Who Knew It Was So Easy to Buy the Smithsonian?

Well, shit on a pointy stick. I could've just skipped grad school and spared myself a lifetime of indentured servitude to S@llie M@e Bloodsuckers, Inc. and for the low, low, low price of $16k gotten the validation of "co-sponsorship" from the venerable old Smithsonian Institution. No matter the years of research and intellectual inquiry, no matter an international reputation for sound science and visionary exploration. Pshaw! The Smithsonian don't care about all that jazz!

For the price of Hyundai, I could've had the entirety of the Smithsonian name and reputation behind whatever wackadoodle "ideas" I may have had. Now, that would've been something to send in to the alumnae/i magazine! Instead, like an idiot, I went the actual "read books and study" route, which cost me significantly more dollars and less prestige. Damn, these wingnut dominionist fundies are savvy. Always working an angle.

Smithsonian to Screen a Movie That Makes a Case Against Evolution

First of all, what the hell is that crap title in the NYT?? Is there a case against evolution? Um, no. So then how can the Smithsonian screen a movie that makes a case against it? For the love of Darwin, are third graders running the show up there?

Fossils at the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History have been used to prove the theory of evolution. Next month the museum will play host to a film intended to undercut evolution.

The Discovery Institute, a group in Seattle that supports an alternative theory, "intelligent design," is announcing on its Web site that it and the director of the museum "are happy to announce the national premiere and private evening reception" on June 23 for the movie, "The Privileged Planet: The Search for Purpose in the Universe."

"An alternative theory"??? Like, say, the earth is flat, or what was that thing Galileo was on trial for? Lissen here, people, we're either going to go with science in our pursuit of knowledge of the material world, or we're going to all just turn into dogmatic little imbeciles. Somebody please just say it outloud. [Thanks, National Center for Science Education!]

The film is a documentary based on a 2004 book by Guillermo Gonzalez, an assistant professor of astronomy at Iowa State University, and Jay W. Richards, a vice president of the Discovery Institute, that makes the case for the hand of a creator in the design of Earth and the universe.

News of the Discovery Institute's announcement appeared on a blog maintained by Denyse O'Leary, a proponent of the intelligent design theory, who called it "a stunning development." But a museum spokesman, Randall Kremer, said the event should not be taken as support for the views expressed in the film. "It is incorrect for anyone to infer that we are somehow endorsing the video or the content of the video," he said.

Heavens, no! Where would anyone get such an idea?? The Smithsonian obviously does not support the views expressed in that film, even though they're co-sponsoring the event (by default, yes, but they're still co-sponsors), and showing it on their grounds in their auditorium with the whole apparatus of the Smithsonian staff, machinery, and promotion behind it.

The museum, he said, offers its Baird Auditorium to many organizations and corporations in return for contributions - in the case of the Discovery Institute, $16,000.

Gives all new meaning to the term "chump change."

More.

Comments

[Lance McCord]

Good freaking god.

[Erudite Redneck]

OK. I honestly do not see the reason for a freak-out here. The Smithsonian does have to exist in the real world. And, you either believe the following, or not:

"But a museum spokesman, Randall Kremer, said the event should not be taken as support for the views expressed in the film. 'It is incorrect for anyone to infer that we are somehow endorsing the video or the content of the video,' he said."

If you're merely embarrassed, as an intellectual, at the idea that such a discussion is "allowed" at the Smithsonian, well, too bad.

If you think the idea should be snuffed out, or relegated to tent revivals, because you don't agree with it, well, same.

One is science. The other is probably theology -- or bunk, which is what most theology is to anyone who doesn't believe in it.

But, really, why the freak-out? The Smithsonian is about much more than science.

[The Heretik]

You mean the earth isn't flat?

[ae]

Erudite Redneck, I do not believe the following:
"But a museum spokesman, Randall Kremer, said the event should not be taken as support for the views expressed in the film. 'It is incorrect for anyone to infer that we are somehow endorsing the video or the content of the video,' he said."

partly because I find the following wanting:
Mr. Kremer ... added that staff members viewed the film before approving the event to make sure that it complied with the museum's policy, which states that "events of a religious or partisan political nature" are not permitted, along with personal events such as weddings, or fund-raisers, raffles and cash bars.

Since when is Creationism not of a "religious" (not to mention partisan political, natch) nature? (I ask this of the Smithsonian program officers, not you, though please weigh in if I'm missing something.) If the Smithsonian, by its own rules, does not allow films of a religious nature -- and we cannot credibly disclaim the religious and political nature of this topic -- I'm at a loss as to why the Museum of Natural History would screen it.

Sure they get $16k, but what do we all lose? Because that's a small price to pay to conflate science and theology in a charged political environment. The Smithsonian Institution is not going to close its doors if they don't get that $16k, so why did they take it? The answer to that question will probably answer your question about my freak-out. I am furious, indignant, incredulous, and lots of other adjectives about this, because I feel very strongly that anti-intellectual and anti-science "theories" are cropping up all too often as part of this madministration's kowtowing to the Religious Right, and this is just another example in a larger pattern of attacks on science and a call to return to a Biblical worldview. No, thank you.

Afterall, they're the Museum of Natural History, not the Museum of Whatever Bunk We Made Up and Want to Disguise as Science to Push Our Theocratic Vision. A few more donations of $16k from certain sectors and who knows what that Museum could be, though I would venture not what founder John Smithson had in mind. No matter the Smithsonian's protests to the contrary, they lend their name and reputation with this "co-sponsorship" to "theories" that would never make their way into their hallowed halls otherwise. I find their protests disingenuous and their policy dangerous.

As for creation stories in Sunday School or temple or mosque or altar in the living room or park bench or even tent revival, rock on! I'm not here to snuff out anyone's personal beliefs. I do hold, however, that personal beliefs must not be given equal weight (or auditorium hosting) in houses of science with what the scientific community, after years of research and peer review and observation and rigorous method, find to be observably true.

[ae]

'tik, this guy seems to think so! ;-)

Hi, Lance!

[handdrummer]

I wonder why everyone thinks that we who find the scientific worldview persuasive must allow this garbage into our most important intellectual sites? You would never be able to have a pro-science film shown or an informational discussion of evolution held in one of the big box churches that are popping up everywhere. Ask at one and see how far you get.

Talk creationism/ID in any venue that will have you. But since there is absolutely no scientific meaning in debating creationism, it is completely inappropriate to allow this propaganda into a place of science as anything other than a discussion of faith. Creationism is not science. It is theology.

[Erudite Redneck]

OK. Either I posted a reasoned response here a few days ago, and it was deleted, or I went through the motions of leaving a comment and the gods of technology have cursed me with erasure. Which?

??