Darwinism Intelligent Design

How materialism is enforced when the evidence is against it

Spread the love

Fashion mags rule:

A recent University of Michigan survey claims “Evolution now accepted by majority of Americans,” or 54 percent. Salon declared the debate over, posting the headline “Science quietly wins one of the right’s longstanding culture wars,” calling it a “setback for purveyors of pseudoscience.” What role does information suppression play in this trend?

In 2006, an article in the journal Nature reported “70 years of enforced atheism and official support for darwinism in the Soviet Union” were causing a public backlash against evolution in post-Soviet Russia. During the Soviet era, virtually everyone accepted Darwinism, largely due to government indoctrination and a lack of intellectual freedom. Could a similar intolerance be responsible, at least in part, for increased public acceptance of evolution in the United States?

More than 1,100 scientists have signed a list agreeing they are “skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.” As a scientist, I’ve signed that list. But as an attorney, I can attest that many of these scientists — and others who are afraid to sign the list — face discrimination because they won’t toe the Darwinian line.

Casey Luskin, “Why You Only Hear One Side Of The Debate Over Life’s Origin” at The Federalist

Luskin probably doesn’t know the half of it. But then he probably knows that.

6 Replies to “How materialism is enforced when the evidence is against it

  1. 1
  2. 2
    jerry says:

    This article by Casey Luskin is a major set back for Intelligent Design. Because it implicitly aligns ID with non scientific points of view. It undermines ID as proposing better science.

    It does not define evolution but seems to accept the definition that is based on DNA changes or the production of proteins.

    Based on this article I am not sure that Casey Luskin understands ID. I would also object to Luskin’s interpretation as non scientific.

  3. 3
    Seversky says:

    More than 1,100 scientists have signed a list agreeing they are “skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.”

    Project Steve is a list of scientists, restricted to just those with a given name of Steven or Stephen or variants thereof, who have signed in support the following statement concerning evolution,

    Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to “intelligent design”, to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation’s public schools.

    As of Jan 28 2021, 1465 Steves have signed the statement.

    Casey must have missed this. I’m sure he wouldn’t have ignored it deliberately.

  4. 4
    Lieutenant Commander Data says:

    @Sewersky

    Project Steve is a list of scientists

    Project engineers biologists when is ready? :)))

    There is nothing random in biology, there can be errors but only because preset processes didn’t succesfully complete their tasks.
    “Remove the teleological element in the description of DNA and genes and you strip them of everything that makes them explanatorily useful in biology.”(E. Feser)
    PS: if we are able to explain functioning of a cell that means there is directedness . We can with the mention we are too stvpid to understand all.

  5. 5
    ET says:

    Earth to seversky- Not ONE of those Steve’s can tell us how blind and mindless processes did it. No one cares what they signed. People care what they can demonstrate. And as of today they are demonstrating that they are totally clueless.

    Casey didn’t miss that. And we all know that you are ignoring it, deliberately

  6. 6
    Silver Asiatic says:

    The Steves said

    Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution,

    Patterns and processes? Evolution itself is a pattern and process. So there are debates. It has taken them several decades to admit this. They still won’t allow debates about evolutionary processes in schools – it’s illegal to question it. While at the same time, supposedly, there are no weaknesses in the theory. This is the jumbled confusion that we’re accustomed to from such a group – Steves or not.

    there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred

    Bacteria evolved into humans and nobody has a doubt about that, even though they can’t even show bacteria evolving into a single-celled organism. This only illustrates the gullibility of the Steves or lack of scientific integrity.

    [and no serious scientific doubt] or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence.

    Larry Moran thinks it’s a minor mechanism. But aside from that, the Steves answer this:

    “skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.”

    By saying that natural selection is a major mechanism but entirely avoid giving evidence that it can account for the complexity of life – because they don’t have it.

Leave a Reply