Didn't I tell you Casey Luskin would weigh in on the DI's take on Judge Jones' "plagiarism" in his own inimitably bumbling way? What do you know, he did, and he has already been shot down. John West has also floundered in trying to address the issue, and he too has felt Sandefur's fists of fury. Poor Discovery Institute. Isn't media management supposed to be their area of expertise? How can they be sucking so badly at it?
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 various modes of worship which prevailed in the Roman world were all considered by the people as equally true; by the philosopher as equally false; and by the magistrate as equally useful.
[Edward Gibbons]
Recent Posts
- We're doomed. It's another sign of the apocalypse.
- A wonderful debate
- The world is ending, again
- Rudeness required
- Now I understand everything
- I get email
- Happy Carl Sagan Day!
- A poll in my own backyard
- A True Scotsman™ keeps his Bible in his sporran!
- Who does he think he is, Charles Dickens?
A Taste of Pharyngula
Recent Comments
- Kobra on We're doomed. It's another sign of the apocalypse.
- jeremymichaelskktddvbgfr on New thread for Ken Ham's old whines
- equisetum on We're doomed. It's another sign of the apocalypse.
- raven on A wonderful debate
- Rorschach on A wonderful debate
- Crewvy on A wonderful debate
- Janine The Ineffable, OM on Now I understand everything
- Yes on Ref. 71 on Vote today!
- Thedepressingstatistician on A wonderful debate
- Andrew on A wonderful debate
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
« Reason #11 to vote for Pharyngula | Main | Women who read SF should not be bug-eyed monsters »
The Disco Institute's Division of Legal Affairs screws the pooch again
Category: Creationism
Posted on: December 14, 2006 2:30 PM, by PZ Myers
Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/28197
Sign in or register with TypePad. Sign up with Movable Type.
Comments
Posted by: Great White Wonder | December 14, 2006 2:52 PM
Sandefur's fists of fury.
TIMMEH!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Robert | December 14, 2006 2:56 PM
But what do you think of Larry Moran's opinion of the matter?
Posted by: Great White Wonder | December 14, 2006 2:58 PM
But what do you think of Larry Moran's opinion of the matter?
Larry apparently grew up believing that Judge Learned Hand was normal.
I can assure you: Learned Hand was abnormal.
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Posted by: Larry Moran | December 14, 2006 3:56 PM
Here's my latest opinion Lessons from the Culture Wars.
Not that it will matter very much. Most people seem to be quite incapable of figuring out what I'm trying to say. They're too busy being appeasers. Judge Jones must be brilliant because he's on our side. End of story.
I wonder if he's a Theistic Evolutionist? :-)
Posted by: les | December 14, 2006 4:01 PM
Since the point of a judge's order is to set out the facts in contention that were supported by evidence, it's pretty easy to see how the DI types can't make the connection.
Posted by: Steve LaBonne | December 14, 2006 4:04 PM
Readers of Larry's excellent blog will also find in the comment thread to his latest post my patient explanation of why he's off base on this one. ;)
Posted by: les | December 14, 2006 4:13 PM
Hmm. I missed that the point, at least in part, was the award of points for original writing. Each side is invited to present its findings of facts--the contentions they advanced and attempted to support through evidence and examination of witnesses. The only technical reason for the judge to rewrite or change them is his judgment that the submitted facts were not supported; that the evidence led to some other conclusion. To do it (that is, select which submitted finding of facts to include in his/her order), a conscientious judge has to fully understand both the facts in issue and the support given them (or not) by the evidence. Aside from a pure love of creative writing, what benefit is gained by rewording?
Posted by: Erasmus | December 14, 2006 4:17 PM
it seems that some lawyerist type person could compile a short list of similar, preferably high-profile, cases just to shut these idiots up. i'm amazed at how quickly some fools (read UD, worldmagblog) will jump to conclusions that support their ideological agenda.
but then i knew that when i was reading their bullshit anyway. PZ congrats for predicting the predictable. I'll buy you a beer.
Posted by: Great White Wonder | December 14, 2006 4:49 PM
Most people seem to be quite incapable of figuring out what I'm trying to say. They're too busy being appeasers. Judge Jones must be brilliant because he's on our side. End of story.
Not even close, Larry.
