Pharyngula

Wells and Cordova get everything wrong

Afarensis takes on both Sal Cordova and Jonathan Wells on the subject of anthropology. Would you believe that those two creationist frauds are talking out of their hats and are readily spotted as dishonest kooks when they discuss anything in which their reader has any expertise? I know, I was so surprised myself.

Comments

  1. #1 Krystalline Apostate
    March 30, 2007

    Would you believe that those two creationist frauds are talking out of their hats
    I think you’re being overly kind, as I’d have them talking out of something a bit lower on their anatomies. 😉

  2. #2 j
    March 30, 2007

    Something else that is round and inappropriate.

  3. #3 eewolf
    March 30, 2007

    Would you believe that those two creationist frauds are talking out of their hats
    PZ

    I think you’re being overly kind, as I’d have them talking out of something a bit lower on their anatomies. 😉

    Krystalline Apostate

    If their heads are where i think they are, pz was not too far off the mark.

  4. #4 Leon
    March 30, 2007

    Post a link, man! I want to see the Sal/Wells smackdown!

  5. #5 RBH
    March 30, 2007

    Afarensis, where the takedown is.

  6. #6 PZ Myers
    March 30, 2007

    Both of the links in the article are to Afarensis’s site.

  7. #7 Krystalline Apostate
    March 30, 2007

    If their heads are where i think they are, pz was not too far off the mark.

    Which explains why everything they say is so garbled.

  8. #8 J-Dog
    March 30, 2007

    j and eewolf – Thank you – I am now thinking of a Jim Carey in certain scene in Ace Ventura, Pet Detective… and if I were going to debate either of these two clowns, I would show the scene to the crowd while they were talking.

  9. #9 Tracy P. Hamilton
    March 30, 2007

    If their heads are where i think they are, pz was not too far off the mark.

    So that is what ass-hat means!

  10. #10 David Marjanovi?
    March 30, 2007

    So that is what ass-hat means!

    Oh. 🙂

  11. #11 David Marjanovi?
    March 30, 2007

    So that is what ass-hat means!

    Oh. 🙂

  12. #12 Cocky Bastard
    March 31, 2007

    W cn thnk Gd tht frd s lmtd t crtnsts.

    Y cn b dmn sr thr s n frd n mnstrm scnc.

    N sr!

    Y cn bt yr grnt mny n tht!

  13. #13 Azkyroth
    March 31, 2007

    The funny part is, when fraud occurs in mainstream science it’s exposed and denounced *by scientists*, generally pretty quickly. Meanwhile, fraudulent claims from Creationists are not only almost never exposed or denounced by other Creationists, but are generally repeated by Creationists not limited to the perpetrators of the initial fraud on many occasions and for a very long time after being exposed and denounced *by scientists*.

    By the way, what does this have to do with elephants in spring?

  14. #14 Stephen
    March 31, 2007

    In other news, I see that at uncommondisdain Denyse O’Leary is now admitting what the folks around here had long suspected: the Johnsonist mob consider the age of the earth to be more a political issue than anything else.

  15. #15 jimmiraybob
    March 31, 2007

    You can be damn sure there is no fraud in mainstream science.

    Creationist/ID Fraud = a for-profit industry with constant stockholder demand for maximum financial growth and market expansion. Enron/TYCO-type management – stockholders look other way in vain anticipation of huge one time dividend.

    Scientific Fraud = anomolous and destructive – to be exposed and rooted out with perpetrators punished.

    Hmmm, the similarity boggles the mind.

  16. #16 Banned by 28 Atheist Sites.
    March 31, 2007

    f th rlgs bckgrps f Wlls, t l. r rlvnt nd clr thr thnkng, th thstc bckgrd f PZ. tc s ls bvsly ffctng thr thght prcsss nd th wy thy dl wth ppl.

    Wh y ll kddng hr?

    xcpt yrslvs, tht s?

  17. #17 Tatarize
    March 31, 2007

    Not only that, but there are even strong signs that the original study Wells and Cordova are citing is completely overstated anyhow.

    As John Hawks notes this hugely altered reconstruction… consists of changing the angle of the image and an extremely minor alteration in the face.

  18. #18 John Marley
    March 31, 2007

    What do creationist troll have against vowels?

    On the other hand, it makes them easy to spot and ignore. So keep it up.

New comments have been temporarily disabled. Please check back soon.