Dispatches from the Creation Wars

For those who think that my article using the tsunami (that is, using scientific explanations for the tsunami, not the fact that it killed people) to make a point is tasteless and inappropriate, let me show you what a real tasteless response to it might be. I’m sure there will be a great wailing and gnashing of teeth coming any minute now from the ARN crowd over this one.

I think some people really need to get a grip on this one. I was discussing the scientific aspects of it, I wasn’t making fun of the victims. It’s no more “exploitative” than newspaper articles discussing how warning systems might have saved lives, or how scientists try to predict such occurences. If I had used Krakatoa as an example instead, the substantive argument would be precisely the same (the one the ARN crowd is so stalwartly avoiding) and I still would have been referring to a disaster that killed tens of thousands of people. And, I would add, it’s not even close to the level of exploitation going on with the various whackos around the world talking about how these are the “last days” and claiming that God killed those people on purpose for their (or our) sins, not to mention the utter inhumanity of a cretin like Fred Phelps celebrating it because it killed “dykes and fags”. Yet of all those things, my article that did not even mention the victims of the tragedy is criticized as tasteless and exploitative? You’ll pardon me if I don’t take this feigned outrage very seriously.

Comments

  1. #1 Strange Doctrines
    December 31, 2004

    I have to say Ed, having read your post and the sentiments expressed by the folks at Westboro Baptist Church, that I have a very hard time distinguishing between the two.

    Well, except for the “dykes and fags” stuff. That’s a bit different, I’ll admit.

  2. #2 Ed Brayton
    December 31, 2004

    I have to say Ed, having read your post and the sentiments expressed by the folks at Westboro Baptist Church, that I have a very hard time distinguishing between the two.

    That absolutely baffles me. My post did not blame the victims, it did not celebrate anyone’s death. Indeed, it didn’t even mention the victims. It hardly even mentioned the tsunami itself except as a jumping off point to discuss how the type of argument used in ID could also be used as an “alternative” to mainstream scientific explanations for why tsunamis and earthquakes occur. A hard time distinguishing between the two? What on earth do they have in common other than that they both mention, one barely in passing, the same event?

  3. #3 Strange Doctrines
    December 31, 2004

    Ed, I forgot to use the HTML tag for irony.

  4. #4 Ed Brayton
    December 31, 2004

    LOL. Sorry, I guess I should have recognized that. In my defense, I’ll note that I really was baffled!

  5. #5 Strange Doctrines
    December 31, 2004

    “I really was baffled!”

    Well, any sort of joking in connection with these matters is (of course) completely inappropriate. You were probably just expecting to me to be appropriate.

  6. #6 raj
    January 1, 2005

    FWIW, this fag found Ed’s satire regarding ID quite insightful. Ed, don’t let the IDers get to you. They’ll bitch and moan about anything to try to divert attention from their silliness.

The site is undergoing maintenance presently. Commenting has been disabled. Please check back later!