Financing Pseudoscience: Intelligent Design and the Evolution "Debate"

Premise: The Intelligent Design 'wedge strategy' and pseudoscientific Evolution "Debate" obscure the escalating biological effects of pollution and industrial contamination on the biosphere and life on this planet - and were designed purposefully to do so.

Topic: This thread is devoted to identifying corporations who finance campaigns promoting Intelligent Design and the pseudoscientific Evolution "Debate." If you wish to discuss scientific theories and hypotheses or pseudoscience, numerous other ATS threads exist where you may do so. Please refrain from posting such discussion here. Thank you.


Background:

Intelligent Design is the brainchild of the Center for Science and Culture, a relatively recent progeny in a long line of corporate-funded think tanks established to preserve and protect the rights and freedoms of international corporations to profit without constraint, regulation or oversight.

1. In 1946, the United States Army Air Forces and the Douglas Aircraft Company begat the RAND Corporation;

2. In 1961, Herman Kahn and the RAND Corporation begat the Hudson Institute;

3. In 1990, Bruce Chapman and the Hudson Institute begat the Discovery Institute;

4. In 1996, Michael Denton and the Discovery Institute begat the Center for Science and Culture; and

5. In 1998, the Center for Science and Culture begat the Intelligent Design Wedge Strategy.

"This is not the brainchild of homegrown, Texas religious-right activists," said Samantha Smoot, executive director of the Texas Freedom Network, which opposes allowing creationist theories in science textbooks. "It's part of a national agenda. But what has changed is the religious right has changed its tactics. They no longer come in under the banner of promoting creationism. These are think tanks with pseudo-scientific information that destroys real science."

The "Intelligent Design" strategy was designed as a "wedge" to go where creationism and anti-evolution campaigns could not go.

...a Discovery Institute strategic memo that made its way onto the Web in 1999: the so-called Wedge Document. This seven-page paper represents the antievolutionist equivalent of the tobacco industry documents revealed as a result of litigation, or the American Petroleum Institute’s internal memo laying out a strategy to undermine mainstream climate science.

...the document states that intelligent design "promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions." In order to achieve this objective, the ID movement will "function as a 'wedge'" that will "split the trunk [of scientific materialism] . . . at its weakest points." Much like the strategy implicit in the American Petroleum Institute memo, part of the Wedge strategy involves currying influence with "individuals in print and broadcast media." The document actually expends far more energy outlining media strategies and achievements than in describing a program of scientific research.

The Wedge Document puts ID proponents in an uncomfortable position. ...Discovery’s ultimate agenda—the Wedge—clearly has far more to do with the renewal of religiously based culture by the overthrow of key tenets of modern science than with the disinterested pursuit of knowledge.

Also see: Intelligent Design: The Wedge Strategy

The Intelligent Design wedge strategy reformulates creationism, redirects the "evolution 'debate'" and fulfills several strategic functions, including:

1. Neutralizing legitimate Christian scientists who argue that believing in God does NOT preclude accepting science or evolution, a position that threatened the corporations' larger goals and strategies;

2. Maintaining and solidifying support from the religious right as a primary constituency, and refocusing the right's financial contributions and public efforts;

3. Creating and nurturing a secondary constituency of supporters by accommodating the idea of 'aliens' as the Intelligent Designer;

4. Creating the illusion of a scientific foundation for the strategy, in order to bypass tax laws that prohibit using public monies to finance religious activities, and laws prohibiting the coupling of church and state;

5. Confusing the public about the underlying science and the effects of industrial activity on the planet's life and biosphere; and

6. Distracting public attention from the escalating biological crises created by industrial activity;

Thereby

7. Generating vocal public support for government policies that preserve and protect the rights and freedoms of international corporations to profit without constraint, regulation or oversight - despite the escalating destruction of the biosphere, impacts on human health, and rising rates of animal extinctions related to unconstrained corporate-industrial activity.


