Another ClimateGate — Creationism Coupling

It’s getting strange out there. In the Washington Examiner, which Wikipedia says is “a free daily newspaper published in Springfield, Virginia, and distributed around Washington, D.C. and its suburbs,” we read Keeping the lid on – and the science out.

It’s a column by Barbara Hollingsworth, described as the “Examiner’s local opinion editor.” Here are some excerpts, with bold added by us:

I now know that science is sometimes sacrificed to ideology, as exemplified by the recent scandal at the University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit and the ongoing attempt to silence proponents of intelligent design.

Yet another creationist is claiming some kind of kooky solidarity with skeptics in other fields of science. This is a further example of the phenomenon we wrote about here, which we titled the “vindication of all kooks” doctrine.

Let’s step back for a moment to take a look at the Washington Examiner. That Wikipedia article informs us that it “was purchased by conservative benefactor Philip Anschutz in October 2004.” We’ve written about him before. See: “Weekly Standard” Going Creationist? Wikipedia has an article about him: Philip Anschutz, in which we are told that he:

… has been an active patron of a number of religious and conservative causes [and he helped] fund the Discovery Institute, a think tank based in Seattle, Washington that promotes intelligent design and criticizes evolution.”

Okay, now we know what we’re dealing with. Barbara Hollingsworth is a columnist for a creationist-oriented publication. Let’s read on in her column:

More than 800 Ph.D.-level scientists around the world are seriously considering ID to explain the origin of life, but you’d never know it. Most do so clandestinely for fear of being ostracized by their peers or even forced out of their academic positions.

Lordy, lordy. She’s waving around that shabby list of dentists, proctologists, and political scientists the Discoveroids keep touting, while never mentioning a list indicating that over 100,000 scientists support evolution, including a large percentage involved in the biological sciences. See: Project Steve.

Clearly, Hollingsworth’s column is pure Discoveroid propaganda, but we continue:

Some have secretly contacted the Discovery Institute ( after researching ID, Stephen C. Meyer, author of “Signature in the Cell” — now in its fifth printing and one of’s top 10 science titles — recently told me over lunch.

Ohhhhhhh! Hollingsworth had lunch with Discoveroid “senior fellow” Stephen C. Meyer, and learned about creationists who “secretly contacted the Discovery Institute.” This is exciting! Here’s more:

Others, like Cold War dissidents making furtive contact with the West, arrange discreet meetings to discuss what “evolutionary biologists don’t want to talk about, the origins of the information in the digital code of DNA necessary to produce life.”

Can we take much more of this? No, but let’s see one more excerpt:

Isn’t it interesting that the vast majority of Americans have never heard any of these scientific challenges to Darwinism even though the scientific method is based on questioning existing theories?

These are heady times for creationists. Even Bruce Chapman, president of the Discovery Institute, is jumping on the ClimateGate bandwagon. See: “Hide the Decline” — the Mantra of Corruption.

Now that the Discoveroids think the “corrupt edifice of global warming” is crumbling, they imagine that creationism will emerge triumphant. But we suspect that they’re due to be disappointed.

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

6 responses to “Another ClimateGate — Creationism Coupling

  1. All the kooks are out in force these days. Its actually somewhat entertaining seeing them trot out such favorites as Moon Landing Hoax, Atlantis, and YEC. Even groups that have a slight credibility like aquatic ape, thecodont birds, and the like are singing. I saw one guy even say that the Hubble Space Telescope wasn’t really taking any pictures because it couldn’t see Pluto clearly. And his proof? Climategate. Sigh…

  2. “Barbara Hollingsworth: “…the ongoing attempt to silence proponents of intelligent design…”

    Given that they are free to say whatever they want outside of public school science class, where American History is just as “expelled” as their propaganda, I have yet to see any attempt to “silence” them.

    Maybe she has some information on the identity of the “Darwinists” who keep intercepting the proposals they must be submitting, like the one for alternate explanations of human origins that I solicited on Talk.Origins in 2007. 😉

  3. You know, you’d think the IDers would simply post online their testable hypotheses and proposed mechanisms though which an intelligent agency influences biological complexity. Since they must have them, right? Oh, wait….

  4. “testable hypotheses” –

    You are resorting to overkill.

    How about just asking for their “hypotheses”?

    “What sort of thing happened?” “What sort of thing might happen?” “What sort of thing did not, or could not, or will not happen?”

    Once we get some hypothetical scenario, then we can get around to asking how we can tell the difference between that scenario and something else.

  5. James F says:

    You know, you’d think the IDers would simply post online their testable hypotheses …

    Don’t be ridiculous! Their secrecy is perfectly understandable. It’s the same reason I don’t post the plans for my time machine. “Big Science” would only scoff, and I’d be “Expelled!” But with the collapse of global warming, I’ll get my revenge. Just you wait!

  6. TomS, true that. But since ID is really, truly, a Scientific Theory™ I figure I have to up the ante….

    S.C., just don’t go back and randomly kill a butterfly, OK?