Search This Blog

Monday, September 12, 2011

Anti-Science Darwinist censors are getting hit where it hurts - their wallets!!!

"Anyone who thinks that today's culture of science allows an open discussion of evolution is sorely mistaken," said Dr. John G. West, associate director of the Center for Science and Culture. "When it comes to intelligent design, private and government-run agencies are suppressing free speech."

The Anything-But-God crowd will go to great lengths to lie about Creation Science and Intelligent Design Science.   In point of fact the evidence for Intelligent Design and Creation is far more compelling than anything one can come up with for Darwinism.    Darwinism in fact is in big trouble because the more we learn about Physics and Biology, the more design and information and complexity and intentionality we find.  At some point scientists have to give up on the overused "argument from incredulity" and acknowledge that the normal mind should be incredulous at the fantastic and ridiculous claims made by Darwinism in the light of what we now know about the world around us.  



‘I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.’
– Malcolm Muggeridge, well-known British journalist and philosopher—Pascal Lectures, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.


I intend to continue the "Deliver us from Evil" series soon, but frankly the recent findings against the censorship and prejudice and anti-science attitudes of Darwinists is beginning to cost them big money.   This is the way it is going to be and,  for Darwinists, the way it should be.   The reason for this is that Darwinists are afraid of having their assertions compared to the evidence for Intelligent Design and Creation because on the level playing field of actual science?   Darwinism is going to lose and lose big.   Don't miss the very last article in this post, it is especially fascinating in the light of the pompous pronouncements of the likes of Eugenie Scott and Richard Dawkins and PZ Myers about "science versus religion."   Yeah, right!!!


Series of Costly Case Settlements Warns Darwin's Bullies: Stop Censoring Intellectual Freedom



"Three case settlements this year show that it is a costly mistake for intolerant academic elites to suppress the viewpoints of Darwin-critics," said Casey Luskin, an attorney and policy analyst with Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture. "The growing trend is that those who discriminate against intelligent design face stiff penalties."


This month, the state-run California Science Center (CSC) paid $110,000 to avoid a public trial and settle a lawsuit by American Freedom Alliance (AFA). The suit was filed because CSC violated AFA's First Amendment right to discuss intelligent design (ID). As part of the settlement, CSC has also invited AFA back to present the ID event CSC previously cancelled. The case number is BC 423687.


This case reflects the ongoing trend of discrimination against intelligent design. In January, the University of Kentucky paid $125,000 to settle a lawsuit by astronomer Martin Gaskell who was wrongfully denied employment because he was perceived to be skeptical towards Darwinian evolution. (Gaskell actually considers himself a "theistic evolutionist," but he stated "there are significant scientific problems in evolutionary theory" and respectfully cited the work of intelligent design proponents Michael Behe and Phillip Johnson in online notes for one of his talks.) Soon after the settlement of Gaskell's case, Applied Mathematics Letters paid $10,000 and publicly apologized to avoid litigation after it wrongfully withdrew mathematician Granville Sewell's paper critiquing neo-Darwinism.


This case is merely the latest in a long line of well-documented incidents of discrimination against proponents of intelligent design. In 2004, biologist Richard Sternberg was ousted from a research position at the Smithsonian Institution after he allowed a pro-ID paper to be published in a Smithsonian biology journal. Two government investigations found he was the victim of a campaign to investigate and intimidate him due to his skepticism of Darwinian evolution.


In 2006, astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez was denied tenure at Iowa State University in large part due to his work developing arguments for intelligent design from cosmic fine-tuning. E-mails uncovered during a public records request showed that Gonzalez's colleagues engaged in secret tenure deliberations where support for ID was counted as an automatic negative.


In 2007, distinguished professor of electrical engineering Robert Marks was forced to shut down a research lab at Baylor University because it investigated intelligent design. There have been multiple similar well-documented cases around the nation.


CSC rented its IMAX theater to AFA to show Darwin's Dilemma, a science documentary advocating ID. However, when CSC learned the film would portray ID favorably, CSC cancelled AFA's event. AFA filed suit in California Superior Court alleging viewpoint discrimination and breach of contract.


"The CSC settlement puts another high price tag on Darwinian censorship of the ID viewpoint," said Joshua Youngkin, Program Officer in Public Policy and Legal Affairs. "The going penalty for viewpoint discrimination against ID is about $100,000, though successfully defending freedom of ID expression is priceless."


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


This latest court finding against censorship by Darwinists is telling, since academics and the media and in fact the entire modern American culture has been absolutely SOAKED in Darwinist propaganda.   It is akin to the methods used by the Soviets in the USSR, continually boasting of the advantages of the Worker State while the poor hapless citizens stood in lines for toilet paper and lived in crowded hovels.   In the world of science, Darwinists get grant money and everybody else gets the shaft.   But, again,  this is going to change because truth eventually wins out in the world of science no matter what the odds. 

California Science Center Pays $110,000 to Settle Intelligent Design Discrimination Lawsuit


California Science Center
The state-run California Science Center (CSC) has paid $110,000 to settle a lawsuit by American Freedom Alliance (AFA) against CSC for violating AFA's First Amendment free speech rights to advocate intelligent design (ID). As part of the settlement, the CSC also has invited AFA to present the ID event it previously cancelled.