Where does the campaign money come from?

It's a family affair. The corporations support the "parent" think tanks, the parents support their progeny, and they all support each others' campaigns.

Financing for the Discovery Institute's "Center for Science and Culture" - and Intelligent Design campaigns - comes through the Hudson Institute from a variety of biotechnology, genetic engineering, agricultural, pharmaceutical and other corporations, including:

* Monsanto
* DuPont
* Dow-Elanco
* Sandoz
* Ciba-Geigy
* ConAgra
* Cargill, and
* Procter & Gamble

HUDSON INSTITUTE

Based in Indianapolis, IN, the "institute’s corporate funding ... includes Monsanto, DuPont, Dow-Elanco, Sandoz, Ciba-Geigy, ConAgra, Cargill, and Procter & Gamble."

***

The Hudson Institute is supported by donations from companies and individuals. Corporate contributors include Monsanto, DuPont, Dow-Elanco, Sandoz, Ciba-Geigy, ConAgra, Cargill, and Procter & Gamble.

Where does the money go?

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is charged with protecting Americans health, and ensuring the safety of a broad range of products including food, dietary supplements, drugs, medical devices, biologics like vaccines and blood products, animal feed and drugs, cosmetics, radiation-emitting products like cell phones and microwaves, and combination products.

So neutralizing the FDA is one of the corporate-financed think tanks' highest priorities.

A report by Public Citizen illuminated the industry money behind the major think tanks campaigning to strip regulatory authority from the Food and Drug Administration: "Seven think tanks - the American Enterprise Institute, the Cato Institute, the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Hudson Institute, the Progress and Freedom Foundation and the Washington Legal Foundation - received at least $3.5 million between 1992 and 1995 from drug, medical device, biotechnology and tobacco manufacturers and their corporate foundations."

Think Tank Genealogy: Intelligent Design's Family Tree


RAND Corporation

Hudson Institute

Discovery Institute

Center for Science and Culture

Intelligent Design: The Wedge Strategy



Additional Resources:

Right Web: Exposing the Architecture of Power That's Changing Our World

Politicized Scholars Put Evolution on the Defensive

www.exxonsecrets.org...


Reminder: This thread is devoted to identifying corporations who finance campaigns promoting Intelligent Design and the pseudoscientific Evolution "Debate." If you wish to discuss scientific theories and hypotheses or pseudoscience, numerous other ATS threads exist where you may do so. Please refrain from posting such discussion here. Thank you.

If you have information identifying corporations who finance these campaigns, then please, post it.

Thanks, sofi

Posted by melatonin on the old thread:

I would be interested if there was a link between the biotechnology industry and intelligent design, but on reading the new thread, I can't see any obvious link between this Hudson institute and the DI.

Maybe I'm missing something...

Not sure what you're asking:

The corporations - including the biotechnology industry - support the "parent" think tanks, the parents support their progeny, and they all support each others' campaigns.

Financing for the Discovery Institute's "Center for Science and Culture" - and Intelligent Design campaigns - comes through the Hudson Institute from a variety of biotechnology, genetic engineering, agricultural, pharmaceutical and other corporations, including:

* Monsanto
* DuPont
* Dow-Elanco
* Sandoz
* Ciba-Geigy
* ConAgra
* Cargill, and
* Procter & Gamble

It's a sometimes complicated web, but the basic connections are apparent.

Originally posted by soficrow


Not sure what you're asking:

The corporations - including the biotechnology industry - support the "parent" think tanks, the parents support their progeny, and they all support each others' campaigns.

Financing for the Discovery Institute's "Center for Science and Culture" - and Intelligent Design campaigns - comes through the Hudson Institute

Well, I guess I was expecting a major figure in the Hudson institute to be involved in some capacity with the DI. I couldn't see that in any way via the links you provide.

It is something that many people no only me has known, is the way in which corporate American control everything in our nation, with the blessing of government.

