Paul Nelson in Norway

A reader sent along a few notes on Paul Nelson's grand tour of Norway—I've got to say that his strategy and his talk sounds awfully familiar, right down to the vacuous thought-experiments and god-praising screen-saver that conveniently kicked in during the Q&A. Most significantly, the Norwegian audience of scientists had little patience for his nonsensical arguments, just like our audience of students.

I really wonder how Nelson gets these travel invitations. Did the Scandinavian creationist groups pay his expenses, or is the Discovery Institute funding his missionary work? I think I need some atheist organization sugar daddy to front my junkets to Trondheim and other exotic locales in my ancestral homeland—I'd willingly go into a Norwegian church to lecture on godless evilution and get hammered on by the fundies if it meant I got to visit some interesting people and places.

The summary of his talk (in English, you'll be relieved to know) is below the fold.

…I thought you may like to hear that Paul A. Nelson recently "honoured" my country by visiting us and holding a lecture at the University of Oslo as well as other places. Nelson was invited by a small group of anti-evolution "scientists" we actually have here in Norway, a joint Norwegian-Danish organisation who calls themselves "Origo".

I don't know if this is of interest to you, but I'll give you a short summary of what has happened so far, just in case.

The debate at the University on 20. September was interesting according to this website: http://www.fritanke.no/NYHETER/Brutalt_pa_Blindern/. A large group of biologists had turned up and they gave poor Nelson a hard time, I am glad to tell you! Nelson's lecture followed the standard creationist/ID line. He opened with the ID-nonsense about "irreducible complexity", the flagellum contra Stonehenge and the subsequent design inference (I am so tired of reading about flagella in ID-literature - wish they could come up with another example!), continued with the "Darwinism is a religious point of view" crap, commented that suboptimal design is also an option of an Itelligent Designer (although not very intelligent, if you ask me) and ended with a comment that "the one-tracked scientific method prevents us from understanding reality"!

The following debate was not a happy event for Nelson. Whenever he was challenged he tended to present complex thought-experiments, in fact he did this so much that the debate leader interrupted him and told him to stop! I don't think it was because of these harsh word and the unfriendly treatment, but Nelson admitted at the end that ID would be seriously challenged if it was proven that evolutionary theory could explain the origin of the flagellum (I agree with that!). He further stated that evolutionary theory today has much greater explaining power than ID and that ID consequently should not be taught in schools. Well, at least he got something right!

The real revelation came at the end of the show, though. When asked if Nelson thought the designer was the Christian god he replied diplomatically that it could be God, Jahve, Allah or the Flying Spaghetti monster (my money would be on the latter - if I had the capacity for belief in supernatural beings!). However, when his screen saver turned on during the break the following could be seens flickering across the screen: "Nature is the art of God"! So much for giving equal possibillity to the numerous deities which the deisgner could be!

Even if Nelson definitely lost the debate at the University, he will continue his tour of my beloved country and I am sad to say that he will be able to poison the minds of many still basically uncorrupted young minds. Among the various places he'll visit are high schools, student societies in Bergen and presumably Trondheim and of course various christian communities and churches. I wish I could be there and tell him what he is, but hopefully someone else will, at least in the high schools.

Creationsim is in no way as big a problem here in Norway as it is in the States, but I have always suspected that creationsim and ID is much more widespread in christian communities in Norway than most politicians and scientists like to think and one day I'll conduct a survey of that. If you think you got it bad with the right-wing people ruling your country, know that our prime minister a few years ago was actually a priest!

More like this

Just another international liar .....

By G. Tingey (not verified) on 26 Sep 2006 #permalink

You are already supported by the state in your public university job PZ.

How much of that time do you spend blogging?

Just wondering.

As much time as he wants I'm sure.
He's not paid hourly genius.

How much of that time do you spend blogging?

I guess that question, in Professor Myers's particular case, is basically identical to "How much of the time does our science professor spend a) teaching in his extended classroom, and/or b) publishing his academic writings?" I think he gives extraordinary value for his taxpayer-supported salary, and I'm a libertarian who says so, too.

By speedwell (not verified) on 26 Sep 2006 #permalink

Two components of a faculty position are education and public service. Considering how many people worldwide learn about biology from his blog, PZ is fulfilling both of those those components many times over.

Mr. Raven was just observing that you should write a popular-science book on biology and evolution, PZ (I know, in your copious spare time :). He thinks (and I totally concur) that you could be as or more effective than Asimov was for our generation at communicating science to a non-scientific audience.

