…and this is a 
Poor William Dembski has many thorns in his side. There's that spunky grad student and that guy who knows more math than he does, and there's also been a certain professor of constitutional law who has been quietly plaguing him behind the scenes. I'm on Peter Irons' cc list for these emails, and there have been quite a few occasions when I've been laughing from my easy chair at the well-aimed slingstones winging their way from California to Texas.
Dembski has had enough, and has posted his own reply. Irons has been chatting with Baylor President John Lilley, urging him in particular to not bother to respond to the Expelled film crew that was going to be on campus, 'documenting' (as if such a manipulative and dishonest crew could put together anything credible) the way poor Billy has been oppressed. Lilley replied politely and briefly:
Peter, thanks for your email. It is greatly appreciated. I shall not take the bait on the movie. I greatly regret the difficulty that Dembski has created. John
Dembski, strangely enough, finds this diplomatic comment hard to believe, and rushed to ask Lilley to verify…it sounds exactly like what a university president would write, I'm afraid, quite unlike Dembski's own prior clumsy attempt at a parody. How dare the president of Baylor suggest that Dembski's own desperate floundering attempts to slither onto the Baylor campus are the source of his problems! So here's what he writes:
Dear President Lilley,
Peter Irons, a professor at one of the University of California campuses, continually forwards to me email communications, ostensibly between him and others. He's forwarded to me several putative emails from you. I'd like to confirm whether the exchange below is genuine before I blog on it.
If it is genuine, I would point out that any difficulties you may be experiencing over your suppression of ID-related research at Baylor are of your own creation. My role in this has merely been to shine some light.
Shorter Billy Dembski: is not my fault! It's yours!
Since schoolyard blame-shifting seems to be about the best Dembski can do, he closes his blog post with a bizarre claim he probably intended as a joke, but it's awfully lame: "it's a little known fact that Irons is on Discovery's payroll."
Even shorter Billy Dembski: IKYABWAI!
You all might be interested in Peter Irons' amusing reply to all this.
Dear Billy Botnik,
Thanks for the plug on UD! Since you linked my name to the Wikipedia article on me (which I didn't write, BTW) perhaps some of your readers (at least those who are semi-literate) will check out my books, from which they might learn something about constitutional law.
Since I'm sure you won't let me post a comment on UD, let me make a few comments about you commenters (some of whom need spelling lessons). First, the comment from someone calling him/herself Jehu. Referring to me, Jehu (who claims to be a former student of mine) says, "I guess all those years of tearing down crosses under the guise of constitutional law and protecting the rights of Jews and athiests [sic] were just a subterfuge for his true motives." Do I detect the stench of ant-semitism here? You should really have bounced that one, or at least chastised Jehu.
Another commenter, completely off point, refers to "terrorists who stick their butts up in the air while facing Mecca on a daily basis." Do I detect the stench of anti-Islam here? You should have bounced that one too.
A third commenter, who obviously read the Wikipedia bio of me, asks about "President Lilley's confidential informers who are convicted felons," presumably referring to my prison time for resisting the Vietnam draft, of which I am still very proud. Just a correction here: my conviction was reversed by a federal judge on the ground of prosecutorial misconduct, and I later received a full pardon from President Ford (the only thing Richard Nixon and I had in common). But I would rather be a convicted felon for refusing the Vietnam war than cowards like George Bush and Dick Cheney.
BTW, I should give the DI my address so they can start mailing my paychecks. I wondered where they were.
Putative Peter
Dembski really shouldn't try engaging in a battle of wits — he simply doesn't have any.
Politics
Comments
Posted by: Reginald Selkirk | September 22, 2007 7:03 PM
Mathis didn't get the memo
Expelled associate producer apparently didn't get the memo about ID having nothing to do with religion:
Posted by: Zeno | September 22, 2007 7:05 PM
If William Dembski were clever, I would suspect him of a bit of tongue-in-cheek humor when he tells President Lilley, "any difficulties you may be experiencing ... are of your own creation." Given the ample evidence to the contrary, however, I must conclude that any sly wit is coincidental rather than deliberate.
Posted by: Mrs Tilton | September 22, 2007 7:15 PM
Maybe I'm too charitable. I tend to want to think of people like Dembski: "Not an asshole, just wrong". Dembski himself deprives me of that option, though.
And good for Peter Irons. I thought he was splendid during the bizarre interlude of the Pivar "lawsuit", but hadn't known him before. Thanks to that incident I've become aware of his work; Amazon delivered God on Trial last Friday. I'm looking forward to a feast.
Posted by: wobert | September 22, 2007 7:22 PM
Is Peter Irons god? Well, he has smited a few of late.
Posted by: Dustin | September 22, 2007 7:24 PM
Let's hope he never changes his tactics to force his opponents to fight a battle of being a slimy, pallid, toad-like asshole with a sweater that's 9 sizes too big. Dembski is a juggernaut when it comes to that particular arena.
