The question of ‘darwnism’/’evolution’ on the left

Source:  Cancel versus liquidation culture, the dinosaur left and the marxmail resource… – 1848+: The End(s) of History

This episode is telling and shows why a new generation has to move beyond marxism…and darwinism! In fact a whole generation has been lost in this stupidity. Fred Hoyle sounded the warning in the fifties of the last century! He pointed out that darwinism could never be right given the statistical absurdities of natural selection. But the professional and academic community would not or could not listen and the theology of Darwin persisted, and still is strong. That’s why outsiders like myself took up the question. World History and the Eonic Effect contains one of crucial keys to a real theory of evolution. This book has been sitting around for twenty years, but no academic body will dare to even mention it. The stupidity of professors can be mindboggling. It is almost incredible. The subject has passed into the religious camp with the ID group, using ideas of scientists originally, which has created a huge literature and following along the lines of intelligent design. But that has confused issue all over again. But their critiques are often useful and I check their blog Uncommon Descent for information. But the ID angle doesn’t really work. It can be debated, but the ID people are now as dogmatic as the darwinist camp. Dembski has created a sort of ‘test’ for ID which is confusing and it you dissent they claim you haven’t understood the science! The argument for design is strong, but ‘intelligent’ design creates a slight problem. T
The issue has an exceedingly simple resolution which noone will take:
1. consider the fact(s) of evolution, they are solid
2. be wary of theories of evolution, not a single one has succeeded. The natural selection brand is almost incredibly stupid, but is the official version.
The critiques of darwinism finally made their mark, and my work although banished from public view was read by thousands in free net versions and have had a real influence. There are several academic critics now where before they were fired on the spot.
But the eonic model is too complicated for most, certainly for darwinist professors who seem mentally retarded, brainwashed or pathological liars for a paycheck.
But academic critics of darwnism now exist and they have produced some useful work. The term ‘intelligent’ in ‘intelligent design’ needs another discussion, but basically it doesn’t work because we can’t specify that entity it is that is intelligent. The ID group seems to think the ambiguity can stand unspoken for ‘god’ in the publics they talk to. They are very cautious to others because they can’t specify such ‘designers’.
The only thing we really know is that natural selection is a superstition and that design as such is a naturalistic phenomenon. Your liver shows design, but that doesn’t that ‘god’ created livers.

The left should long ago have decamped from darwinism, but the match with historical materialism created a kind of ‘Odd Couple’ even though Marx initially was skeptical of Darwin, but he changed his mind, no doubt to satisfy Engels.
The left should never try to enforce a theory of evolution. It is an egregious non-essential in a world struggling with capitalism.
Leftist would certainly do better to challenge creationism, and to point to the FACTS of evolution without the presumption of a theory, as yet. Let’s hope we don’t have to waste another generation on this. The reputation of scientists is starting to nosedive. In a period like the current pandemic that is dangerous because at the level of medical epidemiology the science is critical.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s