If God were real, you would think it would no longer be necessary, after 2000 years, to have to drill his reality into people's heads every weekend.

Think of all the time priests, ministers, rabbis, etc. waste spewing insane nonsense about non-existent deities.

A waste of time! I'll take PZ sanity anyday. They should pay him MORE for providing enlightenment well beyond the confines of his classroom.

"How much of that time do you spend blogging?"
I concur with the others that PZ is worth his weight in gold in publicity and outreach. However, I have sometimes wondered how he can possibly keep up, I am sure many people email PZ things so he does not have to search for information, and he can sometimes post things he uses on his students. Still given a job, a family life, a wayward cat, and the occasional flooded basement, it is an impressive output.

By oldhippie (not verified) on 26 Sep 2006 #permalink

...I thought you may like to hear that Paul A. Nelson recently "honoured" my country by visiting us and holding a lecture at the University of Oslo as well as other places. Nelson was invited by a small group of anti-evolution "scientists" we actually have here in Norway, a joint Norwegian-Danish organisation who calls themselves "Origo".

Just for the record, "Origo" isn't directly an organization, but a magazine published by a mixed batch of people, some of which are scientists.

According to the homepage of the magazine, the purpose of "Origo" is to spread knowledge about:

1. The scientific theories of creation as alternatives to evolutionary theories about the origin of the universe, the origin of life, descent of man and more.

2. The scientific methods - especially regarding the abilities and limitations of the sciences.

3. Ethical issues concerning natural science and medicin.

4. Philosophy of science questions related to the relationship between faith and science.

(Translated from Danish by pwe)

All in all, fairly standard issues. While old school creationism never caught on in Scandinavia, the ID movement has spawned some interest.

Because science and Chistianity hasn't been all that antithetic to each other in Scandinavia, there's actually a well-established tradition for discussions about the relationship between science and Christianity, and to some extent the ID movement might seem to fit well in here. The problem though is that we are not all that used to "proofs" for creation, and that's why I, although i may agree with some of the IDists on some issues, don't really think we can use them for all that much. They are too dependent on particular US issues.

Christ on a stick, is that "how do you spend your time" argument up again? That's the last defense of someone who is simply grumpy and has nothing to complain about. Gary, how much of your weekend do you spend clocking hours for your job? How much of your evenings? How often do you stay up until 2 am doing your job after already putting in 8-10 hours during the day? How often do you read the news and look at pop culture with the specific goal of figuring out how well they would do as examples at your job? Academic jobs don't turn off at 5:00 every day, Gary.

How much of that time do you spend...

Having been married to an academic, I'd say about 60-80 hours a week on university business, including research, writing, community outreach (generally considered a big plus by any university), committee and other meetings, and of course teaching.

Sometimes more. How much time do you spend? (Me, I'm too lazy for academia, definitely.)

Heh, at first I misread it as "orgio.."

He further stated that evolutionary theory today has much greater explaining power than ID and that ID consequently should not be taught in schools.

Just because it's obvious doesn't mean that it shouldn't be said: How does ID have any explanatory power in biology, aside from the actions of evolved agents? IOW, fine, got one thing mostly right, and another thing completely right (that ID oughtn't be taught), but he failed to show that ID has any promise whatsoever.

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/b8ykm

Talk about spreading a nasty, foreign contagion to another part of the world. Yikes! And Norway is such a beautiful place too. (Bergensbanen from Bergen to Oslo is one of the most spectacular train rides in the world, so is the trip from Oslo to Trondheim for that matter.) I hate to see all of that natural beauty being overrun by creationist wing nuts. Uff da!

Fortunately, we do not only get people like Nelson to visit this exotic place (Oslo, Norway). This month we have been visited by both Richard Dawkins and Lynn Margulis.

Unfortunately, Paul Nelson got quite a lot of attention in the press and in Norwegian discussion forums, but the other two, I think, were almost only noticed by those who attended their public lectures.

I am so tired of reading about flagella in ID-literature - wish they could come up with another example!

I'm hip! I can't find the New Yorker article online, but its take-down of Behe's blatting in Dover was just priceless; it went something like, After a while one wished that the creationists could come up with something original--evolution had stacks of evidence on its side, and the ID folks had...the bacterial flagellum.

Here's to hoping that even the true believers will get flagellumed-out soon.

Considering that PZ blogs under his own name with plenty of mention of his university, and that the university acknowledges his web page on their site, I think we may safely assume that they believe they're getting their money's worth out of him, and that's all that counts.

