m trying to show that the rest of you know that Joe G is untrustworthy, but still you don’t ban him, don’t delete his comments (as you’ve done to countless polite evolutionists), and you give him the privilege of writing top-level posts at UD, so he’s one of your big intellectual leaders. But you don’t even challenge his most transparent lies. So I’m showing that UDites know that Joe is untrustworthy, but enable it and give him a big megaphone.
I see your point, but I hope you'll consider also that this blog doesn't require everyone to be virtuous and saintly. It would be nice - sure, but there's room for a lot of different personalities. I think the charge of "lying" against someone is more difficult though. A person can forget what he said in the past or be mistaken about it. In other words, I think you're making too big of a deal about this and it seems like a personality clash between you and Joe and you're using that to condemn the whole site. One final point - I think this is essential and I referenced it before ... I believe Joe has already been banned for a while quite recently. So, when someone has been punished and then rehabilitated to the site after a while -- in fairness, would it make sense to go back to posts that he wrote before he was banned? I can't say much more than this because I don't know the situation. But I will put my 20 bucks in as I said.Silver Asiatic_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
03:47 PM
3
03
47
PM
PST}

LoL! Why isn't Dio infuriated at itself and all evolutionists for lying over and over, being caught and then lying again? BTW I said nothing about you driving to my house to shake my hand. As if I need more lowly species slithering around here. You are anonymous and as such have an unfair advantage. At least I know the name of the last loser evolutionist who bet me and lost $10,000- Andreas "Andy" Schueler. Also we would have to determine if calling out a coward for being a lying little weasel is the same as a threat. The local police don't see it as a threat when you merely stand up for yourself in the face of unrelenting hubris. So we would have to make sure we have clear and concise definitions of the words being used. But perhaps you have some other alleged lies that will be easier for you to expose? Or are you just lying again?Joe_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
03:36 PM
3
03
36
PM
PST}

Silver Asiatic: OK, you said you'd kick in $20 so at least you have some guts.
You seem driven by a lot of emotional hostility and I’m not sure why but maybe I can learn something from this.
Why do you keep speculating about my motivation? Does it matter? My name is Inigo Montoya and Joe killed my father. You ID proponents sure love to appeal to motive. My motivation, of course, is that I'm infuriated by Joe lying over and over, and glibly believing that he can just deny, issue counter-accusations and get out of everything. So first, I want to show how Joe Gallien will always weasel out of any challenge that requires honesty. I just get my kicks watching him weasel, weasel, weasel. It's predictable. Now his thing is, I have to drive to his house and shake his hand! Weasel, weasel. Second, by challenging other UDites to kick in some cash of their own, I'm trying to show that the rest of you know that Joe G is untrustworthy, but still you don't ban him, don't delete his comments (as you've done to countless polite evolutionists), and you give him the privilege of writing top-level posts at UD, so he's one of your big intellectual leaders. But you don't even challenge his most transparent lies. So I'm showing that UDites know that Joe is untrustworthy, but enable it and give him a big megaphone.Diogenes_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
01:30 PM
1
01
30
PM
PST}

No Joe, I'm not meeting you anywhere. I don't know where you live, I don't want to know, and I think you're dangerous and probably unvaccinated and have cooties. Your trying to insert conditions that are unnecessary and dangerous for me and non-standard. We can send our cash to Michael Behe and he can hold it for us. That's how it's done, SOP.Diogenes_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
01:24 PM
1
01
24
PM
PST}

Also, is there a difference between a threat and a promise?Joe_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
12:22 PM
12
12
22
PM
PST}

Diogenes, my claim stands. That is why context is important. My money is right here. Meet me and we will shake on it.Joe_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
12:20 PM
12
12
20
PM
PST}

Diogenes
I have to spell everything out. OK, now if it really bothers you Silver Asiatic, I’ll let YOU choose the terms! 1. Two links of threats of violence,
That first one is fine with me. He said he never threatened violence. So, "extermination by non-violent means" would not count. I will kick in $20, which is not a lot but I also have to say you're assuming that everyone on UD knows each other well enough to defend and support whatever is said at any time. Plus, if someone has been posting on this topic for several years, I don't think it's quite fair to dredge up something said 7 years ago, for example, and use it as evidence against the person. So, I wonder what you think you'll achieve with this bet. "Some people on UD say rude things therefore there is no evidence of intelligent design in nature"? That's pretty lame. You've jumped to some absurdly wild conclusions about how UD is a fascist blog and a totalitarian hate site, based on some stray remarks from people who post here. You seem driven by a lot of emotional hostility and I'm not sure why but maybe I can learn something from this. I can understand the desire to win $1000, but beyond that I don't think there's much to gain against ID as a concept. Simple argumentation and discussion would work a lot better in my view.Silver Asiatic_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
12:20 PM
12
12
20
PM
PST}

