A Moment of Clarity: Darwinists Plan to Recruit “People Who Do Not Care About Science”.

Michael Egnor

Every once in a while, in an epochal public debate, there’s a moment of clarity. Darwinism’s most recent moment of clarity came a short time ago, when prominent Darwinist and scientist Mike Dunford released the strategy developed by his colleagues in a policy forum piece published in the latest issue of the journal Science. The strategy is remarkable.
Dunford notes the emerging Darwinian strategy:

I think Matt [Nisbet] and Chris [Mooney] are right. We do need to spend more time (and thought) on communicating our views effectively, particularly to people who do not care about science.

In their article “Framing Science,” Darwinists Chris Mooney and Matt Nisbet discuss the options for Darwinists facing an uphill battle against Intelligent Design scientists in the public forum. They note that the public doesn’t “get it” that Darwin’s theory is beyond reproach, and they agree that what’s needed is a new “framing” strategy, championed by political consultant George Lakoff.

Matt [Nisbet] and Chris [Mooney] suggest that we use a technique that they call “framing.” This consists of emphasizing the parts of the message that relate to the things that the audience cares about…As long as the people we need to reach are uninterested in the science involved in the issue, we’re going to need to find other ways to get them interested in the issue itself.

Notice the difference in strategy between proponents of Intelligent Design and proponents of Darwinism. Intelligent Design scientists are energetically seeking public and academic forums to debate the science. They fight censorship from Darwinists in universities and federal lawsuits from Darwinists in public school science classes.
Darwinists furiously suppress public discussion of the Darwin/Design controversy and now seek to enlist “people who do not care about science” to help the Darwinist cause.
People uninterested in science are a natural Darwinian constituency. They’re a mother-lode for philosophical materialists who deny the scientific evidence for design in nature.
Here’s the Intelligent Design strategy: We’ll continue to enlist people who do care about science.

Michael Egnor

Senior Fellow, Center for Natural & Artificial Intelligence
Michael R. Egnor, MD, is a Professor of Neurosurgery and Pediatrics at State University of New York, Stony Brook, has served as the Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery, and award-winning brain surgeon. He was named one of New York’s best doctors by the New York Magazine in 2005. He received his medical education at Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons and completed his residency at Jackson Memorial Hospital. His research on hydrocephalus has been published in journals including Journal of Neurosurgery, Pediatrics, and Cerebrospinal Fluid Research. He is on the Scientific Advisory Board of the Hydrocephalus Association in the United States and has lectured extensively throughout the United States and Europe.