The Discovery Institute’s David Klinghoffer — described in the Cast of Characters section of our Intro page — has just posted this dandy item at the Discoveroids’ creationist blog: Scientific Anti-Humanism Is Being Refuted by Science Itself.
“Scientific anti-humanism”? We thought we were familiar with all the Discoveroids’ Orwellian anti-science terminology. This one is new, so it deserves our Newspeak Alert. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us and Klinghoffer’s links omitted:
Scientific anti-humanism refers to the cheapening of human dignity and of the value of human life in the name of science. Among many other pieces of novel information on that theme, the most important point that came out of Michael Medved’s discussion with John West just now on the Science and Culture Update is that this corrosive tendency is being refuted by science itself.
Anti-human science is refuting itself? M’god — compared to that, a pretzel seems like a Euclidean straight line. He continues.
Darwin persuasively taught that life is the product of blind, meaningless, purposeless churning, making all life, not just human, hardly anything more special or dignified than cosmic refuse. Indeed in a Darwinian worldview, life is cosmic refuse.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!. Well, let’s be fair here. Your Curmudgeon has a “Darwinian worldview” — in the sense that we’re far more impressed by verifiable evidence than by mythology or untestable claims about supernatural phenomena — and yes, when we observe their work product, we’re sometimes tempted to think of some people as cosmic refuse. Let’s read on:
While accused abortion butcher Kermit Gosnell may be an outlier, he is an emblematic personality in our Darwin-tutored culture.
Oh happy day! Klinghoffer had recently disappointed us by failing to blame the Boston Marathon bombings on Darwin — although he came close by claiming that Darwin has made it impossible to properly mourn such events (see Klinghoffer: Darwin Has Stolen Our Grief). We’ve been expecting him to get around to Gosnell (see Vomit Opportunity: Creationism & Abortion), and now he’s come through. You heard it from Klinghoffer — Gosnell’s abortion mill is Darwin’s fault!
Hey — hold on a second. We just thought of something: It could be argued that intentionally interfering with the natural process of reproduction is an example of — gasp! — intelligent design. Why not? Doesn’t the Discoveroids’ designer — blessed be he! — run around and tinker with our DNA to change what would have otherwise been born? So maybe Gosnell is inspired by the Discoveroids. Anyway, Klinghoffer’s article continues:
However the good news is that the latest science demonstrates that for hundreds of millions of years a purpose, an intelligent design, has been working itself out through the history of complex life.
The latest science demonstrates that? Really? Wow — we want to hear more. Here it comes:
Very far from being galactic garbage, life was intended from the start, with human life as the peak expression of the designer’s creative intention.
Well, come on, Klinghoffer. You’ve got our attention. Where’s the data? There’s only one more paragraph, so it’s got to be a good one. This is it:
That’s the bottom-line takeaway of Darwin’s Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design, by Discovery Institute senior fellow Stephen Meyer. As ENV readers will know well, you can and should go here and get your 43% discount when you pre-order NOW!
Aaaargh!! We were really expecting something good, but all we got was a crude plug for a Discoveroid book. Ah well, this was time well spent nevertheless — we got the Gosnell-Darwin claim, and that was amusing.
Copyright © 2013. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.