Wow: it looks like PZ Myers and his fans are embroiled in a bit of a kerfuffle with Chris Mooney and Sheril Kirshenbaum and their adherents over the new Mooney/Kirshenbaum book, Unscientific America
First, PZ says the book is "useless." Chris says well, phooey, because plenty of other people like it. And then everybody calls one another "poopyheads" (or variants thereof) in the comments sections of both blogs, which are running into the hundreds.
I'm relieved to note that I am completing two big projects next week, so I won't have time to read my copy of Unscientific America for a couple weeks - until all of this dies down. But now I'm really, really interested to read the book. . . which is probably exactly why Chris sent PZ a copy. ;-)
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Mooney and Kirshenbaum have been so stung by my criticisms of their book that they have launched a multi-part rebuttal to my review. Here's my reply to their reply.
We didn't get personal, and we didn't attack atheism in general! Hmmm. Here's a sampling of what they do say: "Myers' actions were…
This year has seen an explosion of books written by science bloggers, and it looks like the trend is going to continue well into 2010.
Jason Rosenhouse recently published The Monty Hall Problem and is hard at work on a new title about what goes on at creationist conferences.
Chris Mooney and…
Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens our Future by Chris Mooney and Sheril Kirshenbaum tries to make several different points. The central framework of the book, on which all the arguments are hung, is that science has a status, a place, in American culture, politics, and…
Chris Mooney and Sheril Kirshenbaum are discussing their book on Daily Kos. The subject of my review has come up a few times, and one commenter cited this sentence from me:
Following this, he proceeds to damn the "New Atheists" for "collapsing the distinction" between methodological and…
Ah ha! It's a publicity ploy!
This is called framing the book launch. Highly technical stuff, don't expect to understand it...
(great hair, BioE!)
"But now I'm really, really interested to read the book. . . which is probably exactly why Chris sent PZ a copy. ;-)"
I thought the same thing, and this exchanged piqued my interest, too. Not so much about the new-ending atheism debate, but about what the authors really say about Pluto's demotion. At least it will be a quick read (135 pages?!).
First post on this blog, see, the kerkuffle is good for the most obscure bloggers !
M&K's adherents now included the likes of John A D*vison,John K*ok,and David M*bus,all known internet lunatics,insane and at times committed in real life,one has to congratulate M&K for this sort of support.
PZ has fans, btw, because he makes a lot of sense most of the time.And if he doesnt, his "fans" point that out.But I guess it's easier to picture his blog as some sort of church full of zealoty followers, if you into knocking over strawmen.
Fact of the matter is that M&K wrote an irrelevant,awful book and are trying to pimp it(and their blog) by mentioning PZ and the New atheists.
And it's working.
Ah,comment moderation !!
Well,what did I expect.....
Rorschach: yes, I moderate comments. You're probably unaware of the reasons why (which I recently posted) because you don't ever visit my "obscure" blog. :)
If your only reason for visiting is to engage in attacks and insults like the ones in your comment, I'd prefer you let BioE languish in "obscurity" and comment somewhere else. I happen to like PZ quite a bit, but that doesn't mean I like all his adherents. . . and I'm not interested in high traffic if it comes with ad hominem attacks. That's just not my thing.
I fail to see the ad hominem and insults in my post,to be honest.
I was commenting on your blog post,and the parts I consider wrong or factually incorrect.
Adherent huh? LOL
Wow. Do I really have to tell you that attacking people's mental health is insulting?
In this post, I said that PZ and his blog commenters are arguing with Chris and Sheril and their blog commenters over the quality of the book, and that this cross-blog argument is piquing people's interest. I then quoted one of the more colorful comments. If you consider any of that "wrong or factually incorrect," then you have drunk some kind of Kool-Aid with which I am unfamiliar. I'm sure PZ would have no problem with the post. Shall I go get him and ask?
All due respect, the mental health--or, rather, lack thereof--of the particular commenters named by Rorschach is hardly in doubt by anybody actually paying attention.
And what exactly was the relevance of naming those commenters and attacking their mental health in Rorschach's comment? Nothing, because they weren't mentioned in the post and didn't comment on it. It was gratuitous and inappropriate. The reason I supplied links to the debate on the blogs of the interested parties is so BioE readers could go straight to the source and read both sides of the argument, if they wished to do so - not so non-readers like Rorschach would feel they had a new forum to insult people who don't even comment on this blog.
I think what might have prompted Rorschach's comment, lacking in clarity and tact as it was, is that it may come off as dismissive to label all participants in a discussion either PZ "fans" or Chris/Sheril "adherents". I'm sure you didn't mean it that way, but OTOH there's been so much of that kind of labeling lately, it gets tiresome.
If people want to read that into a neutral post, Windy, there isn't much I can do to stop it - or much I can say to avoid being misread. Fact: those comment strings I linked to are places where you find strong, vocal supporters of both sides (and if I really wanted to be insulting, I'd have called them hordes or groupies). I don't think it's necessary to make the point that not *everyone* in the comment thread is a rabid supporter of either PZ or Chris & Sheril, because I think that's obvious to anyone who clicks through the links and reads the debate - or really to anyone who reads blogs and is familiar with comment strings.