You’ve probably heard of the March for Science, which is planning a bunch of marches in Washington and elsewhere on 22 April — a few days from today. We haven’t paid any attention to it, but now we will, because it has the Discovery Institute all riled up.
This appears today at the Discoveroids’ creationist blog: John West: March for Science or March for Secularism?, and it has no author’s by-line. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:
This week, The Stream and the Center for Science and Culture [the Discoveroids] are teaming up the [sic] ahead of the March for Science to provide some crucial ballast. From April 17-21, The Stream and the CSC will counter the March for Science’s hypocritical claims of openness and diversity with a series of essays from leading scientists and scholars.
We imagine their “leading scientists and scholars” will all be creationists. Let’s read on:
Today, CSC Associate Director John G. West [“Westie” to us] has a post up at The Stream highlighting the double standards upheld by the March for Science organizers, and what they tell us about the purpose of the March.
This is Westie’s article at The Stream: March for Science or March for Secularism? We never heard of The Stream before, but they have something like a statement of faith which you can read here: Summary of Our Ten Principles. Among other things, it says: “Our most basic conviction is the Imago Dei, the idea that every human is made in the image of God with inherent dignity and value.”
The Discoveroids quote from Westie’s article:
March organizers say they believe that “science works best when scientists come from diverse perspectives.” They also claim that the “scientific community is best served by including voices and contributions from people of all identities and backgrounds.” Tell that to scientists who think there is evidence of intelligent design in nature. Discovery Institute represents many of those scientists, and so asked to become a “partner” for the March. We were turned down flat. I asked the March co-chair Jonathan Berman to explain why. He emailed me that “it is not our policy to advance specific worldviews or ideas outside of current consensuses of scientific fields.”
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! The Discoveroids are shocked — shocked! They say:
That seems odd, considering some of the other groups that the organizers seemed to have no problem partnering with. West notes that these include American Humanist Association, Secular Student Alliance, and the Secular Coalition for America—all of which use science to argue that God doesn’t exist. So much for no “specific worldviews.”
The rest of the Discoveroids’ post is one more quote from Westie’s article:
Then there is the March’s honorary co-chair Bill Nye, the “Science Guy.” A few years ago, Nye was named “Humanist of the Year.” He claims “evolution is not guided by a mind or a plan.” He also invokes science to argue that humans are “insignificant” and “suck.” So according to the leaders of the March for Science, if you argue that science provides evidence of purposeful design, you’re anti-science. But if you argue science disproves God and shows humans “suck,” that’s fine.
We can’t find any actual reference to Nye saying that, but Klinghoffer mentioned it earlier and we wrote about it in The Discovery Institute’s Glorious Struggle.
Anyway, the March for Science has no place for the Discoveroids. They probably have no place for Hambo’s people either. The Discoveroids are furious. They promise more articles on the subject, but we’ll probably ignore them — unless they’re spectacularly amusing.
Copyright © 2017. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.