creationism
pharyngula | March 2, 2006Never mind me, I'm running around with classes and meetings today…here are a few quick links.
The 29th Skeptics' Circle.
The Tildification of Norwegianity.
The Terry Writing Challenge—there's real money involved.
An in-depth interview with PZ Myers.
I and the Bird.
Intelligent Design subverts itself.
An example of the research promise of ID.
Don't trust the NIH.
The Carnival of the Liberals.
stcynic | March 2, 2006As many of you no doubt know by now, Henry Morris, founder of the Institute for Creation Research and the man most responsible for the revival of creationism in America, has died at age 87. By all accounts of those who met him, he was a gentleman of unfailing civility and good will. Sadly, he was also the purveyor of a great many lies and distortions foisted on a credulous group of followers. It was Morris who popularized such ridiculous claims as the famous "moon dust" argument, the Paluxy "man tracks" and much more. Perhaps more than any other, he mastered the art of the deceitful out of…
pharyngula | March 2, 2006In my talk on Tuesday, I suggested that if we really want to teach the controversy, we ought to put the Norse creation myth in our classes. I had no idea the plan would be so popular.
pharyngula | March 1, 2006Some things are just too stupid for words, but lots of people are emailing me about this fool's plan.
A Las Vegas masonry contractor wants to amend the state constitution to require various inane ideas about evolution be taught to kids.
He wants to enshrine his ignorance in the Nevada constitution.
And he's a democrat. Gaaaaa. Can we all just point, laugh, and turn our backs on this guy from now on?
pharyngula | March 1, 2006Here are a couple of accounts of encounters with creationists that are amusing to read.
Jobe Martin. Jobe Martin is, well, a radically insane classic young earth creationist, whose favorite arguments are all ancient chestnuts, like the receding moon and the woodpecker's tongue and other such tripe. And he was invited to speak by an IDEA club? That kills the notion that IDEA has anything to do with science, I think. I've got one of Martin's books (my son Alaric gave it to me: I think he was trying to kill me to get his inheritance early, but it didn't work), and it's positively ludicrous.
Kent…
pharyngula | March 1, 2006If you live near Austin, on 9 March there will be A Debate on the History of Life on Earth with Sahotra Sarkar and Paul Nelson. I scowl disapprovingly on the debate format: it means half the time is going to be wasted with some creationist babbling on stage. The topic, "Can the history of life on Earth be explained by purely natural processes?", doesn't sound particularly promising, and simply invites the creationist to say "no", although he won't have any evidence to support that conclusion. Go to hear Sarkar, though, which should be interesting.
New Yorkers can attend the Bridges symposium…
pharyngula | March 1, 2006We laugh at the yahoos on the Kansas Board of Education who are dragging their state down the drain with bad science education, but don't confuse that with laughing at Kansans. There are some very smart people down there. I am very impressed with this op-ed by Cassie Gentry—she very effectively takes down an Intelligent Design advocate…and she's a college freshman in English.
I'd suggest that she ought to think about coming up to Minnesota and majoring in a science, but I think they need more like her right where she is.
stcynic | February 28, 2006Some of the other ScienceBloggers have been writing about this amusing little blog carnival called "Darwin is Dead". This is really elementary school-level creationist apologetics. It includes an entry from "highboy", a minister in training whose blog features a picture of Jesus with a rifle in his hand, that goes right for perhaps the dumbest argument in the history of creationist arguments:
To the evolutionists: First, evolution claims that humans and apes have a common ancestor. But since apes are not still evolving into man that notion is debunked without performing a single experiment.…
pharyngula | February 28, 2006The DI has long had this goal of getting their work published in mainstream science journals; unfortunately, they don't want to bother with that unpleasant business of trying to do real research. Give Up Blog has examples of their prodigious output: 5 abstracts that have been published in science journals. That's it.
They've managed this feat by exploiting a loophole. Here's how to get published in a major journal: 1) Write an abstract about just about anything. 2) Send the abstract and your registration fee to a conference organized by the scientific society behind the journal. 3) Watch your…
pharyngula | February 27, 2006Unbelievable. Orac and Matt have found an amazing carnival: Darwin is Dead. It's short; you can read all 5 entries in about 5 minutes, and I promise, it won't kill more than a few thousand brain cells.
