Culture Darwinism Intelligent Design News Science

In the March for Science, what hats will Darwin’s fans wear?

Spread the love

We learn from Tracy Vence at The Scientist that evolutionary biologist Patricia Princehouse, interviewed, is organizing a March for Science in Cleveland:

Patricia Princehouse: I never expected to be an activist of any kind, but when the creationists tried to take over the public school science curricula in Ohio, I had to say something. At first, when we went to Columbus, I said I would only do the science part—I had nothing to say about the legal things or the politics. We went down there, and we said what [they were] teaching . . . was wrong. And, basically, they said, We don’t care. It’s what our constituents want. I was very naive. I was completely floored by this. Eventually I had to look into the other dimensions of this. We went back and we said, Well, it’s illegal. It’s not only bad science, it’s illegal. We were stunned when they came back with We don’t care. It’s what our constituents want.

For whatever reason, one senses that that is not the whole story.

TS: What’s your response to those who’ve expressed concerns that the march could politicize science?

PP: From the time that people started, for example, the National Center for Science Education back in the 1980s, scientists have been concerned, you know, Don’t annoy people; The people that are attacking science will go away. That has not worked. Instead, they have gotten the ear of the press, and the mainstream press will cover attacks on science like crazy, and give them all kinds of credibility that they don’t deserve. We need to address that the anti-science movement has made simply doing science political in some way.More.

It’s astonishing that someone can actually think, in the age of massive peer review scandals, rethinking evolution, and assorted other cataclysms, that all the problems are caused by “the anti-science movement.”

There is no anti-science movement. There are a lot of people who are fed up with government of, by, and for the dinosaurs.

But now, about those hats. What say we get Muppet laboratories to design them?

See also: Geologist on why a scientists’ march on Washington is a bad idea An increasingly typical (but usually unspoken) response to “I Marched!” is, “Who cares?” Why not save the jet fuel by staying home and helping educate the community? Especially if your big thing is the environment?

Follow UD News at Twitter!

12 Replies to “In the March for Science, what hats will Darwin’s fans wear?

  1. 1
    asauber says:

    Will they be carrying I’m With Piltdown —-> signs?

    Andrew

  2. 2
    Mung says:

    My bet is that they will be wearing a strainer.

  3. 3
    rvb8 says:

    I doubt it asauber, as it was scientists that were sceptical of Piltdown, and eventually uncovered the hoax.

    As for scientists marching, that is a demographic that is almost entirely benign, when they are angry, something is very wrong.

  4. 4
  5. 5
    asauber says:

    something is very wrong

    It sure is.

    Andrew

  6. 6
    Axel says:

    Indeed, there is an anti-science movement ! And PP is evidently is an enthusiastic lobbyist for it.

    Oh, the irony ! What will future generations think of the wilful lunacy of the atheist nescientists of today ?

  7. 7
    Axel says:

    Indeed, there is an anti-science movement ! And PP is evidently an enthusiastic lobbyist for it.

    Oh, the irony ! What will future generations think of the wilful lunacy of the atheist nescientists of today ?

  8. 8
    Axel says:

    To adapt Pauli’s ‘bon mot’ regarding Dirac : There is no god but scientism, and Princehouse is its prophet.

  9. 9

    Just more evidence of the culture war that is raging in the United States.

    “…the March for Science, which presents “colonization, racism, immigration, native rights, sexism, ableism,” etc. as “scientific issues.”

    http://www.evolutionnews.org/2.....03472.html

  10. 10
    bornagain77 says:

    semi related:

    Unbelievable? Are atheists stealing from God? Frank Turek vs David Smalley – 4th February 2017
    http://www.premierchristianrad.....id-Smalley

    podcast – On this episode of ID the Future, David Klinghoffer reviews Tom Bethell’s book Darwin’s House of Cards.
    http://www.discovery.org/multi.....-new-book/

  11. 11
    Eric Anderson says:

    There is no anti-science movement.

    Exactly. At least not in broad strokes.

    What I personally am opposed to is philosophy masquerading as science. That is the primary issue with materialistic Darwinian evolution, for example.

    As far as other allegedly “anti-sciences” stances, such as healthy skepticism about the claims of catastrophic global warming propaganda, I could add that I am opposed to political and socio-economic agendas masquerading as science.

    In either case, few who challenge the consensus are against “science.”* In so many cases, what they are trying to do is protect science and keep it objective. Protect it from the philosophy and from the political and socio-economic agendas.

    That is the way science should be carried out. Those who pound the pulpit for their agenda in the name of science are the ones causing problems for real science.

    —–

    * Please don’t misunderstand me. There are plenty of non-consensus nutcases who are abusing objective science. The desire to use science to uphold one’s agenda runs deep on all sides of the political and social spectrum. We need to be alert to it, whatever the source.

    But that there is some large organized movement among the masses that is “anti-science” is nonsense.

  12. 12

Leave a Reply