I can’t pretend to understand the ridiculous hagiography of the ol’ Brit toff Darwin,

Speaking of ridiculous hagiographies of Darwin, perhaps the most ridiculous (and therefore the best) is an early one by Haeckel disciple V. Robinson:

Darwin, Saint of Science

I already linked to that page, remember? It doesn’t help your case.
… Read for comprehension

The page says “American Eugenics Society” and lists the presidents from 1922 until today. But you say the society ceased to exist in 1972.

It has nothing to do with eugenics anymore… you go ahead and comb through all the various articles published in its journal over the years, and get back to us…

Who is “us”? The papers are much like the papers published by AES members before 1972. What do you think should be found there? Rants about the Jews?

Ah, so, the AES was actually the NSDAP? Or were you just going for guilt-by-association? Yeah, it used to be a pro-eugenics society (so did the USA-at-large, for that matter). And? Germany used to be the Third Reich. And half of it used to be East Germany. None of those things are true anymore, though, now are they?

I asked a simple question: “If the Nazi party renamed itself, would you sign up?” Now, any normal person would just say no, but for some reason you embarked on this fine whitewash of the AES. And, in the process slandering the majority of americans back then. Yeah, the majority of americans were eugenists, according to you. I guess that’s why Osborn told the rest of the AES members to stop using the ‘e’ word, because the public (the majority of americans) couldn’t stand it.

And? Germany used to be the Third Reich. And half of it used to be East Germany. None of those things are true anymore, though, now are they?

Keep digging yourself deeper. Your performance is not uninstructive, though. We (people of sense) are supposed to believe that the American Eugenics Society de-nazified itself somehow and suddenly became a respectable organization. What did they do? Kick out all the eugenists? That would mean they kicked out all their members. Did they apologize for foisting eugenics on the public? Did they apologize for all the white-supremicist neo-nazis in their society? Did they recognize their misdeeds and fraudulent science? Well, no. But they are good guys now, we’re supposed to take your word for it.

In a way it’s understandable why evolutionists have to doggedly defend and whitewash this organisation, when you consider how many prominent evolutionists are on the membership list. But really, do you have to slander the “majority of americans” in the process and drag them down to the level of the eugenists?

Good of you to explain that the SSSE is just another name for the American Eugenics Society.

Vlad, or, er, Ethan:

a. I already linked to that page, remember? It doesn’t help your case. But, um, alright: you’re welcome? Oh, and it’s SSSB. Not ‘E’.

b. Read for comprehension. It has nothing to do with eugenics anymore. Follow that other link I kindly provided to the SSSB’s website. It’s really rather boring. Tell you what though: you go ahead and comb through all the various articles published in its journal over the years, and get back to us if you discover evidence of a lurking eugenic conspiracy. Mere mentions of the word don’t count, mind you. We’ll need some actual evidence of eugenics advocacy, preferably within the last decade or so. OK?

If the Nazi party renamed itself, would you sign up?

Ah, so, the AES was actually the NSDAP? Or were you just going for guilt-by-association? Yeah, it used to be a pro-eugenics society (so did the USA-at-large, for that matter). And? Germany used to be the Third Reich. And half of it used to be East Germany. None of those things are true anymore, though, now are they?

Also, you’ve failed to prove Scott is a member. You just have some website that says she is based on some nebulous ‘Osborne list’. Where is this list? Oooh, oooh, lemme guess: it’s like all secret and conspiratorial and stuff? Do you think maybe they were involved in 9/11 too? I smell a Pulitzer!

Nice try there, Vlad. The “American Eugenics Society” no longer exists. In 1972 it was re-named to the Society for the Study of Social Biology,

Good of you to explain that the SSSE is just another name for the American Eugenics Society.

dbthomas wrote:

The name change should sufficiently clue you into the fact that promoting (or even discussing eugenics) is no longer its purpose.

If the Nazi party renamed itself, would you sign up?

Seversky said:

T H Huxley is credited with coining the word ‘agnostic’ because he wanted a label for beliefs which were neither theistic nor atheist.

The word “atheist” in those days (today too, actually) carried with it heavy negative connotations: much like the terms ‘public defacator’ or ‘eater of babies’ and such do. So atheists are forever inventing sexier labels for themselves.

T.H. Huxley was of course a raving atheist.

As most here know, T H Huxley is credited with coining the word ‘agnostic’ because he wanted a label for beliefs which were neither theistic nor atheist.

We should also note that it is one version of Christian belief that holds that the natural world has been provided by God for us to exploit as we choose. This allows for animals to be treated as no better than rocks or plants since they are held to have no souls.

As for “Darwin’s bulldog” we should remember that, according to the Bible, one man was so in thrall to his God that he was prepared to sacrifice his child as proof of his devotion to this “all-loving” God and that he was led to believe that this God would look upon him with favor for so doing.

Scott’s and Dawkin’s new epithets are simply meant to be humorous references to Huxley’s epithet, no more. That is really all that is meant, O’Leary’s somewhat insulting insinuations notwithstanding.

BTW, I have noticed that O’Leary does a lot of insinuating and suggesting. I have not yet seen her make many actual claims and arguments, though. Why is that?

So, the question is, whether the leopard changes its spots, or simply finds a new camouflage.

Is “the leopard” supposed to be anyone or any group in particular? Or is this just idle speculation?