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.”

[CE2949BB]

I was referring to the Darwinist site that Coyoteman, et al started.

lol. DC isn't anti-FR. DC is a forum for pro-science conservatives.

Pro-Science Conservatives may want to check it out, so here's a link:

http://forum.darwincentral.org/

Please: explain how the Republican party is supposed to win a nation-wide election in the 21st century when it rejects science. I'd love to know.

[Donald Rumsfeld Fan]

Gould didn't think neo-Darwinism was the be all but he made it clear that evolution its self was not to be questioned whatever the actual means.

The Church of Darwinism forced him to recant.

[metmom]

You are banning Coyoteman because he was trying to gently remind someone that discussion forums have consistent and non-arbitrary rules for civil discourse.

In your dreams. I know that's just what you and your cohorts over at DC would really like to be the case but saying so don't make it so.

[tacticalogic]

That’s alright. Let him keep talking. It’s in little crises like this that some people demonstrate they have character. Other people just wet their pants.

Ain't nobody going to wet their pants over some anonymous poster on an internet chat forum telling them what they better say or not say about what happened on a thread.

[wagglebee]

There was NEVER a need to use this theory to condone evil, Einstein’s and Newton’s work never was. But Darwin’s work was.

[wagglebee]

Please: explain how the Republican party is supposed to win a nation-wide election in the 21st century when it rejects science. I'd love to know.

I don't recall a single election where belief in science has played a role. You and your ilk seem to think the conservative movement can succeed by rejecting God and THAT is impossible.

[Gumlegs]

Eugenicists were also Christians. So what?

I don't suppose you'd like to back up that "faithful Darwinists" description? Hitler and Stalin used any excuse that was handy, including God.

Martin Luther was a Darwinist? Do tell! I know he was a notorious anti-Semite, and his teachings were very influential in the virulent anti-Semitism in Germany that enabled the Nazis to construct the Holocaust, but I've never heard until now that he was a Darwinist.

In any case, it appears you use "Darwinists" as some sort of catch-all term for "really awful people." Go right ahead. But at least slap some sort of warning label on your posts that you're not referring to the Theory of Evolution, just some really awful people no one likes.

[tpanther]

I don’t know why you think I want your account. You do as much for my cause as I do, perhaps more so!

[Sam's Army]

"Please: explain how the Republican party is supposed to win a nation-wide election in the 21st century when it rejects science."

Maybe they should stop rejecting conservative ideals first.

[Elsie]

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

Well; the latest National Geographic is all about Charles and his lucky guesses.

Even goes as far as to call DNA 'scripture'! (page 59 sidebar)

---

Page 44 has the line:

Darwin hadn't signed on to the Beagle as it's official naturalist; he was a 22-year-old Cambridge graduate pointed rather indifferently toward a career as a country clergyman, invited on the voyage as a dining companion for the captain, a mercurial young aristocrat named Robert Fitzroy.

Indifferent indeed; it seems...

---

 

 

 

His own words...

 

 

 

Charles Darwin (1809-1882)

"By further reflecting that the clearest evidence would be requisite to make any sane man believe in the miracles by which Christianity is supported,—and that the more we know of the fixed laws of nature the more incredible do miracles become,—that the men at that time were ignorant and credulous to a degree almost incomprehensible by us,—that the Gospels cannot be proven to have been written simultaneously with the events,—that they differ in many important details, far too important, as it seemed to me to be admitted as the usual inaccuracies of eye witnesses;—by such reflections as these, which I give not as having the least novelty or value, but as they influenced me, I gradually came to disbelieve in Christianity as a divine revelation. The fact that many fake religions have spread over large portions of the earth like wildfire had some weight with me. But I was very unwilling to give up my belief; I feel sure of this, for I can remember often and often inventing day-dreams of old letters between distinguished Romans, and manuscripts being discovered at Pompeii or elsewhere, which confirmed in the most striking manner all that was written in the Gospels. But I found it more and more difficult, with free scope given to my imagination, to invent evidence which would suffice to convince me. Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted even for a single second that my conclusion was correct."

( Charles Darwin in his Autobiography of Charles Darwin, Dover Publications, 1992, p. 62. )

---

Charles Darwin (1809-1882)

"I think that generally (& more & more as I grow older), but not always, that an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind."

( Quoted from Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin: The Life of a Tormented Evolutionist, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1991, p. 636. )

 

 

 

 

NIV 1 Timothy 1:20-21

 20.  Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge,
 21.  which some have professed and in so doing have wandered from the faith.   Grace be with you.

