…and this is a 
Mark Mathis doesn't like me
Category: Creationism • Kooks
Posted on: April 24, 2008 5:08 PM, by PZ Myers
Mark Mathis does not come off as a nice man in interviews. You may have listened to the SciAm interview, a truly painful experience in which he made claims about evolution and then backtracked when confronted with his mistakes…and admitted that he knew nothing about the subject. He's done it again in an interview with a Detroit weekly (scroll down to the "Unevolved" article on that page).
I confront Mathis with this point, and he counters that evolutionary theory is also untestable. This is patently untrue—to give just one example, scientists have witnessed speciation, the arisal of a new species from an old one.
When I point this out, he interrupts me immediately: "Whoa! Wait a minute! Please send me whatever material you have that demonstrates that we can observe speciation because I have not seen anything. I've never heard anyone even claim that!"
Is he serious? He's just produced a film about evolution, and he's never heard of the fact that speciation has been observed and thoroughly documented in the scientific literature? I'm stunned. I send him peer-reviewed research confirming this fact via e-mail, and he later responds, "This isn't an important argument for me."
So I ask him about falsifiability. Clearly, evolution could potentially be disproved, but how could one ever disprove the existence of a deity? He laughs. "You can't apply falsifiability to Darwinian evolution. How is it falsifiable?"
I respond by quoting the biologist J.B.S. Haldane: "Fossil rabbits in the Precambrian." One instance of fossils appearing in the wrong strata would disprove current evolutionary theory in an instant. Mathis pauses before saying, "If you want to get into the science..." He then trails off and mutters something irrelevant before finally confessing, "Look. You can get into the intricacies of the science on both sides. And I am not qualified." On that point, we can both agree.
It's really easy to find descriptions of speciation events on the web, there are thousands of papers on the subject, and there are even whole books discussing it (with difficult, hard-to-find titles like Speciation, which must be why Mathis couldn't find them). It is cute how the poor man melts down when he meets anyone with even a hint of scientific knowledge. I don't think "Fossil rabbits in the Precambrian" counts as a scientific intricacy, at least not in the circles I hang out in, where it's more of a glib quickie. But then, even that level of science probably leaves poor Mathis floundering and lost.
You'll have to read the rest to find out what he says about me, personally. I guess calling him the ass-prod was an insult that really stung.
Sagittarius: Uh-oh. A Republican is going to notice that you are a man-animal hybrid today. Expect vicious denunciations on the steps of the Capitol; beware of federal agents in white lab coats.
Comments
If it stung, why has he been doing nothing but acting like an ass-prod ever since?
Come on, he's the typical repressed moron, he likes being an ass-prod and unconsciously flaunts it. He just can't admit it.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7
Posted by: Glen Davidson | April 24, 2008 5:20 PM
He's obviously not keeping up with the YEC literature, since they are dead keen on speciation these days. Indeed, they rely on it, to get post flood biodiversity. Carl Wieland of AiG says:
Poorly-informed anti-creationist scoffers occasionally think they will 'floor' creation apologists with examples of 'new species forming' in nature. They are often surprised at the reaction they get from the better-informed creationists, namely that the creation model depends heavily on speciation.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/TJ/v11/i2/speciation.asp
Mathis obviously isn't a "better-informed creationist".
Posted by: SteveF | April 24, 2008 5:25 PM
Apparently he doesn't come off as a nice man in person, either. I've got a couple of friends in the film biz who have met him and agree that ass prod is... sweet, kind, and mild as a way to describe him.
Posted by: Rilke's Granddaughter | April 24, 2008 5:25 PM
But where are the dogs turning into cats, huh? ;^)
Posted by: Mena | April 24, 2008 5:25 PM
"But if ID isn't creationism, then oral sex isn't sexual relations."
...
"The theory of relativity will be taught alongside the theory of divinity, which maintains that E = whatever God good and well pleases."
I rather like this guy.
Posted by: Karen | April 24, 2008 5:26 PM
I'm not sure what an ass-prod is. All these scientific terms confuse me sometimes.
