Darksyde's "Know your creationists" series on Daily Kos has become a "Know your friends" edition today, with a profile of Wesley Elsberry of the NCSE.
Pharyngula
Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
Search
Profile
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
…and this is a pharyngula stage embryo.
• a longer profile of yours truly
• my calendar
• Nature Network
• RichardDawkins Network
• facebook
• MySpace
• Twitter
• Atheist Nexus
• the Pharyngula chat room
(#pharyngula on irc.synirc.net)
• Quick link to the latest endless thread
I reserve the right to publicly post, with full identifying information about the source, any email sent to me that contains threats of violence.
Random Quote
The ACLU is to Christians what the American Nazi party is to Jews.
[Rev. Jerry Falwell]
Recent Posts
- Another of those polls that should be 100%:0%
- Apostasy is a crime punishable by death in Islamic countries
- Mr Deity brings me solace and hope
- The Deep Rifts simply call us unto the breach once more
- Correcting Ken Ham's standard omission
- Evolution in two minutes
- The cameraman speaks
- Mary's Monday Metazoan: What's pink and tubular?
- We're doomed. It's another sign of the apocalypse.
- A wonderful debate
A Taste of Pharyngula
Recent Comments
- Matt Penfold on The Deep Rifts simply call us unto the breach once more
- Rorschach on The cursed undead heart of the vengeful bride of the son of the thread that will not die!
- Jafafa Hots on The cameraman speaks
- Caine on The Deep Rifts simply call us unto the breach once more
- sex shop on Radio reminder
- Richard Eis on The cameraman speaks
- Kel, OM on The Deep Rifts simply call us unto the breach once more
- Tim_Danaher on Another of those polls that should be 100%:0%
- McCthulhu on Another of those polls that should be 100%:0%
- Aquaria on The Deep Rifts simply call us unto the breach once more
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
Blogroll
Other Information
« Bad business at the Burke | Main | A complaint I have to get off my chest »
Elsberry on dKos
Category: Creationism
Posted on: January 28, 2006 9:47 AM, by PZ Myers
Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/594
Sign in or register with TypePad. Sign up with Movable Type.
Comments
Posted by: Kristine | January 28, 2006 12:29 PM
I joined the NCSE last year; glad to see them get this recognition. I had no idea that anyone confused them with the Natonal Science Foundation!
Posted by: Charlie Wagner | January 28, 2006 12:39 PM
On The Value of Theories and Hypotheses
The only reason for having theories and hypotheses is to guide
experiment. They have no value on their own as truth.
The very idea of "selecting" between competing theories is
ridiculous. It brings us no closer to the truth. The way to
decide among competing theories is to test them, not decide
which is probably true based on some theoretical calculations
or by using some trick, like Occam's Razor.
After you collect all of the data, then you can draw
conclusions as to what is or is not likely. And one theory will
usually emerge as superior. Truth does not flow from the human
imagination, it flows from experiment and observation. That's
the only thing that has value. Speculation is interesting and
keeps the mind amused and helps us to design experiment, but it
serves no purpose in it's own right.
Of course, the number of possible hypotheses is infinite.
The human mind can create an unlimited number of scenarios to
explain any observed phenomenon. But if that is true, it's not
just a minor flaw in scientific reasoning. It becomes quickly
evident that all possible hypotheses can never be tested.
This may not seem to be a problem until you consider that if
this is so, then the results of *any* experiment will never be
conclusive. The scientific method becomes incapable of proving
anything, ever.
But this is not catastrophic because fortunately, science is not
in the business of proving and disproving things. The business
of science is saying what is most and least likely. In addition,
what is sometimes referred to as "scientific truth" is a very
fleeting phenomenon at best, and is inversely proportional to
investigative effort. In the past, scientific truths lasted a
long time, because very few people were looking very much.
But as time goes on, their lifespan is becoming increasingly
shorter. Science finds itself today leading mankind, not to a
single, absolute truth, but to multiple, indeterminate, relative
ones. Rational science is supposed to eliminate this uncertainty,
but it does not. In fact, it contributes to the chaos. Look at
what we deal with on a daily basis. Studies of various kinds are
reported every day with wildly varying claims. This is good for
you today, but it was bad for you yesterday. Substance after
substance is demonized by alleged "scientific studies" that tell
us things that we know are not true. Sugar is evil, salt will
kill you, eggs will give you a heart attack, fat is poison,
blah, blah, blah. Science is not making things clearer its making
people crazy. So what happens?
They look for an anchor, something that doesn't ever change,
that is constant and supportive. So they turn to God and religion.