Their money is behind anything that is to stop, control and mislead from science to religious and many other views so they can be to their advantage.

Specially when they are part of our government because they are the government.

To know what companies are invovle all you have to do is check the millions of dollars that goes for lobbying and the corruption of politicians in Washington.

Thats where the control starts to keep laws in their favor and be able to feed their many branches all over the nation.

It is very distressing to see how billions of dollars can be use by the multibillion dollar corporate empire to pay for what they want from the government but none of that money is use to help our nation or the populations that suffer because of their abuses.

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by soficrow

Financing for the Discovery Institute's "Center for Science and Culture" - and Intelligent Design campaigns - comes through the Hudson Institute

Well, I guess I was expecting a major figure in the Hudson institute to be involved in some capacity with the DI. I couldn't see that in any way via the links you provide.

The Discovery Institute is a branch of the Hudson Institute - and runs the Intelligent Design campaign.

Isn't that a close enough association for you?

But here's a nifty little association to ponder: Dennis Avery, Hudson's primary critic of organic produce, also serves as the resident global warming skeptic.

marg

It is very distressing to see how billions of dollars can be use by the multibillion dollar corporate empire to pay for what they want from the government but none of that money is use to help our nation or the populations that suffer because of their abuses.

True. And what really grinds me is that peoples' honest faith is abused and manipulated to trick them into supporting things they never would if they knew the facts.






phrasing

[edit on 25-11-2006 by soficrow]

Originally posted by soficrow

True. And what really grinds me is that peoples' honest faith is abused and manipulated to trick them into supporting things they never would if they knew the facts.

Exactly, by the time the money comes down the tree is hidden under some harless sugar coated phylantrophy organization looking for the well being of the people they are reaching too.

Then you most wonder how the government is allowing faith base programs to get funding by the tax payer.

Sugar coating, nothing more than sugar coating.

Originally posted by soficrow

The Discovery Institute is a branch of the Hudson Institute - and runs the Intelligent Design campaign.

Isn't that a close enough association for you?

Glad you find it funny, I do like to make people happy.

Just stating it to be so doesn't really cut it, I read the links you presented as evidence and saw no direct link - wiki seems to agree with you, just make it clearer, it would save me running around forming the links for you - the fact I bothered shows I'm interested, some of us are quite busy you know, it's a scientists life

So here's a good link...

Mr. Chapman was a fellow of the Hudson Institute for two years until he founded the Seattle-based Discovery Institute, a public policy center on national and international affairs, in 1990. The Institute presents public policy proposals that strive to "make a positive vision of the future practical." Subject areas include science and culture, regionalism in "Cascadia," technology and national security.

www.discovery.org...

So Chapman, the president of the DI, was once a fellow of the HI.

I accept there are major links between industry and global warming denial. It's obvious why the likes of exxon do so (and why Du Pont challenged the Ozone science previously; tobacco companies fighting science etc). Doesn't seem so obvious in this case.

I have followed the intelligent design debate for a while, and whilst I have heard of a few businessmen funding the DI - mainly millionaire christians, the likes of Anshutz etc, a biotech link is news to me (although I heard Gates gave them some cash for the transportation thing they do). I wonder why the biotech link is relevant, the HI get some money off some bio companies does this mean that the DI is covering up how chemicals cause mutations and affect health? We know it and it is well known, as someone mentioned, they couldn't achieve this if they wanted.

So you think that attempting to destroy pure materialism in science helps biotechnology how? (This seems to be the major aim of this section of the institute's policy).

Or is it purely an attempt to cover up what? If they are aiming to just distract from what biotech and the chemical industry are doing, why attack evolution? Shouldn't they be attacking directly the science related to these health effects (medical research), as is the norm?

You see, if I was someone wanting to ameliorate worry about reducing biodiversity and current climate change, evolutionary theory would be weapon for me - species adapt to new environments, new species will develop, the earth will recover. If life can recover from the KT incident, it will recover now.

