tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5263095123937881532.post7323801025897802125..comments2023-02-14T00:34:37.922-08:00Comments on Creationism: Lies Creationists Tell: The Julian Huxley LieUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5263095123937881532.post-19730889713205458062014-12-24T20:56:41.793-08:002014-12-24T20:56:41.793-08:00Creationists create such irrelevant side issues al...Creationists create such irrelevant side issues all the time by selectively misciting scientists all the time. They do it so often that the Institute for Creation Research has been dubbed the Institute for Quotation Research, and they do such research very badly indeed. See for instance: <br /><br />http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/ce/3/part5.html<br /><br />or see the Quote Mine Project that uncovers how often creationists and I.D.ists miscite scientists<br /><br />http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/project.html<br /><br />Edwardtbabinskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13036816926421936940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5263095123937881532.post-153284457658403112014-12-24T20:52:42.769-08:002014-12-24T20:52:42.769-08:00How did the first cell come together? Google abiog...How did the first cell come together? Google abiogenesis and origin of life experiments. How did sexual reproduction arise? Google evolution of sexual reproduction. How does selection add functionality to an organism? The question should be how does it not? Genes are only passed along if the organism survives all the way to sexually reproduce itself. Most don't get that far. So whatever is in the genome is the longest surviving arrangement. Edwardtbabinskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13036816926421936940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5263095123937881532.post-68584130470008868382014-12-24T01:04:45.304-08:002014-12-24T01:04:45.304-08:00Maybe he said it, maybe he didn't. It really i...Maybe he said it, maybe he didn't. It really is an irrelevant side issue. The fact is, the statement does ring true. The real issue is why would anyone embraced such a spurious theory? How did the first cell come together? How did sexual reproduction arise? How does selection add function to an organism, such as a single cell organism getting the ability to walk and then fly? So many short-fallings of a ludicrous theory. <br /><br />Oh, and Merry Xmas to you and yours!Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04675107749994588730noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5263095123937881532.post-1769049707726787802014-08-17T06:40:27.858-07:002014-08-17T06:40:27.858-07:00Thank you for your thorough research.Thank you for your thorough research.GENERATIONS CHURCHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14292522499793074708noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5263095123937881532.post-37530351869255093772013-11-10T10:50:41.568-08:002013-11-10T10:50:41.568-08:00It just seems to me that you would want to base yo...It just seems to me that you would want to base your philosophy of life on an infinite source instead of a fickle human one. Our opinions of morality and justice seem to morph and shift with our surroundings and for expedience sake. Please don't judge Christianity on its abuses but rather by the recorded life of its founder. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12721674617679056706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5263095123937881532.post-11676887188741662982013-04-04T08:04:02.246-07:002013-04-04T08:04:02.246-07:00Here is another version of the fake Huxley quote, ...Here is another version of the fake Huxley quote, again appearing <a href="http://www.mininggazette.com/page/content.detail/id/529400/Theory-of-evolution-obviously-atheistic.html?nav=5004" rel="nofollow">in the Daily Mining Gazette of April 3, 2013</a>, written by a Robert Kohtala. <br /><br />The April 3 letter is intended to defend the previous letter, which had a different fake Julian Huxley quote, that I described in my comment above. The April 3 letter defends the previous fake Julian Huxley quote by saying that Aldous Huxley said the same thing-- and then presenting a doctored version of the real Aldous Huxley quote.<br /><br />Note that they're using the same strategy as Coral Ridge Ministries employed with Ed. First they use a totally fake Julian Huxley quote. When they are challenged on the non-existence of the quote they invented, they don't admit their quote is fake; instead they try to substantiate it by deploying a doctored version of a real quote from Julian's brother, Aldous.