Discovery Institute Exploits James von Brunn

We should have known that there was no bottom to the Seattle slime pit. The neo-theocrats at the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture (a/k/a the Discoveroids) have once again reached new depths.

For a sampling of the lows they’ve already achieved, there’s the allegation of links between Darwin’s theory and Hitler. Not only that, but also Communism. However, even those monstrous lies aren’t enough for the Discoveroids. They have an obsession to link every new and ghastly headline to Darwin.

Examples abound. They blamed evolution for the suicide of Jesse Kilgore. And let’s not forget that the Discoveroid propaganda mill claimed that the Columbine High School massacre was Darwin’s fault.

These people have taken the leftists’ advice: Never let a good crisis go to waste. They behave like a tribal witch doctor who takes advantage of every thunderstorm and rumbling of the volcano.

We’ve recently been writing about their latest shabby enterprise — linking Darwin to James von Brunn’s maniacal shooting at the Holocaust Memorial Museum. Our first post on this new Discoveroid disgrace is here, and when the Discoveroids persisted, we followed up with this.

Now they’re at it again. We present to you, dear reader, some excerpts from Whitewashing Darwinism’s Ongoing Moral Legacy, which appears at the Discoveroid blog. It’s by David Klinghoffer, a “senior fellow” in the Discoveroid hierarchy. The bold font was added by us:

Is it somehow petty, offensive, exploitative, and beyond the pale to point out how the Holocaust Memorial Museum shooter, who murdered a guard on Wednesday, writes about evolution in his sick manifesto? Should it be considered beneath one’s dignity to quote the man and let his words speak for themselves?

We’ve already explained that von Brunn’s babbling was clearly not about Darwin’s theory, but Klinghoffer just can’t let it go. Let’s read on:

James von Brunn, the suspect in question, is a white supremacist, a bitter anti-Semite, a Holocaust-denier, a wacked out conspiracy theorist, who served more than 6 years in a federal prison for attempted kidnapping. All this is fair game to report. Everyone agrees to that.

Yes. We agree — to that. Let’s continue with Klinghoffer’s hit-piece:

But the fact that he writes of “Natural Law: the species are improved through in-breeding, natural selection and mutation. Only the strong survive. Cross-breeding Whites with species lower on the evolutionary scale diminishes the White gene-pool” — that’s somehow inappropriate to note in public?

One can certainly note that von Brunn wrote it, but it’s an impossible stretch to attribute the imperative of racial in-breeding to Darwin — which is what Klinghoffer continues to do. Here’s more:

That seems to be the message from the media, which has ignored the fact, and from some readers who have responded to my blog on the subject. I realize the topic is uncomfortable for all sides in the evolution debate.

The only discomfort we’re experiencing is watching David continue to write buffoonish essays. Moving along:

So let’s try to step back and consider this rationally.

We’re all for that, but is David up to the challenge? Let’s see another excerpt, but for this one, we’ll have to insert some subtle commentary where Klinghoffer runs off the tracks.

From Darwin’s own musings on the logic of genocide [What?], to his cousin Francis Galton’s influential advocacy of eugenics [What?], to the Darwin/monkey statuette on Lenin’s desk [What?], to Hitler’s Mein Kampf with its evolutionary theme [What?], to the biology textbook at the center of the Scopes trial that advocated racism and eugenics [What?], to the modern eugenics movement right here in the U.S., to recent school shootings in which the student murderers invoked natural selection [What?], to yesterday’s tragedy at the Holocaust Memorial Museum [What?], and much more along the way — the thread is persistent, if widely ignored.

We really can’t go on with any more of this. Darwin didn’t muse on the logic of genocide; Darwin’s cousin was paddling his own canoe — and besides, the practice of eugenics is at least as old as Sparta. This is the first we’ve heard of a statuette on Lenin’s desk. In Klinghoffer’s Discoveroid brain, he’s found the missing link that somehow makes Darwin responsible for the whole October Revolution. Hitler’s book didn’t have an evolutionary theme (any more than von Brunn’s babbling did — which it didn’t), and we’ve already been through the Columbine affair in an earlier post.

