Hi all,
Another way in which anti-evolutionists abuse their quote mining tactic, is
to quote from scientists who either hold a minority view (often a tiny
minority), or sometimes from a scientist whose views are down right nutty,
and present them as if the views they represent are of equal weight to the
consensus view held by the vast majority of scientists. Often these fringe
scientists do not even have directly relevant backgrounds to the subject
they are being quoted on. Moreover the actual views of these fringe
scientists often clash not only with mainstream science but also with those
of the anti-evolutionists who are quoting them as authorities.
Fredrick Hoyle is a perfect example of this. Hoyle, who by all accounts is
(or was) a brilliant astronomer, wandered out of his field to write several
books expressing skepticism about various parts of evolutionary theory and
promoting his own unique ideas on how the history of life on earth should be
explained, and it is these works that anti-evolutionists mine for quotes to
support their arguments.
However what anti-evolutionists do not explain to their audiences is why A)
this astronomers views should carry any particular weight in a discussion
about biology and/or paleontology, or B) exactly what Hoyle's alternative
explanation for the history of life is.
Regarding A), the anti-evolutionists penchant for quoting him (and others
like him) is really little more an attempt at argument from authority. The
idea being that these are respected scientists with PhD's so what they say
on any area of science must be important. Quotations of Hoyle given by
anti-evolutionists are often prefaced by referring to him as "respected
scientist", or "famous astronomer", in order to further build up his
supposed authority in the eyes of their audience.
The fact that Hoyle is an astronomer certainly does not disqualify him from
having an opinion on other areas of science, nor does it disqualify him from
possibly making valuable contributions to them. There have been many
scientists (and even non-scientists) who have done so in the past. On the
other hand the fact that he has a PhD and is noted in astronomy does not
make him any better qualified to do so than any other
non-biologist/paleontologist to comment on these fields. Unless they can
show that Hoyle has distinguished himself by demonstrating his mastery of
these fields (despite his lack of formal background in them) and has been
acknowledged by scientists in those fields as having done so (and I submit
that he has not), then anti-evolutionists may just as well quote their own
views on evolution as those of Hoyle.
Regarding B), the other thing most anti-evolutionists do not usually talk
about is what Hoyle alternative views are. I submit that the reason behind
this omission is that they themselves consider them to be at the very least
unacceptable, and know that if they told their audiences about Hoyle's ideas
then all their building up of Hoyle as an authority would come crashing
down. Anti-evolutionists know that their audience, usually made up of
mostly those who wish to have their pre-existing skepticism about evolution
confirmed, will find comfort in having a "respected scientist" quoted as
agreeing with their views. However they also know that if they tell their
audience that this "respected scientist" also believes that - insects might
come from outer space, and that they may be as intelligent as humans but are
hiding this fact from us, and that the changes in life of earth are the
result of a (natural) alien intelligence which has been raining mutation
causing viruses down on the earth throughout geologic time - that their
audience might not find the company to be quite so good.
Case in point, I was personally present when an acquaintance of mine asked
Duane Gish about Hoyle's alternative views immediately after Gish had used
this tactic in a talk he gave to students at Azusa Pacific University
(2-11-99). Gish's response to us was something to the effect that Hoyle's
ideas were "silly". But in front of the students he was a "Sir Fred Hoyle
the famous British astronomer".
This sort of quotation while perhaps not as blatantly dishonest as quoting
mainstream scientists out of textual context is certainly further evidence
of the lack of intellectual integrity which pervades the anti-evolution
movement.
Bye
Troy Britain (Amateur Naturalist)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 05:16:52 EDT