Home » Darwinism, Evolution, Intelligent Design » Who’s in it for the money?

Who’s in it for the money?

Critics of the ID movement often complain that we’re fabulously well funded by right-wing extremists and in it for our own aggrandizement. Fortunately, money leaves a trail. When one follows it, Darwinists seem to be doing much better financially than ID theorists (perhaps an indication that they are serving Mammon more faithfully). Let’s consider a few better off Darwinists:

(1) Saint Charles himself. By present standards, Darwin would probably have been worth about US$20 million. He was a gentleman scholar who lived very comfortably.

(2) Francisco Ayala. A recent New York Times article indicated that Ayala and his wife Hana own 6,000 acres of vineyards in California. Even with the real estate market as it is, the Ayalas seem to be doing quite nicely. Not bad for an ex-priest who presumably once made a vow of poverty.

(3) Richard Dawkins. He’s sold over a million copies of THE GOD DELUSION, and apparently is looking at an almost $3 million advance for his next book.

(4) Ken Miller, whose textbooks carefully misrepresent Darwin’s theory to make it appear stronger than it actually is, has, I understand, sold hundreds of thousands of copies, and thus has yielded him some extra spending money to the tune of 7 figures over and above his Ivy League salary.

(4) E. O. Wilson, Dan Dennett, etc., who have gotten advances around a half million or more for their books.

And let’s not forget the fabulously wealthy resources these Darwinists have to support their racket. There’s the whole private sector, which includes Microsoft magnates like Paul Allen, who underwrote the 2001 PBS series on evolution, and like Charles Simonyi, who endowed Richard Dawkins’s chair at Oxford. And then there’s all the public money, ripped off from tax-payers, to pay Darwinists so that they can properly indoctrinate our children.

Darwinism has always been an upper-class movement. ID, by contrast, is strictly middle-class. That’s our base and that’s where we find our support.

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

20 Responses to Who’s in it for the money?

  1. Rothschilds is nodding from within the grave.

  2. An elitist idea created by an elitist and supported by elitists for the elitists.

    Britain’s upper class never had it so good.

  3. Iowa State University President Gregory Geoffroy makes $307,920 a year. He’s not paid to promote Darwinism, but at the very least, he pulled a Pontius Pilate when the Darwinists and Atheist Activists came and demanded the head of Guillermo Gonzalez. He apparently knew which side his bread was buttered on, and he did the thing that would protect his paycheck.

  4. And Ann Coulter made how much off of “Godless” not to mention all the other books she wrote? I could compile a pretty long list of millionaires who reject evolution and made lots of money off of their books.

    So what?

    Talk about a red herring…

  5. Not surprising, really. Religion tends to put restrictions on how much money one makes and how one makes money in the first place. So wealthy people have plenty of motivation to adopt an ideology that undermines religon.

  6. Ann Coulter is a political pundit, not an ID theorist. She writes books, not to support ID, but rather to annoy liberals.

    I’d be interested to see Kil’s list of millionaires.

  7. Darwin hardly “lived very comfortably”, most of his adult life was affected by illness, he was often bedridden for months, he wrote: “Constant attacks….makes life an intolerable bother and stops all work”

    I am not surprised that evolutionary scientists have sufficent investments, seeing as their work has you know… scientific APPLICATIONS. What practical applications do you see emerging from young earth creation science?

  8. 8

    [Comment deleted]

    The question was about scientists. The deleted list was various televangelists.

    psychodelict is no longer with us ~ud admin

  9. #7

    I am not surprised that evolutionary scientists have sufficent investments, seeing as their work has you know… scientific APPLICATIONS. What practical applications do you see emerging from young earth creation science?

    Mister (I suppose), what are you speaking about?
    The major TDE claims (macroevolution under NS+RS) didn’t (and doesn’t for that matter) provide any useful scientific APPLICATION.
    Or perhaps do you think that RD speculations have been of whichever aid in the advancement of science?
    On the other side I will answer with only one example: retroengineering of bacterial flagellum by Nanojet scientists in order to DESIGN a more and more improvede nano rotor with almost 100% efficiency.

  10. An awful lot of the middle classes must be buying their books…

  11. Darwin hardly “lived very comfortably”, most of his adult life was affected by illness, he was often bedridden for months,..

