Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
I just posted the following comment on Chen's blog:
I've been an ID watcher for a long time and I've seen a lot of funny things get said. But I have to say, this performance may take the cake. It's at least on the level with Dembski's nonsense last fall where he claimed that our side pulled Shallit's testimony because it was an "embarrassment", then was shown that in fact his side had tried frantically to keep Shallit off the stand, and then deleted the posts where he had made the accusations in the first place, saying that it was all just a bit of "street theater". Chen posts a comment claiming that the DI doesn't support their own statements, has it pointed out how absurd that is (especially in light of the fact that they have explicitly stated that they still affirm those statements), and then deletes his own comments from his blog. I have to take my hat off to him; by any measure, this is a bravissimo performance. Keep this up and you'll be working for the DI in no time.
Office pool on how long before that comment gets deleted as well?
Comments
Oh yeah....well maybe he'll just ban himself from his own blog...that way he never has to see your post.
Ever thought of that smart guy?? :)
Posted by: Dave S.
| April 21, 2006 1:29 PM
I just tossed up a similar taunt right below yours to serve as a buffer. Hey, you never know what might work.
Posted by: Beaming Visionary
| April 21, 2006 2:09 PM
This is awesome. It just keeps getting less intelligent.
"We modify, delete, and deny our own statements, but you Darwinists sometimes don't care to read our BS. Those things are exactly morally equivallent."
Thanks, Dave S. I needed the laugh.
Posted by: Evil Bender
| April 21, 2006 3:06 PM
The great thing about science is that only the process is what matter. I do not know most of the scientist that have come before me, nor I care to know. And after I'm retired, know one will remember me.
To this day the ID people have not publish a single, not one experimental manipulation of JACK to several hundreds of thousands of papers in evolution, from molecular to populaton to evolutionary ecology, etc., etc., etc.
ID may be the greatest thing since slice bread, but until they start doing experiments and have meaningful data, is all worhtless. The one and only thing that matters the DOING the science. Everything else is bull$shit.
Posted by: TrekJunkie
| April 21, 2006 3:40 PM
You would think that if Samuel, Dembski and others fond of Orwellian history rewriting had a good appreciation for science they would understand that transparency is essential.
Obviously blog entries aren't science, but I always wonder what these people would do if they were in labs. Would their logbooks be as falsified and adulterated as their blog entries are? If they can't be trusted to be honest and forthright about something as silly as a blog entry how could they possibly be trusted to engage in ethical scientific practices? And if they can't do that then they clearly don't understand science.
I work at a company that does research on pharmaceuticals and one the first things I was told is that I will never be fired for making a mistake. But if I try to cover up my mistake I will be thrown out no questions asked. I have subsequently learned that this is absolutely essential and that without this standard our data is worthless. Further, I have tried to carry this over into my daily life because I think it is a good practice. Your friends and family will forgive your mistakes and will respect you if you own up to them. They'll (rightly) think you're a lying, childish jackass with a fragile ego if you don't.
Anyway, the sheer hypocrisy of pretending to understand science while at the same time violating a fundamental best practice always strikes me as a telling indicator of where these people are coming from.
Posted by: Leni
| April 23, 2006 12:05 PM