Home » Education, Evolution, Intelligent Design, Science » Judge Jones gets multiple honorary degrees, Ben Stein has his withdrawn

Judge Jones gets multiple honorary degrees, Ben Stein has his withdrawn

Judge Jones, whose distinction prior to the Dover case was running the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board, now has multiple honorary doctorates for rendering his decision, which he cribbed from the ACLU’s Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. Ben Stein, who is an acclaimed actor, author, and economist, on the other hand, has just been denied an honorary doctorate at the University of Vermont:

“This is not, to my mind, an issue about academic freedom or the openness of the campus to all points of view. Ben Stein spoke here last spring to great acclaim,” UVM President Dan Fogel said. “It’s an issue about the appropriateness of awarding an honorary degree to someone whose views in many ways ignore or affront the fundamental values of scientific inquiry and I greatly regret that I was not attuned to those issues.” (full story click here)

That’s right, for questioning Darwin and pointing out the racist implications of his theory (implications that Darwin himself drew in his DESCENT OF MAN), Ben Stein is now an affront to science.

Perhaps one beneficial consequence of the current recession/depression is that tax-payers will pay more attention to how their tax dollars are being misused by schools like UVM. But that may be too much to hope.

We’ll know that the tide has turned when Judge Jones’s Dover decision and Darwin’s inflated claims about the power of natural selection are themselves seen as an affront to science.

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

35 Responses to Judge Jones gets multiple honorary degrees, Ben Stein has his withdrawn

  1. You really can’t win against these people. What else is there to say?

  2. “Ben Stein, who is an acclaimed actor, author, and economist”

    I wouldn’t like to judge his achievments in the first two areas but I have to diagree with you on the economist line. He got more wrong last year than the majority of economists and in this market that is quite an achievement. Check the WSJ for details.

  3. We should have a “ceremony” that gives JJ an honorary village idiot “degree”.

  4. It would have also been nice had Dan Fogel actually said what it is that Stein ignores or affronts.

    I also notice that the article says that Stein connected something to the Hlocaust.

    Had he watched the movie- something that neither the NCSE nor Mike Shermer did for their review- he would have observed that OTHER people made the connection- not Stein.

    IOW this is a “shoot the mesesenger” approach.

    Truly pathetic…

  5. 5

    It may have something to do with these comments on an interview with Paul Crouch of the Trinity Broadcasting Network.

    ——————————

    Stein: When we just saw that man, I think it was Mr. Myers, talking about how great scientists were, I was thinking to myself the last time any of my relatives saw scientists telling them what to do they were telling them to go to the showers to get gassed … that was horrifying beyond words, and that’s where science — in my opinion, this is just an opinion — that’s where science leads you.

    Crouch: That’s right.

    Stein: …Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place, and science leads you to killing people.

    Crouch: Good word, good word.

    —————————–

    It’s just possible that these feelings could be interpreted as anti-science.

  6. What on earth? How do you get an honorary doctorate for rendering a decision in court? That doesn’t make any sense. Well, apparently it does when you have nothing but venom for anything contra-darwinism.

  7. @Joseph #3:

    “Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place, and science leads you to killing people.”

    – Ben Stein, Trinity Broadcasting Network, aired Apr 21, 2008.

  8. That does sound fairly anti-science. I bet he regrets saying that. It doesn’t seem consistent with some things he has said in the past. Perhaps he was feeling bitter about things like the Holocaust and the roll scientists played in it, and how they justified bad behavior with their scientistic ideas. Still, not a responsible thing to say as a spokesman for ID.

  9. Is Stein calling ID scientists murderers?

  10. Collin, he may or may not regret saying it.

    In any case, I can see little regret by anyone who participated in the throat slashing that took place against Stein and the Expelled producers for even suggesting that (S)cience had anything whatsoever to do with the mindset leading to the Holocaust.

    To the contrary, I think they are quite proud of their defense against the lying Jew.

  11. These types of Darwhiners are truly the most uncouth, unscrupulous, freedom hating, rampallian scum in the history of modern academia.

    As for Stein’s words, you really can’t blame him after the way ‘scientists’ from the majority, consensus side treated him.

    Stein merely understood the link between Darwinism and Hitler’s artificial selection, ‘final solution’, as being as clear as the link between hedonism and fornication.

    Teach people that they are mere animals, the result of mere chance and necessity with no ultimate meaning, and they will finish by acting worse than wild carnivorous beasts.