Let's get this straight: Larry was confused about who wrote the section in the opinion about the scientific facts in the case. Larry apparently thought the Judge drafted each of those sentences de novo. Larry was wrong. Therefore, anyone who claims that the Judge got the science right and praises the opinion for setting the record straight is an "appeaser."
Man, that's crazy talk.
But I still luv ya, Larry. Partly that's because you look like a constipated Robert Altman.
Posted by: Stanton | December 14, 2006 4:55 PM
I would ask "Why on Earth are these yimmeryammering fopdoodles still going on about the Dover Trial? Don't they know they LOST the Dover Trial?", but, sadly, this is the sort of behavior one should expect from a subculture that regards physical facts as the Devil's playing cards.
Posted by: damnthing | December 14, 2006 5:55 PM
Must you tarnish the term "disco" with this abominable nickname? Painting an entire genre of wonderful dance music the same color as a buncha dimwittedly supertstitious paranoiacs is hardly fair.
Posted by: Stanton | December 14, 2006 6:02 PM
Professor Myers hates disco, too.
He's never forgiven Saturday Night Fever for starting John Travolta's career.
Posted by: Graculus | December 14, 2006 6:10 PM
The first time around disco sucked.
Now? it swallows.
Y'all can capitalize "disco" for added effect.
If you read the comments that Judge Jones had made since the trial, it is obvious that he was applying the law as he saw it. Being as he believes in the rule of law as a value above and beyond politics, I think that puts him on "our side" no matter what his personal religious or political beliefs are.
Posted by: Steve_C | December 14, 2006 6:30 PM
Are we talking just Disco or all dance music?
There is a difference.
Posted by: Robert | December 14, 2006 6:41 PM
It makes me angry when I see creationists making ignorant evolutionist arguments based upon their irrelevant professions. Electrical engineers applying their expertise to decide that life is too complex and obviously mirrors
their work don't hold much weight for me.
So hearing a biochemist make an ignorant attack on a judical decision based on his academic experience also holds no weight for me.
I think the only thing that could really restore my respect for Larry (and I did have respect for him) would be for him to admit that legal rulings aren't within his area of expertise, and that his criticism of it was based upon ignorance.
Posted by: MarkP | December 14, 2006 7:23 PM
Let's see:
Substanceless
Over-polished
Little variation or innovation
Impressive to the uninformed but laughable to everyone else
"Disco" sounds like the perfect label to me.
Posted by: Steve Fisher | December 14, 2006 7:43 PM
Despite his excellent blog, Larry seems to have proved himself an irascibl curmudgeon.
Posted by: Larry Moran | December 15, 2006 12:05 PM
Robert says,
The law is not within my area of expertise. I know almost nothing about the law in general, and even less about American law. There, does that restore your respect? :-)I do know something about science. When I read what Judge Jones wrote about science I thought it was brilliant. I thought he deserved a heap of credit for getting it right. I believed such writing could only be produced by someone who had mastered the complex scientific issues.
I was not alone. Many others praised the eloquence of Judge Jones' science writing and his knowledge of science.
Now I know that Judge Jones did not write those words. I only learned this recently because I was ignorant of common legal practices. (Proving, in case you're interested, that I don't know anything about law.) Jones copied most of that material from the Plaintiffs' Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. In other words, the "brilliant" parts were written by scientific experts.
Because of my knowledge of science, I'm forced to admit that my previous evaluation of Judge Jones was probably wrong. His writings about science were not brilliant and his knowledge of the scientific issues has not been demonstrated.
I have never criticized the legal issues and I have never questioned the ruling. That would be stupid since I am completely ignorant in that area.
Now the most important question is where are all those other people who heaped praise on Judge Jones for his eloquent science writing and his profound understanding of the scientific issues? Have they changed their minds?
Posted by: Larry Moran | December 15, 2006 12:21 PM
Great White Wonder writes,
This is correct. I was wrong. And you know what I find most amazing? Judging by the reponses from all over blogland, I was the only one who was wrong about this. Everyone else knew that what judges write in the "fact finding" part of legal opinions isn't their own opinion. Do you realize how dumb I feel?Partially right. Everyone who knows what I know but continues to praise Judge Jones for the eloquence of his science writing and his ability to master complex scientific issues is probably either an appeaser or just doesn't understand what's going on. (The latter seems to be very common.)