Attention Darwin’s male fishwives: We’re on to you. And it’s not working.
|July 4, 2012||Posted by O'Leary under Culture, Darwinism, Intelligent Design|
Sure enough, the only attested example of Darwinian evolution that would really impress the public is just what kairosfocus talks about here: The evolution of the male fishwife.
See, traditionally, guys didn’t shriek abuse the way they do at Darwinist blogs today. And they certainly didn’t publish sexual filth about women they don’t even know. People would think there was something wrong with a guy like that.
Hello, hello, people still do think something must be wrong with a guy like that.
It may be part of the reason that, despite heavy public funding and strong elite support, Darwinism is still stuck at stupid in the polls, and likely to remain so.
There’s some stuff Darwinists just can’t fool people about. They can’t be their own worst advertisement, make a huge public noise, and expect no one to notice or draw any conclusions.
Traditionally, (female) fishwives were allowed to shriek abuse because they had no social power. In a civilized society, moral restraint accompanies social power.
Anyone who wishes to know where unrestrained antics get you on the Internet (assuming the person is important enough that anyone cares) could usefully consult a former American Congressman here. And if the person is not important enough that anyone cares, why do they bother?
Even the (surprising!) evolution of the male fishwife is not going to stop rational assessment of the actual power of Darwinian evolution to explain events in the history of life on Earth. After all, it’s not clear that that variant form has any future.
To all our American readers, happy July 4 from the News desk, and salut!:
Follow UD News at Twitter!