Michael Shermer is complaining about the Cancel Culture Darwinians like himself helped create

_{Denyse O'Leary

January 22, 2023

Academic Freedom, Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Now that it is attacking the revered Darwinian E. O. Wilson (1929–2021):

Quillette podcast host Jonathan Kay talks to book author and Skeptic editor Michael Shermer about why scientific media, professional organizations, and academic departments are increasingly succumbing to progressive ideological fads.

The trouble is, it’s unclear what can be done now. Most of the Woke are as full of self-righteousness as an overfilled balloon is with air. That said, ideas welcome.

You may also wish to read: Woke comes back to bite the Darwinists — and they deserve it. Intelligent design people stood up not only for our colleagues and those who think as we do but we also stood up for freedom for people. (Michael Egnor)

Comments

Off topic: Dr. Cornelius Hunter's first part, of a six part video series, explaining exactly why Darwinian evolution is a religious theory, not a scientific theory, has just been uploaded,
Evolution is a Religious Theory Part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHKAgioMekg
bornagain77_{January 28, 2023
January
01
Jan
28
28
2023
04:22 AM
4
04
22
AM
PDT}

Martin_r at 5, Dawkins is a journalist? When did that happen? A degree is required. Writing a guest article does not count.relatd_{January 25, 2023
January
01
Jan
25
25
2023
08:17 AM
8
08
17
AM
PDT}

CD, you are so ridiculous :))) No, THE GUARDIAN is the perfect place where to learn what biologists are and how they fight each other, because the theory is a big mess :)))) We are looking at 3 biologists, and each has a different view on the problem :))))))))))))) But let me add this, from the same THE GUARDIAN article: EO Wilson:
There is no dispute between me and Richard Dawkins and there never has been, because he’s a journalist, and journalists are people that report what the scientists have found and the arguments I’ve had have actually been with scientists doing research.
Dawkins -- a journalist --- is commenting on bad design :))))))))martin_r_{January 25, 2023
January
01
Jan
25
25
2023
06:56 AM
6
06
56
AM
PDT}

Martin _r You should probably stop getting your science news from The Guardian.chuckdarwin_{January 25, 2023
January
01
Jan
25
25
2023
06:30 AM
6
06
30
AM
PDT}

Off topic: Dr. Tour's next video is uploaded:
Dr. Tour SHINES LIGHT on Scientific Paradoxes on Origin of Life - Steve Benner, Part 03 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=atxmIZw3DdA
Previous episodes
Ep 1: https://youtu.be/4rwPi1miWu4 Ep 2: https://youtu.be/aUOZh4zmrXo Ep 3: https://youtu.be/v3A8_ezYlZY Ep 4: https://youtu.be/N_on6LK6Etc Ep 5: https://youtu.be/t5PfBzQUjW8 Ep 6: https://youtu.be/ZtitTE2BavU Ep 7: https://youtu.be/cL0NIFk1grE
bornagain77_{January 24, 2023
January
01
Jan
24
24
2023
06:17 PM
6
06
17
PM
PDT}

and THE GUARDIAN article continues: (a 3rd Darwinist comes in, professor Koentges, claiming that none of these two famous Darwinists understands the theory of evolution )
According to one expert in evolution and development, Professor Georgy Koentges of Warwick University, the central problem is the impossibility of defining "fitness", whether in organisms, organs, cells, genes or even gene regulatory DNA regions. As a result, he sees both Dawkins and Wilson as "straw men" in this debate. "Dawkins has a lot of unnecessary rhetoric in his review," he said this weekend. "He is usually on the spot, but it has to be said that some of his arguments are based on older models of calculating fitness. The difficulty is in assigning what Darwin called 'fitness' to a particular genetic feature. They are trying to set basic fitness conditions which they believe work over very long periods of time. "This is a fantasy. There is no such thing as a good or bad gene. It doesn't work that simply. Genes are used and re-used in different contexts, each of which might have a different overall fitness value for a given organism or a group." https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jun/24/battle-of-the-professors
THIS IS A FANTASY :))))))))))) I like this Darwinian professor.martin_r_{January 23, 2023
January
01
Jan
23
23
2023
11:15 AM
11
11
15
AM
PDT}

speaking about E.O. Wilson, let me add this (despite a bit off topic): Dawkins was reviewing E.O. Wilson's book:
I am not being funny when I say of Edward Wilson's latest book that there are interesting and informative chapters on human evolution, and on the ways of social insects (which he knows better than any man alive), and it was a good idea to write a book comparing these two pinnacles of social evolution, but unfortunately one is obliged to wade through many pages of erroneous and downright perverse misunderstandings of evolutionary theory https://www.theguardian.com/science/2012/jun/24/battle-of-the-professors
When you consider, that deceased E.O. Wilson was called "Darwin of the 21st century", and then you see Dawkins saying that Wilson does not understand the theory of evolution, so how on Earth should people like Seversky, Chuckdarwin and Co. understand it and school creationists :))))) Through the years, I was accused so many times that I don't understand the theory of evolution :))))) How could I ? When "Darwin of the 21st century" did not understand it as well (according to Dawkins) :)))))) Seversky, Chuckdarwin, could you clarify ?martin_r_{January 23, 2023
January
01
Jan
23
23
2023
11:11 AM
11
11
11
AM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply