Post by erik simpsonIt may amuse some to see what the Discovery Institute has come down to.
Gunter Bechley (a real paleontologist gone bad) is the last man standing
to publicly defend the indefensible: nntelligent design, or at least
guidance. How the mighty have fallen.
https://www.discovery.org/id/about/fellows/
The Discovery Institute claims more fellows than they had when the bait
and switch failed and intelligent design was determined to be a bogus
creationist scam in federal court in 2005. Denton rejoined the ID scam,
after Dover, knowing that the bait and switch continued to be run, and a
lot of creationists seem to have been dishonest enough to support the
bogus intelligent design bait and switch scam being run by the Discovery
Institute. Bechly was only one of the creationists degenerate enough to
want to continue to support a dishonest scam that the Discovery
Institute was running on their fellow creationists after the failure of
the ID scam in Dover. Dembski did quit for a while, but couldn't make
an honest living so he came back to support the bait and switch scam.
No one quit in disgust when the ID perps started running the bait and
switch on the rubes that believed that they had a scientific theory of
intelligent design to teach in the public schools back in 2002, and all
the fellows seem to be in agreement that ID can still be used as bait to
sell the rubes the obfuscation and denial switch scam.
Have there been any objections from any fellows for the last 22 years
that the bait and switch has been going down? It is just a fact that
the primary use of the Discovery Institute's claims about having a
scientific theory of intelligent design is as bait to draw the rubes in
so that they can force the obfuscation and denial switch scam onto them.
The bait and switch has gone down 100% of the time that any
creationist rubes have taken the bait. There have been no exceptions.
Dover happened because the bait and switch failed and the rubes tried to
teach ID anyway.
There seems to be no shortage of creationists willing participate in the
bait and switch as ID perps.
The Discovery Institute ID perps had made getting ID taught in the
public schools part of their Wedge strategy to accomplish their mission
of reviving a theocracy that likely never had existed. Getting 10
states to teach ID was listed as one of their 5 year goals in the Wedge
document (printed in 1998 and leaked in 1999). When the ID scam had
gained enough public notoriety so that creationists rubes wanted to
teach it in the public schools, and it was time to put up or shut up,
the ID perps did neither and started running the bait and switch scam
instead. All the rubes ever get after taking the bait is an obfuscation
and denial switch scam that they are told has nothing to do with ID, and
that they can't mention ID nor creationism when they teach the switch
scam junk.
Obviously, none of the then fellows objected to running the bait and
switch scam because they are still fellows, and none of them resigned in
disgust for being made part of such a dishonest scam.
These are the type of fellows that the ID scam has supporting it today.
The Discovery Institute continues to use ID as bait, but the rubes never
get any ID science to teach.
Current intelligent design briefing packet for educators:
https://www.discovery.org/f/1453/
QUOTE:
Has ID Been Banned from Public Schools?
No. Science teachers have the right to teach science.
Since ID is a legitimate scientific theory, it should be
constitutional to discuss in science classrooms and it
should not be banned from schools. If a science teacher
wants to voluntarily discuss ID, she should have the
academic freedom to do so.
END QUOTE:
From the Discovery Institute's education policy in this document:
QUOTE:
Although Discovery Institute does not advocate requiring
the teaching of intelligent design in public schools, it
does believe there is nothing unconstitutional about
voluntarily discussing the scientific theory of design in
the classroom. In addition, the Institute opposes efforts
to persecute individual teachers who may wish to discuss
the scientific debate over design in an objective and
pedagogically appropriate manner.
END QUOTE:
In 2013 when both Louisiana and Texas tried to use their switch scam
legislation or school board junk to teach ID, both states claimed not to
be "requiring" ID to be taught, but the bait and switch went down on
both states again, and the Discovery Institute told the rubes not to
teach ID in their public schools. The ID perps have updated the
briefing packet 3 times since running the bait and switch on Louisiana
and Texas, and have not retracted any of their claims about being able
to teach the junk.
All existing fellows must be in agreement with the the Discovery
Institute's bait and switch policy because none of them have condemned
what has been going on nor resigned in protest.
West Virginia is just the latest example, and none of the fellows seem
to mind. Luskin is one of the authors of the current briefing packet
and ran the bait and switch on the Virginia rubes. The West Virginia
rubes were also not "requiring" ID to be taught, but Luskin told them
not to do it anyway.
How can any of the fellows not know that the bait and switch is
Discovery Institute policy? Who else is selling the notion that there
is a scientific theory of ID to teach in the public schools? Who runs
the bait and switch every time a group of rubes tries to teach the junk?
Why would any honest academics want to be associated with a dishonest
bait and switch scam? It is a scam run on their fellow creationists.
Ron Okimoto