Today’s message from the Discovery Institute is that you can’t believe any of the pro-evolution propaganda you see from those evil Darwinists. It’s all a bunch of sleazy tricks. It’s a companion piece to one we just wrote about in Discoveroids: How To Write a Biology Paper.
Their new post it titled Answering Simplistic Presentations of Darwinism, and it has no author’s byline. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:
Every once in a while, popular science writers feel the need to re-educate their readers about the fact of evolution, lest the readers be swayed by certain fringe elements. It’s like the need for a booster shot against tetanus; just re-inoculate the public with the same medicine, and they will be safe for another year. The booster shot usually includes some of the following elements:
Okay, dear reader, brace yourself. Here comes the Discoveroids’ list of slimy journalistic tactics used by “Darwinist” science writers. No bold font is needed here. The list is pure gold:
1. Evolution is a fact. It’s obvious. Things change, don’t they?
2. Charles Darwin was the greatest scientist who ever lived. He wrote the greatest book in the history of science.
3. Darwin was wrong about some things, but those have all been corrected now.
4. Natural selection is one of the best-tested laws of nature. It explains everything.
5. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming: whales, antibiotic resistant bacteria, and human sexual behaviors.
6. No serious scientist doubts evolution.
7. Some fringe groups like those intelligent design rascals don’t understand evolution. They can be ignored, like creationists.
8. Evolution is not against religion. You can be very religious and still accept the fact of evolution.
9. Controversy? What controversy?
Take a good look at that list of journalistic tricks. We’ve all used them at one time or another. But we can’t fool the Discoveroids. They tell us:
These talking points are so predictable, they seem to come from the same source every time. Perhaps the reporter consults TalkOrigins or the National Center for Science Education. The reporter feels no need to consult actual ID sources, because nobody should consult fake science from discredited groups. Just ask the NCSE.
Egad — your Curmudgeon has been known to rely on TalkOrigins and the NCSE. We’ve been such a fool! The Discoveroids continue with some examples from recent articles, and then critique them — as only creationists can do. For example:
When fitness is defined in terms of reproduction, then reproduction is a measure of fitness by definition. Such a vacuous thought can explain anything. There’s no way to test it. If it’s fit, it survives. If it survives, it’s fit.
Neat, huh? They quote another article that says:
If someone could really demonstrate a better explanation than evolution and natural selection, [that person] would be the new Darwin … .
The Discoveroids respond:
This implies that the scientific community would immediately jump on the new alternative with gusto. Would that were true, because intelligent design scientists have made a case that not only undermines Darwinism, but offers a more logical and evidence-based alternative. [Hee hee!] They [intelligent design scientists] have the advantage of not taking one side’s talking points on faith, because many of them were evolutionists before they began critically evaluating the theory.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Here’s how the thing ends:
For those who prefer a more balanced view of evolution, here are the most recent books where you will get a real debate looking at both sides: [links to Discoveroid books omitted].
So there you are. Now you know all the tricks used by Darwinists, and you’ll never be fooled again.
Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
The Sensuous Curmudgeon 
Speaking of “facts” and things “not facts”!
That brings up what I have developed in my coverage/commentary regarding the recent Nelson/Ara-Hovind “conversation” and Nelson/Ra’s basic #1 “proof” for evolution.
I have prepared a poll to find out what people think about Nelson’s position (i.e., is it something he believes, or something he knows; which was a big issue in that “conversation”).
I have my poll question illustrated at:
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DXyPS_9V4AAxImo.jpg:large
For myself, I don’t agree with Nelson/Ra.
————————————————————
Would that were true, because intelligent design scientists have made a case that not only undermines Darwinism, but offers a more logical and evidence-based alternative.
What case??? I’ve been asking, even demanding, to see it for years! It must be the “best kept secret” in science today!
Why not mention a few really old-time
tricks:
Who, what, when, where, why, how?
Notice how they use “Darwinism” instead of evolutionary biology. “Darwinism”, like ID, is figment of their impoverished imagination. Trying to claim who wins is like claiming Morgana would outduel Hermione.
If you seek a description of the tricks of the evolution deniers, search for “fallacies”. Beginning with
Non sequitur
Equivocation
Ad hominem
…
“These talking points are so predictable, they seem to come from the same source every time.”
