David Klinghoffer: The paper acknowledges an “explosive increase in dinosaurian abundance.” As Dr. Bechly says, that’s the kind of observation you wouldn’t be surprised at coming from the dreaded “creationists,” and yet it’s a straightforward finding of mainstream paleontology. Watch the rest below, and enjoy.
Klinghoffer: Hedin’s persecutor, Jerry Coyne, “was a prominent academic, enjoying maximum career safety at the University of Chicago. Let’s be honest: between the two, there was no contest. Coyne could move against Hedin without fear, and he did. On the other hand, Hedin’s career was on the line, and both knew it.” Sounds like Darwinism as she is spoke.
Klinghoffer: Dr. Bechly recently penned a blockbuster 14-part series debunking Kimberella as a solution to the Cambrian Explosion. In case you missed it, it is a monumental, and morally important, piece of scholarship. The Cambrian event, a massive saltation, remains an unsolvable mystery for Darwinists, with all that implies about the evidence for purpose and design.
Well, it’s nice someone is thinking about that. A 400-page doorstop may be intellectually flawless but it isn’t going to reach the people who will never read it.
Because what our betters really want is that their nonsense, whatever it stems from and wherever it leads, always be dressed up as “science.”
David Klinghoffer: The truth is that placing a man in the Monkey House was intended as an education for the public in Darwinian evolution. As John West has said, Ota Benga was “only one of thousands of indigenous peoples who were put on display in America in the name of Darwinian evolution.”
A vid, less than three minutes, by John West, presents some evidence. From David Klinghoffer: But see how much nihilism has been justified and advocated by some very smart and influential people in the name of evolutionary theory.
He quotes from a post by paleontologist Gunter Bechly on everyone’s favorite cuddly pet, prehistoric scorpions.
If one is just looking for something to be snarky about, it is best not to engage with any serious issues. In that case, puffing popular Darwinism at every opportunity is the best choice available. There’s sure no Nobel for that.
David Gelernter was NOT flung out on his ear for doubting Darwin. And, how many people much care now what P.Z. Myers thinks? Is ultra-Darwinism past its sell-by date?
Under the circumstances, it is a testament to human decency that more Darwinians AREN’T racists.
An American conservative thinkmag published geneticist Razib Khan, glorifying Darwinism, and he turned out to have apparent racist links. Then someone with even more pronounced apparent racist links rose to defend him.
Williamson lives in a time when people don’t need to know correct facts so much as correct positions. Popular Darwinism thrives in that atmosphere because even to raise problems with a Cool theory. however serious the problems, brands one as unCool. You are never supposed to have problems with a Cool theory.
Recently, we covered Evolution News and Science Today editor David Klinghoffer’s response to a sneer by Kevin Williamson against ID at National Review (where Klinghoffer used to work, incidentally). Klinghoffer cited a number of respectable thinkers who have held Darwinism in little esteem—which led to our publishing a separate and different long list of such Read More…
Klinghoffer offers his vid, The Information Enigma by way of rebuttal. But rebuttal almost misses the point. Today’s Darwinism is a snipe on Twitter, a swipe in passing, a slogan on a whiteboard, a well-practiced rant – not something it would make sense to ask anyone to support with reference to facts or coherent ideas. Williamson’s got that right. No arguing with fashion.