Culture Darwinism News

9-11 truthers in the intelligent design community? But more prominent ones among Darwinists?

Spread the love

At Thoughts from Kansas, Darwin lobbyist Josh Rosenau tells us, referencing a David Klinghoffer post on 9-11 at Evolution News & Views blog,

It’d hardly be worth noting, if not for the fact that the only 9/11 “truther” I’ve seen pop up on either side of the creationism/evolution blogosphere is Bilbo, formerly of the pro-ID Telic Thoughts blog.

Klinghoffer, it seems, had compared elite Darwin reverence to 9-11 troothing, saying,

David Berlinski dismisses the bulk of professional scholars in the West as “a native conspiracy class. They’ll believe anything. And once they believe something the conspiracy is held very tenaciously.” He’s poking fun and exaggerating. Yet undeniably there’s a paranoiac inclination among many academics.

Which Klinghoffer relates to Darwinism. Which Rosenau denies.

At Telic Thoughts, GUTS responds to Rosenau,

Yes, ID creationist Bilbo was (and still is) a toofer (and we’ve debated on this issue). However, there are toofers on all sides of this debate, such as philosopher James Fetzer, co-editor of the ID critique published in Synthese recently.

Oh? Who knew?

Klinghoffer did:

You may recall the news of a few months back that Glenn Branch, deputy director of the Darwin-lobbying National Center for Science Education, had collaborated with 9/11 Truth conspiracist James H. Fetzer in editing a special number of the journal Synthese on “Evolution and Its Rivals.” That issue of the journal became so notorious for the incivility of its contributions that a whole fracas broke out and made the pages of the New York Times.

See here.

Readers may remember the Synthese affair, where a philosophy journal disowned certain Darwinist contributions, explicitly for misguided attacks on philosophers.

Much Darwinist writing on the subject of ID folk, like that Synthese item on philosopher Frank Beckwith, does in fact have a conspiratorial ring to it. UD News was just recently going over mail written by pseudo-expert on ID Barbara Forrest (author of one of the implicated Synthese articles). The mail dates back to a decade ago – and the conspiratorial tone is unmistakable even back then. Most likely an individual quirk, augmented by the tendency of the academy in general, as Berlinski notes.

One handy tip for spotting conspiracy theorists: The theorist pays no attention to the six degrees of separation that encompass everyone in the world. That thesis may be false, in the form stated, but it encapsulates a truth: For example, assume your girl cousin was briefly married to a guy who knew the brother of a woman who lived across the street from a guy who turned out to be a serial murderer. So she’s implicated somehow? And so are you?.

As if.

Follow UD News at Twitter!

9 Replies to “9-11 truthers in the intelligent design community? But more prominent ones among Darwinists?

  1. 1
    bornagain77 says:

    ‘Serendipitously’, I was just listening to Alan Jackson’s touching song tribute that he penned just moments after the September 11 attack.;

    Alan Jackson – Where Were You (When The World Stopped Turning) – Music Videos
    http://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=9119BCNU

  2. 2
    Petrushka says:

    Most of the truthers I’ve heard of were simply hoping it could be pinned on Bush. Perhaps that’s why Bill Clinton felt it necessary to put them down. They were disrupting one of his speeches.

    But irrationality seems easy to compartmentalize. Lots of bright people believe isolated stupid things.

  3. 3
    Gods iPod says:

    ID proponents SHOULD be “truthers”, because both have come to their conclusions from following the evidence, not popular, or an expert’s, opinion.

    Please stop the perforative use of the term “conspiracy theorist”. Every Law Enforcement Officer is a conspiracy theorist, and they arrest people for conspiracy often.

    Some truthers might be a bit insane, but the one’s leading the movement are mostly scientists. http://www.ae911truth.org/

  4. 4
    Gods iPod says:

    *pejorative.

    Darned auto-correct

  5. 5
    paragwinn says:

    Actually, ae911truth.org is led by architects and engineers, not scientists.

  6. 6
    Gods iPod says:

    Scientist: A person who is studying or has expert knowledge of one or more of the natural or physical sciences.

    So they are indeed.

    In addition, Steven E Jones, is indeed a research scientist. http://www.physics.byu.edu/research/energy/

    Jones is one of the 2 leading figures in the 9/11 truth movement. The other being Richard Gage.

    It’s also probably worth mentioning Theologian David Ray Griffin has penned several books on 9/11, all calling the government’s story utter hogwash.

  7. 7
  8. 8
    zephyr says:

    I left a comment at Telic Thoughts on the pertinent post here (under the same moniker ‘zephyr’), harshly taking TT to task for their softness on Bilbo’s 9-11 troofery. Let’s see if it goes through.. It is a longish post as well and I pull no punches.

    Both sides in the evolution debate need to call out 9-11 troofery from within their own ranks, it is not merely oddball, it is sinister. A world gone mad.

    There are very few scientists of note amidst the 9-11 ‘troof’ movement. All the worse for Steve Jones. ‘Boxboy’ Gage is an architect, not a scientist, Griffin is a scholar on religion. Griffin and Gage have had their utter palubum debunked on so many 9-11 debunking sites and blogs, but it makes no difference to the true believers. They go on believing, no matter how many times their ridiculous lies are exposed, time and time again. You can’t argue with true believers for they are true believers, you can only expose them, mock and ridicule them.

  9. 9
    uoflcard says:

    Unlike neo-Darwinian evolution, the collapse of the WTC towers can and has been virtually modeled and accurately simulated. The truthing movement is an absolute crock. There’s no need to go intothe details here, because that’s been done thousands of other times. Those who still believe “it was an inside job” fall into one of the following categories:

    1.) They WANT this to be true. Maybe for the pure drama of the theory; it’s more powerful than the most jaw-dropping conspiracy movie ever made.

    2.) Theyre too dumb to comprehend the rebuttals

    3.) They’re too stubborn to honestly, openly consider the rebuttals

    They will believe this from now until they day they die, but from now on they should just be ignored, like people who still say Charles Manson was set up. Those truthers would be reasoned with have since changed their minds. Everyone else, have fun blogging about how George Bush hired his cousin to wire up several tons of thermite through WTC 1, 2 and 7 over a weekend or two, hired known terrorists to fly the planes into precise locations on the buildings (how they managed to fly literally one floor above the “explosives” is beyond my comprehension…), etc. We will be moving on with reality and leaving this theory to bong-talk

Leave a Reply