Now let's see how Silver Asiatic will weasel out:
The original comment was about ‘violence’. Now you added ‘or extermination’. Once I see something like that, where it appears as if you’re playing games, I become suspicious.
*sigh*. Extermination is a subset of violence. A disjunction of X or a {subset of X} has the same logical structure as X but it may sound stronger. For example, "a sandwich or a chicken sandwich" means the same thing as "a sandwich" but hints that I have chicken in mind, get it? I have to spell everything out. OK, now if it really bothers you Silver Asiatic, I'll let YOU choose the terms! 1. Two links of threats of violence, 2. Two links of threats of {(violence) OR (extermination by violent means)}, 3. One link of threat of violence and one link of threat of extermination by violent means So which wording is acceptable to you? Or you can suggest your own.Diogenes_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
11:51 AM
11
11
51
AM
PST}

What Joe? What happened to your claim that
LoL! Only cowards think that I have ever threatened violence- enter Dio…
No blanket denials of issuing violent threats? Where'd your previous denials go, Joe?
Joe "Security Clearance" Gallien: I am sure that you think you can. I bet you won’t post the entire context.
*sigh* That's your way of weaseling out. I said I would post hyperlinks, Joe. Like to the original. I did not say I would copy n paste. With a hyperlink to the original, the readers can judge context for themselves. So how about it, Joe? Did you, or did you not, make threats of violence to "materialists" and "evos"? If you did, weren't you lying right above? If you didn't, where's your money Bro?Diogenes_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
11:45 AM
11
11
45
AM
PST}

For example I now know that ticks are more attracted to watermelon rinds then they are to orange peels or orange slices. One brutal and dry summer I threw our watermelon rinds into the woods across the road. A week later I overturned the rinds that landed juicy-side down and observed they were covered with ticks, of all things. Ticks, little ugly arachnids. This was repeated with different fruit peels but only watermelon scored on the ticks. All ticks were eliminated during this testing. I also know that dragonflies play. I would say that most hunters, fishermen and hikers have observed that.Joe_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
11:22 AM
11
11
22
AM
PST}

Diogenes:
Joe, I’ll bet you $1000 that I can produce two hyperlinks to you threatening “materialists” and “evos” with violence or extermination– that’s $500 per threat.
I am sure that you think you can. I bet you won't post the entire context.
An oldie but a goodie:
I don't get what you imps think is so "good" about that. But anyway meet me so we can shake on the bet. ;)Joe_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
10:52 AM
10
10
52
AM
PST}

I want everyone at UD to explain why you’re not betting on Joe. Why are you not putting your money where your mouth is?
I don't like the terms of the bet ...
Joe, I’ll bet you $1000 that I can produce two hyperlinks to you threatening “materialists” and “evos” with violence or extermination– that’s $500 per threat. If I produce the links to you issuing threats of physical violence or extermination to “materialists” and “evos”, then I keep your $1000. If I produce no links, you keep my $1000.
Notice the highlighted terms. The original comment was about 'violence'. Now you added 'or extermination'. Once I see something like that, where it appears as if you're playing games, I become suspicious. "Extermination" can be interpreted as something like "All evos need to disappear". So that gives you some huge opportunities that do not match what was stated (there's nothing violent about it).Silver Asiatic_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
10:23 AM
10
10
23
AM
PST}

Joe "Security Clearance" Gallien: LoL! Only cowards think that I have ever threatened violence- enter Dio…
Oh, Joe "Security Clearance" says that he never threatened violence, huh? OK, I'm calling his bluff. Joe, I'll bet you $1000 that I can produce two hyperlinks to you threatening "materialists" and "evos" with violence or extermination-- that's $500 per threat. If I produce the links to you issuing threats of physical violence or extermination to "materialists" and "evos", then I keep your $1000. If I produce no links, you keep my $1000. I'm serious so we have to pick a referee to hold the money, but I don't trust anyone at UD because they're all nuts and will say it's raining while they pee on your leg. I would recommend Michael Behe as a referee because whatever else I think about him, I don't think he would be dishonest in adjudicating what is a cut and dried case of indisputable threats of violence. We can each kick in $1000 and Behe can hold it. Deal? But there's more: I want everyone at UD to join and bet some money on Joe. Who do you think is more trustworthy, UDites, me or Joe? Who do you think is more likely to lie outright, me or Joe? Put your money where your mouth is. If you people at UD don't want to put down your money on Joe (given Joe's history of, to put it mildly, threats of prevarication, it should be a no-brainer), I want everyone at UD to explain why you're not betting on Joe. Why are you not putting your money where your mouth is? Remember, Joe "Security Clearance" Gallien has had posting privileges at UD, he's posted not just comments, but top-level posts. So you regard him as a great intellectual leader, right? So why are you not putting your money on him? An oldie but a goodie:
Query to Joe: What is your position that requires having done science? Joe G: "Electronic engineer and research scientist." Query to Joe: 'What experiments have you done?' Joe G: "Many dealing with ion trap mobilty spectrometry & mass spectrometry. Many more dealing with electronic circuitry and electricity. I can't get specific as it deals with security. If you can get a security clearance I could show you what I do. Then there is astronomy. On any given night I can have 3 telescopes pointing skyward. 2 4,5" aps with a 910mm FL(one automated and one manual) as well as a 10" ap with an 1125mm FL. And that is just the tip of the ole iceberg. That doesn't count the experiments I conduct in my basement. Some labs would be jealous of the equipment I house & use there. For example I now know that ticks are more attracted to watermelon rinds then they are to orange peels or orange slices. I also know that dragonflies play." [Joe G reveals his top secret scientific research at ARN]
Diogenes_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
10:09 AM
10
10
09
AM
PST}