    The SS killed without a twinge of conscince because they were indoctrinated into believing Jews and blacks etc. to be mere animals and sub humans not yet evolved to the high Aryan nature! To them killing a small jewish boy in the street in forn of his mother and father was no different than killing their dog. Both were animals of less worth than the ‘supreme race’.

    Under Darwinism there is no basis for placing higher value on human life than the life of a dog or an ape – as we have seen in Spain.

    Hitler’s ‘doctors of death’ (read the book or see the movie), were convinced of the ‘goodness’ of their actions because their logical conclusion, under polyphyletic Darwinian principles, was right.

  12. Ben Stein did not affront science, he affronted evolutionary racism! And I quote, from Hitler himself, from his book Mein Kampf,

    “If nature does not wish that weaker individuals should mate with the stronger, she wishes even less that a superior race should intermingle with an inferior one; because in such cases all her efforts, throughout hundreds of thousands of years, to establish an evolutionary higher stage of being, may thus be rendered futile.”

    Talk about using current scientific theories to promote racism. One cannot read that and think that Hitler was not influenced by Darwin.

  13. 13

    Leslie,
    Judge Jones has been awarded a number of honorary degrees for his active advocacy of judicial independence in response to the death threats and calumny directed at him by god-botherers displeased with the outcome of the Dover trial.

    Michael

  14. Now wait a minute!

    Somebody’s got to say it. Scientific inquiry is wonderful, but secular science without moral oversight—which secularism cannot provide—is absolutely frightening.

    The situation is horrible right here and now. Secular academics of all stripes sitting smug in moral superiority, condescending to common sense—who’s side you think they’d take should tyranny beckon? Well, where is their outrage now when a head of state threatens another holocaust?

    Rather a stultifying political correctness is de rigueur, and the academy recognizes no dissent. It’s a sure sign that Ben Stein says it best.

    Let not the ID spokesmen cower in moral turpitude. Let the other side obfuscate and complicate and stew—let us say it as it is!

  15. Talking of Mein Kampf, Domoman wrote “One cannot read that and think that Hitler was not influenced by Darwin” and perhaps he was. Let’s have a look at some other passages in that book and think about what influences they might indicate.

    Their [the Jews'] very existence is an incarnate denial of the beauty of God’s image in His creation.

    and

    But if for reasons of indolence or cowardice this fight is not fought to a finish we may imagine what conditions will be like 500 years hence. Little of God’s image will be left in human nature, except to mock the Creator.

    and

    Everybody who has the right kind of feeling for his country is solemnly bound, each within his own denomination [ie Catholic or Protestant], to see to it that he is not constantly talking about the Will of God merely from the lips but that in actual fact he fulfils the Will of God and does not allow God’s handiwork to be debased. For it was by the Will of God that men were made of a certain bodily shape, were given their natures and their faculties. Whoever destroys His work wages war against God’s Creation and God’s Will.

    and

    The State should consecrate [matrimony] as an institution which is called upon to produce creatures made in the likeness of the Lord and not create monsters that are a mixture of man and ape.

    Of course, he might have been spouting nonsense to please his audience (after all, they’re the words of one of history’s archetypical liars). But if you’re going to claim that Mein Kampf honestly declares an evolutionary influence, you also have to acknowledge that it talks of religious ones as well.

  16. Ben should work to get a special showing of Expelled at the University of Vermont.

  17. Mein Kampf quotes are fun:

    “They even enter into political intrigues with the atheistic Jewish parties against the interests of their own Christian nation.”

    “And so I believe to-day that my conduct is in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator. In standing guard against the Jew I am defending the handiwork of the Lord.”

    “Of course, one doesn’t discuss such a question with the Jews, because they are the modern inventors of this cultural perfume. Their very existence is an incarnate denial of the beauty of God’s image in His creation.”

  18. Just thought I would share this with you. This is just how wacked out liberal Vermont is. I’m not sure if you folks in other parts of the country can appreciate the liberal nightmare that is New England (with the noble exection of the great state of New Hampshire).

    http://www.wptz.com/cnn-news/18629149/detail.html

  19. Perhaps he was feeling bitter about things like the Holocaust and the roll scientists played in it, and how they justified bad behavior with their scientistic ideas.
    ————————-
    Will you be putting scientistic in the glossary?

  20. Rude, @ 12,

    What head of state is threatening another holocaust?

  21. Domoman @16

    Amanutjob (sp) in Iran.

  22. Critter:

    Already a simple search away at Free Dictionary.

    scientism.

    H’mm . . .

    Maybe a link to the Free Dictionary should be added, for the lexically challenged?

