The latest post at the Discovery Institute’s creationist blog is Self-Image as a Bulwark of Darwinian Orthodoxy.
It was written by David Klinghoffer, a Discoveroid “senior fellow” (i.e., flaming, full-blown creationist), who eagerly functions as their journalistic slasher and poo flinger. The graphic above this post is in his honor. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:
He begins by mentioning and quoting from an article about the recent disclosure that many psychology studies appear not to be reproducible. Then he quotes a few Discoveroids and fellow-travelers. All of that is irrelevant to what he really wants to say, so we’ll skip it. Finally he gets to the meat of his post:
The only thing [the aforementioned psychology research scandal] this leaves out is an aspect of pride, and that is: prestige. In the context of evolution, it’s all-important. It’s not possible to exaggerate the place of self-image as a bulwark of Darwinian orthodoxy.
Ah, now the fun begins:
Experience has taught us, again and again, how often otherwise thoughtful people refuse to consider alternative understandings of life’s origins because that would potentially lead them down a socially uncomfortable path.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! We’ve seen this before in Discoveroids and other creationists — a total lack of self-awareness. Let’s read on:
Yes, for scientists there are real professional dangers that go with opening your mouth to say something critical of the reigning evolutionary theory. Even for the tenured scholar, and all the more so for the untenured and the graduate student, a great deal of looking over your shoulder and anticipating damnation goes with the thought of admitting that Darwinism faces serious scientific challenges, or that evidence of design in nature might conceivably be worth a look.
Assuming there is some tiny bit of rationality involved here, all we can think of is that this is the latest excuse being given to the Discoveroids’ generous patrons to explain their total failure to have any impact on academia. Klinghoffer continues:
… Darwin defenders so typically respond to ID not with evidence and arguments of their own but with emotional manipulation based on their listeners’ self-image. The strategy has evolved with the times. It used to be that Darwin skeptics were tarred predominantly with language suggestive of religious fundamentalism. Hence the popularity of conflating intelligent design with creationism, resulting in the fanciful chimera of “Intelligent Design Creationism.”
Fanciful chimera? We think it’s a spot on accurate expression. Here’s our last excerpt, and it’s really bad — even for a Discoveroid post:
More recently the tactic has shifted somewhat, with Darwin advocates making increased use of the weaponized terms “science denial” and “science denier.” Here the idea is to subtly associate skepticism with something not just embarrassing but utterly vile — Holocaust denial.
Wow! Yes, we’ve called them science deniers. But Holocaust deniers? We’ve never seen anyone even suggest that — it’s a wildly impossible stretch. The idea never occurred to us. But Klinghoffer is the Discoveroids’ journalistic slasher and poo flinger, so things like that come naturally to him.
Copyright © 2015. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.