home | what's new | other sites | contact | about

  

 

Word Gems 

exploring self-realization, sacred personhood, and full humanity

 

Dr. Stephen C. Meyer's
Darwin's Doubt

An Investigation of the 'Cambrian Explosion'

Answering the
False Statements
of the
Darwin Lobby

 
 

return to "Evolution" main-page

 

Editor's note: The following information is from the Prologue of Darwin's Doubt.

 

Dr. Stephen C. Meyer

 

 

“no weaknesses in the theory of evolution”

We are accustomed to the disingenuous answer, even the bold-faced lie, in the area of politics, but we expect more from science. Indeed, what is science but a search for the truth in the natural world?

Therefore, it’s particularly troubling when spokespersons for science engage in prevarication, and of an egregious sort.

Dr. Meyer recounts an incident at the time of his testimony in 2009 concerning evolution to the Texas State Board of Education. He had prepared a docket of information taken from 100 peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals written by biologists. These writings discussed “significant problems” with popular Darwinian teaching.

Despite this massive questioning of Darwinism, “Eugenie Scott, spokeswoman for the National Center for Science Education,” when interviewed by The Dallas Morning News, insisted that “There are no weaknesses in the theory of evolution.”

Meyer’s points out that, what amounts to a disinformation campaign, the Darwin lobby presents a unified front to an unknowledgeable public. Despite growing criticism of Darwinism within the scientific field itself, high school and college textbooks continue to present Darwinistic thought as if it were unchallenged; or if not, only by kooks and fringers.

“no credible scientific challenge to the theory of evolution”

The National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Sciences, and the National Association of Biology Teachers, says Meyers, “routinely assure the public” that Darwin’s theory enjoys universal support from scientists.

As an example of such side-stepping of reality, in 2006 these groups stated, “There is no significant controversy within the scientific community about the validity of the theory of evolution.”

In this vein, a dutiful echoing by the mass media, New York Times science writer Cornelia Dean proclaimed that “There is no credible scientific challenge to the theory of evolution.”

reality control

On the “Clear Thinking” page, we reviewed a dishonorable debating strategy. It’s called “pounding the table by the losing attorney.”

When you have nothing of import to say, if you cannot address the issues with merit-based consideration, and if you are dishonorable, then you will try to create a scene, a photo-opp, some diversion, to take away the focus from the vacuity of your checkered position.

In short, you simply lie, and get your cohorts to repeat the lie. In Orwellian fashion, you attempt to orchestrate a “reality control.” It's a conspiracy strategy.

 

 

Editor's last word:

fact-free science 

When Darwinists brashly proclaim that “Darwinism is not a theory but a fact” and “There is no evidence against it,” and if they really believe what they’re saying, then these ill-advised statements represent the empty confidence and credulity of a cultish mentality.

Those of such mind-frame might really believe their own propaganda, and, when they do, what they really mean when they say “fact” is actually “dogma” or “one true doctrine,” just as the hard-core religionists tend to speak, according to their private opinions.

It’s fact-free science, it’s dogma-laden science.

Special note: The issue of fact-free science is more prevalent than we know. This same disingenuity is used in dark politics all the time. There might be a mountain of evidence that such-and-such is true, but the totalitarians will immediately begin chanting “There’s no evidence for that.” It’s their default response; because, in Orwellian fashion, if you control the media, and the truth is not reported, then, in a narrowed and skewed reality, there in fact will be no evidence to countermand the prevarication. And as we discussed in the “Levels of Consciousness” writing, some of the rabid political followers really do believe “There is no evidence.” They’re just like the Darwinists, heads in the sand, who claim the same. When the true-believer politicos sing “There is no evidence,” for them it might be true - because their position was never built upon careful fact-gathering and cogent reasoning, but a cultish dogmatism that believes what it wants to believe.