Discoveroids Ain’t No Kin to No Monkey

This appeared yesterday at the Discovery Institute’s creationist blog, so the grand event it promises for “tomorrow” has already occurred, in all likelihood. The title of their post is Tomorrow: New Science Uprising Episode on Human Origins, and it was written by Klinghoffer. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:

A brand new episode of Science Uprising premieres tomorrow, October 13, at 12 pm Pacific/3 pm Eastern.

What the Discoveroids call “Science Uprising” is a YouTube series described at the Discoveroids’ website: Discovery Institute’s Center for Science & Culture Launches Provocative New YouTube Series Titled “Science Uprising”. We haven’t read their description and we haven’t seen any of their YouTube offerings. Our assumption is that it’s the same old creationism that they’ve been blogging about for years. Anyway, let’s see what Klinghoffer says about their newest offering:

This one, in the typical edgy Science Uprising style [Ooooooooooooh! It’s edgy!], cuts to heart of the mystery of human origins.

The mystery of human origins? Wow — this is exciting! Klinghoffer tells us:

“Human Evolution: The Monkey Bias” features geologist Casey Luskin [Hee hee!] and biologist Jonathan Wells [BWAHAHAHA!], showing that materialism is wed to ape origins for humans because the philosophy’s whole picture of reality demands it.

Everyone knows who Casey is. As for Wells, see Discovery Institute: The Genius of Jonathan Wells. Those two are going to reveal human origins without the bias of materialism. Isn’t this thrilling? Klinghoffer continues:

A view open to intelligent design [Hee hee!] can follow the evidence freely. It does not require a particular narrative of how humanity arose.

Is your view open to intelligent design, dear reader? If not, all we can say to you is Oook, oook! Anyway, here’s the end of Klinghoffer’s post:

Join us for the live event on YouTube and interact with Dr. Luskin as he participates in the simultaneous video chat. See it right here:

What looks like a YouTube video is at the end of Klinghoffer’s post. As we said at the beginning, he posted this thing yesterday, so you missed all the excitement. But maybe you can still learn something by following the links, so go for it! And in conclusion, we say Ooook, oooook!

Copyright © 2021. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

9 responses to “Discoveroids Ain’t No Kin to No Monkey

  1. Why don’t the flaming creationists just come out and say what they are getting at.

  2. Theodore Lawry

    The Discovery Institute has surpassed even itself if that’s possible. Here’s what the Discovery Institute’s video (SU-8) said:

    (SU-8 4:20) “This PBS documentary shows anthropologist Owen Lovejoy manipulating the fossils to make Lucy walk upright.”
    (PBS voiceover Don Johanson 0:37-0:45) “The perfect fit was an illusion that made Lucy’s hip bones seem to flair out like a chimp’s. But all was not lost.”
    (PBS excerpt ) Shows Lovejoy using a power grinder on what seems to be the fossil!
    (SU-8) Shows an audience member staring in disbelief.
    (PBS voiceover Don Johanson ) “As a result the angle of the hip looks nothing like a chimp’s but a lot like ours.”
    (SU-8 Casey Luskin) “So Lucy’s pelvis had to be reconstructed using quite a bit of evolutionary interpretation and imagination.”

    Note that Luskin doesn’t say “fraud” but the preceding clip of Lovejoy using the grinder, as the DI shows it, certainly implies it!

    What is wrong with this picture? This is what Don Johanson actually said, with the part SU-8 left out in italics. (The PBS video is at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8Zf1Ap2BhY. Transcripts are at https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2106hum1.html)

    (PBS voiceover Don Johanson 0:37-1:33) “The perfect fit was an illusion that made Lucy’s hip bones seems to flair out like a chimp’s. But all was not lost. Lovejoy decided he could restore the pelvis to its natural shape. He didn’t want to tamper with the original, so he made a copy in plaster. He cut the damaged pieces out and put them back together the way they were before Lucy died. It was a tricky job, but after taking the kink out of the pelvis, it all fit together perfectly, like a three-dimensional jigsaw puzzle. As a result, the angle of the hip looks nothing like a chimps, but a lot like ours.

    Lovejoy ground up a plaster copy even though SU-8 accused him of “manipulating the fossils to make Lucy walk upright.” Lovejoy had good reasons for doing so, which SU-8 also left out! Lovejoy and Johanson explain:

    (PBS voiceover Owen Lovejoy 0:00-0:37) When I put the two parts of the pelvis together that we had, this part of the pelvis has pressed so hard and so completely into this one, that it caused it to be broken into a series of individual pieces, which were then fused together in later fossilization.

