The Meerkat Responds: Denouncing Reality, P2

No sooner had I rebuked Derrick Thomas Thiessen, aka Mr David Tee of Theology Archaeology, for his misleading and ignorant statements about science, he wrote up a lengthy, angry rebuttal, which, as is normal for Derrick Thomas Thiessen, completely missed the point!

According to Derrick Thomas Thiessen, no one can trust science, and science is inherently evil. To justify his claims, Derrick Thomas Thiessen (why does he get so upset with someone using his given, legal name?) , cherry-picks examples, whilst ignoring every way in which scientific endeavours have helped humanity.

To quote from Derrick Thomas Thiessen’s lengthy diatribe (ignoring Derrick Thomas Thiessen’s petty insults and deceptions):

Science is inherently neutral, and scientists do not act from a place of malice. They merely seek to learn about our world, and aim to understand how things work

This is patently not true, and we proved our point in the previous article by quoting an actual scientific paper written about the malice and unethical behavior of scientists. We can back up our point again, but this time from Harvard:

“In addition to a long history in which science has benefited people, there are also theories and aspects of science that are used to harm,” said course director Jonathan Beckwith, the American Cancer Society Professor of Microbiology and Immunobiology, Emeritus, at Harvard Medical School.

“Science students should be aware of this and, particularly, recognize that science is not necessarily objective,” said Beckwith. “Most problematic instances often occur when a scientist’s biases influence his or her theories.”

“I think it’s important to at least have thought about some of these things,” said Michelle Boisvert, a PhD candidate in biological and biomedical sciences who is enrolled in the class. “When you’re doing experiments with other scientists in the future and thinking of what their ethics are and what yours are.” (source)

Here, Derrick Thomas Thiessen conflates science with scientists. Human beings carry with them all sorts of conscious and unconscious bias, this is human nature. This does not mean that science itself is good or evil. Even the very article he quotes refutes the notion that science is some sort of living, breathing entity that has human traits (as per what I have emphasised, for Derrick Thomas Thiessen’s benefit).

To refer back to an example of nuclear energy, it has both good and bad applications. These applications are the result of human decisions, not something inherent to an atom or a molecule! How we chose to use our discoveries defines whether they are beneficial or harmful to humanity. The article Derrick Thomas Thiessen quotes is more in line with this point, not Derrick Thomas Thiessen’s vapid statements. You would think an English teacher would have a better grasp of what he quotes…

To present a length list of how scientific knowledge has helped humanity:

1. Pasteurization.
2. Antibiotics.
3. Anesthesia and surgery.
4. Vaccines.
5. Plumbing.
6. Hot and cold running water.
7. Water filtration.
8. Flush toilets.
9. Electricity in every home.
10. Refrigerators, stoves and microwave ovens.
11. Eyeglasses and laser surgery.
12. Dentistry and teeth implants.
13. Average lifespans longer than 40 years.
14. Telephones.
15. Computers and the internet.

I can certainly go on, and I am certain Derrick Thomas Thiessen will yet again cherry-pick in relation to some of these examples (such as his misunderstanding of the covid vaccine, and his complete ignoring of other, extremely successful vaccinations), but if it were up to Derrick Thomas Thiessen, we would not trust the pursuit of knowledge, and we would never have developed any of this. After all, Derrick Thomas Thiessen insists we cannot trust science.

If one wants reality, they need to move away from such comments as:

If he is so anti-science, he should not visit a doctor ever again. He should not use a mobile phone, or a computer, or electricity in any form.

Such comments show the naivety of the responder and show that he is not dealing with reality at all. But we may be wasting our time as we have continuously refuted points made by that responder over the years, and he still doesn’t learn or change his mode of attack.

Not once did the responder use anything credible to support his position. So why waste the time responding when he brings nothing but hatred, lies, and personal attacks to the discussion?

Note that Derrick Thomas Thiessen does not refute my statement, he does what he always does: Derrick Thomas Thiessen claims to have done so, whilst never actually doing so. He insists all I do is attack him personally (there is a fair dose of hypocrisy in that statement), but as ever, Derrick Thomas Thiessen lacks the honesty, integrity and conviction to link to my posts, and address me by name. He is quite prepared to enjoy all the fruits of scientific endeavour, whilst incessantly whinging that science is evil and wrong. Hypocrisy, thy name is Derrick Thomas Thiessen (aka Mr David Tee), of Theology Archaeology.