---

 

NIV Proverbs 4:13
   Hold on to instruction, do not let it go; guard it well, for it is your life.

 

NIV Hebrews 3:6
   But Christ is faithful as a son over God's house. And we are his house, if we hold on to our courage and the hope of which we boast.

 

NIV Hebrews 3:14
   We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first.

 

NIV Hebrews 6:11
   We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, in order to make your hope sure.

 

 

NIV Hebrews 12:3
   Consider him who endured such opposition from sinful men, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart.

 

 

NIV 2 Timothy 2:11-13
 11.  Here is a trustworthy saying: If we died with him, we will also live with him;
 12.  if we endure, we will also reign with him. If we disown him, he will also disown us;
 13.  if we are faithless, he will remain faithful, for he cannot disown himself.

 

NIV 2 Peter 2:20-21
 20.  If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning.
 21.  It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.

 

 

 

NIV 2 John 1:8
  Watch out that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully.

 

NIV Jude 1:21
   Keep yourselves in God's love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life.

 

NIV Revelation 2:25
   Only hold on to what you have until I come.

 

NIV Revelation 3:11
   I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown.

[Elsie]

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

Well; the latest National Geographic is all about Charles and his lucky guesses.

Even goes as far as to call DNA 'scripture'! (page 59 sidebar)

---

Page 44 has the line:

Darwin hadn't signed on to the Beagle as it's official naturalist; he was a 22-year-old Cambridge graduate pointed rather indifferently toward a career as a country clergyman, invited on the voyage as a dining companion for the captain, a mercurial young aristocrat named Robert Fitzroy.

Indifferent indeed; it seems...

---

 

 

 

His own words...

 

 

 

Charles Darwin (1809-1882)

"By further reflecting that the clearest evidence would be requisite to make any sane man believe in the miracles by which Christianity is supported,—and that the more we know of the fixed laws of nature the more incredible do miracles become,—that the men at that time were ignorant and credulous to a degree almost incomprehensible by us,—that the Gospels cannot be proven to have been written simultaneously with the events,—that they differ in many important details, far too important, as it seemed to me to be admitted as the usual inaccuracies of eye witnesses;—by such reflections as these, which I give not as having the least novelty or value, but as they influenced me, I gradually came to disbelieve in Christianity as a divine revelation. The fact that many fake religions have spread over large portions of the earth like wildfire had some weight with me. But I was very unwilling to give up my belief; I feel sure of this, for I can remember often and often inventing day-dreams of old letters between distinguished Romans, and manuscripts being discovered at Pompeii or elsewhere, which confirmed in the most striking manner all that was written in the Gospels. But I found it more and more difficult, with free scope given to my imagination, to invent evidence which would suffice to convince me. Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted even for a single second that my conclusion was correct."

( Charles Darwin in his Autobiography of Charles Darwin, Dover Publications, 1992, p. 62. )

---

Charles Darwin (1809-1882)

"I think that generally (& more & more as I grow older), but not always, that an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind."

( Quoted from Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin: The Life of a Tormented Evolutionist, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1991, p. 636. )

 

 

 

 

NIV 1 Timothy 1:20-21

 20.  Timothy, guard what has been entrusted to your care. Turn away from godless chatter and the opposing ideas of what is falsely called knowledge,
 21.  which some have professed and in so doing have wandered from the faith.   Grace be with you.

---

 

NIV Proverbs 4:13
   Hold on to instruction, do not let it go; guard it well, for it is your life.

 

NIV Hebrews 3:6
   But Christ is faithful as a son over God's house. And we are his house, if we hold on to our courage and the hope of which we boast.

 

NIV Hebrews 3:14
   We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first.

 

NIV Hebrews 6:11
   We want each of you to show this same diligence to the very end, in order to make your hope sure.

 

 

NIV Hebrews 12:3
   Consider him who endured such opposition from sinful men, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart.

 

 

NIV 2 Timothy 2:11-13
 11.  Here is a trustworthy saying: If we died with him, we will also live with him;
 12.  if we endure, we will also reign with him. If we disown him, he will also disown us;
 13.  if we are faithless, he will remain faithful, for he cannot disown himself.

 

NIV 2 Peter 2:20-21
 20.  If they have escaped the corruption of the world by knowing our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ and are again entangled in it and overcome, they are worse off at the end than they were at the beginning.
 21.  It would have been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than to have known it and then to turn their backs on the sacred command that was passed on to them.

