Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

PZ Myers sneaks into press teleconference … !

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

I was in a press conference this afternoon for the Expelled documentary (about scientists who are persecuted for questioning Darwinism and other materialist evolution theories). Ben Stein, the film’s lead, producer Mark Mathis, and others were there.

Mathis confirmed that he kicked PZ Myers out of the film to make a point (Myers endorses the destruction of the careers of those who question Darwinism, yet he was really upset about getting booted from a film).

And … Myers apparently somehow got into the press conference itself! – “under false pretences” according to the moderator. He was told to be quiet, and he rung off (to the best of my knowledge). He told the media to phone HIM instead. Greg, at Hollywood Jesus live blogged the affair and is promising updates.

For more, go here.

Pretty clever operator, the man who said,

The only appropriate response should involve some form of righteous fury, much butt-kicking, and the public firing of some teachers, many school board members, and vast numbers of sleazy, far-right politicians … I say, screw the polite words and careful rhetoric. It’s time for scientists to break out the steel-toed boots and brass knuckles, and get out there and hammer on the lunatics and idiots.

Strangely, while he was in the telemeeting, Myers insisted that Darwinism had nothing to do with Nazi Germany. Of course, historically, Darwin was an enormous influence on the Nazis because his Descent of Man appeared to put racism on a scientific footing. That does not mean (and the Expelled guys made clear that they did not think it means) that today’s Darwinists have anything to do with Nazism. But it is a historical fact that Darwin was one of the Nazis’ heroes, as historian Richard Weikart painstakingly shows.

Note: I update the Expelled story at this page, to keep it all in one place. So if you are interested in my coverage, it is all there by date.

