I went to Barnes & Noble and took a look
at Jack Cashill's book HOODWINKED. I had
written to some of you earlier about the book. I heard
the author on KSFO on the Morning Show with
Lee Rogers and Melanie Morgan. Thank you Lee
for interviewing Jack Cashill.
The author did provide new information that I was
unaware of. But I also recognized some of what he
wrote, since I had read material covering the same ground.
Not only does the author take aim at political issues, but
also some of the bogus garbage done in the name of science.
Both social sciences and "hard" sciences are covered. Mr. Cashill
covers the flawed work of Margaret Mead. Ms Mead. basically was told
what she wanted to hear. Derek Freeman who was originally a follower
of Mead did an expose on her. But as Mr. Cashill writes, there was
hell to pay. Mr. Freeman was condemned by "professionals" but not invited to defend his views. Only one side was presented at the
"professional" organization's meeting. I also recall reading something
in passing in a book about the Holocaust. The authors of that book criticized those who condemned Derek Freeman's work without allowing Freeman to defend his views. Though the authors did not totally agree with Freeman, they thought the actions of the "professional" organization to be inappropriate. One of the author's included
Michael Shermer, a skeptic and NOT friendly to traditional Christian theism.
Mr. Cashill also covers the work of Jonathan Wells, who wrote a devastating critique of the ten classic proofs for Darwinism
entitled ICONS OF EVOLUTION.
He covers the fraudulent drawings supporting the argument of
the embryo going through evolutionary stages of its supposed
ancestors (called Ontogeny Recapitulates Phylogeny). A friend
of mine told me that the school official justified keeping the
fraudulent drawings, because they had been in the textbook for
so long. Defenders of evolution give excuses such as blaming
the textbook writers or hiding behind the platititude that
"science is self correcting. I find the claim of science being
self correcting to be bogus. When a science teacher tried to introduce articles questioning the drawings or exposing students to the fact that
the drawings of the embryos were fraudulent, the ACLU threatened a lawsuit to stop the teacher. According to Denysse O' Leary in her book DESIGN OR CHANCE, the teacher eventually left the public
school system. If science was so self correcting, why didn't the scientists protest the actions of the ACLU? Certainly the ACLU cannot hide behind the separation of church and state arguement. This is not
about church, but about fraudulent drawings. It is not really human
nature to correct one's errors. Granted scientists may be full of themselves and think they are above mere mortals, but they are only
fooling themselves.
Other phonies covered in the book include Ward Churchill and Kinsey (faked research). Ward Churchill claimed to be Native American (Cherokee?), but was exposed as a phony. He is not even remotely
Native American. By contrast the Morning Show radio host, Lee Rogers
is one quarter Cherokee. I understand that even the left wing American Indian Movement has also denounced Churchill as a phony.
Much of what Mr. Cashill writes can be found in various books. But for those who are pressed for time , this book is a handy one volume reference.
Guy
# posted by GuyTak @ 8:45 PM
