- Share
-
-
arroba
This is not an argument “ad Hitlerum”; merely a statement of fact.
And it is an important fact to keep in mind:
I’m still reeling at the stupidity of whoever at Scientific American decided to give a green light to publishing an article, “Denial of Evolution Is a Form of White Supremacy,” by Allison Hopper. The absurdity of tarring critics of Darwinism with racism boggles the mind — given how Darwin’s own legacy, down to today’s Alt-Right, is so tied up with racial pseudo-science, viciously denigrating Africans, African-Americans, and others. See, “On Evolution and Racism, Scientific American Goes to War Against the Truth.”
As a reminder of that historical reality, Evolution News has been republishing some of our past ample coverage on the theme. However, this had escaped me when it was first published: an essay at Tablet by Ohio State bioethicist Ashley K. Fernandes asking, “Why Did So Many Doctors Become Nazis?” Perhaps more so today than ever, there is a tendency to sanctify the medical profession, with the white coat serving as an icon of wisdom, compassion, and morality. But history offers a warning.
David Klinghoffer, “Following the Science, Doctors Joined the Nazis “In Droves”” at Evolution News and Science Today (July 28, 2021)
One possible explanation: The people at Scientific American were so full of themselves that they assumed that the only outcome of publishing a vicious and stupid article would be outrage at creationists.
The reality is that it finally gave all kinds of people — not just creationists — a chance to talk about Darwin’s white supremacy beliefs, something we had never been able to do before (because of the united elite bellowing that “Darwin opposed slavery!”). And then there is the role Darwinism played in Nazi dogma… They won’t be hearing the last of this any time soon.
But they put it on the table. We couldn’t have.
See also: At PJ Media: A response to religious claims made in Scientific American’s “denial of evolution is white supremacy” piece Bolyard: “I’m not here to debate the hows and whys of creationism. I’ll point you to Answers in Genesis for that. But I want to point out a couple of shameless strawmen in Hopper’s piece that discredit everything else she writes in this piece.” Of course. Hopper was almost certainly making it up as she went along, trusting that few readers had spent much time on the relevant literature.