The DI seems to be against stem-cell research and genetic manipulation in general. So are they purely covering up that chemicals can have effects on DNA and health? They originally had no official stand on ID, this seemed to come later. What do you think motivated this change in approach?

Because whatever their aims, they are failing in scientific circles, the very people who discover the technology these companies use. If the HI have any nous, they will quickly discard the DI because they are a joke, like the global warming deniers, they are failing miserably at the science, I agree it is just propoganda.

It seems to me to all relate to christianity, bringing 'god' into science classrooms and destroying the 'evilutionary' theory. They also have clubs in uni's that question ToE and spread ID (the work of the likes of Casey Luskin). But it all seems religiously motivated.

If they succeed by destroying ToE, how does that help biotech and industry?

Just trying to figure out where you are going with this. Sorry for being inquisitive....

[edit on 25-11-2006 by melatonin]

Originally posted by melatonin

Originally posted by soficrow

The Discovery Institute is a branch of the Hudson Institute - and runs the Intelligent Design campaign.

So here's a good link...

So Chapman, the president of the DI, was once a fellow of the HI.

That's correct. As stated in the opening:

3. In 1990, Bruce Chapman and the Hudson Institute begat the Discovery Institute;

FYI - I have neither the time or the bandwidth to put ALL my research into the first post.

Also, I'm focusing first on broad strokes and relationships - then I'll get to the individuals a bit further down the road.

So you think that attempting to destroy pure materialism in science helps biotechnology how?...

Or is it purely an attempt to cover up what? If they are aiming to just distract from what biotech and the chemical industry are doing, why attack evolution? Shouldn't they be attacking directly the science related to these health effects (medical research), as is the norm?

I think we need to focus on the financing - where it comes from, etc - and then the reasons will become evident.

Usually tho, this stuff is quite straightforward in a really twisted kind of way - the device manufacturers are pushing for FDA approval on stents, and trying to kill the cell-therapy competition, so they create public outcry demanding their stents and claiming that the more effective cell therapies are unChristian - yadayada.

Then the next week, they switch gears to politic for a different patent approval - and count on people forgetting what happened last week, and not realizing they are being played.

whatever their aims, they are failing in scientific circles,

True - so did the 'global warming' critics. But they succeeded in the public forums, and created a political "mandate" - which is what counts. It's about the polls. No more, no less.


.

I understand what you mean, Sofi, is always nice to find out from where the christian groups get their funding to work on propaganda against the cell stem reserach.

If you follow the money is a chance that from somewhere the big pharma are involved in the funding through one of many of their Phylantrophy acitivites to help the comunities.

Originally posted by soficrow
True - so did the 'global warming' critics. But they succeeded in the public forums, and created a political "mandate" - which is what counts. It's about the polls. No more, no less.

I can't but agree with this. Which is why it is essential to fight them on the science front. It's hard to get this stuff over to the less scientifically educated and a lot of the public don't have the ability to see through the smoke and mirrors.

I'll just sit back and let you develop this then. As I said, I am interested. There is a new group in the UK, 'Truth in Science' (what a misnomer), which is trying to spread the DI's propoganda in schools.

[edit on 25-11-2006 by melatonin]

Originally posted by marg6043

If you follow the money is a chance that from somewhere the big pharma are involved in the funding through one of many of their Phylantrophy acitivites to help the comunities.

Ahh, so little time, so much research to do.


Just a quick recap - Sandoz and Ciba-Geigy fund the Hudson Institute, which funds the Discovery Institute branch, which funds their Center for Science and Culture, which funds their ID campaign.

TADA!

1996: Sandoz and Ciba-Geigy integrated to form Novartis in one of the largest corporate mergers in history.

About Novartis - a world leader in pharmaceuticals


Ain't life innerestin?

.

I found this very interesting article of how the new way of think tanks are getting very well funded and organized and has been influencing the EU also.

