Earlier I noted that Gnu atheism and intellectual consistency do not seem to mix. For example, Gnu atheists promote themselves as a special class of people with this extreme commitment to evidence. But again and again and again, we find them making claims without any evidence. How is it that a group of people can so easily slip into such obvious hypocrisy?
I have a hypothesis.
Given the hateful essence of PZ Myer’s blog, it was not surprising to see him host Ed Kroc’s expression of hate against religious scientists and mathematicians.
There are three kinds of religious scientists (and mathematicians): cowards, liars and idiots. The cowards need to be reassured and rescued, the liars need to be challenged and contested, and the idiots need to be exposed. It is because of this that I have become an engaged atheist, outspoken and loud, a “new” atheist if that’s what you want to call it. As long as the cowards, liars and idiots are protected by our silence and general disinterest in anything not directly related to our research, they will continue to compromise the credibility of our fields. You can be a brilliant scientist and still believe in god, but you can’t do it sincerely. That’s a problem. Sooner or later will be a clash, whether it’s in the form of muddling research, deceiving students or misrepresenting reality in a public statement or lecture. If you’re going to devote your life to the pursuit of truth, then you better have enough guts to stomach the implications, all of them.
While hate leads Gnus to label people like Jen McCreight as a slut, feminazi, or bitch, the same hate leads Gnus to label people like Francis Collins and Ken Miller as cowards, liars or idiots.
Kroc claims that scientists who are religious are compromising the credibility of their fields because they are religious. There is no evidence for this. Hate needs no evidence.
Kroc then claims that anyone who is a brilliant scientist and still believes in God is not being sincere. There is no evidence for this. Hate needs no evidence.
Kroc then claims it is inevitable that religious scientists will falsify their research, deceive their students, or misrepresent reality in public. There is no evidence for this. Hate needs no evidence.
So think about it. The Gnus commitment to evidence is at best, an abstract intellectual promise to one’s self, or more likely(IMO), public posturing for PR purposes. Such a position is easily steam-rolled by hate. That is, when the hateful emotions arise, that “commitment to evidence” is powerless to prevent the Gnu from spouting off such nonsense like Kroc did. For as any human knows, emotion is more powerful than intellect.
This leads me to predict that until the Gnu atheists can put a check on their hate, they will continue to violate the “commitment to evidence.”
BTW, when East Germany was under atheistic communist control, you were not allowed to be a member of academia if you were religious. One has to wonder if both Kroc and Myers would agree with this policy.