Adnan Oktar is a Turkish creationist whose anti-evolution diatribes are usually published under the name Harun Yahya. Denyse O'Leary is a Canadian creationist who publishes anti-evolution diatribes under her own name.I suppose it was only a matter of time before those two were attracted to one another. Denyse interviews Adnan Oktar on Uncommon Descent [Interview with Turkish Darwin doubter Adnan Oktar].
O’LEARY: How did you become interested in the evolution controversies? The conventional wisdom offered by many media sources in North America is that doubts about Darwin are a product of American evangelical Christianity in the deep rural South, and can only be understood with reference to that culture. Unless I have lost the plot, your doubts could not stem from that culture. From what, then, did they stem?Amazing. It's really hard to decide which one is more wrong, although I must say I'm tilting toward Adnan Oktar. The idea that all wars were due to Darwinism—especially those fought during the expansion of the Ottoman Empire— is mind-boggling.
ADNAN OKTAR: I realized while I was still in high school that there was something odd about World War I, World War II and revolutions. Because people do not suddenly wake up one day and decide to start slaughtering their neighbors or ruining and devastating a country. I did some investigation and saw that the Darwinist materialist mindset lies behind all wars, revolutions and anarchy. I was terribly distressed by the way people were suffering so much, by the oppression and injustice they were being subjected to, and decided to wage an intellectual campaign against Darwinism to the utmost of my powers.
[Image Credit: Guide Martine]
13 comments :
If Denyse O'Leary endorses Harun Yahya, then what more evidence do we need that Harun Yahya is a nut?
(I doubt if she was really interviweing Harun Yahya. Probably it was a "spokesperson". Lol.)
Anonymous: no, the question is, what more evidence do we need that Denyse O'Leary is a nut?
There was definitely more crazy in that interview than usual, even by UD's standards.
I note D'Oh!Leary did not ask him about his anti-Semitism, or some of the allegations about Oktar's criminal activities. Denyse is astonishingly tolerant and/or naive about who she praises, as long as they support her "anti-Darwinist" obsession.
Thanks Moth Eyes, I stand corrected. Now I guess all we need to know is... where's the squirrels!
Bizarre. Next she will be cozying up to Hindu fundamentalists.
Denyse O'Leary - uniting the world's great religions.
I had a look at Oktar's Atlas of Creation once. There was the "fly" with a fish hook in it, the misidentified fossils, and all. But what really burned my toast was when he blamed the 9/11 attacks on Darwinists.
Bizarre. Next she will be cozying up to Hindu fundamentalists.
I met a Hindu Creationist once. It was interesting. Since the Hindu concept of time is cyclical, with a very long period, He have interest in a Young Earth. His knowledge of biology was abysmal though, and he denied that similarities of anatomy, biochemistry, genetics, etc. was evidence fo common descent.
Eamon Knight: "Denyse is astonishingly tolerant and/or naive about who she praises, as long as they support her "anti-Darwinist" obsession."
Yes, O'Leary is not all that discriminating when it comes to who she choose for bed-fellows - another example of this her cozying up to Hiram Canton because of his revisionist views on Darwin (and conveniently overlooking his rather bizarre ideas on AIDS). I think she must spend the day scouring the Internet for any wingnut that vaguely supports her formed-in-stone suppositions.
But then one would not normally use "Denyse O'Leary" and "critical thinking" in a sentence would one? What would such an Important Journalist as Denyse need with critical thinking anyway?
And as I always like to see I cannot think of a better spokesperson for the ID movement than Denyse "buy-my-book" O'Leary, EICJ (Extremely Important Canadian Journalist).
Denyse had also been pretty excited about Stuart Pivar, whose concepts were not religious but opposed the "Darwinist Paradigm." Never mind that they were no more substantial than that with anyone with a copy of Microsoft Paint could make up.
But Harun Yahyahyahaha, had a Yahoo Newsgroup called Evolutiondeceit, that he must have been maintaining in between committing acts of teen sodomy. His main claim is that natural beauty proves creation. I am not sure what ugliness is supposed to prove...
Oh ghods, I actually skimmed that UD post. At the bottom, she actually acknowledges the controversy surrounding Oktar by citing three links, the only one favorable to Oktar being his own website; the other two being pretty damning. Apparently, Denyse wants to "teach the controversy" without coming to the obvious conclusion: the man is a crackpot and/or crook running a personal cult. No one with an ounce of sense or integrity would quote him in their own support. He's the sort of "authority" whose agreement, if anything, brings discredit to the views being supported.
But then this is Denyse O'Leary, the journalistic joke.
From the UD post: Adnan Oktar: "The theory of evolution is a superstitious belief that has been around ever since and that is not supported by a shred of scientific evidence." I damn near fell out of my chair with laughter at the twisted, non-self-aware convolutions present in that statement!
Fun fact: I get a LOT of site hits from people searching for 'jello wrestling'/'naked wrestling'/'naked Harun Yahya'/etc to this post.
For some reason the idea of Denyse and Harun cozying up together reminds me of that scene in 'Annie Hall' when Woody Allen, having trouble in his relationships as usual, walks up to a smiling couple in the street to ask how they manage to have a happy relationship.
"Basically I'm just a very shallow person" replies the man.
But is this a problem to you? Woody asks the girl.
"Why no, I'm a very shallow person too!"
Post a Comment