<br /><br />The April 3 letter has a quote attributed to Aldous, but with no less than FIVE ellipses. Most of them are unobjectionable, though strange; but the quote is fake because it snips off the end of Aldous' last sentence without an ellipsis, instead inserting a fake period, so as to alter Aldous' meaning.<br /><br />This is the same "fake period" trick <a href="http://www.icr.org/article/133/" rel="nofollow">used by creationist Henry Morris back in 1977.</a><br /><br />Here is a snippet of Kohtala's April 3 2013 letter:<br /><br /><i>"Larry Korpi's Feb. 14 [2013] letter [to the Daily Mining Gazette] was criticized for quoting Julian Huxley and Arthur Keith admitting that atheism influenced their beliefs in evolution. Two letters <b>claimed</b> there is no proof those evolutionists made those comments.<br /><br /><b>Similar to the statement by Julian Huxley is this from Aldous Huxley's "Confession of a Professed Atheist."</b><br /><br />"I Had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently assumed that it had none ... For myself, as ... for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was ... an instrument of liberation ... from a certain political and economic system and liberation from a certain system of morality ... (that) interfered with our sexual freedom.""<br /></i><br /><br />For comparision, the original has this sentence: “We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom<b>; we objected to the political and economic system because it was unjust.</b>”<br /><br />Kohtala, following <a href="http://www.icr.org/article/133/" rel="nofollow">Henry Morris 1977</a>, has chopped off the end of the sentence without even an ellipsis, falsely inserting a period.<br /><br />By concealing the fact that Huxley and his (non-scientist) contemporaries objected to the economic and political system <b>because it was unjust</b>, Kohtala and Morris make them appear to be amoral, single-minded about sex and totally hedonistic. Moreover, Morris censors their criticism of an economic and political system that they, Morris and Kohtala, defend.<br />Diogeneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15551943619872944637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5263095123937881532.post-47944323612230758692013-03-07T11:58:16.370-08:002013-03-07T11:58:16.370-08:00The fake Huxley quote continues to mutate and evol...The fake Huxley quote continues to mutate and evolve.<br /><br />Here is another, more mutated version of the fake Huxley quote.<br /><br />This is from <a href="Big-hoax-called-evolution.html?nav=5004" rel="nofollow">a letter to the editor in the Daily Mining Gazette</a>: <br /><br />"The truth of evolution comes from Sir Julian Huxley, the world's leading evolutionist who, when questioned, why have so many scientists been quick to adopt Darwin's Theory of Evolution? He answered - <br /><br />'The reason <b>we scientists</b> all jumped at this 'origin of species' was because the idea of God interfered with our sexual mores.'<br /><br />In other words <b>they come up with these cock and bull theories to live sexually promiscuous lives, rut like bucks</b>, without having to account to their creator God."<br /><br /><a href="Big-hoax-called-evolution.html?nav=5004" rel="nofollow">A letter to the editor in the Daily Mining Gazette, February 14, 2013</a><br /><br />Note that the fake quote has now <b>replaced fake "we" with even faker "we scientists",</b> in order to prove that it originates with the scientist Julian Huxley, not the novelist Aldous Huxley.<br /><br />This marvelous creationist letter contains:<br /><br />1. A fake (new, improved, even faker) Huxley quote<br /><br />2. The totally invented fake quote from Sir Arthur Keith ("Evolution is unproved and unprovable")<br /><br />3. A fake quote from Founding Father James Madison, apparently concocted by David Barton ("sustain ourselves according to the Ten Commandments of God")<br /><br />4. A fake story about Thomas Jefferson requiring the Bible to be taught in Washington DC public schools-- a fake story concocted for sure by David Barton-- Barton in turn backed this fake Jefferson story by relating a fake Jefferson quote ("the studious perusal of the sacred volume will make us better citizens"; see <a href="candst.tripod.com/tnppage/arg6.htm" rel="nofollow">this debunking</a>)<br /><br />In summary: typical creationism.<br /><br />Many creationists are fixated on the idea that scientists believe in evolution because they are uncontrollably horny and promiscuous. The debauched, animalistic sex lives of scientists are a major theme with creationists. They want to know what scientists have on under their white lab coats.