My favorite entry is the same as Orac's, but for a different reason. He seems to have missed this jewel of creationist illogic:
So here goes. To the evolutionists: First, evolution claims that humans and apes have a common ancestor. But since apes are not still evolving into man that notion is debunked without performing a single experiment. Science is the study of things obervable, and man…
pharyngula | February 27, 2006Here's a request from gnosos:
"Dr" Hovind is giving a speech on my campus tomorrow night in a 450 seat auditorium. Usually, questioners only get 15 seconds at the mic at these kinds of things, and I'm trying to think of a question that approaches one of his many glaring errors in thought in a novel way. Do you (or your readers) have any ideas about what you (or they) would say to Kent Hovind given 15 seconds?
I'm cynical: I think the rapid-fire limitation is intended to prevent deep, thoughtful questions or any kind of considered rebuttal, and I also think he'll just reply to anything…
razib | February 26, 2006Nathanial Blake, editor of the conservative campus publication at Oregon State University, has a good piece addressing the issue of evolution and evangelicals over at the Town Hall website. He points out that even C.S. Lewis, that exemplar of modern Protestant Christian orthodoxy, accepted evolutionary theory. The coupling of anti-evolutionary feeling and a segment of conservative Protestant movement goes to show that culture can tack in bizarre directions not under control from on high, the fact is that evolution was generally a marginal issue in early 20th century Christian circles, and…
pharyngula | February 26, 2006Mr Chicken, the Night Stalker, and now…Henry Morris. There is a kind of cosmic harmony to that trio, in that they all made a living with supernatural silliness to some degree, although Morris…nah, let's not speak ill of the dead.
pharyngula | February 25, 2006Texans for Better Science Education is one of those strident creationist fronts that tries to undermine science teaching in favor of religious nonsense while pretending to be promoting rational thinking—they might as well have called it Sound Science, that sneaky and misleading label conservatives like to toss around. Their site is a collection of half-truths and quote-mining, one of those places you have to visit just to gawp at the awe-inspiring ignorance and dishonesty on display.
However, as a reader pointed out to me, there is one shining ray of truth in the whole site. They have a new…
razib | February 24, 2006Norm Levitt throws an excellent broadside against Steve Fuller (yes, it is a polemic, but a delicious one!).
Update: Ron in the comments suggests we be cautious about accepting Levitt's jeremiad in its totality. He concludes:
And from our own point of view, we must view the whole universe, including those parts which the candle of our scientific knowledge does not reveal. In this effort, religion, understood as the rational ordering of our values, ethics, wisdom and compassion, is an indispensable guide.
A does not imply Z here. That is, I cautioned that Levitt's piece was a "polemic" and…
pharyngula | February 24, 2006What's wrong with this statement?
"We're very pleased," said Rick Blake, spokesman in Chicago for Holt, Rinehart and Winston. "Science is a very strong area for Holt."
Since it is in response to Holt's decision to water down biology textbooks in Florida, it's wrong.
I'm sorry, Mr Blake, but science is not a strong area for Holt. You wouldn't be listening to the Discovery Institute if it were.
(via Red State Rabble)
pharyngula | February 24, 2006Creationists have been chanting, "Teach the controversy" at us for some time, to which most biologists simply look puzzled and ask "What controversy?" There is no ongoing debate about the ideas peddled by the Discovery Institute within the scientific community, because, well, there have been no data presented to suggest that it would be a worthwhile and productive discussion.
That's what I say, but I'm just one peon in the academic complex. But now Bob Camp has done a comprehensive survey to assess whether there actually is a controversy. He wrote to the department heads of a number of…
pharyngula | February 23, 2006Scale Model of a section of the Ark by Russ McGlenn
I blew it off again this year: I just don't have a strong enough stomach for it. Every year, the Twin Cities Creation Science Association sponsors a science fair, and I tell myself I ought to go see it, but I know what to expect, and I just can't bring myself to see a bunch of kids getting intellectually abused.
It's pretty much like any other science fair, which means that 90% of it is utter dreck that kids have done because it was required of them, and 10% is real enthusiasm and an honest appreciation of good but simple science. The TCCSA…
pharyngula | February 22, 2006The Salem hypothesis is an old chestnut from talk.origins. It was proposed by a fellow named Bruce Salem who noticed that, in arguments with creationists, if the fellow on the other side claimed to have personal scientific authority, it almost always turned out to be because he had an engineering degree. The hypothesis predicted situations astonishingly well—in the bubbling ferment of talk.origins, there were always new creationists popping up, pompously declaiming that they were scientists and they knew that evolution was false, and subsequent discussion would reveal that yes, indeed, they…