DarkSyde has the 6th installment of his Know Your Creationists series up at Unscrewing the Inscrutable, this one introducing Hugh Ross, the old earth cosmologist, and Ken Ham, the young earth Amish impersonator. He cites me in this installment, but just for the record, I did not come up with the puddle analogy he mentions myself. I believe it was originally Richard Dawkins who used it, but I may be mistaken. Still, it works well.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
DarkSyde has the second installment of the Know Your Intelligent Design Creationists series up at Unscrewing the Inscrutable. This one focuses on a couple of young earthers, Carl Baugh and my old pal Kent Hovind. While anyone with an IQ over room temperature, including most of their fellow…
William Dembski sadly reports that Answers in Genesis is handing out a "$50,000" prize* for a creationist essay…for which no Intelligent Design advocates need reply. He moans that ID doesn't have anywhere near the resources of the traditional creationists (which is true—AiG is bigger, but the DI…
Tonight's edition of The O'Reilly Factor featured a discussion of the brand new creation museum outside Cincinnati. Guest host John Kasich was sitting in for Bill O'Reilly. Representing darkness and ignorance was creationist impresario Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis. On the side of…
i think I've made it exquisitely clear how much I detest and despise the term "Nevile Chamberlain School of Evolutionists." Indeed, my disgust at the term led me to sic the Hitler Zombie on (of all people) Richard Dawkins, the originator of the term, a deed that was either the boldest thing I've…
The puddle analogy is originally from the Douglas Adams.
I was gonna credit Ed with it for all time because Dawkins has tried some smack downs on a few of my homies. I guess I'll have to abandon that idea.
Ed, ~DS~ has done a splended job with these posts, a real rogues gallery to be sure. B
Yes, DS has done an excellent job with this series of posts.
Query for the logician: the two analogies in DS's post, the puddle analogy and the bullseye on the barnwall analogy, describe an oft-repeated fallacy in creationist/anti-evolutionist "thinking." Is there a formal logic or scientific name for this fallacy?