Lesson #1 about people who complain about bloggers wasting their time or their employers' time: They never ever follow up on their argument. Why would they? Their pot-shot is the magic-bullet final word on everything within the blog, and cannot possibly be refuted.

"I really wonder how Nelson gets these travel invitations."

Sometimes organisers are inventive. Last year they disguised a press conference as a seminar at the Swedish Museum of Natural History.

A swedish religious magazine (by a group of nonconformist churches) reports:
"Det blev stor aktivitet på Naturhistoriska riksmuséet i början på veckan. Telefonerna gick varma och alla frågade om de kunde anmäla sig till seminariet med Paul Nelson, forskare i evolutionsbiologi, om Intelligent design. ... Uppgifterna i radion var felaktig, och således fanns det inget seminarium med Paul Nelson att anmäla sig till. Därför blir uppståndelsen på Naturhistoriska stor bland personalen då Paul Nelson verkligen finns på museet, dock inte för att hålla föredrag, utan för att ge intervjuer till svenska journalister." ( http://www.dagen.se/dagen/Article.aspx?ID=96576 )

(Roughly: 'There was big activity at the Swedish Museum of Natural History in the start of the week. The phones were ringing and everyone asked where they could register to the seminar with Paul Nelson, researcher in evolution biology, about intelligent design. ... The information from radio show was erroneous, and so were was no seminar with Paul Nelson to register with. Therefore the commotion at Natural history is big among the personel when Paul Nelson really is at the museum, though not to hold a seminar, but to give interviews to swedish journalists'.)

The norwegian organisation seems to be more organised though, if I read the linked evolution site correctly. It says that creationism has started to organise in Europe, though it isn't a big problem in norwegian academy. But there are a few organisations, such as Origo. Its norwegian site features a "Dr.scient. Willy Fjeldskaar" ( http://www.ansatte.hitos.no/steinar/origo/styre.htm ). He holds a Dr. Scient. degree in Geophysics. ( http://www.rf.no/docsent/emp.nsf/wvAnsatte/WF ; note the same URL for origo mail and his work place.)

Origo produces the magazine ORIGO 'together with a similar organisation in Denmark'. ("Foreningen utgir - i samarbeid med en tilsvarende forening i Danmark - tidsskriftet ORIGO.") The editorial staff has the earlier mentioned Fjeldskaar, but also the danish researcher "Professor, dr. scient. Peter Ãhrstrøm". ( http://www.skabelse.dk/origo.php?id=redaktion )

And now it becomes really interesting ( http://sogneaften.com/peter%20oerhstroem.htm ). Ãhrstrøm, who holds a Ph.D. in the History of Ideas ( http://www.hum.aau.dk/~poe/EngelskWeb/welcome_eng.html ) has produced several publications on logic, programming, ethics and religion. And he is a member of the Danish Ethical Council, of the board of representatives in the Danish Board of Technology and a project partner of the EURECA EU project, an "project on delimiting the research concept and research activities"! ( http://www.eureca.manchester.ac.uk/ )

"This project investigates a still unresolved question that cuts across all areas of research involving human beings: When should an activity count as research? The answer to this question is important because classifying an activity as research sometimes determines whether stricter ethical and legal regulations apply. ... 5. An account of which criteria are most suitable as the basis for the research / non-research distinction in the regulation of different scientific areas."

I can't easily get a grip on the project and its coordinator ( http://www.law.manchester.ac.uk/aboutus/staff/john_harris/default.htm ). He has published a chapter in a book called "Pro-life is Anti Life: The Problematic Claims of Pro-Life Positions in Ethics", but later he also says about the probably anti-abortionist editor of the book "Takala Shoots Herself In the Foot". He has also made a joint pro/against paper on stem cell research. He may be a 'discuss the controversy, go easy on the antiscience, and make a compromise instead' type of guy.

But the conclusion is that we have a creationist involved in the process of deciding what is ethically and legally acceptable EU science. We are screwed over here too!!!

By Torbjörn Larsson (not verified) on 26 Sep 2006 #permalink

Hw cm PZ cn prmt thsm n tx pyr dllrs bt nthr prfssr t th nvrsty f ws cn't prmt thsm n tx pyr dllrs.

nly th thst prfssr f rlgn t th f w knws. Hnt, hs nm s vls nd h s cllng fr th LMNTN f rlgn.

n txpyr dllrs.

Hw cm PZ cn prmt thsm n txpyr dllrs bt nthr prfssr, t th f w, cn't prmt thsm n txpyr dllrs?

Jst wndrng.

Of course, the scope of a project financed by the european commission doesn't need to be that it will be used for decisions on funding. And I can't find it on the EU site.

