Joined: May 2002
IDists like to complain that they are being treated unfairly, that their ideas are being dismissed without being considered or discussed. that may be a fair complaint, but when these very same IDists abuse any display of open-mindedness made by members of the scientific community, they absolve their right to complain. i'd like this thread to be a place where ID critics can post examples of IDists confusing open-mindedness with support.
one example of this is when IDists use book sales as an indicator of the success of ID. considering that an individual has to first buy the book in order to read it, it doesn't necessarily mean that they will then agree with the arguments presented within. on that note, it is interesting what IDists consider to be an endorsement of their work. consider this one, which is printed on the dust jacket of no free lunch:
|I disagree strongly with the position taken by William Dembski. But I do think that he argues strongly and that those of us who do not accept his conclusions should read his book and form our own opinions and counter-arguments. He should not be ignored.|
Michael Ruse, Lucyle T. Werkmeister Professor of Philosophy, Florida State University; editor of Biology and Philosophy; author of Monad to Man and many other books on Darwinism
IDists have even tried to spin disagreement in their favor:
|"If we're generating such strong, visceral responses, we must be doing something right." william dembski|
so even if a scientist disagrees with ID, they interpret that to mean that ID is taken seriously.
i'd like to keep this thread open to more quotes and examples of how IDists have preyed upon the open-mindedness of scientists and perverted their comments to support ID.