Don’t Call it “Darwinism” [religiously defended as "science" by Godless Darwinists]

springerlink ^ | 16 January 2009 | Eugenie C. Scott and Glenn Branch

[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.”

[gondramB]

>>

It would be pretty foolhardy even for a seasoned FReeper.

But then again, maybe that’s why you don’t find many seasoned FReepers who say things like that. They don’t last long enough to become seasoned.
<<

Agreed. Although, it would be hard to find somebody who has been in a group for years, where there is a lot of debate, who has not lost their temper a time or two. But most of us can usually be polite at least for the first month. :)

[little jeremiah]

Have had a very strange virus or something - still not 100% up to par but definitely still kicking, have to stick around in the mortal coil some more. Never a dull moment! The worst thing is that it’s hard to play guitar still.

[gondramB]

That's a very cool cover although its a bit odd the way he's holding that horn.

>>Jay Gould said the "dirty little secret of paleontology is Darwin got it wrong". But getting the ToE establishment to agree is like pulling teeth. Won't happen. Because Darwin is a god to them.<< I don't know if Professor Gould used those exact words but he did work on something called punctuated equilibrium that differed from Darwin's view. Gould felt that evolution moved in relatively faster bursts at times.

But there are lots things that Darwin didn't know or got wrong - this is yet another reason to use a term like developmental or evolutionary biology - "Darwinism" hasn't been a science since the 1930's.

[gondramB]

>>Have had a very strange virus or something - still not 100% up to par but definitely still kicking, have to stick around in the mortal coil some more. Never a dull moment! The worst thing is that it’s hard to play guitar still.<<

Sorry to hear that. Glad you are a bit better but I hope you will be in tip top fighting form one of these days!

[From many - one.]

Thank you for your response. A little late for Coyoteman, though.

I suspect if more of the moderate folk had spoken up, CM might not have been so strong in his subsequent post. He has a long history of fairly well modulated posts.

[gondramB]

They want to grab the kids in kindergarten for indoctrination, which is what worship of their dear leader’s “Day” is all about

I know this is horrible but that post reminded of the problem in kindergarten with the life sized Bratz dolls.

[trisham]

But in this thread, the insults went to Satan by post #3 from a new poster without what I would have thought was appropriate strong disagreement.

*******************

Here's the thing, though. In the opening paragraph of this article, what do we see?

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.

Who really invoked Satan first?

[metmom]

Good Lord, another reason to homeschool if I ever saw one.....

[pandoraou812]

Yes it is.

[ToGodBeTheGlory]

Children have gotten a lot smaller since I went to kindergarten. Maybe they lowered the age requirements to get in? :)

[js1138]

You seem to have struck a nerve. When I was in kindergarten we had live girls. My sisters says I was sent home one day for swaping peeks. I have no memory of the incident, darnit.

[gondramB]

>>Good Lord, another reason to homeschool if I ever saw one.....<<

I sure don’t want the government to decide which toys are moral - they’d probably ban Hot Wheels and G.I. Joe...

but its bad enough to take a doll modeled on a 6 year old girl and give it breasts, makeup and trashy clothes... but when they make it life size instead of 12 inches you’ve basically got a pedophile training device.

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

But there are lots things that Darwin didn't know or got wrong - this is yet another reason to use a term like developmental or evolutionary biology - "Darwinism" hasn't been a science since the 1930's.

That's true as far as the "science" goes. But amongst the "Great Unwashed" Darwinism is synonymous with the ToE.

And scientists, like Richard Dawkins, who speak to them do not disabuse them of this false notion.

We need leading scientists to do as Gould did and tell the world that "Darwin got it wrong" and say how he got it wrong with a clear, unqualified and unnuanced statement.

Unfortunately all we get are chirping crickets or yes..buts.

[metmom]

Who needs life sized Bratz dolls?

I wonder what dimwit educrat thought that was a good idea?

Like I want my tax dollars being spent on classroom supplies like this?

[gondramB]

>>You seem to have struck a nerve. When I was in kindergarten we had live girls. My sisters says I was sent home one day for swaping peeks. I have no memory of the incident, darnit.<<

I have a friend with 6 year old girl - they had another couple over and the kids were too quiet... talking to the kindergarten teacher the next day they were told you just really can leave boys and girls alone at that age or it will happen almost automatically.

[metmom]

And scientists, like Richard Dawkins, who speak to them do not disabuse them of this false notion.

We need leading scientists to do as Gould did and tell the world that "Darwin got it wrong" and say how he got it wrong with a clear, unqualified and unnuanced statement.

That's a really good point. The evos can kick and scream all they want about Darwinism and the non-scientific implications, but over a hundred years later and the most outspoken of the evolution supporters are still carrying the flag.

[gondramB]

>>But there are lots things that Darwin didn’t know or got wrong - this is yet another reason to use a term like developmental or evolutionary biology - “Darwinism” hasn’t been a science since the 1930’s.

---

That’s true as far as the “science” goes. But amongst the “Great Unwashed” Darwinism is synonymous with the ToE.

And scientists, like Richard Dawkins, who speak to them do not disabuse them of this false notion.

We need leading scientists to do as Gould did and tell the world that “Darwin got it wrong” and say how he got it wrong with a clear, unqualified and unnuanced statement.

Unfortunately all we get are chirping crickets or yes..buts.<<

I hear that so much I know it must be a constant experience.

But in the science circles I travel in, everything is debated. A discussion of cheating in baseball can easily lead to half a dozen scientists and engineers taking the day off to drill out bats and cork them and teaching a robot to swing a bat to settle an argument.

It makes me wonder how much the media mis-filters whose who in science and who to listen to. If I say some famous scientist got something wrong it would raise an eye as just about every guru of each generation went to his death bed denying or ignorant of what would become common knowledge in the future. Except maybe for Issac Newton, I can’t think of anybody who merits a whole branch of science named after them - and we only talk about Newtonian to differentiate it from modern physics.

And BTW, Professor Gould got lots of arguments til the day he died. And beyond.

[YHAOS]

"Very well said, . . . Thank you!"

Always my pleasure, mistress. May The Force Be With You.

[Ha Ha Thats Very Logical]

We need leading scientists to do as Gould did and tell the world that "Darwin got it wrong" and say how he got it wrong with a clear, unqualified and unnuanced statement.

I don't understand what you think this will accomplish. Scientists like Dawkins and Gould aren't going to say "Darwin got it wrong--and therefore the whole theory of evolution has collapsed." What elements of "Darwinism" do you think the public needs to be disabused of?

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

So much for thinking I could have a rational discourse with you.

Politeness has disappeared from this site. Insults are the regular course for anyone who even apparently strays from the pack mentality.

C'mon now, you're hardly in any position to try to arrogate to yourself some sort of aggrieved moral high ground. You and several others have been flinging around all kinds of accusations - including at the site owner - to the effect that there's this huge, massive "witch-hunt" targeting people who believe in evolution. This is simply nonsense. Essentially, that means that you've been lying about and slandering other forum members since Coyoteman met his untimely demise. Sorry, but I don't think you've got any room to accuse anybody else of anything.