I'm from Missouri

This site is named for the famous statement of US Congressman Willard Duncan Vandiver from Missouri : "I`m from Missouri -- you'll have to show me." This site is dedicated to skepticism of official dogma in all subjects. Just-so stories are not accepted here. This is a site where controversial subjects such as evolution theory and the Holocaust may be freely debated.

Name:
Location: Los Angeles, California, United States

My biggest motivation for creating my own blogs was to avoid the arbitrary censorship practiced by other blogs and various other Internet forums. Censorship will be avoided in my blogs -- there will be no deletion of comments, no closing of comment threads, no holding up of comments for moderation, and no commenter registration hassles. Comments containing nothing but insults and/or ad hominem attacks are discouraged. My non-response to a particular comment should not be interpreted as agreement, approval, or inability to answer.

Wednesday, April 01, 2009

"Somebody's got to stand up to experts!" -- Texas BoE chairman Don McLeroy

A video of Texas state board of education chairman Don McLeroy's full speech is here.

David Klinghoffer wrote in an article in Evolution News & Views,

To follow the experts unthinkingly is simply the prestige path for most people. Such docility also explains the resistance of certain constituencies, from whom you’d expert better, to thinking fresh thoughts about Darwinian evolution.

Sometimes, the temptation to surrender to expert opinion arises from nothing more complicated than laziness. I’m positive that’s the case with many in the politically conservative community of journalists and other intellectuals. Science bores or intimidates these folks, and they haven’t yet perceived the relevance of Darwinism to their other political and cultural concerns. Therefore expert opinion provides a welcome excuse, at least on this issue, to turn their brains off.

IMO that's true -- I virtually never see a mainstream-media editorial that supports the anti-Darwinist side or that is even neutral.

The article said,
.
In other communities, there’s a tendency to be overly impressed by credentials, titles, honors, and offices. This is surely a big part of what keeps more Jews from “getting” the Darwin debate. You could call it a case of My Son the Doctor Syndrome. Just as the stereotypical coffee klatch of Jewish mothers will speak in absurdly hushed, reverential tones about the fact that one of them has a son in the medical profession — the technical Yiddish term here is kvelling — so too there’s something in recent Jewish culture that inclines us to revere “experts” to excess, no matter what the context. This is ironic given that Jews spent the previous 2,000 years refusing to defer to the dominant expert views of the culture around them.

Among the main reasons for Jewish Darwinism and opposition to "teaching the controversy" are that many Jews (1) view questioning of Darwinism as a Christian fundamentalist thing, (2) see "teaching the controversy" as a violation of the so-called "separation of church and state," and (3) see the Darwin-to-Hitler idea as an attempt to deny the Christian religion's responsibility for the holocaust. The Anti-Defamation League is representative of these Jews. There are noteworthy exceptions: for example, the ultra-orthodox Jews of Israel are probably staunch young-earth creationists -- many of these Jews have not studied science since elementary school. And Jews Ben Stein and David Berlinski (Berlinski considers himself to be a secular Jew) believe that Darwin influenced the Nazis.

Also, whether expert opinions deserve to receive deference or extra weight strongly depends on the question being asked. For example, such deference or extra weight may be warranted if the question is whether a particular criticism of evolution is a real weakness. However, such deference or extra weight is not warranted if the question is whether to include the "strengths and weaknesses" language in science education standards.
.

Labels:

4 Comments:

Blogger Cervantes said...

I virtually never see a mainstream-media editorial that supports the anti-Darwinist side or that is even neutral.

Nope. And I haven't seen any endorsing the geocentric universe or the moon made of green cheese either. And your point is?

Thursday, April 02, 2009 1:53:00 PM  
Blogger Larry Fafarman said...

Cervantes quixotically moaned,
>>>>>> And I haven't seen any endorsing the geocentric universe or the moon made of green cheese either. <<<<<<

Nor have I seen any endorsing the heliocentric universe or the idea that the moon is not made of green cheese. So I guess that means that mainstream journalists do not believe in a heliocentric universe or that the moon is not made of green cheese.

Thursday, April 02, 2009 3:08:00 PM  
Blogger Jim Sherwood said...

These Darwin-fans are so dumb, or pretend to be so dumb, that they don't know that quite a few eminent and serious scientists, including biologists, reject Darwinism!

Have they been sound asleep for the past 30 years? Possibly.

Thursday, April 02, 2009 5:40:00 PM  
Blogger Jacqueline said...

Jim sherwood posted:
"These Darwin-fans are so dumb, or pretend to be so dumb, that they don't know that quite a few eminent and serious scientists, including biologists, reject Darwinism!"

No they don't. I think if you do a search you'll find that no eminent serious scientists reject EVOLUTION.
Darwin has been dead since 1882 and science has moved on. There is now much more scientific evidence for EVOLUTION than there was in Darwin's time.

"Have they been sound asleep for the past 30 years? Possibly."

The creationists that label EVOLUTION as "Darwinism" have been asleep since 1882, so try to get your facts right next time, Mr Sherwood.

Friday, August 07, 2009 3:46:00 AM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home