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.

Publisher braces for controversy as definitive book on intelligent design hits market

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Publisher braces for controversy as definitive book on intelligent design hits market DALLAS – November 19, 2007 – The Foundation for Thought and Ethics has just published The Design of Life. This definitive book on intelligent design (ID) comes as a shot across the bow to dogmatic defenders of Darwinian orthodoxy. Written by two key ID theorists, mathematician William Dembski and biologist Jonathan Wells, it presents the full case for intelligent design to a general audience. Critics, in dismissing The Design of Life, contend that intelligent design has collapsed in the wake of the 2005 Dover trial. Author William Dembski responded, “Those same people have been announcing intelligent design’s demise every year since 1990. Strangle it as they might, intelligent design just won’t die. The Design of Life shows why the better arguments and stronger evidence are now on the intelligent design side.”

According to FTE president Jon Buell, The Design of Life is not intended for high school students; it is aimed rather at college/university students and adults who want a clearer understanding of why a growing number of scientists doubt Darwin. “FTE enlisted William Dembski and Jonathan Wells because the public needs a book that compares the argument for design, point by point, with the argument for no-design,” noted Buell. The book covers the origin of life, origin of species, and origin of consciousness, as well as other controversial areas. “We now know so much more than Darwin did,” said author Jonathan Wells, who also wrote The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design (Regnery 2006). “Instead of just papering over more cracks, it’s time to take a fresh look. The Design of Life shows why it is no longer possible to be an intellectually fulfilled Darwinist.” The Design of Life, which goes on sale today, retails for $35. It is available through online booksellers and at a discount directly from the Foundation for Thought and Ethics at www.thedesignoflife.net.

About the Foundation for Thought and Ethics FTE is a nonprofit educational organization based in Dallas. It publishes books on topics impacting the public understanding of worldview, morality, and conscience. From its inception over 25 years ago, the organization has maintained a special interest in intelligent design, publishing books in this area and fostering dialogue about it among leading scientists, scholars, and educators. FTE’s web site is www.fteonline.com.

Note: I will be putting entries on the book's blog site when it is up. I have been saving some favourites.

What if the Dover School board had just put an alternative text in the library?

With respect to the Dover school board's case in general, intelligent design's godfather Phillip Johnson, transcribed here, muses in a recent note,

The Dover board could have placed the ID book in the library, and merely posted a notice that the book was available for any who wanted to know about a different view of the subject. In that case there would probably have been no teacher rebellion, no community commotion, no ACLU lawsuit, and no media circus.

However, that would not have satisfied the enthusiasts on the school board, who thought they had profound thoughts to express, or the lawyer, who wanted to win a test case. If the ACLU hd sued to remove a book from the library, the media might have looked at the case outside the "inherit the Wind" stereotype. It is always self-defeating for local citizens or school board members to write a disclaimer. It just sets up a target.

Johnson's alternative scenario will be easy to test.

The Design of Life, a supplemental textbook that critiques the hype of textbook Darwinism, is about to be released by the same Foundation that published Pandas (the book at the origin of the Dover suit). The official rollout is Monday, November 19.

Will TDOL's placement in school or public libraries trigger lawsuits? Will students be prevented from bringing personal copies to school? To mention anything they learned from the book to anyone on school property? We shall see ...

Right now, Darwinism is the Enron of biology and it is hard to imagine its proponents wanting the books balanced now or ever. So their cause is urgent.

Incidentally, political theorist Paul Marshall (Hudson Institute) told me in a recent note that European secularism in particular is assuming the character of Turkish secularism - that is, not only dogmatic but coercive. If that spreads to North America, I would not be surprised if there is a general purge of non-materialist books and ideas of all kinds and all degrees of merit from the education system, under the Orwellian guise of "avoiding conflict" or "equality" or "human rights" or some such.

What an interesting confluence of cultural events that would be!: Materialist atheism becomes the de facto religion of a school system supported by taxation of a population that overwhelmingly rejects it. Mind you, if the people choose to put up with that, it is their own fault.

Note: I will have more to say about the textbook later. I have seen the published version.

Attacking books vs. seizing manuscripts

I rarely respond to comments, but this one, in response to the post on the seized manuscript for Design of Life may be worth making an exception for.

The group preventing open discussion of a manuscript is acting in the interests of an open society; and the group that is trying to bring this manuscript into public view is acting as an enemy of open society?

Peer review 101. Pronouncements are examined and discussed by scientists. Here's the chance that the proponents of a new "theory" have been asking for. How about welcoming it?

Yes, indeed, in an open society, published books are attacked. But the reader seems to have lost track of the fact that, in this case, the manuscript was seized from the publisher. That is a typical closed-society tactic. It also signals that Darwinism is a bankrupt ideology.

After thirty-four years in publishing, the comfort I can offer publishers is that those who engage in such tactics have no moral certainty of their own position. And indeed they should not.

(Note: If this is not the story you were looking for, see the Blog service note below or the stories listed in the sidebar. )

Blog service note: Did you come here looking for any of the following stories?

- The op-ed by Catholic Cardinal Schonborn in the New York Times? Note also the Times's story on the subject, some interesting quotes from major Darwinists to compare with the Catholic Church's view, as expressed by the Cardinal, and an example of the kind of problem with Darwinian philosophy that the Cardinal is talking about.

