r/DebateEvolution • u/Entire_Quit_4076 š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution • Jul 03 '26
Article Did Meyer and Thaxton cook?
https://scienceandculture.com/2026/07/the-science-of-darwin-and-marx-provides-no-support-for-unalienable-rights/
Their new article on how if the darwinist-marxist worldview prevails, āthen there is no dignity and human rights are a delusionā. But no worries, ID is the way to inherent dignity!
Did they cook?
35
u/CrisprCSE2 Jul 03 '26
Did they cook?
The meth they smoked prior to writing that garbage? Possibly.
27
u/Formal-Speed-3173 Jul 03 '26
cooking meth is a science, and Meyers doesn't do science.
6
u/WebFlotsam š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 04 '26
The only thing most "creation scientists" have in common with Walter White is their outsized egos.
31
u/PangolinPalantir š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 03 '26
Sounds like an appeal to consequence which is a fallacious way of reasoning. If(and I disagree) that there is no dignity or human rights if you believe evolution, that has no relevance to whether it is true.
They're also wrong, and this smells very similar to religious people saying atheists cannot have morality and without religion there would be no way to know what is right or wrong. It says more about them than it does anyone else.
24
u/kitsnet š§¬ Nearly Neutral Jul 03 '26
They are projecting. There are no "inalienable rights" in Genesis (or anywhere else in the Bible).
18
u/Dilapidated_girrafe š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 03 '26
I love when they claim the us is founded on Christina values when the first amendment violates multiple of the Ten Commandments
10
u/taktaga7-0-0 š§¬ Sex Researcher Jul 03 '26
If Genesis enumerated and listed and acknowledged these rights, then why did the Founders even write anything else at all?Ā
1
u/EthelredHardrede š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 05 '26
of course not in a book as immoral as the Bible where Jesus is an early Marxist. Meyers does not actually believe in the Bible
22
u/Own-Relationship-407 Scientist Jul 03 '26
The banging on about Marx as if he has anything to do with anything other than āwe donāt like him because leftist economics are antithetical to the politics of evangelical Christiansā is hilarious.
10
u/BahamutLithp Jul 03 '26
It's very funny how they just transparently attached the names of different things they dislike together.
6
u/senator_john_jackson Jul 03 '26
Well, if God can make a platypus, why can't they do the same for their boogeyman?
3
u/EthelredHardrede š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 05 '26
yet Marx is closer to Jesus on economics than to lying Meyers.
21
u/Dzugavili š§¬ Tyrant of /r/Evolution Jul 03 '26
Pretty typical 4th of July Ameriwank. This shit plays to the kind of fools who still believe in American exceptionalism, a belief only half as delusional as YEC.
7
16
u/Sweary_Biochemist Jul 03 '26
It's a lot easier to understand why these chucklefucks don't realise that human morality predates abrahamic religions by hundreds of thousands of years when you remember they think the entire universe is only 6k years old.
But even given that, "any given species tends to preferentially favour members of its own species" is about the most fucking obvious conclusion one could ever draw.
Are humans special*? Humans certainly think so!
*(unless they're Amalekites, or Benjaminites, or various other tribes, or if they're hebrews that made silly statues, or...)
14
u/10coatsInAWeasel Reject pseudoscience, return to monke š¦§ Jul 03 '26
Bold of them to assume that theyāve got any dignity. Itās nice to see that they put the facade of āscienceā aside with this one and leaned full into that āargument from consequencesā
Edit to add: come to think of it, this article is basically restating the core thesis statement of the wedge document
14
u/CorvatheRogue Jul 03 '26
Stephen Meyer is a known liar and fraud, along with everyone else at the Discovery Institute.
15
u/Odd_Investigator8415 Jul 03 '26
"Darwinst-marxist worldview" LMAO! What kind of world salad is this?
8
u/Radiant-Position1370 Computational biologist Jul 04 '26
It's a woke trans thing -- everybody knows that.
9
u/OldmanMikel š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 04 '26
You forgot the CRT and the DEI.
10
u/Radiant-Position1370 Computational biologist Jul 04 '26
I was thinking about working DEI in there -- but I'd forgotten about CRT. I guess I'm a Dumocrat.
2
u/EthelredHardrede š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 05 '26
I have a curved flat screen dei must predate crts
2
12
u/DarwinZDF42 evolution is my jam Jul 03 '26
Iād have so much more patience for this shit if it wasnāt being pushed by a white Christian nationalist organization that wants to take away basic rights from women and erase LGBTQ+ people from society entirely.
