View Single Post
Old 2nd March 2013, 08:28 PM   #13
blabla
Student
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 26
Thanks for the welcome Minarvia.
I have been here a while though, just usually can’t be bothered to reply. I didn’t start the topic btw, that honor goes to idoubtit. I am not worked up either, nor do I suffer from depression, so don’t worry about me. I am not angry, I am just disappointed .

I find it difficult to imagine not to take offense at his position here and I do agree with the point made in Blake Smith’s post (linked to by idoubtit earlier) that the original comments were horribly insensitive and should have been condemned publicly by prominent skeptics.
His choice of words strongly suggest it is not just a slip of the tongue. Randi chooses his words very clearly and they are not open to interpretation. He uses unambiguous terms as “weeding out” (weed: a plant that is not desired) and he claims to find justification for his beliefs in Darwin’s theory of evolution, showing his incapability to understand the basic underlying concepts as ‘natural selection’ and ‘survival of the fittest’.

I have no respect for people trying to justify their own insensitive point of views and, I am going to say it, quasi-fascistic beliefs with a misguided interpretation of Darwin’s beautiful theory of evolution. The fact that it comes from Randi, a leading figure in the skeptics movement makes it all the more important to speak out against.

By the way, if it would have been David Icke or Sylvia Browne stating something similar, I strongly suspect we would have hit the 100 page mark already , but since it is Randi…ah well…

Last edited by blabla; 2nd March 2013 at 08:30 PM. Reason: grammar..grammar
blabla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top