    DON JOHANSON: After Lucy died, some of her bones lying in the mud must have been crushed or broken, perhaps by animals browsing at the lake shore.

    OWEN LOVEJOY: This has caused the two bones in fact to fit together so well that they’re in an anatomically impossible position.

    When the video wasn’t making paleontologists look dishonest, it was busy Leaving Stuff Out. See 4:07 where Luskin says they didn’t find Lucy’s feet, showing a picture of Lucy’s skeleton with a big red circle showing that the left leg ends at the knee. Yes, but there are several bones below the knee for the right leg, what do they tell us about whether Lucy walked upright? Luskin doesn’t say!

    Johanson goes on to talk about the footprints at Laetoli which were solid evidence that someone was walking upright 3.5 million years ago. Again, Luskin says nothing!

    Luskin is a lawyer, so I suppose that what he said doesn’t count as libel, Lovejoy and Johanson are still alive. But I sure hope so!

  3. Dave Luckett

    I heard the, er, narrative about Lovejoy’s reconstruction of “Lucy’s” pelvis, oh, it must have been ten years ago. I forget what agency of the creationist noise machine purveyed it, but it was presented along with a set of carefully crafted lies about how her supposed knee-joint had been found three hundred meters away and in different strata. That, of course, was another specimen from another individual entirely.

    I knew of the reconstruction, and exactly how and why it had been made, as soon as I actually researched the topic. Lovejoy had, in the manner of all of his profession, kept careful notes of what he had done and of course he had not altered the original fossil in any way. That was radically asymmetrical as found, and for that reason, as he said, “anatomically impossible”. Any individual with that pelvis could never have been ambulate. Nor had he ever dissembled his actions in the slightest.

    But there’s another lie, subtly woven into the DI’s fiction: that the A. afarensis type specimen “Lucy” is “like us”. She stood about a meter tall, and had shoulders very different to ours and proportionally much longer arms. Her teeth were smaller than a chimpanzee’s, but still larger than ours. But she was fully bipedal, as the evidence from her hip-femur and knee joint make absolutely undeniable. She was a fully bipedal primate who was still capable of rapidly climbing trees, with reduced teeth in a face flatter than any other ape. She is thus as perfect a transitional form as it’s possible to have.

    The purpose of this DI foray into the fantastic – one of many – is to deny evolution. It is not to defend intelligent design. In theory, that A afarensis is a transitional between earlier apes and undeniable hominins should not disturb them much. They’ve always refused to say where, when or how their designer intervened. Anyway, he, she, they or it could have taken a hand to guide the evolution of modern human beings, and A afarensis could have been just one more stage in that process, with no effect on their conjecture at all.

    But no. They’re not pushing any such idea. Not really. They are promoting fiat instantaneous creation of the “kinds”, the same as the rest of the creationist caravan. They’re hoping, by not actually saying so, that they’ll present a smaller target. That is, they’re not merely dishonest in their assertions about the evidence, they’re dishonest about themselves.

    They are, like all creationists, liars. They’re trying to be more cunning and subtle about it – but of course that only makes it worse. The serpent, we are told, was also subtle.

  4. bewilderbeast

    But lyin’ is OK if you’re lyin’ for Jesus or the Intelligent Designer (his dad).

  5. Not only do they misdescribe Lucy, but they suppress all the evidence for other specimens(of which there must by now be dozens) showing clear evidence of early bipedalism

  6. “Geologist” Casey Luskin ain’t no kin to no scientist…..

  7. @och will
    Is there a transitional form?

  8. Theodore Lawry

    I would still like to know whether Luskin et al. can be sued. As I said, Lovejoy and Johanson are both still alive. Being sued for libel might finally teach those liars a lesson. On the other hand, the DI could probably use the publicity.

    Incidentally, anyone with a brain would know that if Lovejoy or Johanson had done anything improper with a fossil, they would never have re-enacted it for TV cameras. And yet none of the comments on the youtube video mention this point!

    BTW, in response to one comment FYI, “Discovery Science” said

    “we will be releasing longer interviews with Casey Luskin and Jonathan Wells over the next couple of weeks that will discuss some of the items in this video in more detail.”

    I can hardly wait!

  9. Tomorrow’s headline: Kings of quote-mining watch videos, you won’t believe what happens next.

Make a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s