Posted by: Gary | April 24, 2008 5:26 PM
Listen, lets get away from the facts. Truth isn't about facts. This evolution stuff is all fact, no heart. There are those who think with their head, and those who know with their heart.
(Courtesy to Stephen Colbert)
Posted by: Dennis N | April 24, 2008 5:27 PM
Oh, and just read the review:
How come Kevin Miller never posts here anymore? I want to taunt him for being such a shitty, oh-so-very-shitty writer.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | April 24, 2008 5:30 PM
but
does count as damn funny.I pulled together from all on line image sources google could finger as many images of fossils or renderings of what the living creatures might have looked like and a few game attempts at cladistic trees and set them as a slide show screen saver. its kinda like flash cards. and I am getting the names down for all the wacky weirdness found in the Burgess shale. But damned if I have seen a rabbit yet.
Precambrian rabbit: made me laugh.
Posted by: greensmile | April 24, 2008 5:31 PM
This is my favorite of the Mathis quotes from the article, "We have the option of ex... uh, of kicking, uh, of not allowing P.Z. Myers to come to the film he wasn't invited to. Okay? Who cares?!"
LOL! Some people are born to be clowns.
Posted by: RamblinDude | April 24, 2008 5:33 PM
C'mon, man! I've been waiting all day for my horoscope! When are you going to post for Aires?
Posted by: Eximious Jones | April 24, 2008 5:35 PM
"The theory of relativity will be taught alongside the theory of divinity, which maintains that E = Oh fuck it, God-did-it!"
Posted by: Damian | April 24, 2008 5:39 PM
Still no Taurus horoscope, eh? Well to hell with you, I have an email that says I have been "confirmed for the finalist's prize of $500,000." So I don't need those lottery tickets. I am rich, RICH. And I am going to make a movie with my money and expose you as the Athiest you are. Bet that's never been done before.
Posted by: Dennis | April 24, 2008 5:40 PM
By this time, I think "wanker" fails to sufficiently describe Mr. Mathis. I think I'll come around to "ass-prod".
Posted by: Rey Fox | April 24, 2008 5:40 PM
Not to step on PZ's toes, but I've got one for Gemini that incorporates a comment my roommate made last night:
Gemini: As a twin, prepare to be hounded by behavioural geneticists, sociologists, and psychologists, especially if you and your clone are raised apart.
Posted by: Brownian, OM | April 24, 2008 5:44 PM
Ah, a Sagitarrius horoscope! That's me!
Posted by: Matt | April 24, 2008 5:44 PM
Damn you, PZ!!! You have outed my hybrid nature in your horoscope. I'll see you in court. In Texas.
Posted by: beagledad | April 24, 2008 5:44 PM
I've been thinking: I doubt that all the volleys we online science-writing folks have fired at Expelled have impacted the movie's core demographic, but Web sites like Expelled Exposed have probably influenced the critics who have reviewed the movie. I mean, who reviews a movie nowadays without Googling for it? This matters all the more because prior to its opening, the film had rather low awareness scores. Outside that core demographic, people might only be hearing about it through negative press.
Posted by: Blake Stacey | April 24, 2008 5:47 PM
Creationists like to use the word species, but they obviously don't know what it really means. To understand them better (if you want to), substitute the word "order" or "class" when they say species. Then you can understand that what they are saying has never been observed is the ID Tinkerer God doing his stuff, and they're right.
Posted by: pough | April 24, 2008 5:51 PM
Seriously, would fossil rabbits in the Precambrian really falsify the theory of evolution? I've always wondered about that.
Posted by: Screechy Monkey | April 24, 2008 5:52 PM
Mark Mathis. Hahahahahahaha. He makes Geoffrey Simmons look like R.A. Fisher.
Posted by: danley | April 24, 2008 5:53 PM
Wow. Just, ...Wow.
Posted by: Alex | April 24, 2008 6:01 PM
Just idly wondering about the "rabbit fossil in the precambrian" bit:
If such a discovery were ever made, could it alternatively be considered as evidence in support of the possibility of time travel rather than as an invalidation of evolution?
Or would the existence of time travel in and of itself invalidate our modern understanding of evolution?
