This is bizarre, but it’s the sort of thing we expect from the Discovery Institute. The latest at their creationist blog is New Website Advocates Free Science — An Idea Vital to the Progress of Knowledge, written by Sarah Chaffee, whom we call “Savvy Sarah.” Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:
Today, we launch a new site calling for freedom in science. The liberty to challenge ideas, in science and other fields, is a precondition to the advance of the theory of intelligent design. It is also a litmus test for the culture itself: In defense of orthodoxy, do we suppress dissent? If so, what cost will be paid by science?
You know where she’s going with this, don’t you? Here it comes:
At the newly launched Free Science, you can learn about public opinion on academic freedom, and read accounts of those who have been caught in the crosshairs over their dissent from Darwinian evolution. Also, find out about legislative efforts, and how you can get involved in defending free science!
Ooooooooooooh! A whole website where the Discoveroids can promote their Teach the Controversy campaign. Savvy Sarah tells us:
The progress of intelligent design [Hee hee!] is an illustration of a rebel idea that has made its way in defiance of the establishment, often paying the price for arguing in favor of “uncomfortable science.” As the case of ID demonstrates, values of free thought and critical inquiry are under siege precisely in the place where they should be most valued and protected — the scientific community.
Yes, the Discoveroids’ “science” of intelligent design has “made its way in defiance of the establishment.” So has the Time Cube, Moon-landing denial, flat Earth, and astrology. She continues:
Most should agree that people should not suffer professional harm because of personal views – especially those in the university. But that’s not what happens when it comes to evolution dissent.
She gives a few examples of creationists who experienced “professional harm,” most of whom we’ve written about before, including Richard Sternberg — about whom see Sternberg peer review controversy. Let’s read on:
Problems with conventional scientific explanations for the origin of life and of biological diversity are widely acknowledged — and scientists around the world tackle these issues. Why should scientists who think DNA code is a product of design, just like computer code, face discrimination and career repercussions? Couldn’t knowledge be gained by exploring these ideas?
Well, dear reader. Couldn’t knowledge be gained by exploring the Discoveroids’ “theory”? Anyway, at the end of her post, Savvy Sarah declares:
Freedom is necessary for scientists open to the thesis of intelligent design to make the case for the theory. But this is also what is necessary for scientific advancement more generally. So let’s encourage dissent and embrace an authentically liberal approach.
Sounds lovely, doesn’t it? It’s what’s been called Abuse of the Language of Rights
We doubt that we’ll be spending much time visiting the Discoveroids’ new website. The one we all know and enjoy is more than enough for us.
Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.