<br />Diogeneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15551943619872944637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5263095123937881532.post-41288138980763784702013-01-13T09:22:49.034-08:002013-01-13T09:22:49.034-08:00Dear Ed, You may be interested in my own (rather o...Dear Ed, You may be interested in my own (rather old by now) article about the Aldous Huxley quote. (Perhaps you are already aware of it):<br /><br />http://www.update.uu.se/~fbendz/nogod/ah_quote.htm<br /><br />Not only is the quote out of context, but parts have been omitted and merged without proper notification.Benzocainehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04686191978660017936noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5263095123937881532.post-69977330936747643872012-11-03T18:58:49.605-07:002012-11-03T18:58:49.605-07:00I just came across your blog and I appreciate your...I just came across your blog and I appreciate your clarification. I'm interested in Aldous Huxley's rebuttal of the "Philosophy of Meaningless" as you recorded it from p. 316-317. Am I to understand from his statement that he and 'most of (his) contemporaries' (as he put it), that he at one time did object to the morality because it interfered with their sexual freedom? In other words it sounded like earlier in his life he embraced the philosophy of meaninglessness, but later in life he rejected it. Or, am I misunderstanding it what he is saying in that last paragraph? Monitor Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04212232556806936625noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5263095123937881532.post-74683932666567535402012-08-08T10:51:17.957-07:002012-08-08T10:51:17.957-07:00Thanks for your heart for truth. I probably disagr...Thanks for your heart for truth. I probably disagree with you strongly on what it is, but I respect your desire for it. I don't like quotes out of context or things misrepresented for making a point (though I am sure I have inadvertently done it myself in my blog, writing and teaching). I, like the first commenter, am a Christian and pastor (and staunch young earth creationist) who was researching the quote by Huxley on meaninglessness and found your site and others. I did a quick search through End and Means for "meaninglessness" and it seems to me that, in the end, he rejects meaninglessness (though I only skimmed some parts). It is so important that we know a full picture before we use part, and I appreciate the amount of work you put into your post. Again, I stand opposite you in most areas it would seem, but I wanted to say "hi" and "thanks" and wish you a great week.Erick Reinstedthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17687593837022660081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5263095123937881532.post-74912895081428576712012-06-20T17:46:37.070-07:002012-06-20T17:46:37.070-07:00Thanks for the kind words Eli, Take care. Though i...Thanks for the kind words Eli, Take care. Though if you ever get the inkling to read more on the subject of the meaning of Genesis and also on the evidence for evolution versus creation/I.D., there is a site administered by Evangelical Christians (who are also biblical scholars and scientists) that features discussions of such topics: <br /><br />http://www.http://biologos.org/<br /><br />Mesopotamian Cosmic Geography in the Bible [research paper at the BIOLOGOS website]<br /><br />http://biologos.org/uploads/projects/godawa_scholarly_paper_2.pdf<br /><br />Biblical Creation and Storytelling: Cosmogony, Combat and Covenant [research paper at the BIOLOGOS website]<br /><br />http://biologos.org/uploads/projects/godawa_scholarly_paper.pdf<br /><br />And there's an Evangelical Christian professor of Old Testament, John Walton, who teaches at Wheaton College (Billy Graham's alma mater) who has engaged deeply with Ancient Near Eastern cosmological ideas. This book is his most recent: <br /><br />http://www.amazon.com/Genesis-1-as-Ancient-Cosmology/dp/157506216XEdwardtbabinskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13036816926421936940noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5263095123937881532.post-70061222819185800522012-06-20T14:37:50.549-07:002012-06-20T14:37:50.549-07:00Mr. Babinski, I wanted to thank you for mining out...Mr. Babinski, I wanted to thank you for mining out this misquote of both Huxley's. I am a Christian and was looking for the Huxley quote to use in a teaching, thank you for clarifying both the quotes of Julian Huxley and Aldous Huxley. I am sure this will be an oxymoronic statement to you but I only want to present validated information. I am not sure that I would like a lot of your other blogs but I definitely appreciate this one. Have a great day!Elihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18156434911992573033noreply@blogger.com