I hope it helps with your thread.

This people call themselves the Think tanks

Covert industry funding fuels the expansion of radical rightwing EU think tanks

The groups that are sprouting in EU are also link to the US corporate groups and they are in for the purpose to influence political debate.

They are funding and helping establish activities to influence their own corporate political agendas.

This secrecy enables corporations to play a double game of nurturing a public image of corporate social responsibility while at the same time funding think tanks that fight social, consumer protection and environmental legislation across the board. Furthermore, in principle, think tanks are not expected to engage in direct lobbying on specific legislation.

Look in the article the way in which this institutes work to raise money for the selling of their ideas.

Tim Evans of the Centre for the New Europe (CNE) explain that "free market conservatism" and "anarcho-capitalism" is a product of huge value to corporations and foundations that want to promote these ideas.

.

This are the names of some of the Think Tanks

Michel Kelly-Gagnon, CEO of L'Institut économique de Montréal (IEDM) They help companies fight environmental complains for funding.

Nicole Gray Conchar of the London-based International Policy Network (IPN), presented the fundraising techniques used by US think tanks such as the Cato Institute and the Manhattan Institute. This group has been very aggressive against the Kyoto Protocol.

They also encourage companies to used charity status to be able to fund money tax diductable on pet programs like "Climate Change Outreach".

This is a wide network of unlimited funds and is getting bigger and very powerful.

This people are involved and helping corporations on about everything for health care to oil business, software, technology you name it.

All they have to do is add foundation at the end of the projects they are to be hiding under to fund money for anything.

Not only are these think tanks promoting an economic jungle society with few limits on corporate activity, they are also more than willing to fight specific environmental and health regulations.

www.corporateeurope.org...

Originally posted by marg6043

Not only are these think tanks promoting an economic jungle society with few limits on corporate activity, they are also more than willing to fight specific environmental and health regulations.

www.corporateeurope.org...

Excellent find marg!

...And I agree - corporate-funded think tanks were established to preserve and protect the rights and freedoms of international corporations to profit without constraint, regulation or oversight.

Here are a few more very informative links I just found.


Biotech Brigade

Hudson Institute's Friends

[url=http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=3256&name=Industry,-Consumer,-Political-Watch-Organizations
Industry, Consumer, Political Watch Organizations's Friends[/url]

.

Cool!

I assumed you'd done your homework, Soficrow...
will look over what you've uncovered thus far.

Originally posted by soficrow

Premise: The Intelligent Design 'wedge strategy' and pseudoscientific Evolution "Debate" obscure the escalating biological effects of pollution and industrial contamination on the biosphere and life on this planet - and were designed purposefully to do so.

It seems so far you are only looking at players on the ID side of the debate, true? There's a concerted effort (I'll stop short of calling conspiracy) to stop ID papers from being published. In some cases it is policy to not even read them. ID sympathetic scientists can have their careers and reputations ruined for merely making their views public wrt ID.

.. further

Any idea how many big corporations, chemical or otherwise, fund evo research and PR? What do you think that list would look like? I've always been leary of the DI and I'd like to know where all the money is going... sure as hell isn't research and lab work. But I think you give them too much credit. ID does not challenge common ancestry either. Whether evolution is random/undirected or telic in nature or design is the question. You've bought this whole 'they're out to destroy science' rhetoric, the anti-wedge if you prefer.


There are indeed legitimate scientific arguments made by many scientists who are un-affiliate with the DI or the 'wegde' document. The creationists/apologists are another, much larger community, that also has no connection. These are/have been major 'players' in this debate for decades. Some (see: Dover) of those people would like to use ID to "go where creationism can't," but they didn't create it for that purpose. They wish to use it as such, which imho is an important distinction. Those guys [Dover School Board and the Thomas Moore Law Center] failed miserably by the way.