Or is the very question evidence that I read too much science fiction?
Posted by: amphiox | April 24, 2008 6:05 PM
Screechy @ #20, at this point, a fossil located in the "wrong" strata would most likely be a hoax. If it is genuine, my understanding is that it would really cause a stir. But the entire model would not be thrown out. The new observation would need to be understood and assimilated into the current body of understanding and information.
Posted by: Alex | April 24, 2008 6:06 PM
Expelled - the comedy that keeps on giving.
Posted by: DavidONE | April 24, 2008 6:09 PM
It's really easy to find descriptions of speciation events on the web, there are thousands of papers on the subject, and there are even whole books discussing it (with difficult, hard-to-find titles like Speciation, which must be why Mathis couldn't find them).
That's okay Ben Stein didn't see any substantial criticisms of his movie either. I think maybe they having reading glasses problems or something over there.
Posted by: 386sx | April 24, 2008 6:16 PM
#23 amphiox wrote:
You may be on to something.
Posted by: James F | April 24, 2008 6:16 PM
Three cheers for Jay Davis! Encouraging to see that there are still sensible members of the press.
Posted by: Sili | April 24, 2008 6:18 PM
The problem with starting with your conclusion, like Mathis shows, is that you don't need to know squat and that fact may very well shine through when you least want it too.
What an ass prod/-clown/-hat!
Posted by: Hank | April 24, 2008 6:20 PM
Creationist hardly ever (never??) use the term 'species' they virtually always use the term 'kind.' There is more weasel room implicit in 'kind.' By using 'kinds,' creationists can blather rapidly- Gish galloping and forever moving goal posts.
A simple argument that has, as yet, always worked when dealing with Gallopers is to insist that they define 'kinds' at whatever taxonomic level they prefer and then skewer them with the implications of their choice. Works because the Gallopers have no real knowledge of evolution or taxonomy (or science).
Posted by: mothra | April 24, 2008 6:32 PM
Mathis' impeccable logic is just soooo simple, PZ!
He claims entry into the ranks of the multiply-born. That means he can make a movie all about what he thinks is necessary for anyone else to claim they, too, are similarly oriented, and claim it's not about that at all. It's okay. He's in the same company with St. Peter, who made three similar denials before the poultry signalled it was dawn.
You, on the other hand, claiming to only have been born once, are cursed with the damnable burden of consistency, which proves you are in no such august company. That makes him right.
He gets to misrepresent his production in order to trick biologists (and "other" atheists) into speaking candidly, so he can twist your words into his pre-conceived "Lord.Privy.Seal" editing style, but that's okay, you see, because since his sins are forgiven, any future sins he may commit (like bearing false witness, for example) will also be forgiven. He's in the clear.
You, on the other hand, can find no solace in your dogged adherence to simple truth, since you, being among the voluntarily unforgiven anyway, will gain no credit in his imaginary afterlife by hiding behind abstract notions of childish ethics. You automatically lose.
He gets to exaggerate and misrepresent the poorly-articulated rantings of a genocidal movement as the result of evolutionary doctrine, since if he succeeds in this effort, hordes of new believers will obviously clamor to join the ranks of the multiply-born. His ends justify his means, because the latter are designed to achieve what is, to him, a greater good. Why, no deity would dare punish him for that!
You, on the other hand, are to him nothing more than a tool he can use to achieve those ends. Since you are not of his multiply-born association, this gives him the right to treat you however he wishes. Should you "repent," you will automatically (by definition) acknowledge the correctness of his actions anyway, and (what is more likely) if you don't, at least those undecided may see the just (shabby?) treatment you have received at his hands, and thus be persuaded to join the "winning" team.
He most assuredly does not have to know anything at all about speciation, genetics, or any science whatsoever. He only needs to claim he is speaking for God (while claiming not to speak for God), and those whom he regards as godly will recognize his inherent godliness. Only the truly wise will be given the gift to recognize his wisdom.
You, on the other hand, will find no solace in all your knowledge, incomplete and imperfect as it is, which will drag your soul into his version of Hell, kicking and screaming.
He is dangerously deluded about many things, most importantly, the nature of his presumed religion.
