Creationism News

Creationists Characterized as Gloating over Vandalization of Evolution Center

Spread the love

Arsonists reportedly destroyed a well known Science Center in Naples Italy that promotes Evolutionism. From the pages of the Journal Nature:

On the night of 4 March, unknown arsonists destroyed the famous City of Science centre in Naples. This shocking event has been publicly welcomed by some hard-line creationists in Italy, who disapprove of the teaching of evolution at the centre.
The conservative commentators who instead seemed to rejoice at the centre’s destruction include the national news paper Il Foglio, which applauded the flames as purification against the sourge of evolutionism — “a nineteenth-century superstition” destined to bring young people to “despair and simian behaviors”. This inflammatory anti-Darwinism has been rapidly amplified on the Internet.
Italy’s current climate of political uncertainty seems to have fostered an unexpected resurgence in creationism…

The article only claims the creationists welcomed the burning of the center, it does not actually, imho, demonstrate that creationists ever said they approve of arson! But, in the spirit of openess, if any of our Italian readers can provide original source material and translate it for us, I would be grateful.

By the way, it is nice to see the pages of nature use the term “evolutionism” since the commitment to the theory of evolution is one of dogma rather than evidence.

10 Replies to “Creationists Characterized as Gloating over Vandalization of Evolution Center

  1. 1

    No-one should be rejoicing at such an event. It should be condemned in the strongest possible terms and those responsible for the arson must be held accountable. There is no productive reason to engage in or encourage this kind of lawless behavior.

  2. 2
    scordova says:

    At issue is whether the claims by the reporter are actually accurate!

    I’m not so sure that the creationists in Italy actually condoned the arson. They can be negative about Darwin (we are here at UD every day!), but that doesn’t mean they approve of burning buildings. That is an insinuation by the report in Nature, and I’m not so sure that insinuation is accurate.

    If it is not accurate, it is merely a smear, and not the truth.

  3. 3
    kairosfocus says:

    Arson is a crime, one next to murder (and often ends up being murder as buildings tend to have people in them, and firemen get harmed). There is never an excuse for arson, and arsonists need to do heavy time and serious counselling, as they may be outright insane. If any group condoned the arson, it is wrong, period. That has nothing to do with whether or no, the naturalistic, molecules to man theory of evolution is well warranted, and it is separate from whether or no the evolution promoting centre was acting in the right way in its promotional activities. And, judging by the state of evidence on origins of the world of life, both OOL and OO body plan level biodiversity, the resurgence in design thought and in Creationist thought — separate things — is quite understandable. The attempt to put down and belittle by suggesting that it is hard times that lead to such, is out of order, especially given the wider climate of historical and current associations in a country such as Italy. Of course, I await findings on what was actually said, by whom why, and what actually happened in March. KF

  4. 4
    Axel says:

    Given their axiomatic total lack of intellectual integrity, as laid out so plainly in the article: Why Quantum Theory Does Not Support Materialism, linked from a post, I believe, of Chance Ratcliffe, here yesterday, it is no more than ‘par for the course’.

    This one:

    I would venture that abuse of power is very prevalent, almost an unwritten law, rather than aberrant, in our unregenerate, Western society, but these characters ‘go the extra mile’ with their risible pretention to be paragons of Reason.

  5. 5
    Axel says:

    One would think, since they make their living off QM, and in view of the inerrant, probative role of its mathematics, materialists, while given any wriggle-room, however specious, have always exploited it, hitherto, finding none in QM, would ‘put have their hands up and said’, ‘OK. It’s a fair cop, guvnor.’

    Except, I dare say, any burglar caught ‘red handed’ would have some concept of fairness, right and wrong, etc. Doubtless, for some reason, feeling that to share a common, external code of morality is the only sensible way, even if wont to transgress it, personally.

  6. 6
    scordova says:

    The mayor of Naples thinks it is related to criminals. This article mentions the mafia.

    Another report points out that we don’t even know if arson was involved:

    The more I think about it, the more I think that opinions and insinuations were being passed off as fact in the Nature article. It was sloppy reporting, but I suppose since it smears creationists, the editors of Nature will let it get published.

  7. 7
    Axel says:

    Sorry. ‘and’ missing between, ‘hitherto’ and ‘finding’. A clumsy sentence, but by no means wide of the mark.

  8. 8
    Axel says:

    Arson, like poisoning, is a particularly vile crime, and surely, invariably with murder in mind, when buildings are occupied, and a fraudulent insurance claim isn’t the motive.

  9. 9
    scordova says:

    Here is an article after the fire that was published by Il Foglio. Nature claims Il Foglio seemed to rejoice in the burning of the Science Center.

    I found an anti-Darwin article after the fire, but it mentions no rejoice of the burning of the center.

    I used babel fish to translate. Of note is the article is by Giuseppe Sermonti, the editor of one of the worlds oldest peer-reviewed biology journals and where John Davison got published.

    There is no mention of approving of the burning of the Naples Science Center. It does have a nice quote from Einstein that I was not aware of.