Perhaps it's the foreplay?

By Torbjörn Larsson (not verified) on 26 Sep 2006 #permalink

Jamal, why do I wonder if your claim is accurate? Perhaps the extreme vagueness of your contention is a factor; you could provide enough info to let people know what you're talking about.

How come PZ can promote atheism on tax payer dollars but another professor at the University of Iowas can't promote theism on tax payer dollars.

OMG HE IS SO RIGHT LOLOLZ!!111 PZ IS A PROFESSOR AT A PUBLIC UNIVERSITEEE THAT MEANS HE IS IN NO WAY ENTITLED TO EXPRESS ANTI-RELIGIOUS OPINIONS ON A PERSONAL BLOG ROFL!!!111onehundredandeleven

By The Anti-Myers (not verified) on 26 Sep 2006 #permalink

Of course in my above comment I'm giving Jamal the benefit of the doubt and assuming he's not talkin about Guillermo Gonzalez, which would of course be a gross fabrication on his part (so I'm sure that can't be it).

Guillermo Gonzalez is objecting to the fact that scientists on his campus signed a petition saying that non-science shouldn't be taught as science, a stance he seems to have some disagreement with. Not letting your preferred brand of pseudoscience be taught as science is not --- IMO -- a bad thing, and doesn't really have anything to do with either promoting religion or non-religion -- it has to do with not promoting non-science in a university science class.

Of course in my above comment I'm giving Jamal the benefit of the doubt and assuming he's not talkin about Guillermo Gonzalez, which would of course be a gross fabrication on his part (so I'm sure that can't be it).

Uh, okay. I was talking to Tyler DiPietro just a minute ago, he says he doesn't want anyone being a wet-blanket and using fair-mindedness to ruin the creation of an internet alter-ego he's creating to parody PZ's more ridiculous detractors. I wonder who he's talking about....

By The Anti-Myers (not verified) on 26 Sep 2006 #permalink

How come PZ can promote atheism on taxpayer dollars but another professor, at the U of Iowa, can't promote theism on taxpayer dollars?

Just wondering.

...I wasn't aware that Scienceblogs was funded by taxpayer dollars. Damn! I wonder if I can ask for more of my tax dollars to go to Myers and Zimmer instead of going to faith-based BS and bloated politician's salaries.

"the probably anti-abortionist editor"

Sheez! I was tired in the end of that over-long comment. I'm should be glad I got rid of the "EU/EU financed project" conflation already then.

But "pro-life" is anti-abortion, so Tarkala is probably pro-abortion, and the project coordinator John Harris too since that would be more consistent from him.

He still seems to want to discuss both sides though which is rather ludicrous if the sides are science and anti-science.

By Torbjörn Larsson (not verified) on 26 Sep 2006 #permalink

Here in the States, we often have a lot of problems with introduced invasive species, usually from Eurasia, damaging the environment. Is the problem reciprocated now?

It could be global warming that gets creo loonies (abextra noncomposmentis) to try new feeding grounds. They naturally produce a lot of hot air, so they must love the new world climate.

By Torbjörn Larsson (not verified) on 26 Sep 2006 #permalink

John Owens wrote:

Here in the States, we often have a lot of problems with introduced invasive species, usually from Eurasia, damaging the environment. Is the problem reciprocated now?

I have read that European earth-worms are out-competing native earth-woms in the US, so maybe Paul Nelson's visit is a kind of revenge.

However. I think we should search for another explanation. In the 17th-18th century we sent all our creationists to, what became the USA. The 'independence' was really intelligently designed to finally have them enclosed in their own country.

Sure, we still accept visits from 'over there' just to have something to laugh at ;-)

Actually, European earthworms were introduced into Eastern North American forests, where all of its indigenous earthworm species had died out during the last Ice Age, and the newly imported earthworms were running amok by eating up all the leaf litter, thus drying out the forests' understory.

From the summary-

He opened with the ID-nonsense about "irreducible complexity", the flagellum contra Stonehenge and the subsequent design inference

For the flagellum, everything- for the apical complex, nothing....(sob!)

http://www.impact-malaria.com/FR/EPS/Formations_et_cours_internationaux…

.................................................

ASH: You still don't understand what you're dealing with, do you?
A perfect organism...... It's structural perfection is matched
only by it's hostility.

LAMBERT: You admire it....

ASH: I admire it's purity.....a survivor....unclouded by consience,
remorse, or delusions of morality.....

.................................................

By Dark Matter (not verified) on 27 Sep 2006 #permalink