So after writing that last post and fretting that Coyne had provided the ID bloggers with ample fodder for demonstrating the intemperance of their critics, I decided to look around to see if any of the ID blogs had responded. And sure enough, William Dembski has already weighed in on the subject.
The title of his entry: “Jerry Coyne -- The Herman Munster of Evolutionary Theory.”
And just below the headline are side-by-side photographs of Coyne and the 1960's television character. That's right -- his lead point, his main argument, the thing he fancied so clever he just needed to put it on the main page of his blog, was a crack about a person's physical appearance.
What a classless, no-talent buffoon. I guess in all my hand-wringing about Coyne's review I had forgotten that, at bottom, the ID folks are such total worthless frauds that I needn't worry too much about the niceties of the arguments going back and forth.
Comments
...what did you expect? these are the incompetant boobs who think fart noises are devasting critiques.
--Simon
Posted by: Simon G. | June 16, 2007 12:14 AM
When you can't possibly refute anything your opponent has stated - concede.
Or, if you're an IDer, make some stuff up and ridicule your opponents physical appearance!
Posted by: Maragon | June 16, 2007 3:38 AM
Revenge of the Nerd is making fun of the way other people look?
Posted by: pough | June 18, 2007 12:58 AM
I would have thought Dembski would have realized that his attempts at humor always backfire. His Blog is replete with numerous examples of his sophomoric, childish parodies. It's exactly the humor of 10-year old boys who sit at the back of the classroom sniggering because somebody farted (which of course indeed did figure into one of Dembski's pieces once, before being removed).
It's hard to really fathom that this man is some kind of professor or that he has two PhDs. He seems incapable of reading how others will interpret his actions and ideas.
What ever intellect Dembski possesses it does not seem that he expends any of it on wit or humor.
Posted by: Timcol | June 18, 2007 6:13 PM
Is it just me or does it not seem rather hypocritical when creationists reject evolution or any one of its components on the basis of "lack of evidence". After all, the basis of their own belief system itself stems from the hear-say and conjecture of the bible! Where is the “scientific proof” for the crap the bible is claiming? How can a so called PhD. graduate make such irrational claims. He denies what has science behind it and promotes something that cannot even be proven!
Go figure......
Posted by: Sean | June 19, 2007 10:20 AM
Hardly surprising considering it comes from Dembski, whose disappearing act at Dover proved him to be less the "Issac Newton of information theory" than the Max Bialystock of pseudoscience.
Posted by: triviality | June 26, 2007 6:46 PM