Matt Dowling has organized the YouTube recordings of Dembski's lecture at the University of Oklahoma: parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. The man can drone on.
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)
Random Quote
Calvin: I'm a genius, but I'm a misunderstood genius.
Hobbes: What's misunderstood about you?
Calvin: Nobody thinks I'm a genius.
Bill Watterson, Calvin and Hobbes
Recent Posts
- Our illness is their profit
- Friday Cephalopod: NUMBERLESS HOSTS!
- Dear Jezebel
- There Will Be Blood?
- Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- Friday Cephalopod: Feasibility trial successful
- Making excuses
- More bad science in the literature
- An open letter to the Indiana legislature
- One Carnival of Evolution, coming right up
A Taste of Pharyngula
Recent Comments
- Tumara Baap on Our illness is their profit
- chriswarr on Our illness is their profit
- vibise on Zooming in on the Origin of Life Science Foundation
- mrpoxman on Our illness is their profit
- Everbleed on Friday Cephalopod: NUMBERLESS HOSTS!
- CherryBombSim on Our illness is their profit
- I'm sorry, thank you on Our illness is their profit
- https://www.google.com/accounts/o8/id?id=AItOawlg3ZrAn0yJktAa1txQLOB6bCND-AfW0pA on Our illness is their profit
- mandas on Our illness is their profit
- sue.welsh on Our illness is their profit
Archives
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- 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
« Is "megachurch" a synonym for "sex scandal"? | Main | Our local newspaper embarrassment »
More articles by PZ Myers can be found on Freethoughtblogs at the new Pharyngula!
Feeling masochistic?
Category: Creationism
Posted on: November 20, 2007 1:48 AM, by PZ Myers
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/56171
Leave a comment
HTML commands: <i>italic</i>, <b>bold</b>, <a href="url">link</a>, <blockquote>quote</blockquote>








Comments
Posted by: DLC | November 20, 2007 2:38 AM
Uh, I have an iron stomach, but a low threshold for stupidity, so I'll pass. Recent reading has convinced me that Dembski and his pals are nothing more than disingenuous cdesign proponentsists ninjas. They can't get into Academia through the front door, so they must sneak in through a window in the back.
Posted by: AlanWCan | November 20, 2007 3:21 AM
OK, own up. Who added this to the urban dictionary: cdesign proponentsists: The missing link between "creationists" and "design proponents", as used in the textbook Of Pandas and People. Used to refer to creationist dumbfucks who are all to generally confused by science theology or even common sense.
perfect description of Dembski I'd say.
Posted by: freelancer | November 20, 2007 4:01 AM
C'mon ERV,
Own up, were you in this, and if so where?
Posted by: Kevin Murphy | November 20, 2007 4:58 AM
This is actually a pretty good session -- but only for the fact that the students are openly hostile to his arguments and fully crucify him in the Q&A. Very encouraging.
Posted by: Inoculated Mind | November 20, 2007 8:17 AM
What, where's the sweater?
Posted by: Shawn Wilkinson | November 20, 2007 9:00 AM
I want a refund on my time spent...
Posted by: ERV | November 20, 2007 10:03 AM
I think you can hear me in Part 4 somewhere :)
Posted by: JMax | November 20, 2007 10:26 AM
oooo I think I see me over to the right ^__^
Posted by: danley | November 20, 2007 10:55 AM
Just in time for the holidays.
Posted by: ERV | November 20, 2007 11:09 AM
danley-- Dembskis Christmas present to us this year?
Posted by: Ian H Spedding FCD | November 20, 2007 2:42 PM
Interesting. That's the first time I've been able to watch and listen to Dembski at length.
First thought: he's another data-point in support of my hypothesis concerning the arrogance and narrowness of mathematicians. Let me hasten to say that I'm sure they're not all like that. I've just never met one.
Second thought: the man's an idiot - in both senses of the word. (Okay, maybe that was my first thought)
Third thought: I was impressed at the restraint shown by the questioners, particularly ERV given the way she'd been treated by them. I'd have been sorely tempted to be more forthright.
Fourth thought: what's the latest thinking on the role of sweaters in framing the debate?
Posted by: foxfire | November 20, 2007 9:14 PM
ERV wrote:
Oh the wonderful ERV comes through again! An Abbie elf giving the DI something Xtra-special for !Jebuseason: Harvard/XVIVO awareness of blatant theft. How thoughtfully cool!
Posted by: Beagle | November 22, 2007 9:01 AM
Y'know, I'd never wasted the time listening to their arguments before, but I figured, WTF, it's the night before Thanksgiving when I'm going to be too stuffed to think, everyone else is in bed, so why not?
I was struck by 3 things:
1. As is so often the case with science wannabes, they accuse science of doing what they do: Teleology? Yup, must be part of evolution. Conspiracy? Check, evolootionsists at work. No way to explain unexplained phenomena? You know it! EEs (Evil Evolutionists) at work.
2. Where are the eyes?
Why is it all flagella, all the time? What happened to the "irreducible complexity" of eyes? Oh wait! Maybe something about the fossil record and the increased understanding of the molecular biology of eyes and the similarities and differences in eye structure between species, both at the macro and micro level. This suggests that their real strategy is whack-o-mole: once scientists have whacked flagella (which they clearly have), they'll pop up elsewhere with toes (or toe jam) or mitochondria or the Isle of Langerhans or whatever.
3. They are revisionist historians of the highest order of duplicity. They conveniently forget that it was Darwin and evolution that had to undergo years of criticism to overcome the bias against it. It was, what, 100 years before it made it into standard textbooks at the secondary school level? Quantum physics had to go through an amazingly rigorous test before it was accepted. It has been measured to a degree that has never been approached before - by several orders of magnitude, yet these bozos, because of their lack of imagination, throw up their hands and say "We can't think of any way this could happen so it must be designed! We can't prove anything, but the burden of proof is on you!"
In short, they are intellectually, morally, and spiritually (yes! - the spirit of discovery) bankrupt. While on one hand, I'm not surprised, having followed your blog for some time, I was surprised at the breathtaking duplicity of Dembski, down to trying (and failing!) to beat up students and using the old "talk to me offline" when he can't overcome an argument. What a POS he and his colleagues, no, make that co-conspirators, are!