Editor Explains Reasons for 'Intelligent Design' Article

  • Thread starter Thread starter buffalo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

buffalo

Guest
Editor Explains Reasons for ‘Intelligent Design’ Article

Evolutionary biologist Richard Sternberg made a fateful decision a year ago.

As editor of the hitherto obscure Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, Sternberg decided to publish a paper making the case for “intelligent design,” a controversial theory that holds that the machinery of life is so complex as to require the hand – subtle or not – of an intelligent creator.

Within hours of publication, senior scientists at theSmithsonian Institution – which has helped fund and run the journal – lashed out at Sternberg as a shoddy scientist and a closet Bible thumper.

“They were saying I accepted money under the table, that I was a crypto-priest, that I was a sleeper cell operative for the creationists,” said Steinberg, 42 , who is a Smithsonian research associate. “I was basically run out of there.”

An independent agency has come to the same conclusion, accusing top scientists at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History of retaliating against Sternberg by investigating his religion and smearing him as a “creationist.”

The U.S. Office of Special Counsel, which was established to protect federal employees from reprisals, examined e-mail traffic from these scientists and noted that “retaliation came in many forms . . . misinformation was disseminated through the Smithsonian Institution and to outside sources. The allegations against you were later determined to be false.”

more…
 
Poor guy, the amazing thing about this is that the NCSE and his other scientific peers-turned-against-him acted in a manner not unlike how the Catholic Church would, and ‘excommunicated’ him for being a bit ‘liberal’. I don’t say that as a criticism of the Church, because the Church must protect its dogma and teachings. However here is a perfect example of the evolutionary community behaving like an organized religion, with naturalism and macro-evolution being the dogma for a ‘creation’ story of their own making. To them he is an ‘employee’ who broke ‘the rules.’ Their passions expose them, as if this were any other scientific theory then opponents would calmly give their refutations, but when it comes to macro-evolution they go waaaay overboard.
 
40.png
jdnation:
Poor guy, the amazing thing about this is that the NCSE and his other scientific peers-turned-against-him acted in a manner not unlike how the Catholic Church would, and ‘excommunicated’ him for being a bit ‘liberal’. I don’t say that as a criticism of the Church, because the Church must protect its dogma and teachings. However here is a perfect example of the evolutionary community behaving like an organized religion, with naturalism and macro-evolution being the dogma for a ‘creation’ story of their own making. To them he is an ‘employee’ who broke ‘the rules.’ Their passions expose them, as if this were any other scientific theory then opponents would calmly give their refutations, but when it comes to macro-evolution they go waaaay overboard.
Evolution is the ONLY theory in all of science that can never be challenged.

Scientists will calmly debate Newton’s theories, Einstein’s theories, physical laws, rules about the structure of matter, the Big Bang versus the Steady State theories, theories about black holes etc. etc. but when it comes to evolution, any challenge is met with untold hysterics. When you challenge evolution you somehow offend a deeply held belief, more entrenched and more powerful than religious belief.

Why? Because they know that a totally secular universe with absolutely no room for a God requires a totally secular theory of creation. Challenge that and you are attacked on all sides. Calm debate? - forget it.
 
40.png
rjs1:
Evolution is the ONLY theory in all of science that can never be challenged.

Scientists will calmly debate Newton’s theories, Einstein’s theories, physical laws, rules about the structure of matter, the Big Bang versus the Steady State theories, theories about black holes etc. etc. but when it comes to evolution, any challenge is met with untold hysterics. When you challenge evolution you somehow offend a deeply held belief, more entrenched and more powerful than religious belief.

Why? Because they know that a totally secular universe with absolutely no room for a God requires a totally secular theory of creation. Challenge that and you are attacked on all sides. Calm debate? - forget it.
The religion of Secular Humanism is based on evolution. It is the main stay of their belief system. Thus it is not to be challenged. IMHO it is their deeply held religious belief.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top