Casey Luskin is revisiting one of his topics. See High Risk Quote Mining. Casey is everyone’s favorite creationist among the neo-theocrats at the Discovery Institute‘s creationist public relations and lobbying operation, the Center for Science and Culture (a/k/a the Discoveroids, a/k/a the cdesign proponentsists).
The Discoveroid blog offers us Casey’s latest effort: NSF Spends Almost $2 Million Of Taxpayer Money Crafting Darwin Only Lessons. Here are some excerpts, with bold added by us:
As discussed in my previous post, it’s best to just lay all the cards on the table: The goal of the Evolution Readiness Project is to get “young children” to “believe in” evolution. According to, NSF’s website, they’ve spent $1,990,459 of taxpayer-funded NSF dollars to bankroll this project.
That “believe in” business was clumsily quote-mined from the NSF website, as we demonstrated in our earlier post. We’re much more interested in Casey’s mention of the nearly $2 million that the NSF is spending. Our highly-developed Curmudgeonly instinct tells us that it must be funding time again for the Discoveroids, and they have to convince their patrons of the desperate need to fight the “Darwinist” beast. As we mentioned here, Discovery Institute: Their 2007 Tax Return, the Discoveroids spend about $2 million per year promoting creationism.
Let’s read on:
The agenda of the project is further clarified in the NSF Grant Award Abstract which states that it aims “to support a learning progression leading to an appreciation of the theory of evolution and evidence that supports it.” That’s fine, but why only the evidence that supports evolution?
Why? Well, Casey, we might shock you with what we’re about to say, so you’d better be near the fainting couch when you read this. Hey, Casey: There isn’t any evidence against evolution! If there were any, it would be taught.
See if you can grasp this, Casey: Back when Steady State was a viable theory, it was taught right along with the Big Bang. Today there are various theories attempting to explain dinosaur extinction, and they’re all taught. And let’s not even try to sort out all the versions of string theory that are being taught. Our point, Casey, is that when the scientific evidence isn’t conclusive, competing explanations are taught. It has always been thus. Casey’s article continues:
Before I say anything else, let me state that I am a firm advocate of teaching evolution. The scientific evidence that “supports” evolution should be taught. But that’s not all that should be taught.
Yes, Casey. Your scare quotes around “supports” gives us solid evidence of your firm advocacy. Here’s more:
The project justifies its dogmatic approach by promoting the myth that there is no scientific dissent from the consensus view on natural selection …
We won’t verify Casey’s next quote from the NSF, because we’re tired of always checking creationists’ quotations, but he probably got this one right. According to Casey, the NSF says:
Yet, essentially there is universal agreement among scientists that evolution by natural selection is the fundamental model that explains the extraordinary complexity and interdependence of the living world.
To counter the NSF’s claim about what is essentially universal agreement, Casey says:
Of course, it is not true that “essentially there is universal agreement among scientists” about evolution by natural selection. Over 850 Ph.D. scientists have now signed a statement expressing their skepticism …
Lordy, lordy. How often are the Discoveroids going to beat that dead horse? Casey refers to that woeful list of “over 850” evolution skeptics who have signed on to the Discoveroids’ Scientific Dissent From Darwinism. But very few of them are biologists. They’ve got a lot of dentists, sociologists, proctologists, and maybe even chiropractors . Despite Casey’s telling us how “it’s best to just lay all the cards on the table,” he doesn’t mention Project Steve, which is now up over 1,100 “Steves.” Only 1% of the population have that name, which indicates that over 110,000 scientists support evolution. And unlike the Discoveroid list, the “Steve” list includes a large percentage of signers who are actually involved in the biological sciences.
You may want to read the rest of Casey’s article, because it starts like this:
Moreover, there is much scientific evidence that challenges neo-Darwinian evolution.
But we’ll leave that adventure up to you, dear reader. We’ve exhausted our daily quota of time we’re willing to spend on Casey’s writing.
Copyright © 2010. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.