He doesn’t believe it will happen:
In the piece below from Medium, Carl has gone a bit farther, predicting the impending cancellation of Darwin. I don’t share his fears, mainly because Darwin hedged his bets a bit, was an abolitionist, and I suppose I’m optimistic enough to think that Darwin’s great contribution to biology—indeed, to all humanity—must outweigh any of the minimal conventional bigotry he espoused during his lifetime. But I guess I could have said that about Jefferson, too, and look what happened to him.Jerry Coyne, “Will Darwin be canceled?” at Why Evolution Is True
But here’s the really interesting part: Coyne points to a medallion struck by Darwin’s wife’s family, the Wedgwood (who were abolitionists):
Darwin’s grandfather (and also his wife Emma’s), designed this ceramic medallion that was popular among abolitionists as early as 1787. That may be enough to save Charles but, as we know, one misstep can cancel you for keeps. And Darwin made more than one—according to today’s lights.Jerry Coyne, “Will Darwin be canceled?” at Why Evolution Is True
The medallion features a black guy in chains, with the message “Am I not a man and a brother?”
Of course he is—but that is essentially a creationist idea. = We are literally all one family from the same parents.
Darwin’s contribution was the notion of the subhuman. In any Darwinian scheme, someone must be the subhuman. The one who is not a man or a brother. Otherwise, there is no beginning to human history.
Of course it needn’t be that guy. But it’s gotta be somebody. Darwinists will need to think hard to get out of that one.
See also: At Medium: On the “Impending cancellation of Darwin.” Essentially, Noah Carl is forcing the biology establishment to admit that they can’t impugn Darwin for his racism because he’s their religion. All those other guys can just be trashed. But not Darwin. Not for anything.
6 Replies to “Darwinian biologist Jerry Coyne contemplates the idea that Darwin might be Canceled”
“Darwin’s great contribution to biology—indeed, to all humanity”—. Lol.
“Ninimal conventional bigotry”. Lol
Darwin’s white supremacism:
So, according to Coyne, Darwin’s theory was not only a “great” contribution to biology but was also a “great” contribution to humanity???
First off, someone forgot to tell biology itself what a ‘great’ contribution Darwin’s theory supposedly was to biology.
As Marc Kirschner stated,
And as Adam Wilkins stated “most (biologists) can conduct their work quite happily without particular reference to evolutionary ideas. ”
That is simply an astonishing statement. To put that in context to just how damning it is to the claim that evolution is indispensable to biology, imagine if Wilkins had instead stated that ‘most physicists can conduct their work quite happily without reference to Quantum Mechanical or Relativistic ideas.”
Moreover, it is not as if Coyne is unaware of this fact. Coyne admits much the same thing when he states, “Truth be told, evolution hasn’t yielded many practical or commercial benefits. Yes, bacteria evolve drug resistance, and yes, we must take countermeasures, but beyond that there is not much to say.”,,,
Biologists simply don’t need Darwinian explanations, (i.e ‘just-so stories), to do their research. As the late Philip Skell noted, “Darwinian evolution – whatever its other virtues – does not provide a fruitful heuristic in experimental biology.”
In fact, you can strip all the Darwinian language from research papers and the science becomes “healthier and more useful.”
Whereas, on the other hand, the type of language that cannot be stripped from biological research papers, without severely compromising the integrity of the papers, is teleological, and/or design, based language.
As J. B. S. Haldane once observed
Again although teleological, and/or or goal directed, explanations are suppose to be forbidden in Darwinian explanations, it is simply impossible for biologists to do biological research without using words that directly imply teleology. Or, more specifically, without using words that directly imply intelligent design.
Stephen Talbott challenges biologists to “pose a single topic for biological research, doing so in language that avoids all implication of agency, cognition, and purposiveness,,,”
Denis Noble also notes that “it is virtually impossible to speak of living beings for any length of time without using teleological and normative language”.
This working biologist agrees with Talbott and Noble’s assessment and states, “in our work, we biologists use words that imply intentionality, functionality, strategy, and design in biology–we simply cannot avoid them.”
In short, the very words that Biologists themselves are forced to use when they are doing their biological research falsifies Darwinian evolution as an explanation for biology.
And although Darwinian explanations have useless to Biologists as they have done their research, Coyne’s claim that Darwin’s theory was also a ‘great’ contribution to humanity itself is an even more laughable claim than his claim that Darwin’s theory was a great contribution to biology.
Darwin’s theory lay at the foundation of the most murderous ideologies in the history of man
Despite whatever rose colored glasses Coyne may be wearing when he looks at his beloved Darwinian theory, the consequences for societies at large, from ‘Darwinian speculations’, have been horrendously and catastrophically bad,
Coyne still believes that information is relevant. It’s not. Powerful people do what they want to do. Period.
The Blind Watchmaker is dead