Why is there an anti-evolution editorial on Lew Rockwell?

[AnonLLF]

I’m pretty embarrassed about articles like that.I have read them and they did make me look more critically at evolution but still there arguments are largely straw man misunderstandings. As someone said before ,I know it’s cool to promote alternative ideas and all but I try to distance myself from pseudoscience like aids denialism,anti-evolutionism,food faddism,paleo diets etc.

Now I know because we’re libertarians there is a tendency to embrace unorthodox views but that does not mean we should knee jerkedly accept any or assume the mainstream is wrong.I like Lew Rockwell.com for it’s politics/economics articles but not when it goes into science especially global warming,food or when I see survivalist articles about the coming collapse of civilization.That’s why I prefer Mises.org more.

[liberty_student]

@Scott F

As someone said before ,I know it’s cool to promote alternative ideas and all but I try to distance myself from pseudoscience like aids denialism,anti-evolutionism,food faddism,paleo diets etc.

You guys who question aids denialism, are you even familiar with the scientific opinions and testing regimens defining what AIDs is? If you’re serious about making claims about denialism, then you should listen to the recent podcast Lew did with a documentary maker who took on the AIDs question and went straight to authoritative sources.

@Scott F

Now I know because we’re libertarians there is a tendency to embrace unorthodox views but that does not mean we should knee jerkedly accept any or assume the mainstream is wrong.

Right. We should knee jerkedly accept and assume the mainstream is right! Up with statism! Down with freedom! Comrade, the proletariat has spoken!

Quite a few of us have been on paleo diets, and they are awesome. That you would consider them (or naturopathy) pseudoscience is ridiculous. What qualifies as science in Scott’s world?

You’re supposed to be a lifestyle libertarian. Why would you reject alternative lifestyles information?

Lew’s magazine is meant to bring a lot of disparate groups together. It’s not designed to cater to one particular ideology or zealots in general. If people can’t be tolerant of evolutionary theory or aids denialism, then we don’t have a shot at creating a free society.

[Autolykos]

StrangeLoop and Prateek Sanjay, sorry I missed your posts.

@StrangeLoop

All testable hypotheses, no matter how heterodox, have scientific merit. Of course, endorsing disproven hypotheses even while thousands die is inexcusable. Dissent can be productive, hence one should always apply skepticism to one’s own views, as well; the HIV-AIDS denialists have shirked this scientific responsibility.

Has Peter Duesberg’s non-HIV AIDS hypothesis been disproven? If so, can you provide some links to literature in that regard?

I point him out specifically because I’ve read some of his articles, and the evidence appears compelling. Of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean it’s accurate or true.

@StrangeLoop

Since we libertarians (and especially we anarcho-capitalists) harbor radically nonconformist beliefs, I’m not sure we’re the audience that would suppress dissent; but, fairly, if articles from David Icke or other world-is-run-by-reptiles conspiracy theorists appeared on LRC, then I think we would be right to question the judgment of its editors. Furthermore, if LRC hosted articles by promiment Darwinists (e.g., evolutionary psychologists), then I think we would all be much more tolerant of the psuedoscientific fringers. Fundamentally, I believe the problem to be that such fallacious arguments (e.g., humans have “minds” thus we are distinct from the animal world) throws large doubt on what else LRC hosts, so we don’t want libertarianism to be weakened by ties to poor philosophy.

That’s a good and fair point. I don’t agree with being contrarian just for the sake of being contrarian. Nor am I a “movementarian” (though I understand that Mr. Rockwell is). So, needless to say, my own interest in LRC would decline were I to see reptilian-conspiracy articles on it.

My granddad used to ask me whether I believed everything I read. It took me years to figure out what he really meant – that one must use logic and science to evaluate others’ claims.

@StrangeLoop

P.S. LvMI seems to have a large amount of Christian (particularly Catholic) believers, so don’t expect them to care about our scientific criticisms. (And that’s not necessarily a problem–I was raised Catholic and plan to raise my own children in that same tradition.)

I always find it tragic when people forsake the scientific method.

@Prateek Sanjay

I agree that we should challenge dogma, but we should also bring strong argumentation and investigation from that end.

Otherwise, we are just internet contrarians.

Agreed. Logic and science should be employed as our “measuring rods”.

[justinx0r]

If HIV doesn’t cause AIDS then why do the vast majority of people with HIV end up getting AIDS? Why does antiretroviral medication work? Why does HIV live up to koch’s postulates? If AIDS denialists are so right why don’t they inject themselves with HIV to prove to the world that they won’t get AIDS?

[Azure]

This Darwin piece is one example. Because many strands of human thought rely on the idea of man being responsible for his actions, some feel we must reject even the scientific notions that possibly make man deterministic and natural. Hence, if a theory of evolution contradicts human action in any way, it must be rejected!

But there is the other extreme: you have seen the disastrous effect of the pseudo-science used by the local Marxist, Robheusdens, who tried to use physics to validate labour theory of value; yet, if his point, “There is no free will”, were true, then it is true. But that simply does zero, and only zero, for economic analysis, because we know what Black, Scholes, and Merton did to economics through mathematics.

