Good press

A colleague just let me know that I’m mentioned in the “Best of the Web” section of Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News. Yay! It’s a positive review!


It’s in the April 15 issue for all you subscribers.


  1. #1 quork
    April 30, 2007

    They even spelled your name correctly. How much did that cost you?

  2. #2 Blake Stacey
    April 30, 2007

    But they didn’t call you attractive and cephalopod-friendly.

  3. #3 Christian Burnham
    April 30, 2007

    ‘The author appears to be P. Z. Myers…’

    Hmmm, I wonder who else the author appears to be? Martha Stewart?

  4. #4 coturnix
    April 30, 2007

    Subsection? I’ve seen subsection and you, sir, are no subsection! I am not sure they really understand how SB works.

  5. #5 Brownian
    April 30, 2007

    The author in question appears to be P.Z. Myers, a professor at the University of Minnesota. Morris and his writings are fun, hip, and squarely in the face of anyone with an antiscience bent. [Emphasis mine.]

    Who’s Morris?

  6. #6 Christian Burnham
    April 30, 2007

    Yes- who’s this ‘Morris’ and why is he appearing to be P. Z. Myers? I want some answers.

  7. #7 drerio
    April 30, 2007

    Heh, heh.
    GEN started showing up in my mailbox about two years ago, and now I can look forward to an approximately monthly call asking if I want to continue my free personal subscription, to which I say, “No” as I know I’ll still get the magazine and the phone calls but not have to answer their stupid questionnaire.

  8. #8 Steve_C (Secular Elitist) FCD
    April 30, 2007

    Bad Press for the Army…

    It’s ok to descriminate against atheists… they have no religion, so it’s not religious bigotry.

  9. #9 bernarda
    April 30, 2007

    That rather reminds me of restaurant reviews in newspapers. Good going, your restaurant should be getting some more grazers.

  10. #10 TAW
    April 30, 2007

    “Evolution, development, and random ejaculations from a godless liberal”

    HA! that makes it sound disgusting….

  11. #11 Rey Fox
    April 30, 2007

    What does the “nothing significant” refer to?

  12. #12 Blake Stacey
    April 30, 2007

    According to their key, the red X icon means “weak points”. That is, PZ’s “weak point” is that he writes about “nothing significant” — which is (a) bollocks and (b) not really consistent with the review text itself. Perhaps the reviewer’s estimation of the harm “antiscience folks” are causing is not concordant with mine.

  13. #13 Blake Stacey
    April 30, 2007

    Also, the blue ribbon means “excellent”. How can you be “excellent” while writing “nothing significant” I don’t know. Maybe I’m reading this completely backwards, and they really mean that PZ has no significant weak points?

  14. #14 Christian Burnham
    April 30, 2007

    Blake- I think you’ll find that it means there are no significant weak points. At least, that’s my interpretation.

  15. #15 TAW
    April 30, 2007

    uh… I think it means that there are no significant weak points…

  16. #16 PZ Myers
    April 30, 2007

    Right, it means no significant weak points. They must not have dwelt on the page for long, or they caught me on a good half hour.

  17. #17 Kseniya
    April 30, 2007


    Pros: “Well written, topical.”

    Cons: “Nothing significant.”

    I think it’s interesting to see which entry was chosen for the screen shot: “We Need A New Gender,” which was, as I recall, a spirited exchanged.

  18. #18 garth
    April 30, 2007

    Vmartin and/or JAD attack in 3…2….1….

    btw, are they actually separate people, or is vmartin like a tiny outgrowth from JAD’s flank, like a little awful conjoined twin? not the friendly conjoined twin.

  19. #19 garth
    April 30, 2007

    now that i think of it, that will be 3, 2, 1 weeks, for a letter to the editor. yeesh.

    i wonder how insane letters to the editors from the idiot twins will sounds

  20. #20 dkew
    April 30, 2007

    GEN had a nice article 15 Mar 2006, by Alan McHughen, of UC Riverside, “Implications of Faith-Based Science” starting
    “Pressure is mounting to install faith-based beliefs into science classrooms. This movement subverts the very foundation of science–a search for the truthand turns science curricula into religious education. In schools and courts, religious crusaders equate faith-based beliefs with scientific theories, arguing, for example, that because the theory of evolution is unproved, alternative faith-based theories are equally valid and should be taught in science classes. .”
    My attempts to embed links don’t work, but
    Several creationists complained, and McHughen had a great last word, in May 2006, but I can’t find letters to the editor in the GEN archives. GEN does have more than its share of right-wing editorials, though

  21. #21 Liam
    May 1, 2007

    Aaaaaaah I seeee … University of Minnesota *COMMA* Morris and his…

    I feel (slightly) less dumb now..

  22. #22 Peter McGrath
    May 1, 2007

    Pharyngula was featured blog in Focus, the BBC’s science and technology mag, too. They particularly liked the idea of a belly-dancing commenter.

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