Wells, and the future of ID

| 17 Comments

Jonathan Wells just reposted an article over at ID: The Future that he wrote about a year ago. The article is a fictional account looking at the history of the ID movement from now until 2025. Here’s what Wells thinks will lead (or will have lead - I never can keep track of the right tense in these future history pieces) to the downfall of Darwinism:

Read more (at The Questionable Authority):

17 Comments

Wells looks back 20 years from now. But the ID movement is almost 20 already. Let’s look back at 20 years of Real ID history.

*Dembski announces our Waterloo, then gets fired *Behe publishes a book that was fake-peer-reviewed *Paul Nelson laments the lack of any actual theory *George Gilder says there isn’t any content to ID at all *Ray Mummert sums it up: “We’ve been attacked by the educated, intelligent segment of the culture.” *Charlie Wagner announces Nelson’s Law: Evolution can’t happen because things like evolution can’t happen. *ID suffers minor setback when every scientific organization from the NAS to the Kenyan Institute for Advanced Lion Studies calls it a W.A.D. of crap. *ID clubs require christianity for officership, claim no religious motivation *ID suffers major setback when some rubes ride it into court in Pennsylvania.

While Mr. Wells daydreams of future glory, I imagine the next 20 years of ID will look more or less like the last 20 years.

Interesting that ID even has a blog called ID the future. I have decided that ID really loves to live in the past, I hereby nominate this song as IDs themes song (apologies to Jethro Tull)

Living In The Past Happy and I’m smiling, walk a mile to drink your water. You know I’d love to love you, and above you there’s no other. We’ll go walking out while others shout of war’s disaster. Oh, we won’t give in, let’s go living in the past. Once I used to join in every boy and girl was my friend. Now there’s revolution, but they don’t know what they’re fighting. Let us close out eyes; outside their lives go on much faster. Oh, we won’t give in, we’ll keep living in the past.

Well, then. I think this is just as timely as ever: “A Look Back at the Demise of Atomic Theory”

Waterloo !!!! Waterloo !!!! Waterloo !!!!!!

Hey Jonathan, how does “Dover” fit into your plans? (snicker) (giggle)

IDers have no problem finding rich backers to fund their polemic activity.

I’d love to see Wells go to these same people asking for seed capital for a biotech start-up based on ID principles. I have a feeling their spontaneous laughter would give the lie to his optimistic assessment.

I am just happy to see that Mr. Wells has finally realized that his ideas belong more in the realm of science fiction than science.

Sorry, I can’t get excited about old Wells nonsense.

Wells is less relevant than Garner Ted Armstrong, arch creationist, who at least had a radio program.

Wells who?

Id the Future? Never heard of it.

Let’s take a moment to look back at the last 20 years of Intelligent Design experiments:

All done.

Steve S Wrote:

Let’s take a moment to look back at the last 20 years of Intelligent Design experiments:

All done.

You forgot the one where Behe disproved the negative claims of ID in one fell swoop!

Has anyone noticed that the Meyer brief is still being posted (in pieces, every few days) on the DI blog? The elephant in the room (as was before or just as the original post went up, and was pointed out immediately) is that the Meyer amicus brief was stricken from the record upon the objection of the plaintiffs. It’s like the punkass who didn’t get into Stanford but still wants to show the world what a smart guy he is, how he learned at any early age how to excepasseed in school and what a great essay he wrote about his life-changing experiences at Boy Scouts summer camp. Truly sad.

Mike, for future tense of past events not yet having occurred and really not likely to happen in the known universe try Dr. Dan Streetmentioner’s, “Time Traveler’s Handbook of 1001 Tense Formations”, mentioned, I believe in the Guide, and note that “future perfect has been abandoned since it was discovered not to be” - D. Adams, TRATEOTU.

The sad thing is that before the Ohio fiasco where they had to admit that ID wasn’t science the scam artists at the Discovery Institute where pushing Wells’ book, as if it were legitimate. It turned out that they weren’t hawking the other ID junk as teachable because they had already figured out that it was all bunk and had dropped ID as the Wedge back in 1999 (according to West’s admission of a change in direction). After the Ohio rubes tried to use Wells’ bogus book and even got caught repeating some of the bogus lies out of the book in their model lesson plan, open Discovery Institute support for Wells’ book seems to have evaporated. They give all their scam artist fellows lip service, but you don’t see them touting the book anymore as being useful in the science class.

What is the most tragic thing about their fall back to dishonest scholarship like Wells puts out is that it was an admission of defeat. They found out that they didn’t have squat, so they had to go back to the standard creationist obfuscation scam, but they couldn’t tell anyone why they were obfuscating the issue. All that effort and they ended up with the worst aspect of scientific creationism without being able to talk about the creationism. They were forced to run a dishonest scam without a reason that they could admit to.

Ron Okimoto

IDers have no problem finding rich backers to fund their polemic activity.

Howard Ahmanson, Jr. is my first argument in favor of a hefty inheritance tax.

Has anyone noticed that the Meyer brief is still being posted (in pieces, every few days) on the DI blog?

Considering that IDCists are still touting the ‘Santorum amendment’, this should not be surprising.

Howard Ahmanson, Jr. is my first argument in favor of a hefty inheritance tax.

That would be Howie III. DI Sugar Daddy Howie is, IIRC, the “Jr”.

Interesting that ID even has a blog called ID the future. I have decided that ID really loves to live in the past, I hereby nominate this song as IDs themes song (apologies to Jethro Tull)

Living In The Past

You had better apologize! Ian Anderson, leader of JTull and songwriter, is a fierce critic of organized religion - i.e. My God - and is also a fish farmer. I doubt very much if he has any time for ID and its acolytes.

What is all this ID nonsense anyway? how can a President of this fine country defend and promote such useless garbage? Scientific theory????? What science has gone into this junk? Scientology maybe? why should our educators even have to deal with this issue when they have much more important things to do. Like recess or basketweaving!!

He HAS to, otherwise he looks like he is rejecting his extremist political base. Remember the reaction from the extreme right when he nominated Miers?

What was his response?

Scalito

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Mike Dunford published on November 8, 2005 5:20 PM.

Missing link: “cdesign proponentsists” was the previous entry in this blog.

Goodbye, Kansas is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.361

Site Meter