Determinism is required for free will.

[Giant_Joe]

If people can’t be tolerant of evolutionary theory or aids denialism, then we don’t have a shot at creating a free society.

Heh. And that’s just two topics. That’s the nice thing about not being on “the left”. We agree on politics and economics, but can be free to disagree on all else, and with all else, have it our own ways.

[Autolykos]

@justinx0r

If HIV doesn’t cause AIDS then why do the vast majority of people with HIV end up getting AIDS?

Correlation does not imply causation.

@justinx0r

Why does antiretroviral medication work?

Before I can answer that question, I need to know what you mean by “work”. Do you mean “successfully fight off the HIV virus”, or do you mean “successfully eliminate the symptoms of AIDS”, or do you mean something else entirely?

@justinx0r

Why does HIV live up to koch’s postulates?

It’s not clear to me that HIV does live up to Koch’s postulates, particularly his second and third postulates.

@justinx0r

If AIDS denialists are so right why don’t they inject themselves with HIV to prove to the world that they won’t get AIDS?

This is a good point. Of course, if they consider other evidence to be strong enough to falsify the HIV theory of AIDS, they won’t see the point in injecting themselves with HIV. On the other hand, they could just as well inject SIV into healthy monkeys and see if they develop the simian version of AIDS.

But why do you lump all “AIDS denialists” together? Surely they’re not a monolithic group. Also, why do you even call them “AIDS denialists”, since (at least in Peter Duesberg’s case) they’re not denying the existence of AIDS, but rather denying the HIV theory of AIDS?

[Prateek_Sanjay]

Quite a few of us have been on paleo diets, and they are awesome.

Holy crap, what a coincidence.

Although for me, it was also a matter of enjoying one’s food. Few and far apart meals of meat like lamb or duck everyday is much better than eating rice and lentils, which overload your stomach, give you too little energy, and make you feel hungry again in a short time.

Once you stop grazing like a herbivore, you start enjoying your food.

And once you enjoy your food, you don’t need dessert or anything else.

Even if it is not all that helpful, I like the psychological effect. With sugary things or spicy things or bread and rice or most foods, you can’t escape the feeling that you have dumped garbage inside your body, even if enjoyed it while eating.

But of course, I have to go by eating standards of everyone else in the house, so I still eat what they eat, but I have already made a strong and radical shift towards eliminating all non-paleo foods. Currently, I have been off, but sensing my lack of inner strength coming back, I am going to start it again.

[Giant_Joe]

Prateek,

I find that getting people to shift more towards free markets and anarchism is a lot easier than trying to get them to even just tolerate my choice in food when I stick to paleo.

I’ve actually been looking for friends in the area who eat the same way as I want to eat. I find that everyone is an enabler of eating non-paleo, and most people are pushers of things that are unfriendly to the goals of the diet. I need a local support network that I can meet up with once in a while if I want to continue pursuing it.

[AnonLLF]

@liberty student

@Scott F

As someone said before ,I know it’s cool to promote alternative ideas and all but I try to distance myself from pseudoscience like aids denialism,anti-evolutionism,food faddism,paleo diets etc.

“You guys who question aids denialism, are you even familiar with the scientific opinions and testing regimens defining what AIDs is? If you’re serious about making claims about denialism, then you should listen to the recent podcast Lew did with a documentary maker who took on the AIDs question and went straight to authoritative sources.”

I’ve read about it and considered it and I see the opponents as straw manning the mainstream.

@Scott F

Now I know because we’re libertarians there is a tendency to embrace unorthodox views but that does not mean we should knee jerkedly accept any or assume the mainstream is wrong.

“Right. We should knee jerkedly accept and assume the mainstream is right! Up with statism! Down with freedom! Comrade, the proletariat has spoken!”

See this is embarrassing.

Opposition to pseudoscience apparently = being pro statism.Such a disconnect.

“Quite a few of us have been on paleo diets, and they are awesome.”

Fair enough ,enjoy them but don’t claim them as some scientifically proven ideal diet.All of these diet plans are fads based on false science.

“What qualifies as science in Scott’s world?”

Actually reasoned and/or empirically proven claims.

“You’re supposed to be a lifestyle libertarian.”

What does that even mean? and Since when?

Because I’m said I’m left lib?

" Why would you reject alternative lifestyles information?"

Even if I accept your claim I’m a ‘lifestyle libertarian’(whatever that is- I assume you mean thick libertarian) then it does not follow I favour all lifestyles.I’m culturally liberal(and always have been I’ll note even when I wasn’t left-lib) but I’m not libertine.Morality exists and some things are just plain wrong or weird.I’m culturally liberal not culturally leftist(in comparison to other left-libs) it’s not culturally leftist vs culturally conservative.I reject the false dichtomy.

“Lew’s magazine is meant to bring a lot of disparate groups together.”

I know.That’s all for the good.

