Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal
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)
[66] "To sum up (or I shall be pursuing the infinite), it is quite clear that the Christian religion has a kind of kinship with folly in some form, though it has none at all with wisdom. If you want proofs of this, first consider the fact that the very young and the very old, women and simpletons, are the people who take the greatest delight in sacred and holy things, and are therefore always found nearest the altars, led there doubtless solely by their natural instinct. Secondly, you can see how the first great founders of the faith were great lovers of simplicity and bitter enemies of learning. Finally, the biggest fools of all appear to be those who have once been wholly possessed by zeal for Christian piety. They squander their possessions, ignore insults, submit to being cheated, make no distinction between friends and enemies, shun pleasure, sustain themselves on fasting, vigils, tears, toil and humilations, scorn life and desire only death - in short, they seem to be dead to any normal feelings, as if their spirit dwelt elsewhere than in their body. What else can that be but madness? And so we should not be surprised if the apostles were thought to be drunk on new wine, and Festus judged Paul to be mad.
[Erasmus, 'Praise of Folly']
An updated book list for evolutionists
I think I despise anti-environmentalists as much as I do anti-evolutionists
« Pianka and Mims | Main | Ammoknight »
Category: Creationism
Posted on: April 3, 2006 1:09 AM, by PZ Myers
Just a few more examples: David P. Wozney, who doesn't believe dinosaurs ever existed, and Tom Ritter, a Pennsylvania school teacher who wants to have a debate.
I just can't keep up with them all.
YES! Send me a free issue of Seed.
If I like what I see, I'll receive 5 more issues (6 in all) for just $19.95. If I'm not completely satisfied, I'll simply write "cancel" on the invoice and owe nothing. The free issue is mine to keep.
(Non-U.S. subscribers, click here.)
Comments
Posted by: Martin | April 3, 2006 1:39 AM
Methinks we need a new all-purpose terms for these folks. "Creationists" doesn't quite identify them with the pinpoint accuracy one would prefer. "Creationist kooks" is more accurate, but still doesn't encompass the global scope of their ignorance and stupidity. How about Reality Deniers? We could just refer to them as "RD's" or "the RD crowd" henceforth. How's that for a meme?
Posted by: garth | April 3, 2006 2:25 AM
ardee ar ar....
get it? a play on "RD". ugh. it's late.
I don't believe in dinosaurs either. Though i doubt that will make any dinosaur skeletons disappear. The truth rarely takes my opinion too seriously. neither should you.
Posted by: Heathen Dan | April 3, 2006 4:07 AM
Cretinists and IDiots are already in use.
Posted by: G. Tingey | April 3, 2006 4:11 AM
You don't need to keep up with them.
First: At every opportunity, you, and we must shout LIAR! at these nutters.
Second: They aren't reality-deniers, they are trying to create their own new reality ( Gilead )
Third: they have an awful lot in common with the islamofascists - to the extent, that as shown recently, a lot of US citizens would rather trust a muslim than an unbeliever.
Fourth: Most important ---
Be sure that you are ready to run (emigrate/refugee) to Canada/Europe by the 2016 US election.
Posted by: bigdumbchimp | April 3, 2006 7:30 AM
They are even making it into the apex of pop culture.
There was a full bore cretinist on the Sopranos last night.
Posted by: Michael Hopkins | April 3, 2006 7:35 AM
Wozney tells us that dinosaurs were first described by Owen, the first discoveries in North American in 1854, and concludes "So, dinosaurs were described in 1842 before the discoveries in 1854 which were required to give a clear picture of what dinosaurs looked like!"
Wow this makes no sense even if one accepts all his "facts." Does he never consider that the European Owen might have been describing dinosaurs from Europe? And even if Owen did not understand what dinosaurs looked like in the detail made possible by discovers made afterward he could still say they existed.
And contrary to Wozney, one can usually tell the real bones in a museum: they tend to catalog numbers written is one of the more obvious signs.
Posted by: wamba | April 3, 2006 8:21 AM
Sure, let's have the least-informed judge science. Lord of the Flies, here we come.Posted by: Jim Wynne | April 3, 2006 8:28 AM
Thus reads the resolution for the debate proposed by the wingnut physics teacher Ritter. The resolution doesn't makes sense even in creationist terms. Shore sounds purty though, don't it?
Posted by: DJ | April 3, 2006 8:37 AM
"Flooders". Like Nutters.
Posted by: Tony Jackson | April 3, 2006 8:42 AM
From his web site, it seems that Wozney doesn't believe Neil Armstrong walked on the moon either. What's interesting here is that, just like the creationist misundertandings, the same old moon hoax claims are repeated again and again. ie "but there's no stars in the pictures from the moon, and there's no exhaust from the lunar module, oh and the astonauts' shadows don't look right" etc etc. Of course all of these have been debunked many many times but that doesn't seem to stop the likes of Wozney. People like Wozney are beyond help.
