Darwinism as science’s own ideological anti-science?  Science itself is the worst offender. The whole science culture has been turned in a bunch of idiots, laughing stocks next to the right’s Darwin exposes

At a time when the far right is indulging in anti-science it is important to see that one of the worst offenders is the world of science itself as the natural progress of biological evolutionism research is captured by its mysterious ‘fake science’, the at theory natural selection.

It is hard to see how this situation arose in the wake of Darwin. In the background, the radical Lamarck who had the gist of the right approach was displaced the conservative British Darwin displacing Wallace also who soon rejected the theory as obviously inadequate. The rise of social Darwinism is always blamed on Spencer et al but the reality is that Darwinism is itself the culprit and we can see the mostly suppressed portrait of Darwin with his seldom mentioned colonial genocide perspective of ‘inferior’ races. But the so-called left itself succumbed to the false science. But Marx originally rejected Darwin as a British ideologue, then conformed to the rapidly spreading paradigm on the left, destined to the confusion of genocidal class warfare.
But the issue seesawed to the point that by the turn of the twentieth century there were doubters in good standing. But sometime after the 1940’s the hardcore paradigm consolidated to the point of becoming an enforced belief system beyond challenge in the biological field, from there to science orgs generally. By this point the religious right, at first creationists, then design adherents, have entered the fray, making the Darwin camp even more rigid in the confusion over theology and science. The era of Dawkins emerges with the propaganda of atheism, and keeping ‘god’ ideas out of science is find, and a necessity for science, but the way to do that by using natural selection is a gross fallacy and made the confusion even worse. The answer is that design is present in nature and has no theological implications. The ID movement suggests without proof the plausible thesis that nature seems ‘intelligent’ which is an endless and confused debate. But the idea that nature looks intelligent is no scientific heresy in the end but also hardly a scientific statement. ID adherents have come close to saying that ID in nature has nothing to do with theism.
But the ID orgs have produced an immense amount of critique of Darwinism, work that biologists were incapable of.
It is a bizarre situation, made the more so by the way that after preaching about the capitalist ideology as theory the left embraced the whole confusion. They must extract itself from that quagmire.

9780984702909_Descent_of_Man_Revisited(3): this book has suddenly become popular with hundreds of downloads. I think the paradigm is starting to collapse, but the process is likely to be prolonged. The powers that be have corrupted science and won’t easily confess or change their neat propaganda system. The book critiques Darwinism and touches lightly on the issue of the eonic effect as a perception of what real evolution looks like

Source: Descent of Man Revisited World History: The Hidden Clue to Human Evolution  – 1848+: The End(s) of History

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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