Don't talk about "Evolution News"...

 https://barryhisblog.blogspot.com/p/dont-talk-about-evolution-news.html

...or link to or quote from its articles. It is well-known that it is the false propaganda blog of the long discredited "Discovery Institute" that has never made a single discovery since its inception in 1991 following the leaking of its "Wedge Strategy" anti-science manifesto. 

It is never news and often not about evolution.

Are creation "science" and intelligent designer spotting, are they cargo cult sciences?

The term "cargo cult" comes from the WWII  and post-WWII Melanesia where islanders would witness westerners arriving with Western technology and supplies. The islanders imitated the activities, behaviours and trappings of the Westerners with mock radios and airstrips etc in the hope of gaining similar "cargo".

"Cargo cult science" is a term introduced by the great Richard Feynman to describe pseudosciences that assume all the trappings of real science. It is a "pseudoscientific method of research that favors evidence that confirms an assumed hypothesis. In contrast with the scientific method, there is no vigorous effort to disprove or delimit the hypothesis".*

I very much doubt that the creation "scientists" and intelligent designer spotters actually believe that their "science" is effective, as the Melanesians hoped their activities would be. Rather, they hope to gain credibility from the gullible by imitating the trappings of respectable science.

This is perfectly exemplified by their use of the image below, by the "Discovery Institute's" Ann Gauger, posing in front of a green screen which was used to try and fool us into thinking she was in a real scientific laboratory.

The very title, "Discovery Institute" is deceptively named to give the impression that they are an institution dedicated to making discoveries, just like real scientific institutions. They are not. The "institute" has discovered precisely nothing since its inception in 1991. Their Wedge Document, leaked in 1999, reveals a manifesto for destroying established, mainstream science. 

Their blog, also deceptively named, is "Evolution News and Science Today". It is a mere propaganda blog of their "Center for Science and Culture". It rarely carries any real news, and is mainly dedicated to attacking evolutionary science and other sciences that creationists inaccurately call evolutionary, or more typically, "evolutionist". 

Their now defunct "Biologic Institute" the promotion of which used the infamous image, "claimed offices in Redmond, Washington and laboratories in the Fremont neighborhood of Seattle, Washington. Instead, Biologic Institute consisted solely of a rented office space in Redmond which is no longer in use for several years (since at least 2015)".*

Many intelligent designer spotters try to distance themselves from anti-science creationism, but in many cases, that is yet more deceptiveness. They try to  hide their true beliefs. Indeed, the fashion emerged after the repeated failures of "creation science" to insinuate itself into American science lessons. Intelligent design was a ploy to attempt to circumvent the separation principle, but it failed spectacularly at the "Dover trial". The intelligent design scam never really recovered. They are left with whimpering that schools should teach an imaginary scientific "controversy".

In a perverse way, the for-profit creation "science" organisations are more up front in saying what they are about. The rejection of the core principles of science entirely! They are science organisations in name only. Here, for example is Kenneth Ham's "Answers in Genesis'" "Statement of Faith", to which its employees are required to adhere.

"By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information."

To which I say, "Regardless of whether or not you have scientific qualifications and a track record of scientific achievement, to relinquish the basic skepticism inherent in the scientific mindset is to relinquish science. Deciding on an outcome and seeking to promote it, whatever the evidence actually suggests, is an anathema to science. Indeed, we gain confidence in scientific ideas precisely because we seek to destroy them, rather than shield them from examination. The fact that they withstand testing is the way in which we gain confidence in their veracity. If creationist ideas were true, they would not need to be corralled away and protected from examination in this way. To agree to this faith statement is essentially to admit to having no confidence whatsoever in its truth! It should be unnecessary, and it is only necessary because it is fundamentally unsupportable."

More deception stems from the fact that, in America, anyone can call themselves a university without becoming accredited, and anyone can call themselves a Ph.D by obtaining a certificate by filling out a form from the back of a cornflakes packet and sending it off with a few dollars. Illegal anywhere else, I think, except in America.

* Quotes taken from Wikipedia articles at the links indicated.

Re. Ann Gauger, I was once in a Facebook message exchange with her on the subject of endogenous retroviruses, slam-dunk evidence for evolution. Eventually, she asked me to cite the relevant scientific literature which I did @ https://web.archive.org/web/20230531193743/http://www.evolutionarymodel.com/ervs.htm#References As soon as I provided it, she promptly blocked me! 

(https://barryhisblog.blogspot.com/p/dont-talk-about-evolution-news.html)