here is rvb8's 'open minded' Darwinian world: http://www.cogniview.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/thinkinginsidethebox.jpg Whereas, here is the ID proponents world http://livinggreenmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/thinking-outside-box1.jpgbornagain77_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
06:51 AM
6
06
51
AM
PST}

rvb8 @26 Don’t be such a twit – you could have easily ignored the thought experiment or any part of it that doesn’t apply to you – instead you chose to unjustly attack. I post a thought experiment and you tell me to open ‘my mind’ – while stereotyping Americans as dim. You know nothing about me – where I'm from – where I’ve been – yet you judge me and act as if you know how I view science and the world based on my screen name. This defines shallow thinking. BTW, America does not offend everyone.Heartlander_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
06:32 AM
6
06
32
AM
PST}

Diogenes:
This jumping to conclusions without evidence
That is what evolutionists and materialists do on a daily basis. So perhaps you should clean up your own house before telling others to clean theirs.
Look, can you guys just admit now that UD is a totalitarian hate site?
LoL! THAT from the internet's biggest hater!
Perhaps Joe will show up in a moment threatening more violence,
LoL! Only cowards think that I have ever threatened violence- enter Dio...Joe_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
05:27 AM
5
05
27
AM
PST}

LoL! rvb8, a close-minded evolutionist/ materialist, tells someone to open their mind!Joe_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
04:44 AM
4
04
44
AM
PST}

Heartlander, not being an American citizen why would it be bad for me if Evolutionary Theory redefined, 'fundamental American values'? If thse values include assuming every other culture or people share these values, then I say roll on 'Darwinism' and please, please redefine them. You see Heartlander, the idea of living in that great central land mass that is the U.S. 'heartland', would put me into somnambulistic hell. The tedious goings on of intellectual dumbells appers the nearest I could come to enforced myopia: Open your mind, there are many other things that are of interset in this fascinating world,than your perverted view of science.rvb8_{February 13, 2015
February
02
Feb
13
13
2015
01:49 AM
1
01
49
AM
PST}

Well, Happy Darwin Day... Just a simple thought experiment - if Darwin's theory was never published, but we still had the knowledge of Mendel and Wallace - would science and society be better off? Consider the misuse of Darwin's theory; eugenics, sterilization, Hitler, Marx, Freud, atheism / anti-theism, environmentalism, and justification for the redefining of fundamental American values. So again, if science and society had the knowledge of Mendel and Wallace - how does Darwin's theory really benefit humanity? (And yes, this is the same type of thought experiment atheists do with religion)...Heartlander_{February 12, 2015
February
02
Feb
12
12
2015
09:04 PM
9
09
04
PM
PST}

And let's not forget what set you off: Journaliistic malpractice. The facts are that a guy murdered three Muslims. Upon perusing his Facebook page, we find that he was an atheist. It is Journalistic malpractice for Denyse O'Leary to assume that his atheism motivated the crime. According to the police, the crime was motivated by a parking dispute. Fox News printed a correction on the story, making it clear there was no evidence that atheism motivated the guy's crime. You guys are even more irresponsible that Fox News, got that? Now later on we might find out more evidence showing that atheism motivated the crime, but right now it's journalistic malpractice for O'Leary to present speculation and armchair psychoanalysis as evidence, and that will not change in the future if new evidence emerges: speculation is not evidence, but Journalistic malpractice is Journalistic malpractice. Moreover, crimes committed over parking disputes are common. Atheists committing murder is not common. Check out our prisons: hard core criminals in the USA are overwhelmingly Christian or Muslim, especially on Death Row. Atheists in prison are so rare it's hard to measure the proportion but certainly less than 1% and less than their fraction of the general population. "When you hear hoofbeats, think horses not zebras." Thus, until more evidence emerges, a priori the higher probability hypothesis is that the murder was over a parking dispute. But I want to emphasize that it's discrimination to look at a guy's webpage, see a NON-VIOLENT, NON-EXTREMIST affirmation of atheism and then conclude that his atheism motivated his violence. If the media went to his Facebook page and saw pictures of a Christmas tree or generic, NON-VIOLENT expressions of Christian belief, no one would have said his Christianity motivated the murder. This jumping to conclusions without evidence is just bigotry, and Uncommon Descent is a hate site. Censorship, fascist violent threats, and totalitarian thought control are your only options because you were defeated scientifically.Diogenes_{February 12, 2015
February
02
Feb
12
12
2015
02:47 PM
2
02
47
PM
PST}