    G

  23. That’s right, for questioning Darwin and pointing out the racist implications of his theory (implications that Darwin himself drew in his DESCENT OF MAN), Ben Stein is now an affront to science.

    I agree fully with DaveScot who, IIRC, recently stated here that it won’t help ID to play the Nazi card. E.g., look at Bishop Williamson who denies the holocaust. I don’t know what he thinks about evolution or ID. However, his brotherhood, the Society of St. Pius X, seems not to be friendly evolution. Just google “evolution site:fsspx.info”

  24. 24

    Reg[15],jamirokwhy[17],
    But surely Darwin is mentioned much more often than God in Mein Kampf?

  25. Having obtained the email address of the President of the University of Vermont from this blog: http://tinyurl.com/dhm3xd
    here is a copy of the email I sent him:
    Dear Sir:

    Professor Jun-Yuan Chen, an expert on the Cambrian Explosion at Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, famously observed: “In China we can criticize Darwin but not the government. In America you can criticize the government, but not Darwin” (The Wall Street Journal, August 16, 1999).

    The recent withdrawal of Ben Stein as speaker at UVM’s spring commencement–following a phone call from your office–highlights this very dynamic in U.S. academia. Ironically, in trying to bring the dynamic to the public’s attention in the documentary film “Expelled,” Mr. Stein has become a marked man himself. Evidently it is not only unacceptable to criticize Darwin…it has now become equally unacceptable to highlight that any such dynamic exists!

    I regret that so many fine people have now fallen on the field of this battle. I take some comfort from knowing, however, that there will eventually be so many targets that they cannot possibly all be overcome.

    [Sent with, I hope, at least as much respect as that displayed by Prof. O here on this blog...]

  26. 27

    Surely, tribune, you must agree that Ben Stein’s words about science are over the top? He insults very biologist, chemist, and physicist in the world. Why should any university that has a science department want him as a speaker? I know a few scientists and nobody has ever try to murder me (but I promise to be careful). I hope Ben has apologized or tried to correct his statement.

    tribune[25], I agree. I think the entire discussion is somewhat silly though. Is the theory of evolution false because of Hitler? Is nuclear physics wrong because of Kim Jong-Il or the mullahs in Iran? Ben Stein could present any arguments against evolution or in favor of ID, and he chose to bring in Hitler? He forgot rule number one in any discussion: Whoever is first to mention Hitler loses!

  27. 28

    Ben Stein says “science leads to killing people.” Who wants ID to be regarded as science? Anyone? Anyone? :D

  28. Surely, tribune, you must agree that Ben Stein’s words about science are over the top?

    Of course, but do you really think he meant them to be taken at face value?

    I don’t at least in the sense that it is somehow immoral to practice the scientific method and those who do are destined to be killers.

  29. Is the theory of evolution false because of Hitler?

    No, but Hitler and evolution does illustrate the problem with leaving the establishment of ethics to science.

    Little Kim and the Mullahs aren’t going to use nuclear physics to justify killing. The Mullahs will justify using nukes with some strange religious interpretation — how many times have you heard “religion leads to killing? I have quite a bit.

    Kim, I think, is basically bluffing and he will only use nukes if the thinks he can get away with it. If he did though I certainly will not blame Einstein.

  30. 31

    tribune[29,30],
    Well spoken. Now let’s wait for Kirk to continue on the other thread.

  31. Now let’s wait for Kirk to continue on the other thread.

    Will look for you there :-)

  32. Two things:

    First, William Jennings Bryan involved himself in the Scopes trial because he was afraid of the eugenics movement. Let’s not forget that. A presidential candidate traveled to backwards Tennessee the teaching of Darwinism because of his fears of what Darwinism, via eugenics, might lead to. Something to think about in this context.

    Second: what has science led to recently?

    How about the birth control pill which recent evidence suggests sweeps out fertilized eggs from the mother? If, as science indicates, human life begins at conception, then what about this huge loss of life? Who’s responsible for it? Where did it come from?

    What about “in-vitro” fertilization, stem-cell research? Fertilized eggs–human life–sacrificed upon the altar of science by the great high priests of medical research.

    So, when Stein says that science leads to the killing of people, let’s not pretend he’s simply talking about the past.

  33. PaV:

    Second: what has science led to recently?

    Well said. Apart from the eradication of smallpox, the near eradication of polio, rolling back measles, cutting guinea worm infections by 99% and producing high yielding pest-resistant strains of staple food crops, what’s science achieved recently anyway?

  34. 35

    Ben Stein could have said a lot more about Darwinism and eugenics. See here: Inbred Science and Euvolution. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

Leave a Reply