One thing about Darwinists - they are consistent. They really do NOT believe in information

Bill Dembski has drawn my attention to the Darwinists who vote up negative reviews of Design of Life, his textbook supplement with Jonathan Wells, on whose behalf I blog at Design of Life blog:

The Design of Life has 13 five-star reviews and 4 one-star reviews. None of the one-star reviews give evidence of the reviewer having read the book. Yet the three reviews placed front and center by Amazon are the one-star reviews and none of the five-star reviews appear there. That's because the Darwinists keep voting up the negative reviews and voting down the positive reviews. Please go to the link right now, look at the reviews, and vote on them (toward the bottom of a review are "yes" and "no" buttons for whether a review was helpful).

These naysayers may not be people who have read the book. Any more than the Darwinbots who assailed the showing of The Privileged Planet at the Smithsonian can be presumed to have seen the film. (Had they done so, they would have known that the film was not "anti-evolution", as a New York Times reporter had incorrectly reported)

The Darwinbot's duty is not to see or hear or know, but merely to stupidly protest.

That makes sense. In the final assault of Darwinism against mind-based civilization, the Darwinists are revealing that they do not think that they have minds. Their selfish genes have brought them to the point where they mindlessly yay-hoo against books they have never read and never intend to read, as well as films they have never seen and never intend to see.

I am NOT recommending that anyone who has not read The Design of Life should attempt to do battle with Darwinbots who have not read it either. Why add to the number of stupid wars that infest the planet?

But if you think that the information service that Bill Dembski has provided at Uncommon Descent for years - out of his own resources - is worthwhile, go to Amazon and vote up the reviews that sound like the person has actually read the book. Vote the others down.

Like intelligent design? Hate it? No matter. This is a blow for civilization. Everyone who things they have a mind will be better off.

Note from Denyse re “Darwinbots”

Some persons have said that it is unkind of me to refer to those who assailed the Smithsonian about the showing of Privileged Planet there — without ever having seen it or intending to see it themselves— as “Darwinbots.”

On the contrary, I am making the kindest assumption I can, namely that they cannot help their behaviour. I have certainly heard ruder names applied to that sort of behaviour ...

The part that seems odd to me, as a person who sometimes appears on a TV program whose producer recently called me a “centrist,” is that some of these people may think that they are, in some way, defending liberal values.

They are profoundly self-deceived. It is difficult to be further from classical liberalism than they are. Yesterday, I was glad that T.H. Huxley had not lived to see what has become of Darwinism. Today, I can be glad that John Stuart Mill did not live to see what has become of liberalism.

(Note: IF you came here looking for information on the uproar over the Smithsonian screening of an ID-friendly film, The Privileged Planet, go here and here to start. Then, for best service, go here. I do continue to update the story as I hear new items of interest.)