Klinghoffer: “Darwinists” Are Like “Truthers”

This one is possibly the weirdest yet. It’s by David Klinghoffer, who holds the exalted title of “senior fellow” (i.e., flaming, full-blown creationist), bestowed upon him 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).

There’s probably no need to recite Klinghoffer’s creationist oeuvre, which most of you have seen before, but it’s very appropriate to do so now because he — of all people — is accusing evolutionary biologists of being part of a giant conspiracy. Here’s a sampling of his scholarly output, which shows his qualifications for writing today’s Discoveroid article:

Klinghoffer has previously posted a series of essays attempting to link Charles Darwin to: Hitler, and communism, and Stalin, and the Columbine shootings, and Charles Manson, and Holocaust Museum shooter, James von Brunn, and the Ft. Hood Massacre, and Mao Tse-tung, and Dr. Josef Mengele, and the Occult, and The Dark Side of Darwinism, and most recently James Lee, the Discovery Channel Terrorist.

That is the output of the same man who wrote this new Discoveroid post: Darwinism and 9/11 Conspiracy Theories: The Parallels. It’s rather long and chaotic, it mentions names and publications that don’t interest us here, and a lot of it is about the 9/11 Truthers, a pack of kooks about whom we really don’t care.

But in his Discoveroid article, Klinghoffer actually compares “Darwinists” to the “Truthers.” Yes, that’s crazy, but it’s the task the Discoveroids assigned to Klinghoffer, and we’ve never seen him turn down a dirty job before. Okay, you know what’s coming, so let’s get into it. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us:

What I found striking about [some articles about Truthers] is the parallels with what we know about the thought and writings of Evolution Truth activists: our ever-loving friends in the Darwin Lobby.

We promise you — this isn’t a spoof of Discoveroid writing. It’s the real thing. After introducing his concept of “striking parallels,” Klinghoffer describes the Truthers’ crazed gyrations in response to a factual article that shredded their beliefs, and he says:

There is a sealed-off quality to 9/11 conspiracy theorizing. The theory generates its own alternative reality, which it needs to do since the experience of living in the real world goes so much against it.

That’s fair commentary — about Truthers. But then Klinghoffer lets his inner creationist leap out:

Darwinists would say the same of us in response, they’d have to, but candidly doesn’t all this remind you of the special mental world of the Darwin advocates? I’m not speaking of the run of regular working scientists in biology and other fields, for the vast majority of whom evolutionary apologetics are a subject of little interest, but rather about those inside and outside the world of science who make it their mission to faithfully guard Darwinian orthodoxy.

We’re not making this up. That’s what the guy wrote, and there’s more:

When he burst on the scene a century and a half ago, … Darwin offered precisely a conspiracy theory: a radical overturning of common sense, in this case the understanding that nature reflects design. That was replaced now with an unseen and unseeable material mechanism that simply and comprehensively explained how everything we thought we knew about life’s development was totally wrong.

Darwin’s theory of natural selection was a “conspiracy theory” about “an unseen and unseeable material mechanism.” How horrible! The Discoveroids’ own theory of an unseen ans unseeable supernatural mechanism is so much better! Oh wait — Darwin’s mechanism isn’t “unseen.” Even creationists acknowledge the effect of mutation and natural selection, at least on a small scale, and they call it “micro” evolution. Their magic Designer — blessed be he! — leaves no visible evidence of his mechanism, which is all the more reason to praise and adore him. Let’s read on:

In the ID community, itself the object of much demonological theorizing by Evolution Truthers, we know better than anyone else the imperviousness of Darwin’s true believers to matters of fact.


Once posited, [Darwinism] tells a story that accommodates any observation. This is the brilliance of paranoia. … Whatever nature brings forth can be squeezed to fit the effectively unfalsifiable Darwinian mold, which always turns out to predict, in retrospect, whatever is found.

That is, quite simply, fantastic — especially compared to the wonders wrought by the magical Designer, who can bring forth literally anything and not astonish his devotees. That’s because their “theory” has no mechanism, and there is no limit to what the Designer might do. But there are indeed observations that could contradict the theory of evolution. One of this blog’s first posts was devoted to evidence that could refute Darwin — Where Are The Anachronistic Fossils? The best example is the elusive Precambrian rabbit.

Here’s one more excerpt from Klinghoffer’s article:

Every time you hear a Darwin activist repeat the formula that “ID is creationism,” that it “denies evolution” or “denies science,” that it is an argument from ignorance or incredulity … you can only throw up your hands and suppose it’s because he’s got a tape running in his head, looping back again and again, that feeds him these lines.

We used to think that Klinghoffer didn’t really believe all that stuff he wrote. We thought he was only playing along because they paid him to do it — but maybe we’ve been wrong. It’s starting to look like he’s serious. We’ll never really know, but whether he believes what he writes or not — he’s precisely where he belongs. We hope he’s happy.