Comments
tribune 7 - if Darwin clearly influenced Nazi philosophy and we can blame Darwin for that then logically can we not also blame the other things that clearly influenced Nazi philosophy in equal or greater measure? After all, from the quotes I've just read it's clear to me who influenced Hitler more and it ain't Darwin! I've not yet made my mind up just yet, selective quotes don't often tell the whole story but I'd be interested in seeing where Hitler directly quotes or acknowledges Darwin. Links anybody?f.blair
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
06:54 AM
6
06
54
AM
PDT
BTW, note some of the founders of the American Birth Control League (Planned Parenthood) C. C. Little and Lothrop Stoddard. The American Birth Control League changed its name to Planned Parenthood in 1942.tribune7
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
06:51 AM
6
06
51
AM
PDT
poachy @ 37: It is just irrelevant that SS belt buckles said Gott Mit Uns. Indeed true. That is a debunked atheist talking point. I had hoped for better from Professor MacNeill: Vox Day "The Irrational Atheist", p212: "Onfray writes not a single word about any of the fifty-two atheist mass murderers of the twentieth century, he does not even mention Stalin or Mao, despite devoting more than six pages of the book to inaccurately claiming that Adolf Hitler was a Christian, based in part upon the Gott mit uns11 belt buckle that the German army inherited from the royal house of Prussia. He is obviously unaware that it was not Hitler who gave the Wehrmacht that motto, but Otto von Bismarck, whose imperial standard contained the slogan in 1870; similar Gott mit uns buckles from World War I further prove the falsity of Onfray’s argument. Moreover, the Wehrmacht were not Nazis—the 950,000-strong Nazi army personally sworn to Hitler was the Waffen-SS, and their motto was not Gott mit uns but Meine Ehre heißt Treue12." 11 “God with us. 12 “My honor is named loyalty.” Day's writing style is bombastic at times, but his research is detailed and impeccable.Charles
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
06:51 AM
6
06
51
AM
PDT
Allen --If Stein’s assertion is valid, then Naziism of the kind promulgated by Hitler should have arisen in all of those countries, most notably in England. Because Darwin clearly influenced Nazi philosophy and providing moral backing to the "Final Solution" doesn't mean it's the reason why Nazism triumphed in Germany -- the lack of Common Law (and Constitutional) protections of freedom, the Great Depression and the fact that Germany lost World War I were much more important reasons. But as it's pointed out, Darwin ideas clearly had its influence in the democracies. It provided the moral underpinning for massive forced sterilizations, American racism and lives with us to this day in Planned Parenthood's abortion agenda. Planned Parenthood's original name was the American Birth Control League during which it published "Eugenic Sterilization: An Urgent Need" by Ernst Rudin in its monthly journal. Rudin headed the German Society for Rassenhygiene (Race-hygiene) and was basically Hitler's go-to guy on those matters. Note even Wiki recognizes his connection to (Social) Darwinismtribune7
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
06:46 AM
6
06
46
AM
PDT
Who is Mark Mathis? Has he been expelled here too?sparc
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
06:31 AM
6
06
31
AM
PDT
poachy - out of interest what are your qualifications regarding biology? I'm no professor, just an interested skeptical amateur but I'd not claim to know more then a professor in *any* subject, never mind biology. If I did then likely I'd be a professor too at that point! Don't get me wrong, I don't think you have to have a doctorate to come up with relevant criticisms of the prevailing theory's, but poachy seems to be painting with a very broad brush.f.blair
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
06:30 AM
6
06
30
AM
PDT
After reading the quotes in question I'm afraid to say I'll have to have a good hard think about the whole subject. After all, who better knows Hitlers mind then Hitler himself? I've not seen expelled yet, but this will certainly be in the back of my mind when I do. I'll be interested to see if it's addressed in the film.f.blair
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
06:27 AM
6
06
27
AM
PDT
Allen Due to disrupting threads with continued denialism you’re now in moderation.
Does this mean Allen is expelled? No intelligence allowed here.sparc
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
06:14 AM
6
06
14
AM
PDT
I just do not get why Dawkins was interviewed after a showing, and yet the kicked PZ out of the same thing. I would be mad also Not if you understood it to be a random natural event. it is quite unscientific to infer design you know.tribune7
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
05:57 AM
5
05
57
AM
PDT
[Off-Topic. For the edification of Professor MacNeill] "All that's left is to prove that in nature there is no frontier between the organic and the inorganic." -- Adolph Hitler, to his aidesj
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
05:21 AM
5
05
21
AM
PDT
Thank you for stopping Allen's posts. I always found his presumption that he knew more about evolution than us just because he is a biology professor annoying. And quoting Mein Kampf in an attempt to try and show that Hitler thought he was doing God's work was a low blow. Hitler was a sociopath and distorted anything and everything he could get his hands on to justify his evil beliefs. It is just irrelevant that SS belt buckles said Gott Mit Uns. Religion is just one of the things that the Nazis twisted beyond all recognition.poachy
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
04:12 AM
4
04
12
AM
PDT
Interesting article here: Eugenics and the Nazis -- the California connection I knew eugenic science was fashionable in early 20th century America but I didn't know the Nazi eugenics program was modeled after one first proposed in California.DaveScot
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
03:47 AM
3
03
47
AM
PDT
Allen Due to disrupting threads with continued denialism you're now in moderation. If you want to quote Mein Kampf at length do it on your own blog.DaveScot
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
03:22 AM
3
03
22
AM
PDT
PS to DS: I see how the Wiki article -- I suppose ever predictably -- delicately speaks of Eugenics as "philosophy." In fact, it was put up as SCIENCE, i.e. applied evolution.kairosfocus
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
02:45 AM
2
02
45
AM
PDT
Folks: It may be worth the while to read Vox Day's response [warning fat PDF -- book is well worth the buying in my estimation] to the now much touted atheist arguments coming from the recent spate of books. [His response actually takes in the relevant criminality statistics, Mr MacNeill. BFast's instincts are right.] GEM of TKIkairosfocus
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
02:38 AM
2
02
38
AM
PDT
FtK re; eugenics may not be all that bad Scientifically, of course it isn't. Darwin was 100% correct in saying that only the most ignorant allow their worst animals to breed and the only exception made to that animal husbandry rule is in the case of man allowing the worst of men to breed. As far as that goes it's a rule in agriculture in general and it's long proven it works - you don't propagate the sickly, diseased plants in your garden do you if you've got healthy plants to choose from? Of course not. That's the scientific case and it's indisputable. If it weren't for moral objections the scientific case for selection of the fittest in humans for breeding purposes would easily carry the day. In the early years of the 20th century even in the United States it WAS carrying the day. Eugenics was all the rage amongst the intelligentsia. DaveScot