We also wonder about his English comprehension as points fly over his head, as indicated by his continued one-note responses, distortions, and twisting what was said. Then, why say this:

why should I believe … when he has done nothing to earn my respect or trust, least of all in matters relating to science?

What he is really saying is, he will not listen because we do not agree with him. Which is a typical liberal attitude. They cannot handle a discussion where participants have a different point of view from them. They refuse to change when proven wrong.

We do not trust or respect anyone who has been proven wrong. He has yet to prove us wrong. All he can do is make baseless arguments that refuse to go beyond the superficial and see the reality of science Forbes has this to say in an excellent article on the problems within science:

No Derrick Thomas Thiessen, I meant what I said. What have you done to earn my respect, or my trust? You have frequently lied to me. You have lied about me. You fail to offer proper credit to Bruce Gerencser and myself for our writing, and through your cowardice, you also deceive through omission. You ignore any information that demonstrates you are incorrect. It is not without tremendous irony from Derrick Thomas Thiessen that he accuses me of not tolerating different points of view, considering his routine deletion and/or editing of comments that do not agree with him.

His accusations can be refuted with the simplest of gestures, which is one of the reasons why Derrick Thomas Thiessen is afraid to provide links to my site, and address me by name. Derrick Thomas Thiessen knows anyone who visits Meerkat Musings will be able to leave comments, and that I will not edit comments. I am happy to have debates and discussions in an open, transparent fashion. Meanwhile Derrick Thomas Thiessen, who claims to run his sites for educational purposes, and claims to have science degrees, has a fear of evidence.

Derrick Thomas Thiessen goes on to quote a Forbes post, but it’s clear he once again cherry-picks, because there is this particularly key element from it, one that fundamentalists like Derrick Thomas Thiessen are guilty of:

For the scientist working towards that solution, though, there’s an extraordinary danger afoot. No matter how dispassionate we attempt to be, we cannot help but be colored by the biases of our preferred outcome, no matter how subtle or overt it is. If we perform our scientific inquiry with a view towards the results supporting the conclusion we desire, we run the risk of doing nothing but junk science, rather than sound science.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/startswithabang/2018/11/21/this-is-the-one-key-difference-separating-good-science-from-junk-science

Derrick Thomas Thiessen desires that science validate his religious beliefs. He does not approach science from the perspective of discovery, but rather, he takes his conclusion as the starting point, and wishes to force square pegs into round holes, to force his conclusion to be right, no matter the evidence. This is why he hates science; not because it is flawed, not because it is evil, but because it does not support his conclusions.

Is it true that some scientists are blinded by their preconceived notions? Absolutely. Guess what? Some theologists are too :). This does not mean we should give up the pursuit of knowledge, and despite Derrick Thomas Thiessen’s hysterical protests, it does not mean we should force the evidence to fit conclusions that don’t bear any relation to that evidence. If that was how science was conducted, we probably would still be living in caves.

As to Derrick Thomas Thiessen’s final remarks about evolution, this merely betrays his ignorance – perhaps fear – of evidence, once again. There are countless pieces of evidence to support evolution, not least in that it is a falsifiable theory, as well as an observable fact. I suspect he will not address this, because Derrick Thomas Thiessen does not like evidence, nor the scientific method.

Derrick Thomas Thiessen went on to write a second post (clearly he was so enraged that he had to vent, in fact he added a third post too!). He lists examples that he believes destroys the theory of evolution (because as we know, a handful of examples automatically overrides thousands of other pieces of evidence, geez Derrick, I thought you had scientific qualifications?!). Derrick Thomas Thiessen cites the platypus as an example of something scientists cannot explain, yet it turns out that there is a broad understanding of the evolution of the platypus! There are explanations for the migratory behaviour of birds (despite Derrick Thomas Thiessen’s assertions to the contrary), and I am quite certain a two-second Google search would refute Derrick’s other examples as well.

So yeah Derrick, it is lazy to assert ‘God did it!’. There is a tremendous weight of evidence to favour evolution, as well as the conclusions of geology and astronomy. In fact, these three fields form a broad consensus too, regarding the age of the earth and the age of the universe. The fact Derrick Thomas Thiessen does not understand this evidence does not render the evidence invalid. It is the height of arrogance to assume that he knows better than anyone and everyone else, yet sadly, Derrick Thomas Thiessen certainly does seem to regard himself as infallible, and beyond questioning. How dare anyone disagree with the great Derrick Thomas Thiessen!

Back to The Meerkat Responds