We Fink not

As Ed Brayton notes at some length today, an ID creationism proponent named Deborah Owens Fink is seeking re-election to the Ohio Board of Education. She’s nothing but a run-of-the-mill cliche factory, spouting all of the usual crap about “Darwinian orthodoxy” (why is it that no one complains of “Newtonian orthodoxy” when it comes tp gravitational theory? Gee, I wonder), “elite scientists” who, because they are “paranoid,” are out to “censor ideas” (after all, science classes should admit of vacuous, untestable “theories” out of fairness to the religiously indoctrinated, right?) and the need to “critically analyze evolution” (as if scientists don’t do this every time they perform an experiment).
Owens Fink’s election opponent is one impressively credentialed Tom Sawyer, whose mean, mean stride will hopefully rush him toward a position on the Board on November 7. Of Sawyer’s campaign, Fink says,`”it seems as though he’s running at the behest of the members of the radical branch of the scientific community on a single issue that’s really no longer an issue.” Yes, it’s only the radicals that embrace evolution; the other 1/100 of 1% or whatever of practicing biologists are getting tired of these fringe-dwellers.
If you live in Ohio, read Ed’s post to see how you can become involved in supporting Sawyer’s bid.

2 thoughts on “We Fink not”

  1. ” …one impressively credentialed Tom Sawyer, whose mean, mean stride will hopefully rush him…”
    Ha, ha, I actually got that — Geddy Lee would be proud.

  2. … (why is it that no one complains of “Newtonian orthodoxy” when it comes tp gravitational theory? Gee, I wonder), “

    I am kind of suspicious of the Daltonian orthodoxy, who do everything within their evil little powers to suppress all the scientific evidence against the atomic theory of matter. Clearly these materialists, like all the materialists, have to go! We anti-atomists just want to teach the controversy. Is that too much to ask? :)

Comments are closed.