Dispatches from the Creation Wars

Boy oh boy, Judge Jones being named as one of the 100 most influential people of recent times sure has the ID crowd’s panties in a bunch. First we had Casey Luskin’s inane and shameful insinuation that he didn’t write the Dover ruling himself. And now we have DaveScot’s even more shameful reaction to it. He arbitrarily picks out bad guys that Time has named “Person of the Year” in the past in order to denigrate Jones:

The magazine who made these men “Man of the Year”

1938 – Adolf Hitler
1939 – Joseph Stalin
1942 – Joseph Stalin
1957 – Nikita Krushchev
1979 – Ayatullah Khomeini

now brings you Judge John Jones as a 2006 Honorable (pun intended) Mention.

You can tell how completely insane Jones’ ruling has driven these nutballs when they feel the need to compare the man to Hitler and Stalin. Of course, the choice of those men is completely arbitrary. He could also have picked George W. Bush, who has been named man of the year twice in the last 6 years, or the American Soldier, who was named to that spot in 2003. But that wouldn’t imply horrible things about the man, so those were out.

It also should be said that picking the person of the year has nothing to do with approval of the person named. The award is morally neutral and is designed only to designate the person who most impacted the world, for better or for worse. That’s why Hitler and Stalin are on the list, not because Time is honoring them but because they had a huge impact on the world in the years they were at the top of the list. But who has time for such subtleties when trying to construct a juvenile smear of a man? And of course, Dembski had to chime in with a comment of approval:

Thanks, Dave, for contextualizing this milestone in our proper appreciation of important personages. . . . What a crock.

The only crock here is the one you and Dave are toting around, Bill. You are doing nothing but smear a man for daring to not buy your line of BS about ID. And personally, I think Dave is still sore that his prediction that Jones would cave in to pressure from his conservative benefactors and do their bidding in the Dover trial turned out not to be true. For the record, here it is again:

Judge John E. Jones on the other hand is a good old boy brought up through the conservative ranks. He was state attorney for D.A.R.E, an Assistant Scout Master with extensively involved with local and national Boy Scouts of America, political buddy of Governor Tom Ridge (who in turn is deep in George W. Bush’s circle of power), and finally was appointed by GW hisself. Senator Rick Santorum is a Pennsylvanian in the same circles (author of the “Santorum Language” that encourages schools to teach the controversy) and last but far from least, George W. Bush hisself drove a stake in the ground saying teach the controversy. Unless Judge Jones wants to cut his career off at the knees he isn’t going to rule against the wishes of his political allies.

That’s why he heaps such irrational abuse on Jones, because Jones turned out to have actual judicial independence and a brain of his own and didn’t cave in to the pressure of those who put him in office. And hell hath no fury like an ignorant git scorned.

Comments

  1. #1 Raging Bee
    May 5, 2006

    Please don’t mention the “ID crowd’s panties” again. You’re really planting some disturbing images in my head. Are you punishing me for disagreeing with you on farm policy?

  2. #2 Ed Brayton
    May 5, 2006

    LOL Raging Bee. Perhaps I should have said “diapers” given the juvenile reaction to the Dover ruling.

  3. #3 tacitus
    May 5, 2006

    And the prize for boot-licker of the year goes to “Gods iPod”:

    Bill, don’t be so quick to put down this honor of being man of the year. If things keep going as we hope, I predict you will be gracing that cover sooner than you think.

    (Comment no. 9)

  4. #4 Fox Laughing
    May 5, 2006

    Use “knickers” or “drawers” instead — it implies a stubborn refusal to accept modern advances.

  5. #5 Chance
    May 5, 2006

    You know I used to cut Dembski some slack, I felt he was misguided but otherwise decent.

    I have come to change my view. I don’t know if it’s the process of seeing ones folly dissected again and again or being incapapble of actually proving your research but he seems to be becoming a very ugly human internally.

  6. #6 Dave S.
    May 5, 2006

    1930 Mohandas K. Gandhi
    1932 Franklin D. Roosevelt
    1940 Winston L. S. Churchill
    1944 Dwight D. Eisenhower
    1950 American Fighting-Man
    1956 Hungarian Freedom Fighter
    1962 Pope John XXIII
    1963 Martin Luther King Jr.
    1981 Lech Walesa
    1994 Pope John Paul II
    2003 The American Soldier
    2005 Bill Gates, Melinda Gates, & Bono

    Oh Bono….you fascist you.

    tacitus says:

    And the prize for boot-licker of the year goes to “Gods iPod”:

    Bill, don’t be so quick to put down this honor of being man of the year. If things keep going as we hope, I predict you will be gracing that cover sooner than you think.

    I concur. Rarely does one see such a virtuoso display of hypocrisy combined with obsequious toadyism in two short sentences.

  7. #7 KeithB
    May 5, 2006

    I’m confused. Given the context of the original message was God’s iPod comment a compliment or an insult?

  8. #8 BigDumbChimp
    May 5, 2006

    DaveScot once again shows up floppy shoes, red nose and all to remind us what a clown he is in the circus that is ID, and it was also nice for Dembski to remind us that he’s playing the role of ringleader.

  9. #9 Cody Cobb
    May 5, 2006

    Looks like our good friend Samuel Chen also feels the comparisons are apt. Get a kick out of his concluding sentence:

    “Hopefully the dictatorship he aims to set up in education falls like the dicatorships set up in governments by Hitler and Stalin.”

  10. #10 Dave S.
    May 5, 2006

    KeithB:

    That’s where the hypocrisy comes in. It’s an low honour indeed if an evolution supporter makes the list, but we’d have to reverse gears and change it to a high honour if the likes of Dembski were to make it.

    It’s just rare to see the hypocrisy stated so blatantly.

  11. #11 BigDumbChimp
    May 5, 2006

    Looks like our good friend Samuel Chen also feels the comparisons are apt. Get a kick out of his concluding sentence:

    Chen is a serious joke. After having self appointed himself the head of some organization he made up he now thinks he’s some sort of authority on evolution and ID.

    Intelligent Design Undergraduate Research center. I wonder what this means about his research considering the big boys at the Disco Institute have none.

  12. #12 Cody Cobb
    May 5, 2006

    To be fair, Chen didn’t make up the IDURC; someone else had already set aside the necessary harddrive space to host their research center.

    Currently their research consists primarily of monitoring various media outlets and making sure they’re accurately reporting the IDURC’s research.