The Darwin exhibition frightening off corporate sponsors

The Telegraph ^ | 11/20/2005 | Nicholas Wapshott

[jennyp]

Now, that's just sad.

[Pikamax]

The moronic liberals scared them off with a nice dose of Bush/Christian bashing.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/gossip/story/366903p-312314c.html

[guitarist]

If you could somehow force or "get" all or most all Americans to believe in Darwinism, it wouldn't have nearly the wonderful effect many people claim. It wouldn't speed up medical research, wouldn't get a man on Mars any sooner, and wouldn't make the world more happy or peaceful.

The evolutionists are guilty of overplaying their hand. Others are right to be wary.

[digital-olive]

*puts on flamesuit* personally, I would like to see more support for scientific exhibits. Some of the most religious people I have met have been talented scientists. Also, I don't agree with the notion of being scared to show your support for something for fear of public backlash ( as the same fear the rats have).

[jennyp]

Crevo-list worthy methinks.

I'm dying to know which corporations they approached. Would Microsoft wimp out on something like this? AstraZeneca? Pfizer? Google? Vulcan?

[john_baldacci_is_a_commie]

Not really.

[calrighty]

Who is John Baldacci?

[PatrickHenry]

Evolution Ping The List-O-Links

A conservative, pro-evolution science list, now with over 320 names. See the list's explanation, then FReepmail to be added or dropped. To assist beginners: But it's "just a theory", Evo-Troll's Toolkit, and How to argue against a scientific theory.

[Zeroisanumber]

Heh, I can just imagine Pfizer's response to Evangelicals: "Whatcha gonna do? Boycott penicillin?"

Or Microsoft, "By all means, switch to Linux. We'd love to make it known that every science-phobic, Young Earth Creationist is a Linux user."

[freespirited]

Contrary to their image as nervy, corporations tend to be incredible wimps.

[PatrickHenry]

I'm dying to know which corporations they approached.

I've read that Microsoft (or maybe it was Gates, individually, or through his foundation) has contributed to the Discovery Institute.

[Cicero]

There's nothing wrong with a Darwin exhibit. But it looks as if the exhibitors themselves have politicized it. I suspect that the whole thing was put together in the first place at this particular time for political reasons by rich liberal New Yorkers, mentioned in the article, who are worried about losing the Darwin monopoly in the public schools.

I can remember, when I was growing up, a time when Freud was God and Woody Allen was his prophet. Now both of them have virtually disappeared from the scene. So has Marx. Darwin is next in line.

[Gumlegs]

There is nothing so cowardly as a million dollars.

[durasell]

The movers and shakers at that particular museum are anything but liberal. There is much more to this story than meets the eye.

[PatrickHenry]

Found a reference: Institute Hails $9.3 Million Grant from Gates Foundation. But it's not for their anti-evolution work.

[furball4paws]

Corporations are the men and women who run them. They'll fry a competitor in a heart beat, but when it comes to "public image" you're right. The only word is "wimp".

There was a theater flap a while back. Some theater chains not wanting to show science flicks because of creationist "threats" to boycott.

[furball4paws]

I've know about a dozen CEOs, two of them quite well (big guys, not mom and pop stuff).

To a man they are all very cautious.

[furball4paws]

May not be anti-evo, but anything that keeps the doors open benefits the Creo message.

[Cicero]

Do you have an inside story?

I have always liked the Natural History Museum. And since they do nature, animals, and science, Darwin is a natural fit for them. But it seems more than a coincidence that they should do a major Darwin exhibit at this particular time.

[PatrickHenry]

None of them wants to be associated with controversy. Still, you'd think one of the big pharmaceutical outfits would step forward.