You, on the other hand, are sane.
Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to get to Bible study tonight. Then I have to help a friend pick out a good astronomical telescope for a precocious 6-year-old niece.
I guess that makes me a closeted Nazi sympathizer.
Logic is soooo simple.
Posted by: Farb | April 24, 2008 6:38 PM
You know reading about that interview with Mark Mathews shows that there is money to be made being an internet troll. I suspect PZ is far too kind in his language describing this man. "Delights in knowingly committing evil" seems to be the best description for Mathews.
Posted by: Bob L | April 24, 2008 6:38 PM
"oral diarrhea"?
Who talks like that?
Yeah, you must've said something really nasty to get under his skin like that. I think that's the first time I've actually seen somebody's spluttering quoted before. Is it just me or does anyone else imagine Mathis turning red in the face and spitting whenever he talks about PZ?
[self promote]
BTW, I've added my first post to my blog. I'm not quite as eloquent as some others, but perhaps with practice...
[/self promote]
Posted by: ThirdMonkey | April 24, 2008 6:41 PM
Posted by: Reginald Selkirk | April 24, 2008 6:42 PM
Seriously, would fossil rabbits in the Precambrian really falsify the theory of evolution? I've always wondered about that.
If it checked out, it would definitely falsify something, but what? Evolution, geology, radiometric dating, or all of them?
Posted by: windy | April 24, 2008 6:45 PM
What I find most hilarious is that these people believe the commandment "thou shalt not bear false witness" came straight from the mouth of the all-powerful creator of the universe. And yet they seem completely unable to bear any other kind of witness.
Posted by: Quasarsphere | April 24, 2008 6:47 PM
#2
"Carl Wieland of AiG says:
Poorly-informed anti-creationist scoffers occasionally think they will 'floor' creation apologists with examples of 'new species forming' in nature. They are often surprised at the reaction they get from the better-informed creationists, namely that the creation model depends heavily on speciation.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/TJ/v11/i2/speciation.asp "
Carl Wieland no longer is with Answers in Genesis, but remains with the progenitor, Creation Ministry International (the original AIG). Note that CMI has taken AIG to court in Australia over some kurfufel between them.
Jim Lippard's Blog has a good review of the action.
Posted by: Ganf | April 24, 2008 6:49 PM
I wonder if Mark Mathis gets dumber by hearing himself talk in his own interviews. Maybe earplugs would stop the leak?
Posted by: Dennis N | April 24, 2008 6:53 PM
www.lifescienceprize.org/
Posted by: PAUL ANDERSON | April 24, 2008 6:58 PM
That article has a picture of Mathis, I assume? That's what he looks like? Wow. He's just so... dull.
I mean, I'm sure he gets that a lot, but at least this time it's in regards to his appearance.
Posted by: OctoberMermaid | April 24, 2008 7:04 PM
Wow. Mathis really, really doesn't like PZ:
(I like what the article writer had to say: Just to clarify, Myers did not break into Mr. Mathis' house in a drunken rage with a bowie knife--he has simply been critical of Mathis' arguments.)
And:
The part of the article where the reporter points out that it wasn't an invitation-only screening is also priceless...
Posted by: Etha Williams | April 24, 2008 7:07 PM
#37 Ganf wrote:
Oh, no...did the argument over the style of saddle that humans put on dinosaurs get out of control?
Posted by: J | April 24, 2008 7:08 PM
"Look. You can get into the intricacies of the science on both sides."
hmm, this reminds me of something... Oh, I've got it now:
who knew Mathis was trying out for a role on the Simpsons as Homer's dumb(er) brother?
Posted by: Ichthyic | April 24, 2008 7:10 PM
#39 -
Ok. I'm going to call that one the "Crazy guy on the street corner fallacy".
Basically it goes like this:
The crazy guy on the street corner shouts out a challenge. Nobody responds. The crazy guy declares that since nobody disproved him then he must be right.
Or am I missing something?
Posted by: ThirdMonkey | April 24, 2008 7:17 PM
"If you want to get into the science..."
You are f***ing kidding me.
