You can now read Richard Dawkins official statement on the controversial petition over at the Panda’s Thumb.
Well, this was an interesting chain of events to get to after the New Year festivities calms down. Dawkins position on indoctrination becomes much more clear, though I have to find out more around Orac’s observation on another thread that the “child abuse” position may be inconsistent. (Since Dawkins doesn’t propose harder consequences.)
Anyway, Dawkins came up on top and Brayton on the bottom – as usual he can’t in the end resist attacking people (Moran, Myers, Dawkins) from a negative read even if he sometimes manage to get the prior analysis correct. And he ends consistently with an overlong apology letter where he likewise can’t refrain from suggesting that Dawkins should be chamberlaining.
There is also humor to be found. Brayton has himself slipped in his chamberlaining. His confessed strategy was:
It annoys me to no end when ID advocates portray us pro-science types as enforcers of a “Darwinian orthodoxy” with a zeal to purge all dissent from the ideas we advocate from academia; it is far more disturbing when a few folks on our side of this debate go out of their way to actually match that crude caricature being foisted on us. Nothing good can possibly come from this.
While he now says:
I don’t care about getting along; I care about what’s right.
If anyone wanted the links to Brayton’s parade of odd comments, you are out of luck. Evidently PZ’s spam script is hypersensitive about Ed.
Oh, and I have resolved Orac’s point to my satisfaction by now. (This comment was languishing in the spam queue for a day.) It is a conflict between “child abuse” and “personal discomfort at home”, which isn’t there regarding other abuse.
Recently, Carl Zimmer made a criticism of the computer animations of molecular events (it’s the same…
You know what is really impressing me about Neil deGrasse Tyson’s Cosmos? That he doesn’t hesitate…
He hates Tiktaalik. He hates it so much he even has a hard time spelling its…