- the Privileged Planet film shown at the Smithsonian, go here for an extended review. Please do not raise cain about an "anti-evolution" film without seeing it. If your doctor forbids you to see the film, in case you get too excited, at least read my detailed log of the actual subjects of the film. If you were one of the people who raised cain, ask yourself why you should continue to believe the people who so misled you about the film's actual content ...

- the showing of Privileged Planet at the Smithsonian, go here and here to start, and then this one and this one will bring you up to date.

Blog policy note: This blog does not intentionally accept fully anonymous Comments, Comments with language unsuited to an intellectual discussion, URLs posted without comment, or defamatory statements. Defamatory statement: A statement that would be actionable if anyone took the author seriously. For example, someone may say “O’Leary is a crummy journalist”; that’s a matter of opinion and I don’t know who would care. But if they say, “O’Leary was convicted of grand theft auto in 1983,” well that’s just plain false, and probably actionable, if the author were taken seriously. Also, due to time constraints, the moderator rarely responds to comments, and usually only about blog service issues.

Publisher compelled to turn over manuscript of ID-friendly textbook

When analyzing the conflict between two groups of ID advocates in the Dover school board case, which involves the ID-friendly textbook, Of Pandas and People. I noted that ID theorist Bill Dembski, who was fired as an expert witness because he insisted on bringing his own lawyer, was probably trying to protect the successor to Pandas from hostile publicity about an early stage of the manuscript. Foundation for Thought and Ethics, the Pandas publisher, has written a letter to its supporters that supports my interpretation:

On its face, the suit seeks a change in school policy and the removal of the library copies of Pandas. But more important than the censorship of Pandas to the ACLU and Americans United for the Separation of Church and State, is the plan to abort the book that will succeed Pandas, The Design of Life. Now think of it: The Design of Life isn’t even published yet, and they have seized it! FTE, its Academic Editor, Dr. William Dembski, and the book’s authors have been working on The Design of Life for several years. Our plans were for a 2005 or 2006 copyright date. So, we were forced to hire an attorney of our own.

(Note: If this is not the story you were looking for, see the Blog service note below or the stories listed in the sidebar. )

In a move that I have certainly never heard of before, editor Dembski was apparently forced to turn over his manuscript to the ACLU:

The ground is shifting beneath us. In spite of a Motion for Protective Order filed for us by Jeff Mateer of Mateer & Shaffer, the Court upheld the ACLU’s subpoena of this work-in-progress. To comply with the protective order, FTE had to turn over the manuscript of this forthcoming textbook to the ACLU, which, in turn, gave it to FTE’s other adversaries, including the National Center for Science Education. The NCSE has kept a file on FTE for decades. It is this vigilante-style advocacy group out of Berkeley, CA that instigated the attempt to censor these books, and militantly opposes even the most basic freedoms for proponents of intelligent design.

They are, of course, too smart to try to censor The Design of Life outright. But having copies of the manuscript will give the ACLU and its allies a huge advantage as they work to intimidate science teachers who otherwise would consider using the book once it’s published. Yet FTE has invested much time and drained significant resources to develop the book, and could, itself, be destroyed, if its market is carpet-bombed by hostile media across the country upon its release.

Somehow, I don’t think carpet-bombing will work. I predict a showdown instead, between the ID theorists and groups that have clearly begun to act as enemies of the open society.

The ACLU and their allies have more than a dozen lawyers on this case. Thankfully, the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF) has approved a grant for $100,000 to help finance an expanded legal team on our side through The Liberty Legal Institute in Plano, Texas. (None of these funds will come to FTE). Both sides in the lawsuit predict the case will be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

I sense the frustration the publisher feels. The Supreme Court could go either way on the open society. Many judges are elitists. But a court cannot stop people from knowing that there are serious problems with Darwinism and with the religion of naturalism that it upholds. Meanwhile, a publisher naturally worries most about the fate of his own books.

If you like this blog, check out my book on the intelligent design controversy, By Design or by Chance?. You can read excerpts as well.

Blog service note: Did you come here looking for any of the following stories?

- The op-ed by Catholic Cardinal Schonborn in the New York Times? Note also the Times's story on the subject, some interesting quotes from major Darwinists to compare with the Catholic Church's view, as expressed by the Cardinal, and an example of the kind of problem with Darwinian philosophy that the Cardinal is talking about.

- the Privileged Planet film shown at the Smithsonian, go here for an extended review. Please do not raise cain about an "anti-evolution" film without seeing it. If your doctor forbids you to see the film, in case you get too excited, at least read my detailed log of the actual subjects of the film. If you were one of the people who raised cain, ask yourself why you should continue to believe the people who so misled you about the film's actual content ...

- the showing of Privileged Planet at the Smithsonian, go here and here to start, and then this one and this one will bring you up to date.

Blog policy note: This blog does not intentionally accept fully anonymous Comments, Comments with language unsuited to an intellectual discussion, URLs posted without comment, or defamatory statements. Defamatory statement: A statement that would be actionable if anyone took the author seriously. For example, someone may say “O’Leary is a crummy journalist”; that’s a matter of opinion and I don’t know who would care. But if they say, “O’Leary was convicted of grand theft auto in 1983,” well that’s just plain false, and probably actionable, if the author were taken seriously. Also, due to time constraints, the moderator rarely responds to comments, and usually only about blog service issues.