Tag: Washington Post
Blind Eye Toward Intelligent Design
The Washington Post printed Discovery Institute President Bruce Chapman’s short op-ed in today’s “Free For All” section of the Post.
Freeze Dried Protestors Fight for the Establishment…the Scientific Establishment
I would personally like to thank Washington Post reporter Peter Slevin for highlighting the deeply held convictions of the new branch campus of the Darwin-only lobby in Fairfax Virginia. Like the cause-heads of PCU this group of freeze dried protestors “led mostly by Vietnam-era protesters” who “came together in frustration after the November elections, have little political experience, apart from hoisting Kerry-Edwards signs.” Said Richard Lawrence, 63: ‘”We’re just a small group, maybe with a powerful idea. We don’t have a clue, but we’re not letting go.”‘
Privileged Planet Critics Still Don’t Get It
Today’s Washington Post has a handful of letters about the dust-up at the Smithsonian over the screening of The Privileged Planet later this month, both good and bad. First the good.
Washington Post Editorial Unsophisticated in its Misrepresentations
The Washington Post today publishes an editorial prepared by Anne Applebaum (“Dissing Darwin“) that uses the term “intelligent creator” three times to describe the concept of intelligent design. The writer knows better, but apparently believes that if she can lodge the word “creator” (as in “creationist”) in people’s minds, it will reside there forever. The key to understanding such writing: the proponents of intelligent design must never be allowed to speak for themselves or define their own ideas. Instead they must only be spoken about and accept definitions of their terms that are offered by their foes. The editorial also twice describes the film The Privileged Planet as “religious”, though the writer admits it doesn’t mention the word God. (It Read More ›
Smithsonian Dust-Up Not Dying Down
Telic Thoughts and Post-Darwinist are among the many blogs talking about The Privileged Planet premiere at the Smithsonian that has so outraged Darwinian bloggers. (For all the real juicy details see our previous blog here.)