Seed Media Group

Pharyngula

Evolution, development, and random biological ejaculations from a godless liberal

Search this blog

Profile

pzm_profile_pic.jpg
PZ Myers is a biologist and associate professor at the University of Minnesota, Morris.
zf_pharyngula.jpg …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)

I reserve the right to publicly post, with full identifying information about the source, any email sent to me that contains threats of violence.

tbbadge.gif
scarlet_A.png
I support Americans United for Separation of Church and State.

Random Quote

(Complete listing)

If a man would follow, today, the teachings of the Old Testament, he would be a criminal. If he would follow strictly the teachings of the New, he would be insane.

[Robert G. Ingersoll]

Recent Posts

A Taste of Pharyngula

(Complete listing)

Recent Comments

Archives

Blogroll

(Complete listing)

Other Information

Subscribe via Email

Stay abreast of your favorite bloggers' latest and greatest via e-mail, via a daily digest.

Sign me up!

« What word should they have used? | Main | Darwin's God and the problem of Civil War reenactments »

Neurosurgeon and creationist Michael Egnor podcasts his ignorance

Category: Creationism
Posted on: March 8, 2007 2:33 PM, by PZ Myers

Nah, I haven't bothered to listen to the Luskin/Egnor podcast from the Discovery Institute—I trust Orac's summary enough that I know it's a load of the same arrogant, clueless BS he was spinning here a while back.

TrackBacks

(TrackBack URL for this entry: )

Comments

#1

Look at it this way: if Egnor is the best thing the IDers have going for them now, they're even further toward credibility freefall than we took them for.

Posted by: Tyler DiPietro | March 8, 2007 2:53 PM

#2

You know, this guy kills me. Not so much that he is an ID idot, but because we have the same last name. It is not a very common name, so the odds are good that this dork is actually a distant cousin. Ewwwwww.

Posted by: Bill Egnor | March 8, 2007 3:20 PM

#3

We're ALL distant cousins, Bill. But we can say he changed his name for marriage if it will make you feel better.

Posted by: Mike Haubrich | March 8, 2007 5:42 PM

#4

Makes me wish there were some way to vet neurosurgeons for stupidity before they were allowed to "open up the hood".

Posted by: Caledonian | March 8, 2007 6:32 PM

#5

what really puzzles me is why nobody from the excellent ecology and evolutionary bio. dept. and stonybrook has bothered to stand up and toss a few eggs at Egnor.

Hell, Futuyma himself resides in that dept.

why are they letting him get away with this idiocy?


Posted by: Ichthyic | March 9, 2007 1:32 AM

#6

AT Stony Brook, not AND.

damn clumsy ass fingers.

anyway, for those who don't know, there are several famous evolutionary biologists in that dept.:

http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/ee/

Posted by: Ichthyic | March 9, 2007 1:34 AM

#7

From the silver lining department....

I will be using Egnor in my class 'Introduction to Science and Bioscientifici Terminology' as an example of pseudoauthority...

Posted by: slpage | March 9, 2007 8:15 AM

#8

Woah, George Williams AND Futuyama in that tiny department? Pretty good.

As to the good doctor's argument: I feel there's a bit too much defensive bluster going on. We ought to loosen up and admit that he's right: the genetic code is an open question. We don't know how it developed. There are several *good ideas*, but nothing really definitive. Similarly the ribosome, and a lot of other fundamentals of life.

That said, these are features that are common to all living things. The difficult conundrum of how they developed has NO bearing on the subsequent evolution of that system, which is quite clear.

Especially with regards to information content. I was a bit disappointed that PZ didn't make this clearer, but as far as the Doc's original point goes, Shannon information is EXACTLY the correct way to look at things. That's why it's called "information theory". Mutation represents new information, period. The subsequent decision about whether that's USEFUL information with respect to life is one that's made by selection. It's all quite straightforward. Mutation proposes, selection disposes. Come on. Give us something new.

Posted by: saurabh | March 9, 2007 3:03 PM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. Comments are moderated for spam, your comment may not appear immediately. Thanks for waiting.)





Having problems commenting? (UPDATED)

Blogs in the Network

Advertisement

Top Five: Most German

Search All Blogs