Discoveroids Tout Their Indoctrination Camp

This happens every year. It’s the annual recruitment and creationist apologetics festival run by 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).

A couple of months ago we wrote Discoveroids’ Nine-Day Creationist Seminar when the Discoveroids’ announced this year’s creationist training camp. Although the event is free and the Discoveroids pay for everything — travel, lodging, meals, books and other course materials expenses — they still don’t have enough volunteers signed up yet, so they’re flogging the event again. Something like this happened in 2009, when they extended the registration date because they didn’t get enough registrants.

The Discoveroids’ creationist blog now has this posted: The CSC Summer Seminars on Intelligent Design Could Change Your Life. There’s no news here, because it’s the same event they blogged about earlier — a nine-day babble-fest lasting from 08 to 16 July, consisting of lectures by all the greatest minds in the field of creationism. The real news is that they still don’t have enough people signed up.

What we’ll do here is give you a few of the more amusing excerpts from their latest post, the purpose of which is to encourage the mindless to quit waiting around and to get their applications in. The bold font was added by us:

This is the CSC Summer Seminars on Intelligent Design, an intensive study program for college juniors, seniors and graduate students interested in ID. In just nine days, students from around the world gain exposure to the science of intelligent design theory, both in the classroom and the science lab.

In the lab? Really? Well, maybe the kids dissect frogs while they’re being lectured about how irreducibly complex it all is. Then they can go home thinking they’ve been doing science. Let’s read on:

While Darwinism maintains a monopoly on America’s science classrooms, these students testify to the growing number of young scientists who aren’t satisfied with the way Darwinist professors refuse to address the problems with Darwin’s theory and the strengths of intelligent design.

Did you notice that they say “the strengths of intelligent design”? No weaknesses! We continue:

Of course, this is part of what makes the discussion in that Seattle classroom unique: students awakening to a more full understanding of the relationship between science and nature are able to experience a broad perspective of intelligent design theory, many for the first time.

They teach “the relationship between science and nature”? We assume they also teach the deficiencies of that relationship that can only be explained by invisible designers beyond nature. Here’s more:

The CSC Seminar on Intelligent Design in the Natural Sciences will explore cutting-edge ID work in fields such as molecular biology, biochemistry, embryology, developmental biology, paleontology, computational biology, ID-theoretic mathematics, cosmology, physics, and the history and philosophy of science.

They do cutting edge ID work in all those different fields? Will nine days be enough time for that? Yes — in fact it should be nine days too many. Moving along:

Past participants have noted that what most encouraged and excited them about the seminar was the intellectual integrity they were finally seeing in scientists and instructors, Ph.D.s who seriously considered their questions rather than trying to shut down provocative discussion. Once they discovered science unrestrained by dogmatism, a torrent of excitement rushed through their class sessions.

A torrent of something just rushed from your Curmudgeon’s stomach, but it wouldn’t be, ah … tasteful to explain that any further. Here’s another excerpt:

“It was like taking a drink from a fire hydrant,” one student said.

That’s one way to put it. Hey, get this:

Students learn from Discovery scientists about methods of design detection, the intricacies of DNA and information processing in the cell, quantum theory and materialist metaphysics, and the moral implications of Darwinism.

We already know how to detect design; it’s a three-step process: Step one — look at something. Step two — keep in mind that if it exists it had to be designed. Step three — point and say “Oook, oook!” to announce your discovery. See? It’s simple!

On with the Discoveroid article:

The experience is eye-opening for many. One student already very familiar with intelligent design said of the seminar, “For the first time, I was astounded.”

Your Curmudgeon hasn’t attended, and we’re astounded too. One last excerpt:

Besides giving students a thorough education in the science and philosophy of intelligent design, the program also prepares students for the challenges they likely face in their careers as pro-ID scientists. Students hear from Douglas Axe and Richard Sternberg, scientists who were persecuted by their employers for supporting ID, and the message is clear: it is dangerous to stand as a part of the ID movement, but we have been there, and we’re here to make the way easier for you.

ID promises a life of danger? How exciting! It never occurred to us that Casey had anything in common with James Bond. We’ll have to reconsider.