CSC rented its IMAX theater to AFA to show Darwin's Dilemma, a science documentary advocating ID. However, when CSC learned the film would portray ID favorably, CSC cancelled AFA's event. AFA filed suit in California Superior Court alleging viewpoint discrimination and breach of contract.


"This is an historic victory for the ID movement," said Casey Luskin, an attorney and policy analyst with Discovery Institute's Center for Science & Culture. "The First Amendment forbids government preference for one viewpoint over another, yet evidence disclosed in this case shows the CSC, Smithsonian Institution, and LA County Museum of Natural History attempted to stifle dissent from Darwinism. The result was illegal state-sponsored suppression of protected speech."


AFA was represented by William J. Becker Jr., of the Becker Law Firm, who was supported in the case by the Rutherford Institute. The case number is BC 423687.


"This is the first free speech case for the ID movement, and its first victory in that field," said Becker. "This settlement represents an acknowledgement that a state-owned science institution sought to censor an event solely because it related to ID. It's a vindication for ID, and First Amendment guarantees of free speech."


This case reflects the ongoing trend of discrimination against intelligent design. In January, the University of Kentucky paid $125,000 to settle a lawsuit by astronomer Martin Gaskell who was wrongfully denied employment because he was perceived to be skeptical towards Darwinian evolution. (Gaskell actually considers himself a "theistic evolutionist," but he stated "there are significant scientific problems in evolutionary theory" and respectfully cited the work of intelligent design proponents Michael Behe and Phillip Johnson in online notes for one of his talks.) Soon after the settlement of Gaskell's case, Applied Mathematics Letters paid $10,000 and publicly apologized to avoid litigation after it wrongfully withdrew mathematician Granville Sewell's paper critiquing neo-Darwinism.


"Although Discovery Institute did not host the event, and was not a party to this lawsuit, we were dragged into the case when CSC sought to compel disclosure of thousands of pages of internal documents," said Joshua Youngkin, Discovery Institute's Program Officer in Public Policy and Legal Affairs. "This case warns bullies in the Darwin Lobby there will be consequences for trying to suppress free speech on evolution."


The fact that Darwinism still exists as anything other than in the Museum of Bad Fads tells us that man prefers depravity to dependence on the Creator of all things.  He would rather believe in fairy tales than facts.
‘I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.’
– Malcolm Muggeridge, well-known British journalist and philosopher—Pascal Lectures, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.

9 comments:

anonymouse said...

Wow Radar, complaining about censorship again? Pot, kettle, black, remember?

No doubt this will cost me another irony meter.

Jon Woolf said...

"The Anything-But-God crowd will go to great lengths to lie about Creation Science and Intelligent Design Science."

Nope, try again. Today the real liars are on your side, Radar, not that of mainstream science. The real tragedy of incidents like the CSC breach-of-contract with the AFA is that they give credibility to the lies of the ID/creationism cultists. CSC should have researched the AFA in advance, and upon discovering that the AFA is a creationist organization bent on using the CSC to give false credence to its creationist propaganda, refused any further dealings with the AFA.

"In point of fact the evidence for Intelligent Design and Creation is non-existent."

Fixed that for you.

anonymouse said...

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/08/sleaze_and_controversy_from_th.php

radar said...

PZ Myers calling someone sleazy? He is the Westboro Baptists of Darwinism, that is a joke! I will give Christopher Hitchens a round of applause for being honest and civil. Richard Dawkins is sometimes not civil but at least he is also honest about what he believes and he admits that Darwinists laugh at people like Francis Collins behind his back because they try to mix Darwinism and God. But Myers is a foul-mouthed attack dog. If he doesn't like you, you must be right. So I hope he hates me!

radar said...

If you have asked me questions on recent posts, you may have to wait until the weekend. I put some time aside to blog but will not dig deep into questions until later, as I had knee surgery and work comes first. If there is a desperate need to ask me something put it in here because this is the last one so I am checking it.

Anonymous said...

Derision still isn't an argument, Radar.
Sad isn't it; having to clutch at straws like this in absence of any scientific evidence for creationism?

highboy said...

"Derision still isn't an argument, Radar.
Sad isn't it; having to clutch at straws like this in absence of any scientific evidence for creationism?"

neither is trolling. After all the hoop-la no one dissenting on this site have said anything that amounts to anything more than "na-uh" when radar writes a post. Its comical that radar writes post after post using a set of references and a bunch of anonymous posters don't actually posit an argument or make any case whatsoever for their own sources being more credible. We're just suppose to accept that they are.

Anonymous whatsit said...

"PZ Myers calling someone sleazy? He is the Westboro Baptists of Darwinism, that is a joke! [...] Myers is a foul-mouthed attack dog. If he doesn't like you, you must be right. So I hope he hates me! "

You do realize that this is just an ad hominem attack, an evasion, right? Do you have anything to say about the CSC's misrepresentations? Of course not, cos lying's okay if it's done for Jesus, right?

Anonymous whatsit said...

Highboy, it appears you're not reading the comments section very carefully. For example, a bunch of cogent questions were posed in a recent comment section (radaractive DOT blogspot DOT com/2011/09/big-flaming-ball-of-fire-in-sky-to.html) that Radar has no answer to - and that happen to falsify YEC.