Look Sofi you can trace this argument back to Plato and your timeline from then until now would have very few gaps (which should please anybody who follows the debate.... get it? Gaps?... anywhoo.) IOW this is nothing new, even the scientific arguments have been around for almost two centuries. Certainly since Darwin, without question. I know you don't want this type of a debate but I think you're perhaps a little biased wrt ID (hence the liberal use of the word psuedosciene) and you haven't truely thought this through.


Don't get me wrong sofi, if I was a mod you'd be getting an applause from me (settle for a WATS?) I'm still following and hope I didn't offend you... guess I'm a tough sell. I always thought a good conspiracy was in the last place anyone would think to look. That would be the conspiracy against/to silence ID in this case. Wishful thinking?

Still this may be the first actual conspiracy theory ever posted in the O&C forum. I've got your links in a folder and continuing to go through them and anything I can think of to help (or redirect) if I can. Probably Sunday... never really looked to deeply into the DI (outside of ID related essays/papers and I have studied the 'wedge' a bit also) so I have some catching up to do.

melatonin

Good to 'see' ya mate. You had the opportunity for a hundred low blows and a quick jump on the bandwagon here. Knowing your opinion of ID (and the DI/wedge) I'm very impressed with your objectivity here.

Have a good weekend all
Regards,
-Rob

(edit)

You have voted soficrow for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

Don't know where you find the time sofi... following your threads is akin to reading a book (by the time it's over) sometimes.


[edit on 26-1-2007 by Rren]

Originally posted by Rren

Originally posted by soficrow

Premise: The Intelligent Design 'wedge strategy' and pseudoscientific Evolution "Debate" obscure the escalating biological effects of pollution and industrial contamination on the biosphere and life on this planet - and were designed purposefully to do so.

....Any idea how many big corporations, chemical or otherwise, fund evo research and PR? What do you think that list would look like? I've always been leary of the DI and I'd like to know where all the money is going... sure as hell isn't research and lab work. But I think you give them too much credit.

You have voted soficrow for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

Don't know where you find the time sofi... following your threads is akin to reading a book (by the time it's over) sometimes.

Thanks Rren-Bob - lots of good questions and points.

And my apologies - I forgot about this thread.




RE: Any idea how many big corporations, chemical or otherwise, fund evo research and PR? What do you think that list would look like?

I'm thinking the main players are international agricultural industries - including animal husbandry as well as pharmaceutical and chemical companies that supply the industry (probably the same bunch at the top of the economic 'food chain').

...As you know, I track emerging diseases. Many are set to go pandemic, and are untreatable and incurable because they are drug-resistant - they have mutated, adapted and evolved to resist the antibiotics and antivirals in the human medical arsenal.

More to the point - most drug-resistant new diseases - and new strains of old diseases - are zoonoses. And a key factor in their evolution and drug-resistance is the routine use of human antibiotics in agricultural industries, as well as animal vaccinations. Many mutations were kick-started by vaccine exposure.

Current marketing and PR downplays the 'zoonotic factor' and suppresses information about the role of drug exposures in animals.

Understanding 'evolution' is the key to recognizing the destructive and dangerous role that industrial agricultural practices play in creating new diseases and new strains of old diseases. ...So the marketing strategy works to keep people ignorant by focusing on "God" and ID, instead of the evolutionary mechanisms.


.

Originally posted by Rren

melatonin

Good to 'see' ya mate. You had the opportunity for a hundred low blows and a quick jump on the bandwagon here. Knowing your opinion of ID (and the DI/wedge) I'm very impressed with your objectivity here.

Have a good weekend all
Regards,
-Rob

Hey Rob,

Hope all's well

Yeah, I do prefer to separate science from the politics - pretty hard with the DI running the show. Did you hear about the biologic institute they've set up?

Maybe, just maybe, we might have some real science showing itself from them. I won't hold my breath waiting though, heheh.

Good to see ya around again.

cheers.

mel.