Look, can you guys just admit now that UD is a totalitarian hate site? From O'Leary and Mapou we get the usual demands for totalitarian thought control:
Stop all teaching of Darwinism in the schools now
Yeah you better stop it, scientifically you lost the argument and censorship is all the anti-Darwinian thought police have left. Meanwhile from "Humbled", who seem not very humbled but an egomaniacal sociopath, we hear this about "Darwinists":
These people, like the worst lunatics the world has ever known, places no value on human life... It is these beliefs, this worldview that has spawned the worst tyrants the world has ever known... I personally think people that genuinely believe this tripe should be committed for the safety of the human race. You’ll exterminate us all given half the chance.
So you're fascists, right? Not convinced? What about kicking people in the face with jackboots? That's what skinheads actually do, right? Well what does Reichscommandant Brent say?
I’d had an urge to kick Francis Collins in the face quite a while back. Now it’s uncontrollable. -- [Brent at Uncommon Descent]
So can you just admit you're fascists now? I mean get over yourselves, just admit it. Perhaps Joe will show up in a moment threatening more violence, or Michael Egnor will again demand the prosecution and imprisonment of climate scientists and other non-climate scientists for being in prestigious scientific organizations.Diogenes_{February 12, 2015
February
02
Feb
12
12
2015
02:39 PM
2
02
39
PM
PST}

wd400
It’s a scientific theory — it has no more “morality” than gravity or the germ theory of disease.
That's a very surprising response. Darwinism claims to offer The explanation for the development of every aspect of the entire biosphere on earth. "The evolution of morality". I'm pretty sure you've heard of that.Silver Asiatic_{February 12, 2015
February
02
Feb
12
12
2015
10:51 AM
10
10
51
AM
PST}

Dawkins doesn't want a darwinian societyJoe_{February 12, 2015
February
02
Feb
12
12
2015
09:44 AM
9
09
44
AM
PST}

wd400:
It’s a scientific theory — it has no more “morality” than gravity or the germ theory of disease.
It isn't even a theory, let alone scientific.Joe_{February 12, 2015
February
02
Feb
12
12
2015
09:41 AM
9
09
41
AM
PST}

If, for instance, to take an extreme case, men were reared under precisely the same conditions as hive-bees, there can hardly be a doubt that our unmarried females would, like the worker-bees, think it a sacred duty to kill their brothers, and mothers would strive to kill their fertile daughters; and no one would think of interfering. - Charles Darwin, Descent of Man, and Selection in Regard to Sex

Turning now to the social and moral faculties. In order that primeval men, or the ape-like progenitors of man, should become social, they must have acquired the same instinctive feelings, which impel other animals to live in a body; and they no doubt exhibited the same general disposition. They would have felt uneasy when separated from their comrades, for whom they would have felt some degree of love; they would have warned each other of danger, and have given mutual aid in attack or defence. All this implies some degree of sympathy, fidelity, and courage. Such social qualities, the paramount importance of which to the lower animals is disputed by no one, were no doubt acquired by the progenitors of man in a similar manner, namely, through natural selection, aided by inherited habit. - Charles Darwin, Descent of Man, and Selection in Regard to Sex
See also Evolutionary Ethics Heartlander_{February 12, 2015
February
02
Feb
12
12
2015
09:33 AM
9
09
33
AM
PST}

wd400, it has become much more than a scientific theory. Social Darwinism proves that point. It is a philosophical worldview that denies any divine intervention with respect to life on Earth. Scientific theories should not--and generally do not--teach moral lessons. Notice that nobody has shot anyone else and claimed to be doing so for the sake of Newtonian mechanics. Darwinism is something completely different, and it's about time that people acknowledged that it's gone beyond a simple scientific theory.Barb_{February 12, 2015
February
02
Feb
12
12
2015
09:20 AM
9
09
20
AM
PST}

It’s no different then morality in an atheistic worldview It's a scientific theory -- it has no more "morality" than gravity or the germ theory of disease.wd400_{February 12, 2015
February
02
Feb
12
12
2015
08:56 AM
8
08
56
AM
PST}

1 2 Next

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply