Jonathan Wells - It's got nothing to do with Religion

Weston Bortner
atheist
Weston Bortner's picture
Posts: 56
Joined: 2011-06-12
User is offlineOffline
Jonathan Wells - It's got nothing to do with Religion

I once read somewhere that people from the Discovery Institute are saying that "Darwinists have now started attacking Mr. Well's religion". They say this, of course, in the context that we are just attacking his religion and not his arguments (which I am unable to as I am unintelligible of science though I am reading Richard Dawkins' "The Greatest Show on Earth). But, even though I can't attack his arguments, I find that I cannot trust the man because of his obvious bias.

We all know the quote. He went for a second Ph.D because Reverend Moon urged him to and he wanted to destroy Darwinism. He hated Darwin evolutionary theory from the very start, so we are pretty right to have reasons to doubt his stories. I know that PZ Myers has exposed some of his quote mines and many people declared that Wells had misrepresented them in his book, Icons of Evolution. He now, pretty clearly, believes that there is a conspiracy going on in the scientific community to keep evolution in the classroom. I think it's pretty clear, though, that his claims are the result of him desperately wanting there to be a conspiracy. The reason I don't take him seriously is not because he's a "Moonie", but because of his motives.

We should use this thread here to critically analysis the claims that he makes...

Our job on this Earth, is to take care of each other. Something that we have ultimately failed at doing, hence why we are so miserable.


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
I would say there is a

I would say there is a conspiracy to keep science and therefore evolution in the classroom.  I guess it depends on your definition of "conspiracy".  No, I am not going to quote a dictionary.  If you think conspiracy implies secrecy, then there isn't a conspiracy.  If you think conspiracy implies a concerted effort by a number of people, then, yes, there is a conspiracy.

I go with option 2, and I support that conspiracy.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


Weston Bortner
atheist
Weston Bortner's picture
Posts: 56
Joined: 2011-06-12
User is offlineOffline
Well, option one was in fact

Well, option one was in fact the definition that I was going for and I think that's the definition that Jonathan Wells would use. I don't think option two is a definition of a conspiracy unless you add "malicious intent" into the definition. Research, rescue, construction, farming, swimming, and many other things can be defined as a concerted effort by a number of people, so that's kind of a vague definition.

But, in order for there to be a conspiracy, there has to be an underground group that will attack you "expose" them, there has to be an agreement with thousands of scientists to maintain the science of Evolution to make it fit their "biased" interpretation of the evidence, and it has had to have survived 150 years, despite constantly being hounded by others claiming to be doing the exact same thing that Wells claims he's doing. Evolution has been maintained since it was first proposed, and many different people of many different backgrounds and belief systems have been convinced by it. There is two explanations for this. Either the scientific community is maintaining one big conspiracy (conveniently in the ONE place where religious people would want it) or that the evidence really is as good as the scientific community says that it is.

Obviously, there is no conspiracy. Nobody can maintain a secret of that magnitude for that long.

Our job on this Earth, is to take care of each other. Something that we have ultimately failed at doing, hence why we are so miserable.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Would having a "malicious

Would having a "malicious intent" to wipe bullshit pseudoscience of the face of the planet qualify?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Weston Bortner
atheist
Weston Bortner's picture
Posts: 56
Joined: 2011-06-12
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Would having

jcgadfly wrote:

Would having a "malicious intent" to wipe bullshit pseudoscience of the face of the planet qualify?

 

Uh.........maybe?

Our job on this Earth, is to take care of each other. Something that we have ultimately failed at doing, hence why we are so miserable.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Weston Bortner

Weston Bortner wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Would having a "malicious intent" to wipe bullshit pseudoscience of the face of the planet qualify?

 

Uh.........maybe?

Then cj's definition works. I'm happy to be of service.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


cj
atheistRational VIP!
cj's picture
Posts: 3330
Joined: 2007-01-05
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Weston

jcgadfly wrote:

Weston Bortner wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Would having a "malicious intent" to wipe bullshit pseudoscience of the face of the planet qualify?

 

Uh.........maybe?

Then cj's definition works. I'm happy to be of service.

 

Well, that was where I was going - I may not have been as clear as I could have been.  The conspiracy is to keep idiocy - particularly "intelligent design" and/or "scientific creationism" - out of science classrooms.  The Theory of Evolution needs no conspiracy to keep it going.  Given  - as already pointed out - the vast amount of data that supports it.

 

-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.

"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken

"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
http://www.youtube.com/watch?

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=