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

15 responses to “Klinghoffer: “Darwinists” Are Like “Truthers”

  1. http://bit.ly/qdeSyz

    Meanwhile Victor Zammit turns into Glenn Hoddle and thinks the 9/11 terrorists are at an advantage. Perculiar fellow… why is it that the mere mention of 9/11 brings out the fruitcakes?

  2. “Truthers” are a small group of obsessive individuals who see the establishment – including respected scientists, engineers, investigators, law enforcement at all levels, etc – as participating in a great conspiracy, and only they are special enough to know the truth. They complain at the lack of acceptance of their ideas, but they relish even the universally critical publicity because it feeds their illusion of the conspiracy and makes them feel important.

    Sound familiar Klinghoffer?

    Oh, and critics of ID creationism don’t “connect-the-imaginary-dots”, they simply read the Wedge Document. ID critics tend to be evidence-based, and the DI is especially generous in providing evidence of their motives, duplicity, and the non-scientific nature of ID.

  3. Pardon the “broken record” warning:

    The rants of wingnut theocrats like AiG, ICR or WorldNetDaily are entertaining, but if you really want to see the future of the movement, look no further than Klinghoffer. It has not been about “evidence for Genesis” for at least 25 years. Well before Edwards v. Aguillard, most of the scam artists knew that there was no hope for independent evidence to support any of the mutually-contradictory literal interpretations. It’s no longer about “evidence” against “Darwinism” either. Most of the scam artists know that the misrepresentations disguised as “weaknesses” have been refuted 1000s of times. They know that their obsession with quote-mining, defining terms to suit the argument, conflating evolution with abiogenesis may fool the public, but that it neither refutes evolution nor validates Genesis or “some designer did something at some time.”

    To out it more bluntly, we are witnessing a slow death of both “scientific” creationism and ID. But it is being replaced by a more sinister beast – the paranoid pretense that mainstream science is conducting a “conspiracy” to protect explanations – never mind if they’re correct or not – that drive the “masses” to commit evil acts.

    Contrary to what the Curmudgeon says at the end of the article, I’m more convinced than ever that Klinghoffer the other Discoveroids do not believe the nonsense that they write, but that they do believe that someone needs to write it.

  4. Curmudgeon: “Their magic Designer — blessed be he!”

    So that’s why the Discoveroids refuse to name the designer. They’re too modest to admit that it’s one of their own. 😉

  5. Klinghoffer should look in a mirror. It’s the Discoveroids who are like the Truthers. The level of paranoia and the insane conspiracy theories they weave are very similar.

    Someone actually pays Klinghoffer to write this stuff. Amazing.

  6. Klinghoffer accepts astrology, because the Talmud does. And he has the nerve to complain about people who accept an “unseen and unseeable” explanation that defies common sense…

    It’s science concern trolling, as so much of creationism is. Not one of them likes or accepts science and all of them want to replace it with something else–in Klinghoffer’s case astrology is one of those things.

  7. Gabriel Hanna says:

    Klinghoffer accepts astrology, because the Talmud does. And he has the nerve to complain

    You’re obviously a Scorpio.

  8. Every time you hear a Darwin activist repeat the formula that “ID is creationism,”…you can only throw up your hands and suppose it’s because he’s got a tape running in his head

    Well, yes. A tape of actual events, such as when creationists used the same definition for creation and intelligent design in diffeent editions of their textbook.

  9. The infamous “search and replace” routine reminiscent of the cat license sketch on Monty Python.

  10. Funny people should say that they are now reverting to the “It’s a conspiracy… science is shutting down debate because it has something to hide” because the Claimant suing me is arguing the exact same thing.

    He is paranoid to the extent that he has accused me of working for the scientific publishing industry to troll religious books giving them bad reviews.

  11. Every time I think that the evolution-deniers have managed to remove the last trace of positive, substantive content from their movement, they manage to find a few fly-specks that need eliminating.

  12. I am not a psychologist nor sociologist (unless you count Psych and Sosh 101 credentials!) nor do I play one on TV. So, I struggle with the term “sociopath,” although it seems an apt description of the committed creationists. Into the committed creationists tub I would throw people like Dembski, Klinghoffer, Westie and the rest of the DI, and possibly Behe. I might exclude old Hambo as a simple con man who’s just out to make a dishonest buck and Luskin whom I regard as a simple-minded stooge.

    Klingers appears to have been born anti-social as documented in his own narrative published in the Brown Alumni magazine. (Google klinghoffer brown) I doubt he actually believes anything or has any fixed position, rather he adopts whatever he feels will be contrarian. I stopped reading anything by Klinghoffer some time ago. His drivel is pointless, poorly written and not even funny.

    It really says more about the DI that they give a forum to this emotionally stunted wretch, the Gollum of Seattle, and manipulate him the way they do. And I doubt it’s having the effect they’re trying to achieve.


    p.s. Take the Doc Bill Million Quatloo challenge and identify a genuine creationist comedian. Must be High-Larry-Us to win. Note: funny-peculiar doesn’t count.

  13. Doc: “The Gollum of Seattle”


  14. Even by creationist standards, that’s bizarro; almost as nutty as pore ol Murphy !