Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Answers To Accusations

A. I don't know how many times I have to say it, I AM NOT A WRITER!  I make no pretenses of being a writer, I have no intention of making my writing smooth and elegant, I'm not all that convinced that smooth, elegant writing doesn't often run off the mind like water off a duck's back.   As a fine Canadian actor once said of TV acting,  blog writing is "quick and dirty".  

B.  Oh, no.  You don't get to insist that William L. Pierce was not a scientist.  No, no, no.  And that's not by my say so, that's by the say so of the community of scientists.  He was granted a B.S. in Physics from Rice University, he was granted a PhD at The University of Colorado at Boulder, he taught physics at Oregon State University and left there to become a research scientist at Pratt and Whitney.   He obviously understood the methods and means of scientific thinking, there is no unmaking that fact.   His scientific acculturation is evident throughout his hate writings, his atheist, materialist "religion" his understanding of Natural Selection and scientific racism.   He is hardly the only scientist - so identified by his fellow scientists in many venues - who were also pathological and even extremely violent racists and Nazis.  Scientific thought without any restraint by morality will produce the worst of instrumental thinking, it will kill many people if it isn't stopped from doing so. 

C.  There is no getting past the fact that much of what Pierce and his disciples say about religion, about the nature of the universe is entirely consonant with main-line and popular atheism as can be read on blogs and webloids and comment threads in the thousands.  Especially in its scientistic-materialist orientation.   

That so many atheists share so much thinking with one of the most pathological and dangerously hateful minds of the past century is no big surprise.  Look how many of them shared such ideas with various Marxists, fascists and Nazis of the past century.  It is still considered to have been a mark of respect among many even in our alleged intellectual class to have been a Stalinist, even today when the estimates of those he had murdered approach if not exceed the number of those murdered by the Nazis.  

D. There is something very seriously wrong with an idea, Natural Selection, which has had the history it has.  First and most importantly, as it has been applied so murderously, so unjustly and with such clear intentions of racial extermination in Germany, in English speaking countries and in other countries, notably those bastions of supposed progressiveness, the Scandinavian countries.  Second, needing such constant patching and redefinition to even stand up.  While eugenics is remarkably stable in its assumptions derived from the foundations of Natural Selection in The Origin of Species and other books, the theory, itself has required constant modification and is held far more as a required ideological creed than anything which is actually useful except as a pretense that more is known and understood about evolution than is actually known. Third, as a weapon of atheist invective against religion, the thing which I am convinced is the reason it and its associated mythology is maintained. 

There is something seriously wrong with the kind of liberalism in which such a history and such facts are required to be covered up.  Such liberalism is not real liberalism.  

No comments:

Post a Comment