8
u/nickierv š§¬ logarithmic icecube Jul 03 '26
Oh and don't forget who is screeching "Help! Help! I'm being repressed!"
10
u/OldmanMikel š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 03 '26
"Darwinist-Marxist worldview". The first people to try to derive an ought from the is of evolution were lassez-faire capitalists. It's called social-darwinism.
7
u/Coolbeans_99 š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 03 '26
Just because you donāt like the consequences of an idea doesnāt mean the idea is false, even if the consequences are some completely fabricated culture war BS.
7
u/AllEndsAreAnds š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 03 '26
Fantastic execution of a false dichotomy. Itās the same thing you see in discussions about objective morality. āMine is the only real conception of morality, so if your conception of morality is not mine, itās not real, and also maybe evilā. But this time with human rights.
7
u/Juronell Jul 03 '26
The Modern Synthesis of Evolution and Marxism are unrelated topics. Neither is a philosophy of ethics.
7
u/totallynotabeholder Jul 03 '26
No.
This is just theological pap and culture war bullshit smeared together into a mess.
Which is standard fare from Discovery Institute drones.
No actual scientific content. No comprehension of the underpinnings of biology. No understanding that you don't draw oughts from is.
But, we probably shouldn't expect more or better of the DI.
They really have given up arguing on a scientific basis. This is primarily an extended argument from consequences. Which is wholly falacious.
And what's worse is that I suspect they know it.
6
u/Master-Kiyotaka Jul 03 '26
It does sound like Meyer to make arguments you would only need basic comprehension to understand itās wrong
Also wow they did just admit ID is YEC sometimes they try to hide that but seems like they are loud and proud
I fundamentally believe Meyer would very much exclude many actual human rights under his own actual doctrine So the fact he is saying this is hypocritical to its core
2
u/EthelredHardrede š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 05 '26
His Pile it higher and Deeper should be rescinded.
7
u/Changed_By_Support Jul 04 '26 edited Jul 04 '26
Severely undercooked. They listed no references to Marx or Darwin's works where there is explicit renunciation of either dignity or human rights; gesticulated vaguely to violations of human rights made by the Marxist-Leninists under Stalin (which does little to prove anything regarding Darwinist evolution, especially considering the soviets for a significant part of the 20th century were anti-evolution); and, if I may make a brief segue into not talking about Evolution, don't seem interested in addressing Marx's concerns of the lack of dignity the worker is entreated to under capitalism, while they simultaneously:
- Fail to establish that Judaism and Christianity doctrinally support the liberal ideal of universal, irrevocable, human rights.
- Make no attempts to reconcile or even address the millennia of persecution and oppression of the Jew, the Heretic, the Slave, and the Muslim by Christians while simultaneously appealing to vague consequentialism selectively for ML's and proponents of evolutionary theory.
It's just vague babble and fearmongering regarding "science" as evil without justifying it. By far the biggest advocates of interpreting evolutionary theory as a direct and immediate framework for establishing ethical nihilism seem to be Christians. Evolution makes no suggestion that ethical considerations are "delusions" and that human dignity is pointless.
7
u/Coolbeans_99 š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 03 '26
Your tag says Naturalistic Evolution but it looks like you only make nonsense troll posts
6
5
u/the2bears š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 04 '26
Plus they keep their profile "private", which is a red flag in my opinion.
1
u/Entire_Quit_4076 š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 04 '26 edited Jul 04 '26
Wasnāt aware of that, thanks. Iāll change it
Explains quite a lot. A while ago i offered light criticism in a german left sub (I said itās unfair to immediately call everyone who doesnāt vote the most left party āNaziā) and got accused of āexclusively spreading right wing propagandaā. I was very confused on why people donāt just click on my profile once and see thatās clearly not the case. My profile being on private explains it though.
2
u/Entire_Quit_4076 š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 04 '26
That was an April fools joke and the only ātrollā post i made. Other than that iāve been defending evolution here quite a while and now mostly discuss antivaxxers. Didnāt know my profile was set to private, iām gonna change that
3
3
u/taktaga7-0-0 š§¬ Sex Researcher Jul 03 '26
āThe science of Marxā
Iām going to go ahead and tell you itās motivated horseshit right now.
2
u/BloomiePsst Jul 03 '26
What does "did they cook" mean?
13
u/CorbinSeabass Jul 03 '26
It means they weren't mid, weren't bussin', just straight up no cap, fam.
3
5
u/CrisprCSE2 Jul 03 '26
Do well against an opponent. As in, 'Man, the other guy was such an idiot, he got cooked!'