Yes, you lack-wit! We want to get into the science! That's exactly what we want to get into! That's exactly what your pathetic excuse for a movie claims to get into!
That's like someone grilling Michael Moore and having him reply, "Well, if you want to get into politics..."
Okay. Greta. Breathe. Calm blue ocean, calm blue ocean...
Posted by: Greta Christina | April 24, 2008 7:18 PM
If anyone would like to contribute to my Precambrian Geology Research Fund you will be enabling my crack team of experts to spend the summer in NW Montana's Glacier National Park
swilling beerworking on the intriguing fossil rabbit question - will share authorship. Thanks in advance.Posted by: jimmiraybob | April 24, 2008 7:19 PM
Hy PZ, hr yr mthr lks t f..k wll hng blck mn lk m s prhps 'm yr dddy.
[Mark? Is that you? -- pzm]
Posted by: PAUL ANDERSON | April 24, 2008 7:22 PM
PZ, please close the font tag before the last sentence...
Hmmm... just maybe we might want to get into the science, when we're talking about a scientific theory all the time, when we're already neck-deep in the science, then just maybe...
TSIB.
SQUEEEEEEK! :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D :-D
Well said.
Bingo.
OK, I'll stop here, rather than copying the whole review. Except for this part (sorry, I can only put whole paragraphs into Comic Sans):
There we have the admission. Trumpet it.
Certainly. But time travel is probably less parsimonious.
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | April 24, 2008 7:23 PM
"I've been waiting all day for my horoscope! When are you going to post for Aires?"
You're an Aires? How cool! I'm a De Janiero!
"April 24: You will meet a handsome stranger in a very small bikini. She will want something from you. But since you don't speak Portuguese, she will walk away in disgust."
Steve "This might be a good thing." James
Posted by: longstreet63 | April 24, 2008 7:27 PM
"Listen to oral diarrhea" would work.
"Read verbal diarrhea" would also work.
Posted by: Reginald Selkirk | April 24, 2008 7:28 PM
Okay. Greta. Breathe. Calm blue ocean, calm blue ocean...
Can Mathis swim?
If PZ can dream of priests on lawnchairs floating up to heaven, I can dream of the demented fuckwits like Mathis sinking in a calm blue ocean, right?
Ok, I guess I should add sharks, too.
Maybe lasers attached somewhere...
Posted by: Ichthyic | April 24, 2008 7:30 PM
No, Mr Mathis. We have your photo. You're white.
Don't you want to get into the science?
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | April 24, 2008 7:30 PM
Why so complicated? I'm sure PZ will gladly mutate a zebrafish for you.
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | April 24, 2008 7:33 PM
Why is it that posts about Expelled tend to bring out our craziest and preening lurkers, I wonder?
Posted by: Ryan F Stello | April 24, 2008 7:36 PM
Why so complicated? I'm sure PZ will gladly mutate a zebrafish for you.
Hey! It's my fantasy and I'll add sharks if I wanna!
nyah!
:p
besides where would we attach the laser beams on a zebrafish?
even mutated ones have heads that are too small.
Posted by: Ichthyic | April 24, 2008 7:36 PM
...of priests on lawnchairs floating up to heaven...
No one ever claimed that the rapture wouldn't involve balloons.
Posted by: jimmiraybob | April 24, 2008 7:37 PM
Well if you're a rotten lying ass-prod who makes a dishonest movie, maybe you and your bad film *jazz hands* deserve to be attacked.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM | April 24, 2008 7:38 PM
Why is it that posts about Expelled tend to bring out our craziest and preening lurkers, I wonder?
surely that's a rhetorical question?
I mean, we're talking people who saw Expelled and liked it, right?
I'm black and proud!
proud of what? being an ass?
guess what: color has nothing to do with that.
Posted by: Ichthyic | April 24, 2008 7:38 PM
what's that you say?
No one ever claimed that the rupture wouldn't involve balloons?
:p
Posted by: Ichthyic | April 24, 2008 7:40 PM
I thought that the first thing that one should do while in a hole is stop digging - fortunately for those that like watching the stupid slow-roast in its own juices, but not so fortunately for Mr. Mathis or the Exhumed creators, Mr. Mathis has not learned this. I guess that he and Mr. Stein are trying to prove that there really is an infinite amount of stupidity in the universe.
