I know. I know. Most of the current scientific establishment, Big Science if you will, the intelligensia, allegedly the greatest minds of our time are supposed to be evolutionists. And here I am, crackpot creationist extraoridinaire, suggesting that they aren’t all that smart.
I’m not even sure we can reasonably grant that they’re intelligent. Intelligence tends to challenge the prevailing notions, to push the envelope, to expand the scope of knowledge and human potential. Big Science seems more interested in chasing after grants, tenure and protecting their own interests. They not only go with the flow, following along with lemming-like ardor, they criticize anyone who goes against it. No salmon allowed. Galileo, Copernicus and Darwin all challenged the paradigms of their day. Today, they would be ostracized, criticized and generally ridiculed by the likes of PZ Myers and his rather rabid fan base. Yes, fan base. They would be kept out of peer-reviewed journals and then criticized for not having their work in peer-reviewed journals. Their work would be called pseudoscience without ever considering it seriously. They would be subject to pernicious personal attacks from those who hold to the Party line. They would be denied grants, tenure and visibility because they weren’t bleating the right things, rather than because their work was credible or not.
The Darwin Party is making a Big Mistake.
If they were smart, they’d stop attacking people and start testing their ideas.
You see, people don’t like it when they realize that your position isn’t being held by argument and evidence, so much as propaganda and suppression of any debate. But they’re not giving us evidence for evolutionism and evidence against intelligent design or creationism. They’ve left behind an evidence-based argument.
They’re using censorship to keep any criticism of evolutionism out of public school textbooks.
They’re using deception, using slippery, shifting definitions to get across the Big Idea of evolution to indoctrinate school children.
They’re using indoctrination, presenting children with a rosy view of evolutionism that ignores any of its problems and teaches it as established fact.
They’re using endorsements, pointing to religious leaders who compromised Creationism with evolutionism, saying, “Look, if your preacher thinks evolution is OK, it must be true.”
They’re using ridicule, ad hominem attacks and mockery of the other guy’s position without ever addressing his arguments.
They’re using denialism, saying that the opposition simply isn’t science, but never address whether it is true.
They’re using straw men of their opposition’s actual views, equating OEC with YEC and ID with Creationism in general. They counter and ridicule arguments that no one in the opposition’s camp uses.
They’re using outrage, claiming we’re wasting their precious time with things that are obviously pseudoscience since they are not evolutionism. This strained protest reminds me of debaters who claim that there are sooo many errors on our side that are soooo easy to refute, but they don’t want to waste their time with something sooo obvious. Weak.
They’re using a tight-fisted control of expressive venues, keeping the opposition voice to a fringe minimum, all the while conveniently accusing them of being a fringe minority. Ask Sternberg what happens if you allow the opposition a chance to voice their position.
They’re using extortion and intimidation, denying jobs, tenure, grants and visibility to those who show disloyalty to the Darwin Party.
I think you get the point.
When an established position begins using these tactics at the hint of criticism or closer examination, we correctly suppose they have something to hide.
If evolutionists were smart, they’d get back to the business of science. They’d get back to the evidence. They’d welcome open debate, if for nothing else than the opportunity to squash the opposition and demonstrate the truth of their own position.
Unless, of course, they really do have something to hide. Unless the Great and Powerful OZ isn’t all he’s cracked up to be. Unless there isn’t blessed thing to the Emperor’s New Science.
If the theory really is in such poor shape after, maybe they’re doing the only smart thing they can by refusing to engage us. Maybe it’s not just unfounded arrogance that keeps them from considering the other position. Maybe its not just cowardice that causes them to fascistly suppress all criticism and maintain that High Wall of Protection around East Berlin Evolution. Maybe they ARE smart. Maybe they know that house of cards will come crashing down at the slightest breath of inspection. Maybe they’ve measured their actual troops and resources against that of their opposition and have realized, despite the overwhelming advantage they bluster about having, that an open battlefield is the surest way to defeat!
Of course, if their position is that weak and they refuse to admit it, maybe it’s not their intelligence we should be questioning but rather their motives.
Now compare this to the desire of creationists and intelligent design advocates to engage in open debate. Compare the Darwin Party’s appeals to authority and mockeries to their oppositions evidence-based arguments. One of these is saying, “I’ve got nothing to hide. Test me!” The other is saying, “We have the truth. Shut up and fall in line!”
I wonder what would happen if we were allowed to simply follow the evidence wherever it leads?