Posted on 01/28/2009 11:36:17 AM PST by Coyoteman
We will see and hear the term “Darwinism” a lot during 2009, a year during which scientists, teachers, and others who delight in the accomplishments of modern biology will commemorate the 200th anniversary of Darwin’s birth and the 150th anniversary of the publication of On the Origin of Species. But what does “Darwinism” mean? And how is it used? At best, the phrase is ambiguous and misleading about science. At worst, its use echoes a creationist strategy to demonize evolution.
snip...
In summary, then, “Darwinism” is an ambiguous term that impairs communication even about Darwin’s own ideas. It fails to convey the full panoply of modern evolutionary biology accurately, and it fosters the inaccurate perception that the field stagnated for 150 years after Darwin’s day. Moreover, creationists use “Darwinism” to frame evolutionary biology as an ism or ideology, and the public understanding of evolution and science suffers as a result. True, in science, we do not shape our research because of what creationists claim about our subject matter. But when we are in the classroom or otherwise dealing with the public understanding of science, it is entirely appropriate to consider whether what we say may be misunderstood. We cannot expect to change preconceptions if we are not willing to avoid exacerbating them. A first step is eschewing the careless use of “Darwinism.”
(Excerpt) Read more at springerlink.com ...
Since he was in the habit of accusing Christians of a conspiracy to overthrow the government, destroy the Constitution and ban astronomy and paleontology (and religious practice other than fundamentalist Protestantism), he deserved it richly.
Don’t make the mistake of confusing Coyoteman with science, or sanity.
Physicist never tangled with anyone, so I have to reserve judgement in his case.
He was found unfit, and has failed to survive.
Wow! Evolution in action!
Since there are no land-dwelling "dinousaurs" aprés le deluge, no, you don't.
All hail Coyoteman! Let us bury him . . . not honor him.
It appears 'Yote also violated Nivens First Law: Never throw [feces] at an armed man."
:-)
Coyoteman’s been banned.
If this is true, it’s been a LONG LONG time coming and I for one am supportive.
Jim’s been crystal clear, on several occasions.
I hope other libtards take notice, get a clue, and stop undermining science, Christianity, the Untied States of America and FR.
The cult of darwinism has no place in science because it always ALWAYS attacks any and all threats or challenges to the theory of evolution as religious attacks and anti-science...and coyoteman was one of the absolute worst with his ridiculous “burnings at the stake”, “theocracy”, and “inquisition” nonsense.
Additionally, metmom has multiple times posted links explaining the overall FR view of how people see this clear distinction between his cult and real science.
While I don’t think you have to be a Christian to see it, I do think you almost certainly have to be a cultist not to see it.
Far more than one FRevo calls any non-evo a creationist.
Matter of fact, the tendency is to take anyone who does not hold to the hardline, naturalistic no-God allowed position on the ToE and cram them into a flat earth, heliocentric, 6 day, 6,000 year YEC, Bible literalist box and then mock and ridicule them regardless of what their position is.
Oh, and let’s not forget the *any challenge to the ToE is not scientific, it’s religious apologetics* label.
bttp...worth seeing again.
When you show up for Darwin’s birthday bash you’ll have to say the secret words to gain entrance and let me warn you, “I believe in God as the Creator” are not the words.
That’s not to say you’re not allowed to have religious beliefs, just write them down and submit them to the doorman, and he’ll decide which of them have a plate at the Science table.
But sorry, no primordial soup for you, go to the back door and beg for scraps.
I call it devil worship or idolatry; that okay??
BRAVO!
This incessant PC separation of Christianity from any and all things public is what will ultimately destroy this country if we allow it.
Thankyouverymuch!
“Primordial Soup Nazis?”
Sounds as good as any, to replace “Darwinism,” since the poor, sensitive souls have begun to take offense.
Ever seen those words around these parts, Coyoteman?
I guess Survival of the Fittest really runs things after all..
I love your comment that the ToE is the creation story of the atheists and secular humanists. Succint and true.
“Personalize, polarize, and try to provoke a reaction.”
*sigh* I guess these projections are truly the only thing you’ll have left in your playbook now.
You’ll be even more boring than usual, if that’s even possible.
Maybe the Obama adminsitration will see to it that he gets a bailout:
"This account has been banned or suspended."
Get a grip. It's about misusing science to silence religion.
It's about being anti-God and anti-religion at every turn.
And it appears that it's about acting like you own the forum when you don't.
Thanks Jim.
The atheist Darwinists LOVE to talk about science, because this diverts attention from their real agenda, which is eugenics.
Here are the “highlights” of Darwinist eugenics in just the past century:
Rachel Carson (author of “Silent Spring” which resulted in the DDT ban): 50-80 MILLION deaths and rising every year.
Margaret Sanger: 50 MILLION+ deaths worldwide EVERY YEAR (850 MILLION to 1.2 BILLION worldwide since 1900).
Stalin: 13 MILLION+ deaths.
Hitler: 12 MILLION+ deaths.
Mao: 50-80 MILLION deaths.
(And note that this only counts the genocide that can be directly attributed to them, if the wars initiated by Stalin, Mao and Hitler were included there would be close to 100 MILLION more.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.