Posted by: Hap | April 24, 2008 7:40 PM
I'm glad you had the decency to censor the word 'fuck' there. Otherwise, we might have got the impression you were being rude.
Posted by: MartinM | April 24, 2008 7:40 PM
I guess that he and Mr. Stein are trying to prove that there really is an infinite amount of stupidity in the universe.
...or that you really can end up in China if you just keep digging the hole deep enough?
Posted by: Ichthyic | April 24, 2008 7:42 PM
So let me see here. We (I use "we" to signify the common line taken by the majority of commenters) said the movie was a sham. It is. We predicted that the XVIVO movie was ripped off. It was. We predicted that the music was taken without rights. It was. We predicted that Mathis only kicked PZ out because he didn't like PZ, and for no other reason. Mathis confirms that. We also predicted that the movie would gross less than Expelled *jazz hands* expected. It has. We also predicted that it would get viciously panned. And what do you know?
Even The Onion gives the movie an F.
http://www.avclub.com/content/cinema/expelled_no_intelligence_allowed
Paging Chris Mooney, we need some clean up on isle three.
Posted by: Michael X | April 24, 2008 7:48 PM
Ichthyic (#59),
I know I don't get good answers from these people, so yeah.
Helps bide the time before a good disemvoweling happens.
Posted by: Ryan F Stello | April 24, 2008 7:49 PM
It's being shown at Notre Dame this Saturday. Free Chipotle if you come!
The science department should protest...
Posted by: themann1086 | April 24, 2008 7:51 PM
The science department should protest...
The biology students should go get a free burrito and then shred the fuck out of the movie for their fellow students.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM | April 24, 2008 7:53 PM
re #52, 62:
What's the context? Did one of PZ's dungeon crawlers slither out for a bit?
Posted by: dkew | April 24, 2008 7:55 PM
Band Name!
Precambrian Rabbit
Posted by: Mikey M | April 24, 2008 8:00 PM
No, he also confirmed having had one other reason. As I quoted:
He actually agreed with Nisbet & Mooney that all publicity is good publicity.
It should point and laugh.
Great minds think alike... 0:-°
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | April 24, 2008 8:01 PM
Blake @ #18:
Like you, I would hope that the online discussion (and particularly Expelled Explosed) would enlighten reviewers, but a surprising number of them seem to accept the basic premises that there's a genuine debate about the viability of ID as a scientific theory, and/or that some poor scientists really are being unfairly punished for their brave, pioneering work in ID. This includes quite a few reviewers who have utterly trashed the film on other grounds--see, for example, Jeffrey Kluger at Time, who says "It's impossible to know from the handful of examples [Ben Stein] cites how widespread the problem is, but if there's anything to it at all, it's a matter well worth exposing." Jeez. Are journalists unable to type a few words and click a mouse? Maybe even read the Kitzmiller decision? (A notable exception is Roger Moore (no, not James Bond) at the Orlando Sentinel, who tears the Expelled folks a few extra holes.) There's a pretty good collection of reviews at Rotten Tomatoes, for further reference.
Posted by: beagledad | April 24, 2008 8:01 PM
Yeah, but I think they would take that as an opportunity to educate lots of Chinese people on the facts of evolutionary theory. If they succeed, they'll be able to ensure that China develops a successful economy in...2300. Of course, they haven't succeeded at anything other than revealing their own stupidity and mendaciousness and creating unintentional humor, so I don't expect them to start being successful now.
Posted by: Hap | April 24, 2008 8:01 PM
It should point and laugh.
damn straight.
something Nisbet just DOES NOT get.
At least Mooney had only forgotten for a time, I think.
Posted by: Ichthyic | April 24, 2008 8:02 PM
#64 And don't forget, Michael:
Rotten Tomatoes percentage of positive reviews:
Expelled: 10% (all reviewers), 0% (top reviewers)
Zombie Strippers: 38% (all reviewers), 30% (top reviewers)
Battlefield Earth was 3%...come on, Ben, you've got a ways to go!
