In an earlier entry, I showed how EvolutionNews.org is full of the proverbial. It is something they have a long history of as anyone familiar with them can attest to. Quote mining, full faced lies, falsehoods and what-have-you. Well, they are at it again but seemingly at an entirely new level which really makes you question their reading comprehension skills.
In a new entry over on EvolutionNews.org called Dawkins Flip-Flops on Link between Darwinism and Fascism, John West states:
According The New York Times, arch-Darwinist Richard Dawkins is now asserting that the new film Expelled perpetrates a “major outrage” because the film suggests there is a link between Darwinian ideology and ideas like Nazism.
In 2005, Dawkins himself declared that such a link existed, responding to an Austrian interviewer that “a Darwinian State would be a Fascist state,” which is why he says he opposes trying to run a society “according to Darwinian laws”:
He then quotes the following phrase from Dawkins which goes as such:
No self respecting person would want to live in a Society that operates according to Darwinian laws. I am a passionate Darwinist, when it involves explaining the development of life. However, I am a passionate anti-Darwinist when it involves the kind of society in which we want to live. A Darwinian State would be a Fascist state.
Oh, that sounds like some pretty damning stuff there, doesn’t it? Except, of course, this is just another example of what is known as ‘Quote Mining’ (the practice of choosing one phrase and using it selectively to change its meaning). So how did John West get caught out this time? Well, made the following link in his entry to a page over on Panda’s Thumb.
The page on Panda’s Thumb? Well, this is the funny part … it specifically disproves the point that John West is poorly attempting to make. To sum up the text on the page, I’ll use the following quote from it:
That’s like saying that a Quantum Mechanical society would be an anarchy. I hope that those better versed in logic than our Intelligent Design defender, understands the difference between “A Darwinian society would be a fascist state” and “Darwinism leads to Fascism”?
It is an indeed an old and decomposing argument that Evolution leads to Facism and Nazism style behaviour. One that has been disproved and laid to rest so many time that it is not funny, why people keep trying to dig it up is beyond me. Oh, wait. It is a common practice amongst ID and Creationist groups to repeat something over and over so that people might come to believe it. If nothing else, it’s a common brainwashing technique often used on dubious things such as religious cults, interrogation sessions and so on.
Social Darwinism (which is something no moral person, Christian or Atheist, would say is agreeable) and the Theory of Evolution have nothing to do with each other, except for part of a name. Social Darwinism was actually around long before Darwin ever penned Origin of the Species, with one of it’s earliest proponents being a certain Thomas Malthus … who was a Christian Minister.
Social Darwinism and the Theory of Evolution are completely separate, the only people who seem unable to grasp this simplest of facts are ID and Creationist proponents. One is a poor joke of social policy, the other is an evidence based scientific theory. I’ll end this entry by repeating what was written on the Panda’s Thumb page, which sums up better than I could the idiocy of the link that John West keeps alluding to:
That’s like saying that a Quantum Mechanical society would be an anarchy.
Oh, one more little bit. EvolutionNews.org is also running a link/story about how Expelled was the #1 topic on the Blogosphere. Fine. The press release they link to is full of the same old nonsense such as:
Mathis continued, “I hope PZ’s experience has helped him see the light. He is distraught because he could not see a movie. What if he wasn’t allowed to teach on a college campus or was denied tenure? Maybe he will think twice before he starts demanding more professors be blacklisted and expelled simply because they question the adequacy of Darwin’s theory.”
Yet I have yet to see one case where this has happened. All the so called examples used in the film have been shown to false. Sternberg? Been shown he lied out his ass. Crocker? Contract not renewed due to gross incompetence. Gonzalez? Tenure application denied due to very poor academic record.
Another first hand account of the hypocrisy in regards to Mathis and this film becomes apparent through this entry by Amanda Gefter, where it is shown that the film clearly has a religious basis while trying to deny it, that ID offers no actual answers at all and that Mathis really can not handle questions that do not come from sycophants.