 

 

 

NIV 2 John 1:8
  Watch out that you do not lose what you have worked for, but that you may be rewarded fully.

 

NIV Jude 1:21
   Keep yourselves in God's love as you wait for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ to bring you to eternal life.

 

NIV Revelation 2:25
   Only hold on to what you have until I come.

 

NIV Revelation 3:11
   I am coming soon. Hold on to what you have, so that no one will take your crown.

[wendy1946]

Evolution is junk science and as junk science goes, a spectacularly pathological and dangerous variety with two world wars and tens of millions of dead bodies lying around to its credit. It was the most major philosophical cornerstone of naziism and communism and the various eugenics programs. It is utterly incompatible with modern mathematics and probability theory and the largest percentage of non-believers in a recognizable group is probably mathematicians and not Christians.

[tacticalogic]

You’re getting better, but still not good enough.

[Gumlegs]

No, I’m pointing out that not everyone who believes in God has to be rabidly anti-science.

[bert]

Darwinism is Creo straw man invented to create false debate points when they have no facts to support Genesis.

[going hot]

never thought I would say this, but I do agree with the yote here, and you are way over the top.

Oh, and if it is your pleasure, as it is your site, I will be happy to join him in that hell.

[YHAOS]

"Pre-emptive damage control?"

If there's damage to pre-emptively control it's what you've done to yourself, and what you've revealed about your character. And, you're right; the record is here for all to see.

[count-your-change]

Really? Do you know where I can find it?

Gould was always good for a quote that would irritate his fellows. Scott had to dismiss his comments in the article I cited, guess she thought he was providing too much ammo to the other camp.

[wagglebee]

Your obtuse refusal to accept that Hitler, Stalin and Sanger were avowed Darwinist eugenicists is telling of Darwinists as a whole. I suppose it would be oh so convenient to pretend that Charles Galton and Leonard Darwin never existed, but they did and they laid the groundwork for your hero’s theories to be used to justify over one billion murders.

Your attempts to blame Martin Luther are laughable, anti-Semitism had been the NORM in Europe for well over a thousand years, it was Hitler who used Darwinism as the justification for the Holocaust.

[tacticalogic]

If there's damage to pre-emptively control it's what you've done to yourself, and what you've revealed about your character. And, you're right; the record is here for all to see.

I've got nothing to apoligize for. I simply refused to be intimidated into silence or baited into a flame war.

[tpanther]

Funny you mention wetting pants (or in his case his socks):

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2173566/posts

Also funny you mentioned earlier about “unbecoming a of a scientist”, here he admitted he wasn’t one, (rocket or otherwise) :)

[tacticalogic]

You want to tell them where the “damp socks” comes from?

[Gumlegs]

[YHAOS]

"Ain't nobody going to wet their pants over some anonymous poster on an internet chat forum telling them what they better say or not say about what happened on a thread."

Where did I tell you what to say? I asked you if you hoped, like me, that we wouldn't hear any lies about coyoteman's banishment. That puddle under your chair tells me that we will.

[CE2949BB]

Evolution is junk science

LMAO!

[tacticalogic]

Like I said, the thread will be here to tell the tale.

[tpanther]

“Well then you’ll just have to go see if you can irritate somebody else into an intermperate reaction.”

Oh I’m sure conservatives will appreciate a warning about what an ultimate waste of time you are...you know, pre-projections...

oh wait, those often start right out of the gate!

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2173566/posts

[tacticalogic]

Well then, you just keep right on being sure of that.......

[YHAOS]

"I simply refused to be intimidated into silence or baited into a flame war."

I haven't asked you for an apology. I haven't tried to intimidate you into silence, and I think you would have a hard time demonstrating where you've been baited by me. Looks like you're projecting. But, keep talking.

[RegulatorCountry]

No, I’m pointing out that not everyone who believes in God has to be rabidly anti-science.

Those who unreservedly believe in the God of the Bible accept on faith that we were put here, made by Him. Those who believe otherwise, and yet still proclaim themselves Christian, are making too many concessions to worldliness, and are on a very slippery slope.

Science cannot answer questions on the origin of life, and has veered oddly into theological territory, with adherents shreiking "heretic" at nonbelievers, the whole nine yards.

You guys have turned into something you purport to oppose. Truth does not contradict truth; on that point I agree wholeheartedly with Pope John Paul II. There will come a time when the two, science and Christianity, will return to accord. It will not be God who is shown to be the source of discord, though.

[little jeremiah]

Gosh, I should visit these threads more often. A peaceful respite from 0bamination news!

[CFC__VRWC]

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.

