Darwinists Trick Themselves in Texas

Discovery Institute ^ | March 29, 2009 | Bruce Chapman

[GodGunsGuts]

Darwinists Trick Themselves in Texas

The New York Times got the preview story wrong, and the Washington Post editorial writer probably was too rushed to question the charges of "creationism" coming from the National Center for Science Education, the Darwin-only lobby. So this week's important decisions by the Texas Board of Education (TBOE) on how to teach evolution were predicated in the media by the big question of whether teachers should provide both "strengths and weaknesses" of Darwin's theory. Those words might sound benign, readers were told, but they really are "code words" (take the press' word for it) for creationism and religion.

To the media left, any questioning of Darwin is reserved for denizens of Dogpatch.

So, what did the TBOE do? Well, it turns out that they are fairly adroit politicians. They did remove language providing for "strengths and weaknesses" and then added new language--quite a lot of it--providing that students will learn, for example, to "analyze, evaluate and critique scientific explanations…including examining all sides of scientific evidence… so as to encourage critical thinking by the student." Perfect! A policy distinction without a difference! In fact, the new standards are just fine, an improvement, in fact. Now teachers can tell the kids about the scientific evidence in a variety of fields that seems to contradict the Darwinian account as well as the supposed evidence in support.

Once again the NCSE was too-smart-by-half. It ran blogs making fun of religion, while organizing public speakers who gave fulsome testimony to their Christian faith and how compatible it is with "evolution" (meaning Darwinian evolution). To the purists like Richard Dawkins and P.Z. Myers it probably makes them look like toadies.

In the end, the rhetoric meant to evoke fundamentalist cranks was mixed with pious statements doing the very kind of religious posturing the Darwinists project onto their foes, and reminding me of the church scenes from Blazing Saddles. It all backfired.

By demonizing specific words--and making the elimination of them the test of "science"--the NCSE and its state distributor, the Orwellian-named Texas Freedom Network, simply allowed the Board to do the obvious word shuffle. Okay, no "strengths and weakness, " but instead, we'll pass similar ideas in different words, and everyone will be happy. Except, of course, the NCSE and the TFN.

Don't expect the media to figure this out from the NCSE Talking Points memo, but the insiders get the picture. Dawkins must be enjoying a caustic chuckle at the expense of the NCSE.

[metmom]

There are no lengths to which a Christian hater will not go to discredit Christianity or creationism.

It says way more about him than it does about you.

Anyone with a lick of sense can see right through that tactic.

Don’t sweat it. When they resort to attacks like that, you know that they’ve reached the end of anything reasonable or intelligent that they have to say on the subject.

[GourmetDan]

"Then you don’t know Christian theology very well. Jesus Christ taught to worship G-d the Father, through Christ (in the “name” of Christ, by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. I’m Jewish and know that much."

Then why did Christ accept worship if he taught to worship the Father only? Matt 2:2, Matt 2:11, Matt 28:17, Luke 24:52, John 9:38.

Wasn't Herod struck down because he accepted worship as a god and didn't give God praise in Acts 12? Wouldn't Jesus be subject to the same punishment if he wrongly accepted worship instead of giving praise to God?

[GourmetDan]

"I suggest reading the entire book of Hebrews, carefully."

Then why does Heb 1:6 speak of the angels worshipping God's Son?

Aren't you focused on a half-truth?

[AndrewC]

Those kind of attacks I consider as water on a duck’s back. It fairly well demonstrates your opponent’s lack of intellectual ammunition, commonly known as pissant.

[GodGunsGuts]

Thanks, Metmom. Just wanted everyone to be aware that we have a provocateur running loose on FR who is going around claiming that Christian creationists are the paid foot-soldiers of Islamo-terrorism.

[atlaw]

So I take it you folks are in full agreement with GGG and his Islamic compatriot Adnan Oktar (a/k/a Harun Yahya) that:

— “the majority of radical Islamist terrorists despise creation, and are materialist to the core”;

— radical Islamic terrorists are actually “hardcore Commie-Materialists who worship at the alter of evolutionary materialism”;

— “the more Muslims who become creationists (even if it’s of the Muslim variety) the more that helps the US and its allies in the War on Terror”; and

— that 9/11 was actually perpetrated by Darwinist, materialist, atheists who were just disguised as radical Muslims.

(Just checking.)

[GodGunsGuts]

Why does that name (pissant) ring a bell?

[editor-surveyor]

Comic relief has arrived!

[valkyry1]

willing to engage in slimy, dishonest, slanderous and disruptive behavior in the service of his agenda to discredit Christian creationists

Thats pretty much all they have. 

[Fichori]

“So I take it you folks are in full agreement with GGG and his Islamic compatriot Adnan Oktar (a/k/a Harun Yahya) that:” [excerpt]

Have you stopped beating your wife?

[AndrewC]

You can take anything you want from whatever you want. That doesn’t make you correct or deserving of a reply. Adolph Hitler certainly believed that the sun appeared in the East, so do I, but that does not make me a Nazi(Godwin’s law may be invoked if you like, you seem to be in that rut).

[Fichori]

“Comic relief has arrived!”

Or in my case, research material.

[GodGunsGuts]

Let me set the record straight, Mr. Lawyer:

— “the majority of radical Islamist terrorists despise creation, and are materialist to the core”;

I agree.

— radical Islamic terrorists are actually “hardcore Commie-Materialists who worship at the alter of evolutionary materialism”;

Not all, but many...pehaps a majority.

— “the more Muslims who become creationists (even if it’s of the Muslim variety) the more that helps the US and its allies in the War on Terror”;

Since Muslim creationists denounce terrorism carried out in the name of Islam, this is a given.

— that 9/11 was actually perpetrated by Darwinist, materialist, atheists who were just disguised as radical Muslims.

I don’t think I have ever said that. I have documented that Bin Laden’s #2 man is a known KGB agent. I have also documented that many of the hijackers ate pork, drank alcohol, did not repay debts, and frequented nudie bars. All are a big no-no in Islam. These are not the hallmarks of religiously observant Muslims.

[atlaw]

Actually, a simple yes or no would suffice here (unlike the question you proffer as allegedly analogous).

[GodGunsGuts]

PS I have also documented that the majority of Hezbollah suicide bombers in Lebanon come from secular Communist and socialist parties. And lets not forget that the Tamil Tigers, the terrorist group that carries out more suicide bombings than any other terrorist group, are officially Marxist-Leninist. How do you explain that, Mr. Lawyer?

[GodGunsGuts]

==Actually, a simple yes or no would suffice here

Do you have a problem being reminded of how you operate, Mr. Lawyer?

[atlaw]

So your objection is to my alleged guilt by association argument (though here, of course, I am referencing GGG’s specific assertions, as well as, admittedly, the words of the Islamic-Creationist from whom he evidently lifted his assertions). I am trying to remember, Andrew, have you ever objected to the reams of guilt by association arguments tossed out by creationists? Perhaps so. But I frankly can't recall a specific instance.

[GodGunsGuts]

==though here, of course, I am referencing GGG’s specific assertions, as well as, admittedly, the words of the Islamic-Creationist from whom he evidently lifted his assertions

Again, you have no idea what you’re talking about, Mr. Lawyer. Every assertion I have made I have found doing my own independent research, and not a one of them comes from “Islamic-Creationists”. You really are some piece of work.

[atlaw]

Hezbollah:

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9155/

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/hizballah.htm

And the Tamil Tigers? You’ll recall that we’re talking about radical Islam, GGG. Try to focus.

[atlaw]

Right. The similarity of your assertions to those of Harun Yahya is just remarkable coincidence.