Discovery Institute: The Truth Revealed At Last!

IT took them long enough. The neo-theocrats at the Discovery Institute’s Center for Science and Culture (a/k/a the Discoveroids) have now given us their long-suppressed evidence for Intelligent Design. At least we think that’s what they’ve done.

At the Discoveroid blog they have this history-making post: Is Intelligent Design Science?

If you’re a “Darwinist,” you probably think that question was decided with awesome finality when experts from both sides testified under oath in the celebrated case of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District. We summarized that part of the case here: Kitzmiller v. Dover: Is ID Science?

But the Discoveroid creationists are too magnificent to let a minor judicial setback discourage them. They keep doing “research.” Now, in answer to their blog post’s title (“Is Intelligent Design Science?”) they say this:

Dr. Stephen Meyer, author of Signature in the Cell thinks so.

They’re referring to Discoveroid “Senior Fellow” (i.e., incurably full-blown creationist) Stephen C. Meyer. As we reported here, he was one of three creationist “experts” who were on the 6-member panel selected by Don McLeroy to testify before the Texas Board of Education regarding standards for science education. And before that, Meyer was a central figure in the notoriously shabby peer review controversy.

As you can see here: Discovery Institute: Their 2007 Tax Return, that year the Discoveroids paid Meyer (their Vice President) $102,500, plus expenses. Not a bad gig, really.

But let’s return to the Discoveroid blog. After telling us that Meyer thinks ID is science, what else do they say? Nothing. The only other content of their blog article is an embedded video you can watch, in which — we assume — Meyer reveals why ID is science. If you click over there and watch that video, then you too will know The Truth

So scoot over to the Discoveroid website and take a look. If you learn anything new, let us know. If it sounds interesting, maybe we’ll check it out.

Copyright © 2010. 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

18 responses to “Discovery Institute: The Truth Revealed At Last!

  1. Typical ID obfuscation. He’s basically saying it’s a matter of definition. Not really worth the time.

  2. In other videos the Discovery Institute asks Bernie Madoff, “Are Ponzi Schemes a Good Investment?”

    Phyllis Schlafly is asked, “Gay Marriage: Fair or Foul?”

    Kent Hovind is queried, “Is the IRS Unconstitutional?”

    Kobe Bryant answers the question, “Does ‘No’ Really Mean ‘No’?”

    Fascinating stuff the Meyer “interview.” Basically, Meyer whines that scientists are mean to him because they are biased and protecting their pet theories. Scientists don’t play fair and they make up all the rules.

    Does Meyer actually say in the “interview” that intelligent design creationism ™ is science because of the following attributes and evidence? Nope, he doesn’t.

    Maybe he’d get more respect if he got a decent haircut and wore a white coat. (That is, one that the sleeves don’t tie in the back.)

  3. waldteufel

    Let me give you a synopsis of Doctor Meyer’s eloquent exposition of the Scientific Theory of Intelligent Design:

    “. . . blah .. blah. . .*waves hands* . .dirpa dirpa, blah, blah, . . *bobs head earnestly* …blah, dirpa, gulp, . .. ., blather. . . .*licks thin lips*. ..oogity boogity!”


    Clearly, Doctor Meyer’s clear, logically pristine presentation is convincing beyond debate. The argument is over.

    I’m convinced!

  4. waldteufel says: “I’m convinced!”

    I’m glad. Your Curmudgeon is pleased to have shown you the way.

  5. I did a video about this that compares Meyer’s rantings about his god’s fingerprints with the ACTUAL code left in Venter’s synthetic cell, asking, “Why didn’t YOUR god think of that?”

    If interested:

  6. In the end of the video, Meyer lays down his cards: science doesn’t matter, but rather what is [allegedly] TRUE is what matters. Therein lies the problem, if we’re talking about the alleged scientific validity of ID. If ID is truly scientific, then science must indeed matter. He can’t have it both ways.

  7. retiredsciguy

    Doc Bill says of Meyer:
    “Maybe he’d get more respect if he got a decent haircut and wore a white coat. (That is, one that the sleeves don’t tie in the back.)”

    That’s good!

  8. I’m just interested in whether someone has a (positive, substantive) description of what sort of thing happens when an “intelligent design” event takes place. Like what is there just before, and what is there after, and what is the difference. What sort of thing is designed, and what is not (maybe an example, even just a hypothetical example). When designs happened, and when they stopped happening (if ever).

    It would be interesting to find out why humans were designed to be similar to chimps and other apes. But I suppose that is asking too much.

  9. Gabriel Hanna

    OT: I’ve been reading the archives of James Randi’s blog and I found this little gem:

    A short history of medicine:

    “I have an earache…”

    2000 BC: “Here, eat this root.”

    1000 AD: “That root is heathen. Here, say this prayer.”

    1850 AD: “Prayer is superstition. Here, drink this potion.”

    1940 AD: “That potion is snake oil. Here, swallow this pill.”

    1985 AD: “That pill is ineffective. Here, take this antibiotic.”

    2002 AD: “That antibiotic is artificial. Here, eat this root.”

  10. Gabriel Hanna, that was far more entertaining than the Discoveroid video.

  11. Gabriel that was great! LOL!

    (Curmie, sorry for my absence… I moved from Austin to Dallas. Ugh! You never realize how much unnecessary crap you have until you move it!!!)

  12. retiredsciguy

    LRA writes:
    “You never realize how much unnecessary crap you have until you move it!!!”

    Corollary: You never realize how necessary something is until you try to find it in your new place!

  13. LOL! Absolutely… because your necessary stuff is buried under piles of unnecessary crap.


  14. Doug Groothuis turned off anonymous commenting after I pointed to this thread.

    So now, AFAIK, all ID blogs will not accept anonymous commenting.

    Bradley Monton is like ID and will not accept comments at all.

    All have a common cause though. All are in some way dependent on ID for making money for themselves.

  15. Tom S

    I would like to think that a true ID event would be for babies to start being born with cell phones in their heads.

    Craig can do a website address already so god should be able to do a cell phone?

  16. Chris P says:

    So now, AFAIK, all ID blogs will not accept anonymous commenting.

    That makes no sense. It’s the content that counts. Creationists don’t care about real names anyway. They routinely trash Darwin and all other genuine scientists, so who are they kidding?

  17. bloggercsstemplate

    Trent, thanks for the video. I enjoyed.

  18. @bloggercsstemplate Thanks!