ID and Astrology Again

One of Dembski's acolytes posted an item at Uncommon Descent about an Indian "cosmo theorist" supporting ID. I'm not sure why he posted it, since it said nothing of substance, it just had a quote from the guy saying that evolution contains a "grave error" when it comes to human evolution, without the slightest hint at what he's talking about. The indispensible Bartholomew reports that the man they cited is not only a prominent astrologer, he was also part of a legal case in India that declared that astrology was well supported enough to be taught in schools there:

..."Cosmo Theorist" Dr. Raj Baldev is better known as...erm...a swami and astrologer. His profile on IndianAstrology.com lists his specialities:

"Astro Tantrik, Introduced Sarjatak System of Astrology for the first time, a great divine science of prediction with effective remedies of all problems caused by negative effects of stars and black magic. He also guides in the area of Vastu directions, other systems of Predictions like palmistry, numerology and occult reading, both East and West. Above all, his specialty includes Spiritual Healing and Horoscope Matching, Business prospects, Partnerships, Court Cases, Marriages, Love Affairs, among others."

He even appears to be the favored astrologer of a certain famous dictator:

Dr. Raj Baldev was also consulted regularly by the close deputies of Saddam Hussein privately for their President and Saddam Hussein granted the special privilege to Dr. Raj Baldev for addressing Iraqi Parliament as the highest honor on behalf of his country, which included his best efforts in helping to end Iran-Iraq war by using the good offices of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India.

Sounds like he'll fit right in.

Update: This is priceless. As soon as this post went up, crandaddy (one of Dembski's sycophants chosen to run his blog) removed the quote from Baldev and left the following excuse:

Since the article link and excerpt don't contribute adequately to the purpose of this entry, I've decided to remove them. - Crandaddy

Hilarious. And completely dishonest. We all know that the real reason he removed them was not because they didn't "contribute adequately" to the purposes of the entry but because they proved to be embarrassing since he hadn't bothered to find out that Baldev was a crank and an advocate of astrology and the occult. So in tried and true ID fashion, rather than owning up to that he'll just do the Orwellian thing and try to erase the history so no one will know about it. Just like Dembski did with his false accusations about Jeff Shallit's testimony allegedly being pulled by the attorneys.

The most amazing aspect of it all is that these guys seem absolutely impossible to embarrass. Dembski gets caught red handed posting "anonymous" reviews of rival authors' books, and pimping his own books in the process, and he just glides along as though this wasn't incredibly pathetic behavior. He tells one audience that the designer must be supernatural and transcendant, then tells another that the designer could just as easily be finite and natural - and attacks the person who points out the contradiction as though they were out of line to catch him in his own duplicity. They simply can't be embarrassed, no matter how obviously they ought to be.

Update #2: To make the situation even funnier, crandaddy posts this comment:

Follow the links in comments 32 and 34 to see just how bigoted the other side can be. Is there any bottom to how low they can go? I wonder.

Comment 32 is a trackback to this post. Pray tell, crandaddy, what on earth is "bigoted" about this post? Is it "bigotry" to point out that the person you cited in favor of ID is, in reality, someone you probably really don't want ID associated with? Is it "bigotry" to point out that, rather than admit to that you're attempting to engage in an Orwellian erasing of history, and with a transparently dishonest excuse to cover that fact up? Please explain how any of those entirely legitimate criticisms amounts to "bigotry". This is a hollow accusation made by someone who got caught with his hand in the cookie jar and now wants to blame the one who caught him.

More like this

You may recall a few weeks ago when crandaddy, one of Dembski's acolytes at Uncommon Descent, posted a link and a quote from Raj Baldev noting a "grave error" in human evolution. When I pointed out that Raj Baldev was in fact an astrologer, a consultant to Saddam Hussein, and a general occult…
After Wes Elsberry found this article containing "cosmo theorist" Raj Baldev's take on the new fish-amphibian transitional fossil find, I have to confess to being a bit disappointed that the crew over at Dembski's home for wayward sycophants has apparently learned their lesson about citing Baldev.…
Once again the perennially aggravating subject of Indian marriages is in the news at the beebs. The reporter sez No Indian wedding can even begin without a visit to the astrologer, who for centuries, read the charts and mapped the planetary alignments to pick the best matches. Now, even they have…
In a new post, Dembski's faithful manservant Cato has built a perfectly inaccurate straw man and proceeded to beat the heck out of it while pretending to actually engage an argument being made by the anti-ID side. To wit: The Vatican Newspaper published an article distancing itself from ID and (…
By FREE MUSIC DOWNLOADS (not verified) on 30 Mar 2008 #permalink
By Free Music Downloads (not verified) on 09 Apr 2008 #permalink
By free music (not verified) on 09 Apr 2008 #permalink
By Free Music Downloads (not verified) on 12 Apr 2008 #permalink
By music downloads (not verified) on 18 Apr 2008 #permalink

Nice post Ed.