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
02:21 AM
2
02
21
AM
PDT
Allen Crack out your history books and study the eugenics movement in western culture in the first half of the 20th century. Or just get the Reader's Digest condensed version here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics Once you've become informed if you still deny the link between Darwin and Hitler then you're in denial. I'm beginning to think you live in a constant state of denial but as always I'll first presume you're merely ignorant of the facts. DaveScot
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
01:58 AM
1
01
58
AM
PDT
Re: 17 Ftk, is there a written transcript somewhere? I'm having trouble distinguishing the voices I'm hearing.Berceuse
March 29, 2008
March
03
Mar
29
29
2008
01:35 AM
1
01
35
AM
PDT
Allan_MacNeill:
that explains why the prisons are stuffed with evolutionary biologists, whereas the prison population of Christians, Muslims, and other believers in a faith that is usually characterized on this blog as directly contradicting evolutionary biology are nowhere to be found in the overflowing prisons of America.
Compare apples and spider webs much? To make a more realistic comparison, please compare the biologists with Ph.D. theologians. I don't know how they compare, but much more reasonably than your suggestion. Alternatively, compare the ratio of prison inmates that accept darwinism, v. the inmates to hold to a religious view -- cross-compare with the average of society. Again, I don't know how they will compare, but such a comparison would be at least vaguely fair.bFast
March 28, 2008
March
03
Mar
28
28
2008
09:56 PM
9
09
56
PM
PDT
Whoops, my link in #22 didn't work. Eugenics may not be all that bad according to Dawkins.FtK
March 28, 2008
March
03
Mar
28
28
2008
09:52 PM
9
09
52
PM
PDT
Allen_MacNeill @15 The history is clear. In Germany what developed was Nazism. Meanwhile, what developed in Russia was dialectical materialism. And what developed the U.S. and Great Britain were social darwinism and eugenics. All of these, while distinct, were nevertheless straightforward logical extensions of Darwin's theorizings.
Natural Selection as affecting civilized nations ...But some remarks on the action of Natural Selection on civilized nations may be worth adding... With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the mained, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed. Charles Darwin, The Descent of Man (pp 133-134, 1st Ed.)
How nice...jstanley01
March 28, 2008
March
03
Mar
28
28
2008
08:47 PM
8
08
47
PM
PDT
What is really sad is how the Darwinists try to pin Nazi anti-Semitism on the German Martin Luther just because of some little pamphlet he wrote 400 years earlier.poachy
March 28, 2008
March
03
Mar
28
28
2008
08:42 PM
8
08
42
PM
PDT
To transform the men into nonthinking, unfeeling machines, Himmler needed to indoctrinate them into a secret society of their own. He assured them that a master race was developing, and if the inferior races stood in their way the scientific belief in the "survival of the fittest" dictated that these races had to be exterminated. [...] The SS themselves were convinced that they were the first stage of the superman mutation. The master race was being bred. With the undesirables out of the way, the pace would quicken and a transformation of humanity would accelerate. Erwin W. Lutzer, Hitler's Cross, pp.92-4
JPCollado
March 28, 2008
March
03
Mar
28
28
2008
08:36 PM
8
08
36
PM
PDT
[...] Expelled: the movie, and being a jerk The saga continues: see here and here. UPDATE: more here (you will find a link to the audio in the [...]Myers, Expelled: the movie, and being a jerk « SUMMA PHILOSOPHIAE
March 28, 2008
March
03
Mar
28
28
2008
08:23 PM
8
08
23
PM
PDT
Charles @19. The laugh is right toward the beginning...it's hard to tell for sure whether it's really PZ laughing or someone laughing at him. I'm just being ornery due to his loony antics.FtK
March 28, 2008
March
03
Mar
28
28
2008
08:20 PM
8
08
20
PM
PDT
I generally try to stay out of the Hitler/Eugenics/Evolution discussions, but when one considers some of the things that Dawkins has said, it does make one wonder about where science might wander again if given the opportunity.FtK
March 28, 2008
March
03
Mar
28
28
2008
08:11 PM
8
08
11
PM
PDT
Dr. MacNeill, I am not sure your argument is logical. Just because Darwin's ideas did not contribute to the racism seen in National Socialism in the other countries does not mean it was not a contributing factor to how the Jews were perceived in inter war Germany. We can argue over whether it was a necessary condition or not but it seems to have contributed. Just how much I certainly do not know. There did not seem to be much that was needed to raise anti Jewish behavior in central Europe during previous times so it is certainly debatable what it contributed in the 1930's. Ben Stein is a Jew so he may be sensitive to the issue and this may be one of the reasons he has participated in the movie. I have heard, though I do not have the reference at hand that Darwin was a contributing factor to German militarism prior to WWI. I will have to see if I can find where I heard that. This had nothing to do with Jews. I believe in some of the other countries you mentioned that other forms of undesirable behavior arose such as the eugenics movement. Again we can argue whether Darwin's ideas were necessary or not or if Darwin himself would have endorsed the eugenics movement. But all of these things happened after Darwin's ideas got purchase. You could also argue that there has always been religious extremists who have taken their dogma and justified killing and subjugation because of it. And that would be true and we could debate how much. The two most pointed to instances in Christianity are the Crusades, almost a thousand years ago and the Inquisition, about 500 years ago. This does not necessarily reflect on the religion in general and it core beliefs. But I doubt that anything would get settled here if we decided to discuss the issue.jerry
March 28, 2008
March
03
Mar
28
28
2008
08:09 PM
8
08
09
PM
PDT
Allen MacNeill, I have written extensively about the issue you raise. In Descent of Man, Darwin made racism sound scientific. I am NOT saying that anyone sees it that way today. But they did then. Specifically in the era that birthed Hitler. The main reason some people don't see it that way today is political incorrectness. Darwin's theory, as such, should make racism and the war of all against all a reasonable proposition. But, of course, his theory is not true. Natural selection is not an important source of new information.O'Leary
March 28, 2008
March
03
Mar
28
28
2008
07:58 PM
7
07
58
PM
PDT
FtK @ 17 PZ’s laugh toward the beginning has a ring of dementia to it How soon (~minutes) into the call, and how do you know it was PZ's laugh?Charles
March 28, 2008
March
03
Mar
28
28
2008
07:51 PM
7
07
51
PM
PDT
I've gotta add one more thing here. Can you *imagine* what would happen if the tables were turned here and an ID supporter pulled something like that?FtK
March 28, 2008
March
03
Mar
28
28
2008
07:48 PM
7
07
48
PM
PDT
1 2 3

Leave a Reply