Posted by: Ric | September 22, 2007 7:36 PM
Thanks, Dustin. That seriously made me laugh out loud. The sweater comment was just so dead on.
Posted by: TW | September 22, 2007 8:13 PM
I love this comment on the UD post (from the aptly named bornagain77):
What brilliance... (I wonder if bornagain77 is an abba fan who can't spell very well?)
Posted by: Jewel | September 22, 2007 8:20 PM
Peter Irons has become a hero to me. I had not heard of him before you were sued by that crackpot; I had obviously missed out. Dembski doesn't stand a chance.
Posted by: ERV | September 22, 2007 8:29 PM
I was genuinely disappointed the sweater didnt make an appearance at OU. It was too hot :(I would pay money for that sweater.
Posted by: MAJeff | September 22, 2007 8:32 PM
Don't be dissin' ABBA! Cheezy and tacky, sure. But fun as hell as well!
Posted by: VJB | September 22, 2007 8:50 PM
But still the problem remains, PZ, as you more than most know, these goobers can instigate a frivolous lawsuit, that costs too damn much, to try shutting you up. This makes them rather dangerous to the rank and file academic who simply can't afford legal representation. I know that there are organizations that will take on the suits, but there are few of us can afford the time nor the notoriety. It's scary. Right isn't quite enough if you are trying to support a family and keep on the right side of a tenure committee. What we need are tenured GONZO GEEZERS! to leap full-throated, sword in hand, into the fray. Not one yet, sorry to say.
Posted by: tacitus | September 22, 2007 10:01 PM
Dembski has been keeping track of the "waves" of coverage about the latest Baylor kerfuffle for the last few weeks now. Apparently we're on the second wave now, and so far all they've had to report is so far are several postings on O'Leary's blog, a couple of press releases and blog postings by ID other apologists, and a couple of reports from student newspapers.
Big whoop.
It seems they've finally gotten the a local Waco newspaper to report on something (the visit of the "Expelled" film crew) but it's all rather pathetic really. Nobody outside the ID community and those few who can be bothered to actively oppose them cares one iota what's happening.
Any day now they're bound to claim a cover-up organized by atheistic scientists and the socialist media.
Yawn.
Posted by: uriel | September 22, 2007 10:11 PM
Now that right there is the Hope Diamond of smug self-delusion.If it wasn't for the Dr. Dr.'s need to 'shine some light' by interjecting himself in Baylor's business, both physically and through his endless crowing/bitching on the internet, the stupid web page/ state of the art lab would probably still be up.
Its amazing that Dembski still doesn't realize that the person most single-handedly responsible for dismantling the first 'ID friendly' 'research center' at a 'major university' (scare quotes all required) was, in fact-
Bill Dembski.
Posted by: Dan | September 22, 2007 10:12 PM
PZ? I just can't tell you how much the Comic font brings to these posts of yours. It makes me weepy with laughter when I see it. It is, quite possibly, perfect, and I just picture Dembski speaking in a sort of Andy Kaufman/Latka Gravas voice.
It cracks me up.
Posted by: Steve_C | September 22, 2007 10:45 PM
Does Irons have a blog?
If he doesn't... he needs to start one.
Posted by: Ed Darrell | September 22, 2007 11:08 PM
Alas. It's not likely that many, if any, of the Texas State Board of Education members read this blog, or know who Peter Irons is, or care. And when it comes time to butcher the biology books, Dembski, whose drivers license (he'd better hope) says he's a Texas resident, will among those be invited to the abbatoir of knowledge to participate.
Dr. Don McLeroy is more likely to give credence to Bill Dembski than to President John Lilley or Peter Irons, or P. Z. Myers.
Let's hope Irons can make a complete mockery of Dembski before the book selection process gets seriously underway, if it's to be done.
Posted by: Stanton | September 23, 2007 12:24 AM
For being a proponent of Intelligent Design, Mr Dembski hasn't been very intelligent in plotting his various attacks, or even remembering to not keep making so many unsubtle inferences that Intelligent Design is actually a form of Creationism.
Posted by: Inoculated Mind | September 23, 2007 1:46 AM
I know what sweater you're talking about! Hilarious! I really don't know why anyone would wear such a thing. 'Tis not intelligently designed attire.
Posted by: Hank | September 23, 2007 2:31 AM
The sweater is amazing. Almost like a stitched version of a gem sweater (http://www.lesliehall.com/gemsweater/gallery/gallery1.htm).
Posted by: Brownian | September 23, 2007 2:54 AM
How'd she change in and out of all those sweaters without messing up her 'do?
Posted by: Jesús Ramírez | September 23, 2007 3:44 AM
Dear Professor Myers,
I was wondering if you could help me. I am a student in England recently moved from Spain and I am writing a paper on the intelligent design debate. I have found much useful information in your blog - thank you - but find I cannot register my name at Professor Dembski's blog - it says "username not valid". Am I on a blocklist, or do you have to be a student of Professor Dembski's to register for his blog. If your readers could give me any help I would much apprciate their kindness.