Um, like, maybe because they’re true? Most of them, anyway. It seems the author (whoever he or she may be — judging from the snark, it sounds like Klinghoffer) is stretching things a bit in claiming that actual science writers would state that Darwin is the greatest scientist of all time, who wrote the greatest book in the history of science, but by and large these “talking points” are good points to bring up because they are true.
Take, for instance, point no. 1 — “Evolution is a fact. It’s obvious. Things change, don’t they?” Two hundred years of studying fossils reveals that, yes indeed, living organisms have changed over time. That’s the very definition of evolution. So, yes, evolution IS true. Beyond a doubt. It is obvious studying the fossil record. It is fact. The thing that is theory is what caused evolution to take place. Darwin theorized that evolution is due to natural selection. No supernatural influence needed.
By demanding that people need to deny the obvious in order to be a “true Christian”, creationists, including the Discoveroids, are driving so many thinking, intelligent people away from religion. Amazing they can’t see that truth that is right in front of them.
I am not a scientist, but what I would first of all point to would be that it is obvious that there are obvious relationships among animals. The pattern of taxonomy. And that the obvious explanation is common descent with variation. If this is true, then there consequences, which have been throughly tested over the last 150 years. And no one has even hinted at an alternate explanation.
“many of [the creationists] were evolutionists before they began critically evaluating the theory.”
That claim has been made for many decades. Yet it is just as true today as it was many decades ago that the creationists spouting that lie cannot even state a correct (or even coherent) description of evolution. How could they have even been “evolutionists” when they don’t even understand that topic?
“These talking points are so predictable, they seem to come from the same source every time.”
The debunking of past creationist fictions still works when that same fiction gets repeated at later dates. Calling creationists *clueless* doesn’t even start to describe how fractally wrong they consistently are. They are often even wrong about being wrong, and it doesn’t stop there.
@Zetopan complains: “doesn’t even start to describe”
Terms like IDiots, creacrappers or simply liars are sufficient.
” The reporter feels no need to consult actual ID sources”; this is shameless, since the DI knows perfectly well of, and has attacked by name some of the many sources (SC; Venema, even me) who repeatedly cite ID sources in detail
This is a caricature, of course. Reproduction is a measure of fitness because obviously anything that doesn’t reproduce won’t have descendants to contribute genetically (and evolutionarily) to future generations. And indestructible immortal who happened to be sterile would be unfit by that standard.
And of course there’s a way to test it; change the conditions under which an organism or group of organisms (bacteria, say, or peppered moths) must live and see what happens.
@EricL hasn’t consulted TomS’ list of fallacies:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA500.html
It’s not a caricature. It’s a lie. An old lie. From shameless liars, aka IDiots.
I think you made a mistake in attribution.
The Discoveroid article smells like bad fish. They hurt their mission by writing such trash.
They hurt their mission in some people’s eyes. I think that they understand their base of support.
“7. Some fringe groups like those intelligent design rascals don’t understand evolution. They can be ignored, like creationists.”
Auto-flagellation to inspire pity?
It will not change the fact that scientists do very good (better?) scientific research when ignoring intelligent design and other creationists groanings. However it is understandable that this fact angers the neglected groups.
Paul, As you say, just because someone doesn’t buy their argument doesn’t mean one hasn’t read and understood their argument.
I see this so often following a negative critique:
1) Claim your opponent didn’t read your book or article.
2) When they say they read it, claim they didn’t understand it.
3) When they demonstrate they understand it, change the subject of simply disappear.
The only means of obtaining a “balanced” ID book is to put it on a scale with something of equal mass on the other side.
Breaking news: science got it wrong once again.
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2016/nasa-s-hubble-finds-universe-is-expanding-faster-than-expected
We all here know the correct explanation; none of us for some weird reason wants to accept it: goddiddid.
Wow! They were wrong by a huge 5% – 9%! That difference is so big that it needs Intelligent Design to explain!
The ID list….
1. Creation is a fact. It’s obvious. Gods exist, don’t they?
2. The Christian God is the greatest God who ever lived. He wrote the greatest book in history.
3. We thought the Bible was wrong about some things, but we know better now.
4. Intelligent design is one of the best-tested laws of nature. It explains everything.
5. The evidence for creation is overwhelming: just look at your hand; it is a marvel.
6. No serious theologian doubts creation.
7. Some fringe groups like those new atheist rascals don’t understand creation. They can be ignored, like non-Christians.
8. Intelligent design is not religion. You can be very religious and still be a scientist.
9. Controversy? What controversy?
@Michael Fugate: Well played!