    This thread is about money. “Live comfortably” in this context, means “possess wealth”. If Charles Darwin’s home was filled with straightback chairs, benches, and lumpy mattresses, we could still truthfully claim that he “lived comfortably”.

  12. And Ann Coulter made how much off of

    “Godless” not to mention all the other books she wrote? I could compile a pretty long list of millionaires who reject evolution and made lots of money off of their books.

    So what?

    Talk about a red herring…

    I think you missed the point. The “in-it-for-the-money” charge is commonly leveled at ID theorists, as if Darwinists have taken some kind of vow of poverty. The list of prospering Darwin activists shows that such charges are, as you say, a “red herrings”.

  13. As Stephen Colbert would say, “The market has spoken.”

    It makes me wonder why God refuses to reward his servants here on Earth. I wouldn’t presume to guess His wisdom, but it sure seems like he could get His word out better if he helped his servants out a bit financially, and if he’d stopped the devil from putting evidence everywhere that the earth was really old.

  14. —–”I am not surprised that evolutionary scientists have sufficent investments, seeing as their work has you know… scientific APPLICATIONS. What practical applications do you see emerging from young earth creation science?”

    Darwin’s materialistic theory of evolution, which is not the only theory of evolution, has not produced one positive benefit for mankind in 150 years. Biology doesn’t need it, medicine doesn’t use it, and the culture would be better off without it.

    Even if intelligent design (creation science is not intelligent design [a presupposition is not an inference]) did nothing more than restore our cultures mental and intellectual health, it would be worth it. It would help the average person reacquaint himself with foundational truths, such as the existence of mind, human conscience, and the inherent dignity of the human person.

    Beyond that ID has potential to reverse engineer many biological and chemical puzzles. I will take a 15 year old promise over a 150 year old failure any day.

  15. Say what you will about Iowa State University President Gregory Geoffroy, but when he was Dean of the College of Science at Penn State he would not promote anyone that did not bring in enough money. Phil Skell, a member of Geoffroy’s home chemistry department, will back that up. These days, college administrators will only tenure and promote those faculty that bring in the big bucks, not $22,000. They want million dollar grants. A typical hire in the sciences will be offered $300,000 to $500,000 in startup funds and the university expects to be paid back in full in overhead cost returns from grants. President Geoffroy behaved as I expected that he would, no large grants, no tenure. Universities want funding from NSF and NIH grants. It is OK to fund your research from small grants, but you better have a lot of them. It is that simple.

  16. (3) Richard Dawkins. He’s sold over a million copies of THE GOD DELUSION, and apparently is looking at an almost $3 million advance for his next book. … (4) Ken Miller, … sold hundreds of thousands of copies etc

    Oh dear, is that a whiff of sour grapes coming from Dr Dembski’s direction? ID advocates have written books – and even sold them for money – too.

  17. Meanwhile, Rockefeller donates a record $100 million gift to ID-friendly Harvard University.

    I’m sure the Office of International Programs will have well-trained and evolution-conscient individuals ready for influential positions in academia, media and/or government who will stand ready to fight for our individual (and academic) freedoms as the US slowly phases into the NWO. Just look at what a fine job such elite (and Hardvard-connected) papers like the NYT does in covering ID-related news or reports about the suppression of professors and scientists who are of a different opinion than that of the Establishment.

    Now, all Rock has to do is tell his oil companies to reduce the price of gas, which is causing such a mess in the other industries.

  18. @Barb (#6)

    Ann Coulter is a political pundit, not an ID theorist. She writes books, not to support ID, but rather to annoy liberals.

    Yet her sales figures are worth cheering about on the Intelligent Design weblog and “Close to half the book ['Godless'] is devoted to science and evolution”, a topic on which Dr Dembski had input.

  19. 19

    Charles Darwin would be worth well more than 20 million. If his theory hit today he’d be bigger than Oprah Winfrey and look how much she is worth! In fact, I bet CD would get his own nationally televised talk show. It might be a kind of hybrid between Jerry Springer and a dating game show. It could be called Survival of The Fittest.

    The ratings would be astronomical. Then CD could run for president on the Democrat plat form.

  20. 20

    I would like to play Devil’s advocate here bill. Behe’s book Darwin’s Black Box had to have sold a ton. Why don’t you list those numbers? Is it because he out sold you? ;)

Leave a Reply