Posted by: James F | April 24, 2008 8:02 PM
I don't get why Mark Mathis objects to being called an "asp rod".
(Maybe he hates X-Men for grossing more in a weekend than he will in a lifetime?)
Posted by: Kseniya | April 24, 2008 8:03 PM
It's been taken.
A friend of mine from Washington DC formed a band called "Precambrian Rabbit" six or seven years ago.
Posted by: Robin | April 24, 2008 8:04 PM
I wish Mark Mathis didn't me.
Once again, I'm envious of PZ.
Posted by: Robin | April 24, 2008 8:05 PM
Band Name!
Precambrian Rabbit
Yosemite Darwin sez:
"Ah hate thet precambrian rabbit!!"
Posted by: Ichthyic | April 24, 2008 8:06 PM
"Be vewwy quiet... I'm hunting pwecambwian wabbits..."
Posted by: Elwood Herring | April 24, 2008 8:12 PM
>It's been taken.
>A friend of mine from Washington DC formed a band >called "Precambrian Rabbit" six or seven years ago.
Crap. I guess we'll have to continue to perform as "Astronaut Love Triangle."
Posted by: Mikey M | April 24, 2008 8:18 PM
Daffy Mathis sez
PZ you're dethpicable!
Posted by: spurge | April 24, 2008 8:19 PM
Forgive me David, that is true. Though I suppose I see it being a bit post-hoc-damage control-y and so I dismiss it. Yet even if we take both his reasons at face value, neither of his offered reasons have any ethical justification behind them, nor do they confirm what many trolls have claimed: PZ broke the rules and was rightfully "Expelled". So in then end, the point remains unchanged.
Posted by: Michael X | April 24, 2008 8:19 PM
Wow. Do you read Nature Cell Biology? Or did you get the idea of "asp rod", thought there might be a funny picture to it, and entered it in images.google.com?
:-D :-D :-D
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | April 24, 2008 8:19 PM
Of course not. I'm saying it's even funnier than you said it was!
Posted by: David Marjanović, OM | April 24, 2008 8:22 PM
Tsk, tsk. Mathis is such a child. Unfortunately I know other bratty zealots just like him whose dogma supercedes anything other than their solipsistic view of the world. Mathis is just bawling after being spanked with science by PZ. Nanny nanny boo boo.
Posted by: jsn | April 24, 2008 8:24 PM
Paul, perhaps you should learn how to spell and use grammer correctly before you join the adults on a blog. Goodnight Princess Paulie ! Go teetee so you don't wet your bed, snoogums!
Posted by: jsn | April 24, 2008 8:33 PM
I love to make posts just to sit back and watch you all argueing among yourselfs about a movie so please don't stop as I'm really enjoying all this live entertainment among you back and forth {You're all in a tizzy over this movie so please keep it going}
You know the old saying: if you throw a stone into a bunch of dogs, the one who yelps is the one who got hit but in this case the whole pack of dogs are howling in unison.
{even before this movie came out} so as I said, please keep it going. Good nite. I'll be back tommorow, same time, same channel. This is better that watching a tv.
Your English is 'unpeccable'
Posted by: Nibien | April 24, 2008 8:34 PM
don't stop as I'm really enjoying all this live entertainment among you back and forth
too bad the only thing you yourself can contribute are the tears of a clown.
Posted by: Ichthyic | April 24, 2008 8:37 PM
Shorter Paul: I said something dumb and you all ripped me a new one, and I have nothing of substance with which to defend myself.
Posted by: Michael X | April 24, 2008 8:38 PM
Regarding PZ being expelled from Expelled, it would appear that PZ's karma ran over Mathis's dogma.
(I've always wanted to say that!)
Posted by: Elwood Herring | April 24, 2008 8:42 PM
Mikey M - I vote for "Spanked With Science" (jsn @ #84).
Posted by: SC | April 24, 2008 8:46 PM
*slaps forehead*
"Hello, my name is Michael X and I will be your joke-missing dumbass this evening."
Posted by: Michael X | April 24, 2008 8:47 PM