In short, there is more excrement flowing from Klinghoffer’s pen than there is on the floor of an understaffed 1,000-bed dysentery ward.

Click over to the Discoveroid blog and read Klinghoffer’s rant for yourself, if you can handle that kind of thing. We’ve spend quite enough time on it already.

Important Update: We’re inspired by Klingofffer’s courageous disclosure of that statuette on Lenin’s desk. Following his brilliant example, we’ve decided to reveal the effects a creationist think tank can have on a city. Bizarre Killings Stun Seattle Area. Ideas have consequences!

Copyright © 2009. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

11 responses to “Discovery Institute Exploits James von Brunn

  1. In one if his replies to comments about his “thought experiment” blog, David says, “What he [Hitler] did believe and put into action is much better reflected in Vol. 1, Ch. 11, “Nation and Race,” which is pure Darwin: “Struggle is always a mean for improving a species’ health and power of resistance and, therefor, a cause of its higher development,” etc.”

    I said, Pure BS. That is no more “pure Darwin” than the crusades were pure God’s will. As Turmarion says, David “is just engaging in talking points and ugly slurs…”

    It seems from his posts on this topic and his numerous comments, David is not interested in discussion but in asserting his fallacious ideas. I get the impression that he is sitting back thinking, “Well, I really got their goat on this one.”


    There is really no discussing David’s writings. He doesn’t give a s**t what anyone else thinks. He doesn’t care if he gets his facts wrong. He doesn’t care if his leaps of fancy aren’t based on truth or reality.

  2. That’s a typo. It’s “In one OF his replies to comments…”

  3. Klinghoffer, Darwin, although his information and available technology was not up to today’s standards, was right about selection and common ancestry. Nothing you can say about how evil it is to accept that fact will change the fact. No matter how hard you wish on a star of pray your lips off, it doesn’t work that way. Evolution happens, the theory of evolution is well tested, and there is nothing in those tests that suggest the hand of a designer, supernatural or not.

    Your slimy attempt to convince people to reject the theory based on appeal to consequences betrays your desperation and fear. Tough s^&t!

    Grow up. Show some balls and some intelligence, provide some f^*king evidence for your childish belief system instead of playing f^*king games with suckers minds.

    Sorry, Curmy, this f^*ker has really pissed me off.

  4. BTW, Curmy, your writing is brilliant.

  5. Tundra Boy says: “Sorry, Curmy, this f^*ker has really pissed me off.”

    You’re giving the comments filter a real workout. Besides, what’s the big deal here? That’s the way creationism operates. All the best people are doing it.

  6. I find it ironic that Klinghoffer believes that inbreeding improves the race. Obviously he never had a genetics course. Inbreeding leads to “inbreeding depression” and an increase in the frequency of recessive disorders in the population. OK, I’ve got the solution. Let all these wingnuts inbreed and leave the rest of us alone.

  7. Biokid says: “I find it ironic that Klinghoffer believes that inbreeding improves the race.”

    Perhaps Klinghoffer is from Arkansas.

  8. “All the best people are doing it.”

    All the best people? In which universe?

  9. Yep, that’s the standard creationist career-track: when all of your arguments are soundly refuted by commenters on your own blog, start posting your crap on a blog that doesn’t allow comments.

  10. No need for comments when your blog reveals The Trvth!

  11. “to the biology textbook at the center of the Scopes trial that advocated racism and eugenics [What?]”

    This one is kind of true. As in the book did imply approval of both racism and eugenics. However, the book at the core of the Scope’s trial was the creationist textbook. One of the main reasons that the ACLU backed Scopes was because of this.

    As you said many times though what has truth got to do with getting out “THE TRUTH” about ID *rolls eyes*