But now it’s time to get serious. The deadline for applying is 22 April, so you only have two days left. Better hurry!

Copyright © 2011. 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

16 responses to “Discoveroids Tout Their Indoctrination Camp

  1. They didn’t mention cake.

    Will there be cake?

  2. How about pie?

    Someone seriously needs a pie in the face…

  3. LRA says: “Someone seriously needs a pie in the face…”

    Have you ever stopped to consider that a pie implies a pie-maker? Therefore …

  4. Curmudgeon: “Did you notice that they say ‘the strengths of intelligent design’? No weaknesses!”

    Yes, and thank you! Lately I’m often as annoyed with fellow “Darwinists” as with anti-evolution activists because they almost always miss a perfect opportunity to show how those activists never mention the real weaknesses, which permeate all of their mutually contradictory “theories.”

  5. “It was like taking a drink from a fire hydrant,” one student said.

    A fire hydrant of bullsh*t.

    Students learn from Discovery scientists about methods of design detection, the intricacies of DNA and information processing in the cell, quantum theory and materialist metaphysics, and the moral implications of Darwinism.

    Materialist metaphysics?

  6. Gabriel Hanna

    Students learn from Discovery scientists… the moral implications of Darwinism.

    Takes me back to grad school, when our professors used to give seminars about the moral implications of the Maxwell and Schroedinger equations. Thats how you know you’re getting real science.

  7. Douglas Axe is a member of the persecutti? When was he persecuted and by whom? I’m not aware that Axe had been expelled.

    Now, we know for a fact that Sternberg wasn’t persecuted by his “employer” because he worked for the NIH, not the Smithsonian. His story would be like you working for WalMart and claiming that the city library persecuted you as a patron. Same relationship. But Axe?

    Axe got a PhD in chemical engineering from CalTech in 1990 and then spent a decade or so in various post-doc positions in Cambridge, England, before becoming the director of the DI’s Biologic Institute in Redmond. I’d like to hear his riveting “story” of persecution.

  8. I wonder if students get a free flagellum paperweight as a memento. “Watch the turning flagellum, you are getting sleepy…sleepy….”

  9. The Discoveroids have been doing this stuff for a few years now. But they never post a list of their “graduates” with an account of their accomplishments.

  10. What about campfire songs and corndogs. I’m not going if they don’t have those. But, no, I’m not eligible, having gone too far in my education.

  11. They fail to mention the biggest attraction of all — the opportunity to mingle with all those hot creationist babes.

  12. Last year I jokingly said I would try to attend, since I’m local. But after reading the excerpts (with the bold font added by you), apathy has kicked in and I won’t even make such a promise.

    One positive to take out of this though – attendees will think this course was so important that they’ll add it to their CV, thus being removed from serious consideration from any job prospects in the sciences. They will never have been expelled, since they will never have been considered.

    And Curmudgeon, the only intelligently designed “hot creationist babe” I know of is this one. I hear its IQ rivals that of Casey et al.

  13. I suspect all of their students are from religious schools and seminaries, particularly given the screening application requirements.

    My searching on google turned up this past attendee, Alan Shlemon http://strplace.wordpress.com/2011/02/10/intelligent-design-summer-seminar/ who has links to some interesting descriptions of the class and materials on the page. It is a christian apologetics site, and Alan is working on a masters at Biola.

    Jonathan McLatchie indicated in a blog post that he would attend the 2010 session, but I could find no descriptions afterwards.

    That’s all I could find other than references on the DI’s websites, christian sites, and news aggregators. (besides the Sensuous Curmudgeon, of course, and other skeptical sites) There are no facebook pages from excited attendees with pictures etc, or an alumni web page to keep everyone in touch with each other.

    Are these people sworn to secrecy?

    I could find no other student reference online. I think that’s a bit strange.

  14. How can they claim “a growing number of young scientists” when they can’t even get enough volunteers to fill a seminar that is completely FREE?

  15. they must be quite efficient. Soviet “reeducation camps” could last for years.

  16. TJW says:

    they must be quite efficient. Soviet “reeducation camps” could last for years.

    But it’s not really reeducation. More like a finishing school.