" It’s not designed to cater to one particular ideology or zealots in general."

Somewhat debatable.There is a tendency to favour anti-evolution cultural conservatism.

" If people can’t be tolerant of evolutionary theory or aids denialism, then we don’t have a shot at creating a free society."

It’s not intolerant to say you disagree or think something is not scientific.That’s critical thinking.I’m tolerant sure.I’m fine for it to co-exist with libertarian analysis but it doesn’t mean I have to like it.

[Giant_Joe]

All of these diet plans are fads based on false science.

No! Whatever it is you advocate is a fad diet based on false science!

[Eric080]

I guess this makes me a “hysterical” proponent of evolution. Just like I am absolutely hysterical about germ theory.

At any rate, I am highly disappointed that many Mises readers tend to go the way of conspiracy theories. It really does damage to the public perception of the Austrian movement. If you want to criticize the incentive structure of government-sponsored science research, be my guest; but scientists are not brainwashing artists and they are not out to get you as part of the State apparatus (economists are a different story ). The caricature of any Ron Paul supporter would be a crazed anti-Semitic NWO-obsessed Alex Jones-listener. For as intellectual as the Austrian tradition is, these people leeching on is a downer in my opinion.

[liberty_student]

@Eric080

It really does damage to the public perception of the Austrian movement.

Nonsense.

@Eric080

If you want to criticize the incentive structure of government-sponsored science research, be my guest; but scientists are not brainwashing artists and they are not out to get you as part of the State apparatus (economists are a different story ).

Sounds like polylogism to me.

[Brainpolice]

Because LewRockwell.com has always had a distinct social conservative bent. Nothing new.

[Prateek_Sanjay]

The caricature of any Ron Paul supporter would be a crazed anti-Semitic NWO-obsessed Alex Jones-listener. For as intellectual as the Austrian tradition is, these people leeching on is a downer in my opinion.

It’s why Pete Boettke stopped calling himself Austrian.

It’s not that anything was wrong with the Austrian School, but rather that its ideas got less attention than its brand as “internet right wing conspiracist” and so on.

It’s sort of the same how some socialists feel about other socialists, who can be hippies with long hair and who see a life of communes as a promising life of laziness and endless sex. And when the former try to show the latter their Closed System Models and mathematized planning ideas, the latter quickly run back to standard capitalist world. Then the former get really angry and baffled when the latter talk about racism and Mumia Jamal, before telling them that they have missed the point and they are dreaming if they think proper socialism will have police who’d spare Mumia than killing him.

[Eric080]

Nonsense.

Good rebuttal.

I just have noticed that in the mainstream press, Ron Paul followers do get plenty of negative coverage. I know Hannity has made fun of his supporters, Ben Stein has called his attitudes anti-semitic, Michelle Malkin has linked him with Alex Jones (when really Ron Paul will go on any forum to express his opinions), and Levin has pointed out how “Jews control the banks”-esque Paul people are. It tars the movement and like mentioned earlier, it’s why Boettke is distancing himself from Rockwell types.

This is exactly why, when Paul was approached by 9/11 Truthers, that the media (especially Fox News) thought it would stick and why Paul was asked about donations given from Neo-Nazis. It’s because there is a definitive fringe link that we would be better off to sever.

[fakename]

What AE teaches is that we have a choice, and what I would choose (speaking for myself) is to continue to argue AE and promote logical argumentation. The fact that people are turned off to economics because it is associated with alternative science, only testifies to the universal human predicament to be persuaded by a poisoned well, or changed subject rather than the actual arguments at hand.

So in essence I agree with liberty student and I say if people dislike the alt. methods, then let them argue between themselves but let AE also be taught and if so we too could bring to being a place , “Where ne’er was known the Form of mock Debate,Where change of Favorite’s made no Change of Laws, And Senates heard before they judged a cause.”

[AnonLLF]

I don’t advocate any specific diet as such.Just eat whatever you feel like eating.Just don’t try to claim science apparently backs it up

[AnonLLF]

Oh and on my new shift to left libertarianism,it’s not like I agree 100% with them just like I don’t 100% agree with you guys and probably never have.I’d be quite happy to explain my left-lib positions and reasonings related to it.

Oh and incase the smear liberty student intended was that I’m culturally leftist ,I’m not.I’m culturally liberal.My culture views differ somewhat to most left-libs though I tend to think being left-lib does not imply for example being a radical feminist.I’m certainly not.

[Marko]

I just have noticed that in the mainstream press, Ron Paul followers do get plenty of negative coverage. I know Hannity has made fun of his supporters, Ben Stein has called his attitudes anti-semitic, Michelle Malkin has linked him with Alex Jones (when really Ron Paul will go on any forum to express his opinions), and Levin has pointed out how “Jews control the banks”-esque Paul people are. It tars the movement and like mentioned earlier, it’s why Boettke is distancing himself from Rockwell types.

Boo hoo hoo. I should give a damn about Hannity, Malkin or Boettke why exactly?