Klinghoffer: Terrorist was an evolutionist

Following yesterday’s tragedy at the Holocaust Museum, it is more than a little repellant that Discovery Institute senior fellow, David Klinghoffer, proclaims “James von Brunn, Evolutionist” over at BeliefNet. His evidence? von Brunn’s manifesto in which he states:

As with ALL LIBERAL ideologies, miscegenation is totally inconsistent with Natural Law: the species are improved through in-breeding, natural selection and mutation. Only the strong survive. Cross-breeding Whites with species lower on the evolutionary scale diminishes the White gene-pool while increasing the number of physiologically, psychologically and behaviorally deprived mongrels.

Apparently, Klinghoffer feels that this makes von Brunn an evolutionist. He must have been a Mendelian as well, of course.

Kinghoffer gets called on this rank stupidity in the comments but it is worth remembering that he is only being faithful to his DI masters. The “Darwinism has evil consequences” claim is one of the few arguments that the DI have been able to make since Kitzmiller v. Dover and in so doing, all they do is resurrect a pre-existing Young Earther claim. Faced with the sheer lack of scientific credibility for their position, they have made their “culture war” more explicit and stooped to blaming every ill on evolutionary thinking.


3 thoughts on “Klinghoffer: Terrorist was an evolutionist

  1. Dear little davie klinghoffer,

    von Brunnis a Racist! He is a Terrorist! He is a Murderer! Calling him an Evolutionist is nothing but you bending over and kissing the feet of your Masters over at the Discovery Institute and using this as propaganda for your marketing scheme. You should be ashamed of yourself, but I have learned that shame doesn’t enter into the politicking and marketing hype of the Discovery institute. I am sure you will find support from other people who think like you do. I wouldn’t be surprised at all. The problem is are you actually ‘thinking’? I don’t believe so. Blaming the Theory of Evolution for this tragedy is a perfect example of your lazy intellectual ideas. Rather than understand what the Theory of Evolution actually says and what it does not say, you feel free to use it in such a way that is, at it’s core a lie! I believe that you know it’s a lie, but you propagate it anyway.

  2. wouldn’t “the survival of the most or best adapted” be better than “the survival of the fittest” ?

Comments are closed.