Well, maybe if you were to actually challenge the legions of posters here who adhere to a "flat-earth, (and it's geocentric, not heliocentric - heliocentrism is considered to be just as much of Satan as the ToE is around here) 6-day, 6,000 year YEC, Bible literalist" view, we wouldn't cram you into that box.

But you never do. All you ever do is shout "Hallelujah!" right along side them, praise them for their faith and their "insight," and endlessly mock and ridicule the countless real scientists who have spent centuries showing that the Bible literalist view of the universe is a bunch of ignorant, superstitious crap written thousands of years ago by people who had no idea how the universe really works, and had no way of ever finding out because the observational tools that they needed simply weren't there yet. And I'd point out that many of those real scientists paid for their "blasphemy" with their lives, thanks to people like you.

If the shoe fits, wear it. And until you actually start demanding that these lunatics post some actual proof of their assertions that dinosaurs rode on Noah's Ark and that the earth is the immovable center of the universe, among other things, I and every other semi-rational person who reads your nonsense will continue to cram you into that little box right along side the rest of the Luddites.

[YHAOS]

”Also funny you mentioned earlier about “unbecoming a of a scientist””

He ‘speaks’ for Science, and quite well too. That’s good enough for me.

[tacticalogic]

No problem. Pretty much everybody knows what flame bait and veiled threats look like. I’ll just let the thread speak for itself.

[tacticalogic]

Pick your target, personlize it, polarize it, and try to provoke a reaction.

[tpanther]

You want to tell them where the “damp socks” comes from?

Your bladder control problems?

You live in a flood zone?

Your dryer is broken?

You didn't have shoes on when you stuck your feet in that puddle under your chair?

[tpanther]

there’s that old saying...how does it go...

don’t let the door...

[YHAOS]

"Pretty much everybody knows what flame bait and veiled threats look like. I’ll just let the thread speak for itself."

You've already 'spoken' for the thread, by making allegations you can't support. Typical Liberal tactics. Your slip is showing.

[metmom]

Please: explain how the Republican party is supposed to win a nation-wide election in the 21st century when it rejects science. I'd love to know.

The Dems won the last nation wide election and you're not seriously implying that what they support is science, are you? All that global warming and environazi crap?

[little jeremiah]

The dirty secret is that they love death, so they actually think that all these deaths were a good deed. To eugenicists, all these deaths were not just an unfortunate by-product of over-zealous adherents (of course, they try to pin them on something else). Over-population is one of their creeds.

I am not saying every evolution promoter thinks that all these deaths are a good thing. But to a eugenics and over-population believer, thinning the herd is a good thing, at least in theory, and if it isn’t their family or themslves who are being thinned (at least involuntarily).

[tacticalogic]

The only allegation I’ve made is that you came to me looking to pick a fight. I’ll let the thread stand as evidence.

[metmom]

I guess the mantle of paranoia got automatically passed with cm’s banning.

[tacticalogic]

A toothless, self appointed attack dog gumming my ankles.

[tpanther]

ummm bert?

Oh nevermind.

[tpanther]

You’re getting better, but still not good enough.

Coming from you I must say this means...

absolutely nothing, but what's new?

[metmom]

No, I’m pointing out that not everyone who believes in God has to be rabidly anti-science.

You need to be telling that to your fellow DCers. They apparently haven't gotten the message yet.

[tacticalogic]

Still not good enough.

[tpanther]

I almost ruined my laptop when I read Coyoteman and “gently reminding someone” used in the same sentence.

I had no idea how many there were on FR metmom!

[YHAOS]

”Pick your target, personlize [sic] it, polarize it, and try to provoke a reaction.”

Yeah. That pretty well describes what you’re doing. Right out of the Alinsky book of approved tactics. You’re on a roll. Keep talking.

[CE2949BB]

The Dems won the last nation wide election and you're not seriously implying that what they support is science, are you? All that global warming and environazi crap?

Maybe you forgot how badly Sarah Palin was mocked - rightly or wrongly - for her supposed Creationist beliefs?

Whether or not she is a Creationist (that's open to debate), she was mocked and belittled for being a Creationist.

You can't expect the American people to elect a person to a position of power when they believe something that is rejected by mainstream science.

Same goes for climate change.

Instead of rejecting the reality of climate change, the debate should be on the political response.

It's impossible to have a voice in a political debate when you refuse to acknowledge the reality that led to the debate.

Sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming, "It's not science! Junk science! Make it go away!" doesn't address the problem and doesn't convince voters.