Thank you,
Jesús Ramírez
Posted by: Knight of L-sama | September 23, 2007 4:00 AM
Note to self: Never get on Iron's bad side. I would not want to be on the recieving end of such a masterful skewering.
Posted by: SEF | September 23, 2007 5:08 AM
Assuming you were copy-and-pasting the original accurately, PZ, Peter Irons should have proof-read his own text more carefully. Those sorts of typos always seem to creep in and ruin the effect when accusing someone else of poor spelling.
Posted by: Stephen | September 23, 2007 6:01 AM
Jesús Ramírez: Dembski and friends have banned huge numbers of people from the UD blog. You might be blocked for any of the following reasons:
- someone previously used the same username as you are trying to use and was banned;
- Dembski didn't like your first name;
- you have previously published an intelligent (as opposed to sycophantic) comment on ID;
- Dembski isn't currently allowing any new commenters at all;
- the site is screwed up.
Or it might be something else.
Posted by: Stwriley | September 23, 2007 7:39 AM
Hear, hear Jeff!
We should give all these fundies the "Clockwork Orange" treatment with Priscilla Queen of the Desert until they cry out "yes, yes, I will be tolerant!"
Posted by: forsen | September 23, 2007 9:46 AM
We should give all these fundies the "Clockwork Orange" treatment with Priscilla Queen of the Desert
If we're employing the Ludovico Technique anyway, why play it safe? Go for Pink Flamingos instead.
On second thoughts, Priscilla may be a better idea. PI could, after all, burn out their eye sockets, and physical blindness doesn't make up for intellectual blindness.
Posted by: doesnotcompute | September 23, 2007 10:00 AM
Correction for Irons correction.
The second and third commenter he refers is the same person which should be evident to the most casual observer since both quotes come from a single comment entry by one DaveScot.
I also have a legal question. If a felony conviction is reversed by a federal judge then what remains for a president to pardon? Something doesn't add up there.
I don't expect this comment to survive the moderation policy on Pharyngula but I thought I'd give it a try nonetheless...
Posted by: MartinM | September 23, 2007 10:32 AM
Then you don't know the first damn thing about the Pharyngula moderation policy. It's places like UD that brook no dissent. Here, you're welcome to participate in an intelligent discussion for as long as you can manage it.
Posted by: peter irons | September 23, 2007 10:41 AM
doesnotcompute is right about one thing: the stupid comments on UD about terrorists sticking their butts in the air while facing Mecca and me being a convicted felon both came from a single entry by DaveScot, which I had written down separately; that doesn't make them any less stupid. Also, my presidential pardon was in the works before my conviction was vacated; the pardon, however, wiped out any "collateral consequences" of my conviction, like bars against practicing law or voting. I have the pardon hanging on my wall, next to my Supreme Court bar membership certificate. One final thing: a commenter on UD named "Jehu" blasted me for defending "Jews." That smacks to me of anti-semitism, and I told Dembski he should have booted it. But he didn't.
Posted by: Steve_C | September 23, 2007 10:48 AM
Peter,
Start a blog!
If you don't have one already.
We know Davescot well, he's UD's verison of Bill O'Reilly.
Posted by: Jim Wynne | September 23, 2007 11:17 AM
A pardon "forgives" the alleged offense, not the conviction. Witness Gerald Ford's pardon of Richard Nixon before any criminal proceedings took place. In other words, in the case of Irons, the pardon would protect him from being prosecuted again for the same offense, which might be possible depending on the nature of the reversal.Posted by: Ian H Spedding FCD | September 23, 2007 11:31 AM
ERV wrote:
For some reason that reminded me of how George Bush is represented as a cowboy hat with nothing underneath it in Doonesbury. Couldn't The Sweater do the same work for ID? An empty sweater would be a good metaphor for ID - a sort of comfy, woolly outerwear with nothing inside it.
Posted by: Hans | September 23, 2007 12:46 PM
I don't have anything of substance to add, I just wanted to mention that
reminded me of something someone way smarter than me said:
Don't recall who it was, though.
Posted by: Steve_C | September 23, 2007 4:20 PM
the latest tom tomorrow rules!
http://web.mac.com/arnold_zwicky/TomorrowVirus05.jpg
Posted by: john danley | September 23, 2007 11:46 PM
Take the william Dembski poll at the bottom of this page:
http://thestubborncurmudgeon.blogspot.com
Posted by: Rob Hinkley | September 24, 2007 11:40 AM
To Jesús Ramírez (#21): Anyone can sign up for UncommonDescent (maybe someone has already taken your desired unsername) but remember that you will likely find yourself being banned from there if you say anything even mildly critical, or "insensitive".
Posted by: octopod | September 24, 2007 2:36 PM
What's this about the swetter?