    A:We have just concluded the year of the celebration of “origin of species” that Darwin’s evolutionism controversy turns. The occasion is a book published in America and published in Italian by Feltrinelli version under the title “Darwin’s faults”: authors Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini. I haven’t read the book, but some interviews and comments appearing in the Italian press, that I have enough to make an impression. The two authors are linked to the trend that favors domestic development laws with respect to environmental pressures, affirming the importance of “laws of form” and of “self-organization”, than to fight for life and natural selection. Their line of thought has eminent precursors: suffice it to mention Schiaparelli, Driesch, D’arcy Thompson, Waddington, Thom, Portmann, Goodwin, Lima-de-Faria and Structuralists Osaka group. But, once again, the confrontation will not take place.

    Darwinism is a belief that does not tolerate heretics. Objection to Darwinism is especially hard not to shortage of topics, but for any objections which it raises in all areas of our culture. Every objection, but also every fix, you immediately discredited as if it were a virus that threatens to infect the entire body. Wrote W.H. Thompson (1956), in the introduction to a new edition of “origin of species”: “this situation, where men gather to defend a doctrine that are unable to define scientifically, and even less to prove with scientific rigor, trying to keep his credit with the public through the Suppression of criticism and elimination of difficulties, is abnormal and undesirable in science”. It was the same author to observe that “the success of Darwinism was accompanied by a decline in scientific integrity.”. This is what worries us, rather than a (desirable) comparison of positions. By the Darwinist comparison is not tolerable. Objectors to Darwin are immediately accused of creationism, fixity or complottismo.

    And so, in the name of inviolability of natural selection, we must accept these claims “Darwinian Among all men there must be an open struggle …”, and “some time to come, not very far if measured in centuries, is almost certain that human races are exterminating civilians and replace everywhere in those wild lands …”. These words are terrible because they are not a prediction, but a hope. And we’ll have to drop even Einstein’s observation: “Darwin’s theory on the struggle for existence and the selection was widely taken as permission to promote the spirit of competition … Wherever, in economic life and in politics, the guiding principle is that of the ruthless struggle for success at the expense of their fellow men. ”

    The omnipotence of natural selection has not sold even in the face of criticism from some unsuspecting evolutionists. “Natural selection state that individuals best suited (defined as those who leave more descendants) will leave more descendants”. (C.H. Waddington). Or again: “Though Lamarck’s theory not only is rebuttable, but was actually disproved (…), it is not at all clear what we might consider how possible refutation of the theory of natural selection”. (K. R. Popper). Or, by a highly esteemed geneticist: “The adattazionista program is an adaptation of the metaphysical postulate not only impossible to refute, but not necessarily confirmed by each observation (Lewontin)”.
    The evolution to external forces the book by Fodor and Piattelli-Palmarini opposed an alternative theory, according to which the organic forms are generated from within – for example for the effect of physico-chemical constraints, limits genetic networks of filters to change.

    The thing I liked the American establishment that does not accept the idea that Darwinism is questioned. As the laws of form made by the two authors might be taken as “expansions” of Darwinism, remaining sovereign the role of natural selection, which cannot accept the part of supporting actress. Eliminated the formal antagonist, the sole dealer of oppression, theory of survival of the fittest, “might is right” (the power is correct) is likely to lead us towards a world devoid of beauty, mystery and God. And just reassure us that the Cern physicists have arrived, with a cost of six billion dollars, 6,000 researchers and the use of superaccelleratore Large Hadron Collider (Lhc), a stone’s throw from the Big Bang and have proclaimed to be close to capture “the God particle”. I would suggest assigning them the Nobel Prize in advance, before the latest subatomic collision have turned the Earth into a black hole. It was perhaps unfortunate, but certainly, expressing the maximum power, have had an indisputable reason.

    Giuseppe Sermonti (English)

    If the April 15 article in Nature was referring to the April 7 article and several like it in Il Foglio, then this is really sloppy reporting…its not even reporting, its fabrication!

  10. 10
    scordova says:

    Il Foglio published over 20 anti-Darwin articles since 2010. The first one was, “Beautiful Cannon Fire Against Darwin”. It had nothing to do with the Naples fire, but was a review of Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini’s book, “What Darwin Got Wrong”. Here is a list of the articles:

    Belle cannonate laiche contro Darwin

    Chiese e sette del neodarwinismo

    Ciao Darwin. Perché la selezione naturale non spiega nemmeno l’evoluzione

    Ciao neodarwin

    Così un disegno di comunicazione intelligente ha smontato il mito Darwin

    Giornali e scimmie

    Good bye mr. Darwin

    I censori che processano de Mattei si rileggano Wallace, scopritore della selezione naturale

    I neodarwinisti sono la prova scientifica dell’esistenza di Dio

    Il sogno americano del disegno intelligente

    L’imputato intelligente

    La santa inquisizione darwiniana

    Le suore darwiniane

    Lettera sulla scimmia

    Ma Darwin è ancora di sinistra?

    Parla Richard Thompson, l’avvocato-mastino del “disegno intelligente”

    Perché Darwin non è un mostro ma nemmeno un santo

    Perché Darwin non ha le ali

    Piattelli-Palmarini e la “sacra triade” dei neodarwinisti atei e militanti

    Processo a Darwin

    Risposta all’inquisizione evoluzionista da un professore perseguitato

    Se la chiesa rischia il politicamente corretto

    Tre professori ci spiegano quanto pesano tutti “gli errori di Darwin”

    Tutti i dubbi magisteriali sul darwinismo

Leave a Reply