The debate is churning along at Monkey Trials, and I have to say it's pretty interesting. Hatfield is doing a great job in this titanic struggle between data and "raw intellect".
Check it out.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Responding to an idiotic challenge from Vox Day Scott Hatfield has chosen to debate Vox at some point after August 15th.
I don't know what to think. On the one hand, debating a crank like Vox day is unlikely to do anyone any good. It's not like a guy who doesn't think that science is valid (all…
Bill Hooker is a regular advocate of "open science," and is currently supporting a new subversive proposal: to make all raw data freely available on some sort of Creative Commons type license.
It sounds like a perfectly reasonable idea on the face of it, but I have to say, I'm a little dubious…
The story of research on linguistic relativity can be summarized thusly: early cognitive scientists, inspired by the work of Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf, were all-too eager to find that thought is influenced, if not determined, by language (either by its grammatical categories, ala Whorf, or by…
Reposted from the original Digitalbio.
About a decade ago, I took a fascinating summer course at the UW on bioethics. We read about the Nuremburg trials and the Geneva conventions. We learned about horizon problems and eugenics. And we discussed lots of challenging scenarios with genetic testing…
Oh, the intellect is quite thorougly cooked. I've tried to wade through Vox's long, odious posts, but they're just so wrong. After the 5th or 6th large error in a row, one starts to lose hope.
The interesting thing is, in his last post he suggests that he is winning. Go give some love to Scott.
I don't know how Scott Hatfield thought this would be anything other than an exercise in frustration. Vox Day is as invincibly ignorant as he is cartoonishly in love with his own "raw intellect". Did Scott really think Vox would ever admit to being wrong or ignorant on any one point, let alone admit defeat?
I'm still not sure Scott is the right man for the job. Vox grossly misrepresents Scott for dramatic effect "see: he said that evolution is not really true!" and Scott basically sums that up as them agreeing, completely missing Day playing to the peanut gallery with a wink and a smirk.
Gang -- keep in mind that this is the same Theodore Beale who once made the charming observation that
How does he pull it off? Must be that winsome smile.
Now, as we can see from the above, Vox Day's enthusiastic dive to the bottom of the cesspool of ideas has placed him entirely outside the mapped region of the wingnut-wanker continuum. He is also the most intense wankon emitter known to science. According to my dosimeter, any further wankon exposure will force me to avoid the blogosphere for a month. So -- thanks for the tip, but there is no way I am going anywhere near Vox Day at the moment.