Home » Culture, Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design, Science » Darwin’s “bright idea” — A new website and society for promoting Darwinism?

Darwin’s “bright idea” — A new website and society for promoting Darwinism?

You may recall that summer of 2003 Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett proposed a new “happy” designation for themselves as atheists — a term that does for atheism what “gay” does for homosexuality (the comparison is theirs!). They decided on the word “bright.” For Dawkins’s and Dennett’s opeds, where they originally made this proposal, go here: www.edge.org/3rd_culture/bright/bright_index.html.

A band of D&D devotees ran with their idea of recasting atheism’s image to form www.the-brights.net. Nonetheless, some D&D supporters thought this was a bit much (see, for instance, Chris Mooney’s piece at CSICOP: www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/brights). All in all, I would say Dawkins’s and Dennett’s proposal of “the brights” never really took off — until now.

It appears there is a quasi-secret society inspired by Darwin for promoting his theory: The Biological Institute for Theoretical Evolution Studies (www.thebrites.org). According to the email I just received below (I’m not making this up), this society has now decided to come out of the closet:

From: Finch, Galapagos
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2006 8:54 AM
To: Dembski, William A.
Subject: www.TheBRITES.org

Dr. Dembski,

The BRITES is your worst nightmare and the gloves are off.

After a unanimous vote of The BRITES Board of Directors, we have recently made our internal web site available for the public viewing at www.TheBrites.org .

The vote was due in large part to the ID friendly leanings we are starting to see at the Panda’s Thumb.

Dr. G. Finch, Ph.D., DDS
Executive Vice President for Education
The BRITES
[email protected]
www.TheBrites.org

In perusing the site, I was especially struck with their feature on “Darwin Youth” and “Darwin Scouts”:

Darwin Kids

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

26 Responses to Darwin’s “bright idea” — A new website and society for promoting Darwinism?

  1. I enrolled my son in one of the Darwin camps.
    He complained that every time he tried to play one of their official games they kept changing the rules in the middle.
    “Slow and steady … no speed up …. gradually, gradually…and explode! …no wait, stasis! Stasis!!!!”
    He broke into tears when he was trying to climb the “Darwinian Tree” and fell out because there were no branches supporting the twigs.

  2. I wouldn’t worry. I’m pretty sure the designation “brights” is a reference to the fact that the electricity generated from their brains would be better put to work lighting a small room.

  3. After having a look around the site, this has to be a parody. Nobody could be this stupid.

  4. Does that kid’s uniform come with a red and black armband?

  5. LOL! Great parody site! Everyone on both sides of this debate needs to lighten up and laugh at themselves a little. Whoever did it certainly put in a lot of work – they probably doubled the sum technical output from the ID camp in the last ten years ;)

  6. See: http://www.livescience.com/hum....._dogs.html

    I think that the BRIGHTs need to have a hotdog party. It seems that hotdogs cause mutation, and so are likely to make the BRIGHTs even BRIGHTER!

  7. Another great parody site: http://www.re-discovery.org/ I’m sure it’s been posted before, but it belongs along with this post.

  8. My stomach muscles are still suffering from the painful effects of excessive laughter.

  9. 9

    It is hard to believe isn’t it?

    I love it so!

    “A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
    John A. Davison

  10. For what it is worth, I regarded the “brights” phenomenon as a classic Bad Idea that indicated an approaching crisis in Darwinism.

    The people who started it do not seem to have considered that you do NOT score points with your (in your view) unwashed neighbours by claiming to be smarter than they are.

    So the brights do not seem to have made up their minds whether they want to reach out or retreat into the self-satisfaction of superiority.

    No wonder they invite parody. They should welcome it. People who descend from their private sanctuaries to educate their alleged inferiors as to the nature of reality have invited much worse.

  11. Have the Brites risen from the ashes of SARS?

  12. I can’t resist to reference a bit of the ancient scripture that I think applies soo very interestingly to these self proclaimed enlightened one’s – calling themselves the “brights”. Dawkins and Dennett might curl up inside to know they were labeled before they were born….

    Romans 1:22-23
    “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.”

    It has a prophetic sense to it…doesn’t it? :)

  13. Homonosepoint Man: In windy places in the world, such as Chicago, people will evolve into more aerodynamically efficient body shapes. Doing so will reduce expended energy and make walking easier on windy days.
    http://cedros.globat.com/~theb.....ar/005.htm

    lol

  14. SICK! To paraphrase Dr Robert Morey ~ Humanists have pulled off one of the greatest con jobs in the history of man ~ (he was referring to how what some call science today is actually just humanism masquerading as science).
    Now, read this song they sing at the Darwin Camp. How cna anyone say this isn’t a religion:

    “Do We Darwin, Yes!
    from the Darwin Scouts Campfire Song Book, (The BRITES Publishing, 2001.) Sung to the tune of the old German folksong, Günter und Entfaltete Evolutionisten.

