There is a well known (but seldom mentioned) rule of human behavior that goes like this: When a sudden, embarrassing sound of gastric distress errupts in a crowded room, the guilty party is likely to be the one who says: “Don’t look at me! I didn’t do it! Why is everyone looking at me?”
Today we’re presented with an excellent application of that rule. It was only yesterday that we posted As You Always Suspected, describing a common link between creationism and belief in conspiracy theories. At the end of our post we said:
If any creationists are willing to post about this, they’ll probably claim that it’s a desperate attempt by godless evolutionists to discredit those who know and are proud to declare The Truth™. We’ll be watching, so stay tuned to this blog!
It didn’t take long. This just appeared at the Discovery Institute’s creationist blog: Introducing the New “Conspiracism” Canard. 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. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:
Isn’t deceptive name-calling a wonderful thing? Here’s a new twist to efforts to evade a debate about design in nature by associating ID with tendencies in thought that many people find disreputable. The familiar gambit is to paint intelligent design with the brush of “creationism.” You simply slap that label on us and bingo! — no need to discuss the substance of the relevant scientific evidence.
Klinghoffer is in full Why is everyone looking at me? mode. He says:
Writing, remarkably, in the otherwise sober journal Current Biology, a group of researchers led by Pascal Wagner-Egger claim to uncover a link between “creationism” and “conspiracism.”
After a quote from the research we discussed yesterday, he tells us:
Typically, Wagner-Egger et al. use “creationism” to denote an idea they don’t like but that really is much broader than what the term implies. They define it as “the belief that life on Earth was purposefully created by a supernatural agent.” The origin of life certainly does seem to reflect purpose rather than the mere play of random processes. Whether the purpose is that of a “supernatural agent” is a question on which science, as far as I know, can’t currently shed light.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! Klinghoffer’s denial is going too far. The Discoveroids are constantly telling us that their “science” points to an intelligent creator. Oh wait — he backs up a bit and says:
Obviously, “teleological thinking” — an openness to seeing intelligent causes at work in ways not everyone can agree on — underpins arguments for design, and it would have to underpin most conspiracy thinking as well. But this is a game that can be played in two directions.
Really? He continues:
[T]he only genuine, known conspiracy theory “associated” with “creationism” is one promulgated by Darwinists. This is the belief that whatever ID proponents may say to the contrary, as we do over and over again, we’re really all about a secret plot to teach ID, or the Bible, or creationism, in public schools.
BWAHAHAHAHAHA! He’s saying: I didn’t do it. You did! All of you!
After quoting himself in defense of Discoveroid “academic freedom” bills, he concludes with this:
Hidden codes and secret cabals are the meat and potatoes of conspiracy theorists. Pascal Wagner-Egger and his colleagues can tell the readers of the Current Biology what they like, but it’s Darwinists and their media champions who spread actual conspiracy thinking, not us.
So there you are, dear reader. As with gastric distress, so it is with creationism. He who promptly denies blame is likely to be the guilty party.
Copyright © 2018. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.