Wow. It just keeps getting better. Did you notice that they removed all mention of the guy and the links on that post after the information about Dr. Raj Baldev came to light?

Even the posts (and especially the comments when DaveScot is moderating) are completely subject to revision on Unwelcome Dissent.

It truly is the circus. I'll keep watching until it leaves town.

They have no sense what is expertise, or facts, or knowledge. They grab any and every statement by anyone, just because it feels good to them, then retract when they see our responses. They are politically inept because they have no idea what can and cannot pass muster. They have no criteria, nor a notion they should have criteria. They just THINK in all the wrong ways. Developmentally and educationally stunted at an early elementary school level.

Given how much many ID supporters love 'Argumentum ad Consequentiam' arguments against evolution, it would be amusing to see an article that clearly delineates the link between Intelligent Design and (personal and intellectual) dishonesty (e.g. 'Intelligent Design makes you lie'). ID supporters claim a (generally totally fallacious) moral highground for their cause. An initial breach into this has been made in popular awareness due to their blatant dishonesty in Dover. It would probably be timely to widen that breach.

By Tim Makinson (not verified) on 15 Jan 2006 #permalink

I had no idea Dembski was caught writing anonymous bad reviews of other authors books? That's pricesless! Is there an old post of that somewhere at Panda that goes into more detail?

By John Farrell (not verified) on 15 Jan 2006 #permalink

Its pretty clear why he posted it...its a) someone with a "Dr." before his name who b) is critical of evolution. I'm sure the fact that he is from India feeds into the ridiculous meme that ID is "growing". What more do you need to know if you're riding in the back seat of the ID clown car? That he inadvertently provided yet another embarassing link between ID and astrology, not to mention his source has been associated with a certain dictator, is reason enough to then to make a retraction ... I mean to re-write history.

Oh....and then he calls you (and presumably me and others here who don't see ID as "obvious") a bigot for pointing this out. See comment #36.

John Farrell wrote:

I had no idea Dembski was caught writing anonymous bad reviews of other authors books? That's pricesless! Is there an old post of that somewhere at Panda that goes into more detail?

Yep. See here.

Ed, I've gone to Uncommon Descent a few times since Dembski turned it over to the Keystone Kops. It has really become a joke of a site (if it wasn't already). It's beneath you to even write about these folks now, the site has sunk that low in quality.

Well, gee, if the guy has Dr. in front of his name the DI can add him to their "Doubting Darwinism" list. He wouldn't be the first crank to join the crowd. They have a few young earthers and other wackos on the list.

By skipevans (not verified) on 16 Jan 2006 #permalink

Ed, thanks for the link. Man, talk about the gift that keeps on giving! Far from being humiliated, as you point out anyone should be, he's probably just switched to having others post similar reviews now for him--so he won't be caught anymore...

By John Farrell (not verified) on 16 Jan 2006 #permalink

But can this character cranadddy really post more embarassing tripe thjan Dave Scot? Consider the latest DaveScot missive:

What?s up with the Utah legislature considering whether to teach intelligent design in schools? Haven?t they heard about Dover?

One of his commenters helps him out with the correct LINK.

Turns out this paragon of legislative Intelligent Design virtue is none other than our old buddy Chris Buttars, who explains the need for ID teaching this way:

His bill, SB96, contends that not all scientists agree on only one theory about the origins of life or the origins of the present state of the human race.

Teaching evolution while leaving out creationism "hurts young people," Buttars said.

He cited a mother who said her two daughters were told by a teacher that they evolved from animals, and, "It totally destroyed their faith."

Italics added.

Also, Buttars takes a break to spred some hatred of gays around too, but read the whole thing for yourself.

He's endorsed by none other than Phyllis Schlafly, who says, "I love Chris Buttars," and "Senator Buttars, you're our kind of guy."

Thanks once again DaveScot for underlining the fact once again that Intelligent Design has nothing to do with creationism. :)