Posted by: mathpants | April 3, 2006 9:15 AM
I take an exciting, moderate, position on this whole controversial debate:
While I do not believe the 'moon landing' pictures show man walking on the actual moon, I do believe that they actually show man walking on Underwater Jupiter (it's in the Gowanus Canal, along with some really really gross stuff).
Can I have a senior position at the New Republic, please?
Posted by: Sean Foley | April 3, 2006 9:17 AM
From his web site, it seems that Wozney doesn't believe Neil Armstrong walked on the moon either.
Of course astronauts never landed on the moon. Too many dinosaurs up there. It wouldn't be safe.
Posted by: argy stokes | April 3, 2006 9:23 AM
Speaking of creationists, how did your corespondence with Hutchison go?
Posted by: Will E. | April 3, 2006 9:24 AM
"There was a full bore cretinist on the Sopranos last night."
Yay for Tony S., revealed as dinosaur fan and evolutionist!
Posted by: Don Culberson | April 3, 2006 9:36 AM
->"There was a full bore cretinist on the Sopranos last night."
->Yay for Tony S., revealed as dinosaur fan and evolutionist!
->Posted by: Will E. | April 3, 2006 09:24 AM
There was also a segment that was kinda cheezy, but timely, considering the recent Templeton "study", on the efficacy of prayer for surgical patients. The cretinist and Janice's old boyfriend ("have you heard the good news?") helped Tony get through his surgery by praying for him. Tony seemed to tolerate it... Carmela was into it, of course.
Uncle Don
Posted by: ericnh | April 3, 2006 9:59 AM
Did anyone catch last night's Sopranos? Little existential debate going on for Tony that just happened to involve a dinosaur book (remember he's still in the hospital), a physics-quoting fellow patient who once worked at Bell Labs, and a YEC-spouting hospital priest who gave the whole "man walked with dinosaurs 6000 years ago" spiel. I cringed every time that guy spoke (even though I know the point is to help Tony question his existence and redefine who he is in the final season). The priest even pulled the old "studies have shown prayer works" routine. I actually yelled back at the TV "not according to last weeks study!" Argh!
Posted by: jbark | April 3, 2006 11:13 AM
Christopher's reaction to the Creationist story was priceless.
Something like "The Garden of Eden was supposed to be paradise. If there were T-Rexes there Adam and Eve would have just been running away all the time".
Posted by: bigdumbchimp | April 3, 2006 11:48 AM
I have a recounting of the whole deal here
Creationists love the Sopranos
Posted by: wheatdogg | April 3, 2006 2:21 PM
Ritter is a member of the American Association of Physics Teachers, which depresses me as a fellow member. >Sigh.
The article in the Lebanon, Pa., newspaper has him defining "theory" as essentially a guess. It's not what I would expect a fellow science teacher to say, so I asked him to clarify his remark and to explain how he approaches other theories used in his own subjects of chem and phys. He also made the tired old equality of evolution = atheism, which I noted has no validity at all.
Phil Plait would have fun with the other nutball.
Posted by: BrassyDel | April 3, 2006 6:31 PM
Sean Foley responds to TJ: From his web site, it seems that Wozney doesn't believe Neil Armstrong walked on the moon either.
Of course astronauts never landed on the moon. Too many dinosaurs up there. It wouldn't be safe.
You, sir, have made my day. Eeheeheeheehee.
Posted by: Azoran | April 3, 2006 9:12 PM
To quote a mildly entertaining and somewhat educational television show...
"I reject your reality, and substitute my own" - (Adam Savage, Mythbusters)
Posted by: DiscordianStooge | April 4, 2006 12:15 AM
The best quote came from the link in the dinosaur article to "Larry's Sister Anna."
"If it happened back in the day, it's in the Bible."
Posted by: wheatdogg | April 4, 2006 10:39 AM
Ritter responded to my e-mail. He says he does not have time to answer my questions, and referred me to the Pa. Constitution Party website, where he says I will find the answers to most of my questions.
I asked six questions, all referring to his quotes in the news article about his (the Party's) debate challenge. I'm a little miffed at his lack of response, but that's life. I tried.
Here's part of what the Party website says:
1. No one has demonstrated that life can evolve where none existed before.
2. No one has demonstrated that a new sexual species can evolve.
3. Evolution theorizes the human brain evolved from lower forms of life. Over 50 years into the age of computers, we can build machines that can crunch numbers far better and faster than humans, recognize and use language and tools, and beat us in chess. Yet science has yet to build even a rudimentary computer than can contemplate its own existence1, the hallmark of the human brain.
It goes on from there, including bringing up PZ's favorite equality, atheism = evolutionism, and labeling evolution a "faith" rather than a science.
The Party has extended the challenge deadline to April 7, since there were no volunteers to participate in this farce, I guess.