    Come gather round you Darwin Scouts
    And sing a song to drown your doubts
    Embrace the cause of our evolution
    And join the growing revolution
    –Do We Darwin, Yes .
    Scientists more smart than me
    All say that overwhelmingly
    All the evidence is there
    For evolution everywhere.
    –Do We Darwin, Yes .
    There’s no intellectual escape
    My great great grandpa is an ape.
    I know that I am truly great
    Because I’ve been evolved that way.
    –Do We Darwin, Yes .
    Maybe there is a loving God
    Or maybe it’s all a façade.
    But Darwin taught, and I’ve resolved
    We weren’t created. We evolved.
    –Do We Darwin, Yes .
    There is no need for God in me.
    I just believe the things I see.
    Except I unconditionally
    Accept the evolution tree.
    –Do We Darwin, Yes .
    When I die, there’ll be no hurt.
    I’ll just rot and turn to dirt.
    My death means naught, no cares, no fuss.
    Just everlasting nothingness.
    –Do We Darwin, Yes .
    I know I am not the only
    Scout who’s feeling sad and lonely
    I have the emptiness resolved
    That’s just the way that I evolved.
    –Do We Darwin, Yes .
    So when I’m down, I sing with pride
    To drown the emptiness inside.
    So sing with me, Let it all out
    And celebrate the Darwin Scouts.
    –Do We Darwin, Yes .
    –Do We Darwin, Yes .”

    Question is … Do they what? ..ignore the evidence of intelligent design???

  15. I may have over-reacted posting the bit about the Darwin Camp (even though it was still a sick song). I just didn’t take time enough initially to see that this website was absolutely ridiculous from the beginning. :p It must be a joke obviously.

  16. Here is an article, written by the founder of the Brights, which isn’t a parody but should be:

    Shedding Light on ‘Brights’

    They come from a diverse background. They aren’t just a bunch of atheists — they have agnostics, too!

    A common misconception is that brights are atheists. This misconception was illustrated in “A timeless philosophy: Atheism through the ages,” a timeline created for stories about atheism in the December 2005 Science & Theology News. The copy describes the neologism “bright” as an alternative term for “atheist.” An accompanying “Primer on atheism” mentions rightly that some atheists wish to be known as brights, but fails to mention that so do many members of the other groups listed — such as skeptics and agnostics.

    Also, they now have The New N-Word:

    One civic-identity term in the vernacular is “nonbeliever.” We personally decry the propensity of society and the media to press upon brights that n-word.

    Apparently, the term “The Brights” means that theists must also take idiotic-sounding names upon ourselves. Please, spare us!

    If brights are to be seen as having any theme in common, it is this: They hold their naturalistic worldviews to be as personally satisfying and well-suited on all counts as “supers” — individuals whose worldviews incorporate supernatural elements — hold theirs.

    Why do these people even need parody?

  17. Not to be too inflamatory, but does the above picture not smack somewhat of the ‘Hilter Youth’ movement??(the boy actually looks like a young Richard Dawkins too)

  18. Gloves off????? Please somebody help them put the gloves back on before they end up punching themselves in the face. (if some of those visage pictures on the site are anything to go by)

  19. lucID said: “Not to be too inflamatory, but does the above picture not smack somewhat of the ‘Hilter Youth’ movement??”

    Of course it does, and it’s probably an allusion to how Darwinism often gets blamed for Nazism.

  20. Hey, I kinda like the idea of being a “super”. It is SUCH a positive sounding term! : “I’m super”, no, wait… “I’m A super!:

  21. Hey, imasuper.org is available. We could start our own club. We could get our own kids, and make our own song. Oh boy!

  22. How about a super-duper?

  23. tribune7: “duper” would invite the joke that we are “duped” by our belief in the supernatural…lets not walk into that one!

  24. Parody is becoming more and more difficult to distinguish from reality on all sides of the evolution/design dialogue. Many arguments from Darwinists who believe chance is sufficient to explain all the wonders of the universe border on parody. Conversely, this site appears to have its own individuals pretending to be IDists but are really just parodying the ID position. Obviously, the commentor “Joseph” isn’t serious, but trained scientists like Inlay and Bottarro argue with him anyway.

  25. That is weird. Can those people possibly be serious?

Leave a Reply