It's inevitable. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.
http://www.charliewagner.com
http://enigma.charliewagner.com
http://www.charliewagner.com/Maui2006alb/index.htm
Posted by: Don Culberson | January 28, 2006 12:52 PM
Good interview with a good guy. From the ancient fidonet days when we did battle with the forces of darkness in "Bulletin Board" fashion, Elsberry has been on the front lines. He had the foresight to collect the threads in which he participated. Maybe some interesting reading if you have a spare, um... week or two...
http://www.rtis.com/nat/user/elsberry/evobio/evc/wre_arch.html
...gotta brush up on html tags so I can make those links look cool like the rest of you guys
Uncle Don
Posted by: plunge
|
January 28, 2006 4:01 PM
I hope they do Lynn Margulis at some point. I really need to hear some clarification on what she means about speciation not being possible via natural selection, or who the "neo-Darwinian" bullies are that she disagrees with and how she disagrees with them. Saying things like this and then saying that she believes biology is on track with evolution is just not clear enough, and her quotes are becoming a major part of the creationist quote mining fun.
PZ, you're part of academia: can't you just ask for a clarification from her as to what she means with you magic trans-academia powers?
Posted by: Charlie Wagner | January 28, 2006 4:24 PM
Paul,
How long should I wait before assuming that my comment has been trashed?
Posted by: coturnix
|
January 28, 2006 4:57 PM
Hey, I see Charlie has made the move to the new digs, too. It took two weeks, but what's that compared to the endlessness of Life, Time, Universe and everything else....
Posted by: Tom Morris | January 28, 2006 5:33 PM
Charlie Wagner: what exactly has your comment got to do with either Daily Kos, DarkSyde, the National Center for Science Education or Dr. Elsberry? Nothing. You've got your own website, so go post your garbage there.
Good article. Based on the recent survey, I think Britain is going to need it's own NCSE sometime soon.
Posted by: Charlie Wagner | January 28, 2006 6:05 PM
Tom Morris wrote:
"Charlie Wagner: what exactly has your comment got to do with either Daily Kos, DarkSyde, the National Center for Science Education or Dr. Elsberry? Nothing. You've got your own website, so go post your garbage there."
It's all about exposure. 5000 people a day read this blog compared to the one or two that read mine. I get dozens of hits whenever I post a comment here. Besides, I have to post *something* every once in a while so that Paul knows I'm still alive and kicking.
"We are a link in Amidas golden chain
of love that stretches around the world.
We will keep our link bright and strong.
We will be kind and gentle to every living thing and protect all who are weaker than ourselves.
We will think pure and beautiful thoughts,
say pure and beautiful words, and do pure
and beautiful deeds.
Posted by: Troy Britain | January 28, 2006 9:50 PM
In other words, just like all antievolutionists, Charles is a leach on people who do the actual heavy lifting.
Posted by: plunge
|
January 28, 2006 9:53 PM
In other words, you are exploiting the comments section to spam links to your site? And you actually had the temerity to claim that your post didn't appear fast enough?
Posted by: Tom Morris | January 29, 2006 4:09 AM
So, you are doing it (a) to leech from other people's popularity and (b) to remind Paul that you exist. The first is really not very ethical (but creationists have never bothered too much about their ethical duties - they are commanded by another force!) and the latter can be done by sending P. Z. an email which says "I exist! I exist! I never had a monkey in my ancestry!". Then he could delete it.
Congratulations, off-topic monkey. I can see the DI fellowship coming soon enough for Mr. Wagner.
Posted by: Andy Groves | January 29, 2006 7:22 PM
I would be interested to read an article in which you discuss your thoughts on scientists who are also Christians, like Wesley and Ken Miller.
Posted by: Charlie Wagner | January 29, 2006 8:16 PM
Andy wrote:
"I would be interested to read an article in which you discuss your thoughts on scientists who are also Christians, like Wesley and Ken Miller."
Good to hear from you again, Andy. I hope you're well and happy.
What would be more interesting would be an article in which Paul discusses his thoughts on scientists who are advocates of intelligent design and who are also atheists. I know of at least one.
What is Buddhist Prayer?
"The purpose of Buddhist prayer is to awaken our inherent inner capacities of strength, compassion and wisdom rather than to petition external forces based on fear, idolizing, and worldly and/or heavenly gain. Buddhist prayer is a form of meditation; it is a practice of inner reconditioning. Buddhist prayer replaces the negative with the virtuous and points us to the blessings of Life.
For Buddhists, prayer expresses an aspiration to pull something into one's life, like some new energy or purifying influence and share it with all beings. Likewise, prayer inspires our hearts towards wisdom and compassion for others and ourselves. It allows us to turn our hearts and minds to the beneficial, rousing our thoughts and actions towards Awakening. If we believe in something enough, it will take hold of us. In other words, believing in it, we will become what we believe. Our ability to be touched like this is evidence of the working of Great Compassion within us.
What's more, it can a function as a form of self-talking or self-therapy in which one mentally talks through a problem, or talks through it aloud, in the hope that some new insight will come or a better decision can be made. Prayer therefore frequently has the function of being part of a decision-making process."
Posted by: Andy Groves | January 29, 2006 8:56 PM
Let me guess...... is he a little blond girl?
Posted by: Charlie Wagner | January 29, 2006 9:50 PM
Andy wrote:
"Let me guess...... is he a little blond girl?"
Indubitably... ;-)