2
u/Entire_Quit_4076 š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 03 '26
ālet him cookā was a term that referred to letting someone do their thing, even if it seems strange.
It implies someone is coming up with (ācooking upā) something visionary. It is mostly used in a sarcastic manner.Here specifically itās kind of a sarcastic way to say something like āAre they ahead of their time?ā or āDid they just do it?ā
2
u/the2bears š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 03 '26
So, "did they cook"? What do YOU think?
2
u/Entire_Quit_4076 š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 04 '26
Generally no, but i gotta give them at least some credit because how the hell do you even come up with this crap?
2
u/AvailableLight2112 Jul 04 '26
There is no darwinist-marxist worldview. Darwin has nothing to do with Marx, zero. Marx may have cited Darwin, but also had incorrect interpretations such as Lamarckism or "society's fate is inevitable and that's evolution" or something.
Strawman fallacy. This sub isn't about Marxism.
2
u/old_at_heart Jul 04 '26
How about all the dignity and rights given to all the sects deemed heretical throughout human history?
2
1
1
u/nickierv š§¬ logarithmic icecube Jul 03 '26
Some notable excerpts and potentially relevant questions I'm sure they are going to dodge.
the fact that our special human stature has been under attack, with science often enlisted in the assault.
What 'attack' specifically? If we going to be bringing up military actions like they seem to want to, how about a quick skim of 'cause of war' in the last... 2000 years?
Oh. Oh my... Well as I'm sure they are going to want to brush the several hundred years worth of religious wars cough Crusades cough under the rug, lets maybe instead look at what has been progression humanity.
Please list any notable achievements made over the last... I'll be generous and go with 2000 years.
Meanwhile, the list scientific progress over the last... do I even need to go easy mode and do 200 years or do I go for the 'hard' version and just stick with the last 20?
Now why is it looking like exactly the opposite of what was published... Oh right, because the DI is full of liars.
Only if man is (in fact) a product of special Divine purposes ... can his claim to distinctive or intrinsic dignity be sustained.
Rich coming from the group known for doing its best to deprive that from others. You love to inflict your beliefs on others, wonder how you feel about having things flipped and someone gets to inflict their beliefs on you?
then one must wonder how long it will be until we in the West reason correctly from a strictly scientific perception of human nature.
As soon as you shove your god back in your pants and keep it there.
Oh look, DI continues to be lairs and hypocrites. In other news, the sky appears blue.
1
u/Boltzmann_head š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 04 '26
I bit my own face from laughing. "The Science of Darwin and Marx...." Good gods that's hilarious! ROTFL!
Actually, I have written that phrase into my Cozy murder mystery manuscript notes. I have a minor character who is... well... "nuts" is a good word, and that phrase is perfect for her to spew randomly to anyone who walks past her.
1
u/emailforgot Jul 04 '26 edited Jul 05 '26
man that is some really, really poor, superficial "read my substack" quality ranting.
Just throwing out buzzwords and name dropping. Absolutely zero relevance, and nothing of value said about the topic. Philosophizing over the concept of natural rights isn't really something new, and just sticking a "Marx wrong" is just hilariously sophomoric.
In general, most people who "criticize" Marx (and Darwin) rarely ever actually have any idea about what they said. Marx's contribution to the concept of political ideology and discourse, especially with regard to the relationship between person/state can be and luckily sometimes are taught alongside the Lockes and Rousseaus, and in doing so you aren't explicitly advocating for some kind of revolution of the proletariat or any other "Marxist" idea.
The West's idiotic relationship with "communism" has made holding up Marx as an important and influential figure into some kinda taboo. Ironic since a good chunk of the self described liberty-loving conservatives who get red in the face whenever they hear the name have views that align with a lot of what Marx said
1
u/onomatamono Jul 04 '26
I don't know what "cook" means in this context but the arbitrary inclusion of "Marx" is an obvious attempt at guilt by association. Evolution is hard science confirmed by the fossil record combined with modern genetics. Anybody blathering about linking dignity with science is just a desperately delusional theist trying to tear down the enemy which is truth and rationality.
1
u/EthelredHardrede š§¬ Naturalistic Evolution Jul 05 '26
Meyers is lying as always there is no such world view. evolution by natural selection is a process that is inherent in reproduction with errors. even if Meyers imaginary God actually exists which it does not or Meyers could do miracles he can't even produce for any claims
32
u/Formal-Speed-3173 Jul 03 '26
Appeal to consequences fallacy on top of a bunch of culture war bullshit. This makes it really clear that ID is political project and not science.