Posted on 10/16/2009 12:51:51 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
When a conservative group, the American Freedom Alliance (AFA), recently contracted to premiere a new documentary titled Darwins Dilemma at the Smithsonian-affiliated California Science Center, they couldnt imagine the brouhaha that would ensue.
As soon as word of the screening went public, the Darwinian thought police started complaining about a government-supported science center renting its facilities to a group showing a film that challenges Darwinian evolution.
Why the outrage? Isnt there academic freedom to express scientific viewpoints that dissent from the evolutionary consensus?
To give some background on the controversy, the fossil record shows that about 530 million years ago, nearly all major animal groups (called phyla) abruptly appeared on earth. Dubbed the Cambrian explosion, this dramatic burst of biodiversity without clear evolutionary precursors has created headaches for evolutionists ever since Darwins time.
There are two ways that modern evolutionists approach the Cambrian explosion, or what has been called Darwins dilemma:
A. Some freely acknowledge that the Cambrian fossil evidence essentially shows the opposite of what was expected under neo-Darwinian evolution.
B. Others deal with the Cambrian explosion by sweeping its problems under the rug and trying to change the subject.
Succumbing to pressure from Darwinian elites, the California Science Center chose option B.
The AFA had contracted with the Science Center, a department of the California state government, to show Darwins Dilemma on Sept. 25th at the centers IMAX Theatre. The film explores the eponymous problem of how the Cambrian explosion challenges Darwinian theory and features scientists arguing that the best explanation is intelligent design (ID).
Apparently this was too much for the California Science Center, which abruptly cancelled the AFAs contract just a couple weeks before the screening. The center claims it cancelled the event because of issues related to the contract but refuses to identify the issues.
Contract issues always make a nice pretext for censorship, but a little digging into history uncovers what likely took place.
The California Science Center is affiliated with the Smithsonian Institution, which has a long history of opposing academic freedom for ID.
In 2004, a pro-ID peer-reviewed scientific article authored by Stephen Meyer was published in a Smithsonian-affiliated biology journal. Once the Biological Society of Washington (BSW) realized it had published a pro-ID paper, it repudiated Meyers article, alleging the paper does not meet the scientific standards of the Proceedings.
Of course the BSW cited no factual errors in the paper; they just didnt like Meyers conclusions.
Then in 2005, a critical New York Times story inspired anti-ID censors to pressure the Smithsonian to cancel the screening of a pro-ID film, The Privileged Planet.
To its credit, the Smithsonian honored its contract to show the film but publicly disclaimed the event, stating the content of the film is not consistent with the mission of the Smithsonian Institution. Smithsonian spokesman Randall Kremer said the institution objected to the documentarys philosophical conclusion.
(Of course, when the Smithsonian featured Carl Sagans Cosmos documentary in 1997, it volunteered no objections to the films bold opening statement that The Cosmos is all that is, or ever was, or ever will be.)
The story picks up in 2006, when a congressional staff investigation found that "Smithsonian's top officials permit[ted] the demotion and harassment of [a] scientist skeptical of Darwinian evolution.
The persecuted scientist was Smithsonian research biologist Richard Sternberg, who experienced retaliation for overseeing the publication of Meyers paper.
The Smithsonian Institution seems willing to go to great lengths to oppose ID and send the message that scientists who sympathize with ID will face consequences, but how does this relate to the current debacle with the California Science Center?
For one, Drs. Sternberg and Meyer are featured in the Darwins Dilemma documentary advocating ID. And second, Smithsonian spokesman Randal Kremer has reappeared, stating that he spoke with the California Science Center after becoming concerned by the inference there was a showing of the film at a Smithsonian branch.
Though Kremer officially denies it, all appearances indicate pressure was applied from on high at the Smithsonian, and the California Science Center caved in and cancelled the event. Once we move past the customary pretexts, this is an open and shut case of censorship and the banning of free speech that dissents from evolution.
Darwins dilemma isnt just about a lack of transitional fossils in ancient rocks. Its about how the guards of evolutionary orthodoxy will treat contrary scientific viewpoints.
Will they silence minority views, or will they grant dissenting scientists freedom of speech and scientific inquiry to make their case?
That is the real question posed by Darwins dilemma. Lets hope the California Science Center reverses its decision to cancel the contracted screening of Darwins Dilemma and chooses freedom of speech over evolutionary dogmatism.
I saw it.
Get rid of it.
Sure!
Nonetheless (from Dictionary.com).............
por·nog·ra·phy (pôr-nŏg'rə-fē) n.
1)Sexually explicit pictures, writing, or other material whose primary purpose is to cause sexual arousal.
2)The presentation or production of this material.
3)Lurid or sensational material
(See my ***Tagline***)
having no bearing on or connection with the subject at issue; “an irrelevant comment”; “irrelevant allegations”
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn:
AS IN, THIS IS IRRELEVANT: “Lurid or sensational material.”
(Nonetheless, see my tagline.)
I don’t know why it should be any surprise that the CSC would take the opportunity to cancel the ID event. The CSC and the ID people have opposing missions. In fact the ID is out right hostile to the mission of the CSC. (and all educational institutes)
Everyone should take a moment to google the Science Center and judge for your self what they are up to. Then keep in mind that a federal Bush appointed conserved Judge call the ID people fundamentally dishonest in the Dover Pa trail. It’s a shame that these fundamentally dishonest people are using up CSC time and resources.
To them, up becomes down, black is white and they will never give up trying to lead our country down a path of ignorance.
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.