Here’s information about Crowther from the Dishonesty Institute website. Notice that Crowther is not a scientist, and obviously he doesn’t even know what science is.
“Robert Crowther holds a BA in Journalism with an emphasis in public affairs and twenty years experience as a journalist, publisher, and brand marketing and media relations specialist. From 1994-2000 he was the Director of Public and Media Relations for Discovery Institute overseeing most aspects of communications for each of the Institute’s major programs.”
Crowther and the rest of the theocratic morons of the Dishonesty Institute are traitors who want to destroy America’s science education. If it was up to me they would be put in prison for treason. They are enemies of America, no better than terrorists, and they should be treated like terrorists.
RickK says:
Robert Crowther needs to acquaint himself with the actual contents of “Signature in the Cell”, which after 150 pages of Stephen Meyer’s self-congratulatory personal biography, goes on to COMPLETELY miss the point on evolution. Meyer works very hard to build up the strawman that life jumped into complex existence through some random event. He fails to mention what anyone who has ever written a simple evolutionary algorithm understands – IT ISN’T RANDOM.
Meyer is clever, no doubt. And as he stated in “The Wedge”, he will use that cleverness and will use “Design Theory” as a mechanism to make science more accepting of the Christian God. That’s his goal, spelled out in black and white.
Mr. Crowther – if the Discovery Institute is supposed to be doing research into “Intelligent Design”, why does it seem to consist primarly of journalism majors and lawyers? Why does the visible output from the Discovery Instutute seem to consist solely of press releases and blogs that don’t allow comments?
There was a reply on their Discovery Institute website which was written by the creationist John West who used to be a "political scientist" (he never had a real job and he knows nothing about biology). Here it is:
Supporters of Darwin's theory continue to distinguish themselves on America's college campuses--not for their reason and logic, but for their incredible ill manners and an almost pathological inability to engage in civil discussion. Last week, a factually-challenged attack on intelligent design was published in The Nevada Sagebrush, the student newspaper at the University of Nevada, Reno. Nothing new in that; I see ill-informed articles on intelligent design all the time. But after my colleague Rob Crowther posted a short comment suggesting that readers might actually want to hear from intelligent design proponents themselves (imagine that!), the Darwinist thought-police came out in force. One writer who is so courageous that he hides behind the pseudonym "bobxxxx" fulminated:
Robert Crowther... and the rest of the theocratic morons of the Dishonesty Institute are traitors who want to destroy America's science education. If it was up to me they would be put in prison for treason. They are enemies of America, no better than terrorists, and they should be treated like terrorists.
Traitors? Terrorists? Enemies of America? ID proponents should be "put in prison" for freely expressing their views?!! Perhaps the University of Nevada should consider requiring its students to take a course on the First Amendment. It's pretty obvious that some of them don't understand the value of free speech.
The various statements of what ID creationism is are simply obfuscations of the following argument:
I don't understand the reason for X phenomenon. Therefore X phenomenon originated by magic.
For example, take the contention that the bacterial flagellum could not have originated through a step by step process. That's an obfuscation of the true argument, which is "I don't understand how the bacterial flagellum could have originated through a step by step process."
The response, of course, is:
Well, maybe you not understanding something doesn't mean it can't be understood. There are other reasons why you might not understand something. Maybe you're just stupid.
Dembski gave some talk in Oklahoma, and he got totally pwned. He talked about the bacterial flagellum, and some guy in the audience, during the question and answer session, said, I can explain how the bacterial flagellum could have originated through a step by step process, and did it. Of course, then Dembski wanted more steps. No matter how many steps you present, the ID creationist wants more. This is a slight variation of the ID creationist argument, and reads as follows:
I won't admit that X phenomenon could have originated through natural means. Therefore, X phenomenon must have originated by magic.
And the answer, of course, is: Well, maybe you're just a liar.
The idea that proponents of ID creationism have been discriminated against is based on a misconception - namely, that every idea is of equal merit. ID creationists aren't able to gain acceptance for their ideas not because of philosophical resistance, discrimination, or conspiracy, but because their ideas are stupid. I mean, when a real scientist explains phenomena that an ID creationist says is unexplainable, is the ID creationist still entitled to a respectful hearing for his claim?
ID creationism adherents believe in ID creationism because they haven't considered, or don't want to consider, the possibility that they're just retarded. Well, it's time for them to consider it.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.