09.25.08

Obama on evolution

Posted in Evolution, politics at 10:49 pm by nemo

Nature discusses the presidential race and the candidates, Nature, and Obama on ID:

…Contrast that with Obama’s statement on page 448, in which Nature asked him about the teaching of intelligent design in science classes. It is not easy to address students’ questions about evolution without falling prey to the false notion of ‘teaching the controversy’, as the Royal Society’s director of education discovered last week in a public-relations meltdown (see ‘Creation and classrooms’). But Obama could not be more clear: “I do not believe it is helpful to our students to cloud discussions of science with non-scientific theories like intelligent design that are not subject to experimental scrutiny,” he wrote.

While it is commendable, if, no doubt, a progammed response, that Obama is wary of ID, he should also be aware that the view of evolution proposed by Darwinists and the big science orgs is equally limited. Obama has meet enough lying politics. Perhaps he can have the canny wisdom to see the lying politics of the ID lobby and the Darwin lobby.
It is important for a person in such a leadership position to understand, forced thereby no doubt to keep his mouth shut, the deception in Darwinism, and the dangers of Social Darwinism that spring from Darwin’s theory of natural selection, and the inadequacy of that theory.
The issue is very simple: we have very strong evidence for the fact of evolution, but we don’t understand its dynamics. Wrong views of its dynamics can cause social confusion due to the misapplication of such theories to culture. Real evolution is something far more complex than current science can understand. Further, the distortions of economic understanding created by Darwinism is something any president should be aware of. Economics doesn’t explain Darwinism, and vice versa.
One should note in passing that economic models (Kuttner’s book on this is essential reading) have severe limits and their own element of bogus science. Don’t ever be mesmerized by fancy math in this field, or the people who are smart-alecs who are expert in it. Milton Friedman was great on the math of free markets, and look at the result. That’s all you need to know to be smarter than all these experts who are ’smarter’ than you.
We just learned that this week, with the ‘invisible hand’ meme.
The issue of anti-science in the Republican field over the last presidency is of critical importance, and a pro-science stance is indicated, Darwinism excepted, thus keeping in mind that it is better science to be skeptical of Darwinism, this flying in the face of the mantras of all these experts. The issue of Darwinism is not relevant, in any case, to the technological issue of science and culture, it being a luxury of the scientific worldview obsessed with total explanation and control of thought. If anything Darwinism is holding science back.
Scientists have no monopoly on human knowledge, and can’t even get evolutionary theory straight and live in a closed box created by ’scientism’.

Obama needs to realize something about the big secret of evolution, the failed logic of Darwinism which is being suppressed, and not get thrown from Scylla to the Charybdis of the design camp.

Best of luck surviving this double whammy of propagandas. Letting public policy be influenced by Darwinism is a tragic error. Show some honest cunning in an endrun around these obsessive experts who will try to find any hint of heresy from Darwin dogma. Too bad, but you will have to apply what you learned from playing poker.

Permalink