Q&A: Is the anti-evolution Discovery Institute good or evil?

Question by timeponderer: Is the anti-evolution Discovery Institute good or evil?
So.. I’ve been doing some reading on what is behind this “intelligent design” over in america. It seems like the Discovery Institute is the main force behind it, and especially a Phillip E. Johnson, architect of the Wedge Strategy. Here are some quotes (web-pages to come):

“This isn’t really, and never has been a debate about science. It’s about religion and philosophy.”

“The objective [of the Wedge Strategy] is to convince people that Darwinism is inherently atheistic, thus shifting the debate from creationism vs. evolution to the existence of God vs. the non-existence of God. From there people are introduced to ‘the truth’ of the Bible and then ‘the question of sin’ and finally ‘introduced to Jesus.”

So my question is, is this deception a moral thing to do? Given that there hasn’t been a single peer-reviewed scientific paper published by the Institute, and given that over 99.9% of biologists (many of whom are religious) support evolution. Do the ends justify the means?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA111.html
Yeah, evil’s a bit harsh, should’ve said moral or immoral.
Cogito Sum – here is the problem. Science is not politics (everyone in the western world has free speech by the way). Most people outside of the relevant fields don’t have the time/inclination to know everything. It is clearly deception to ignore the scientific community, and target the general public instead with scientific sounding arguments. Meanwhile trying to paint evolution as athiesm, and (if you read the webpage) proclaiming “teach the controversy”. What controversy? – there is none in science. It seems like Machiavellian politics to me, yes. I was asking people – religious people – if they thought it was justified, if it would bring people to God.

Oh and you say that Lee Strobel, the Christian apologetic who only interviewed DI people for his book (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Strobel) “was very factual on the status of the debate”?? And again what scientific debate?

Best answer:

Answer by Manny
It’s among the silliest notions to ever cross the 20th century.

Not moral at all. In fact, it is an extremely expensive hoax.

Add your own answer in the comments!

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

19 Responses to “Q&A: Is the anti-evolution Discovery Institute good or evil?”

  1. Michael X says:

    Neither, it’s misguided!

  2. maeves_child says:

    I think it’s another attempt at brainwashing. Evil? I don’t know. Devious? Very likely. Not a good idea? Absolutely.

  3. Captain Atheism says:

    Of course not. And it’s frightening to me that enough people in this country prefer delusion over the truth to actually support his organization’s very existence.

    And it is for this reason, that I am SERIOUSLY considering leaving for Europe… for good.

  4. johnocreagh says:

    Neither good nor evil. Merely willfully ignorant.

  5. notmelgibson says:

    Neither, just ignorant.

  6. Girl Wonder says:

    I wouldn’t say they are evil, just massively, massively wrong. Almost to the point where it is funny. The evolution debate really isn’t about religion, because who’s to say a god couldn’t have kick-started evolution? These people are in it for all the wrong reasons, and I don’t think should be taken seriously.

  7. farmgirl says:

    Does everything have to be good or evil? It’s neither.

  8. tammidee10 says:

    It’s evil in its purest form, using lies to control peoples minds for illicit purposes.
    Tammi Dee

  9. Spirit Walker says:

    You are wrong. There have been a great many peer reviews which support “Intelligent Design.” Telling the truth is deception, it is telling the truth so that people will know it.

  10. freeinquiry1965 says:

    No, it’s not moral. But then neither is fellating little boys in the confessional.

    Christianity is about hypocricy, not morality.

  11. Svartalf says:

    Let them. The only people they’ll be able to convince are those who already believe Darwin was wrong…

    Only trouble is to make sure no public money goes there and their spurious “findings” can’t be used to influence policy.

  12. Warren Peace says:

    unless they are prepared to engage in serious unbiased scientific research, it is a JOKE.

    As to your question, I choose ‘evil’. Why do these people want to stand in the way of science and progress? enough.

  13. judith r says:

    America as its wackjobs, just like the middle east, however, American wackjobs don’t strap on some dynamite and blow up children.

  14. Kjelstad says:

    It is not science when you take a preconceived answer and try to find evidence to support it. Science is unbiased and looks for the truth no matter what it may be

  15. carolinatinpan says:

    I am a creationist. But i do not dispute the evidence for evolution. The problem is there are extremists on both sides who are so passionate to prove they are correct that they will lie and cheat. I study the evidence and i make my own decisions. Neither side has all the proof i need to dispute the others claims. I do not think every word is fact because it is in the bible. Man wrote it and man is human.

  16. kenshiro says:

    “evolution” is actually an amalgamation of the origional creatures god created hence why things today eat meat. in the genesis it describes every living creature as being vegitarian. genesis 1:29-30

    29 And God said, “See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food. 30 Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food”; and it was so.

  17. Journey says:

    It is not moral in any sense! But christianity really isn’t and hasn’t ever been about morality; it is about spreading by any and all means necessary. The truly unfortunate thing is that most Americans do not realize how much power the radical right-wing fundaMENTALists have. Our president just stated publicly that he supported ID and funding is not too far behind. I do beleive that America is headed not only for a theocracy, but for another Dark Ages of sorts. Whether or not the ends justify the means depends upon whom you are asking. For me, they do not.

  18. Shaz says:

    The whole argument is 100% because the religious extremists want to guilt everyone into becoming slaves to their frame of mind and they will lie,cheat, and steal to get their way in order to obtain power to force those who disagree to bend knee or go to jail.

    Anyone who tells you differently either doesn’t understand the argument fully or is lying

  19. Cogito Sum says:

    Your statement and back-up remarks were one-sided and deceptive. So are you similar to what you noted?

    First of all, they (DI) do not dispute evolution as noted in the fossil record. That was a polarizing and misleading statement. They question the theory and bring forth valid and profound issues with many aspects related to origins of life and the “New Information” creation mechanism of macro evolution, which appears impossible to do biologically. They are noting the fact that more and more evidence is pointing away from a materialistic universe. If so, we need to hear and understand and decide.

    I agree that the DI has an agenda, or mission, like any group. They have certain beliefs and they are working to communicate them. And whether you agree or not, they believe in what they are doing. There is nothing wrong with that, if this is what they believe. All groups do this.

    Now here is where the rubber meets the road. We have freedom of speech. If The DI is right, then over time, its views will prevail. If not, then it was a waste of time and money. However, they have some very talented and smart people associated with the DI. They have put forth some excellent intellectual work. You need to read it. They have the right to publish it.

    The Case for a Creator by Lee Strobel was very factual on the status of the debate. He was an award winning reporter for the Chicago Tribune. Check it out, if you dare.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Powered by Yahoo! Answers