Unappealing

Shorter Longer Bill Dembski:

It’s wrong to appeal to a judge’s authority on federal law, but not to twist Thomas Jefferson’s words to pretend we can know what he’d think of modern science.

Dembski is responding to Steven Pinker’s reply to Disco. DJ Stephen Meyer’s op-ed claiming Thomas Jefferson would totally have totally disagreed with Charles Darwin (who was 15 when Jefferson died). Pinker wonders why the Boston Globe keeps giving creationists op-ed space, even after Judge Jones ruled ID unconstitutional in science class. Dembski:

Is this vapid appeal to authority all the Darwinians have left?

I kid you not.

Comments

  1. #1 Ian
    July 21, 2009

    So an appeal to the authority of 150 years of evidence versus an appeal to zero evidence? Hmm! I wonder which appeal most appeals to Dembski and his unappealing ilk?

  2. #2 James F
    July 21, 2009

    Now that Pinker has replied to Meyer’s piece, and Dembski commented on Pinker’s reply, the original op-ed counts as a pro-ID peer-reviewed article, right?

  3. #3 RBH
    July 21, 2009

    Dembski has truly become a caricature of his former self.

  4. #4 Modusoperandi
    July 22, 2009

    RBH: What was he before?

Current ye@r *