REPOST: Little Women, Big Men, Casey Luskin Fails Again

This is a repost from the old ERV. A retrotransposed ERV :P I dont trust them staying up at Blogger, and the SEED overlords are letting me have 4 reposts a week, so Im gonna take advantage of that!

I am going to try to add more comments to these posts for the old readers-- Think of these as 'directors cut' posts ;)

I thought now would be a good time to repost one of my previous encounters with Casey Luskin, a charming gnome that volunteers at soup kitchens, who tried to take an internet 'hit' out on me.

A friend and I were loling about Caseys speech last night. Friend hadnt encountered Casey before:

Friend-- Wasnt the topic the Dover Trial? What the FUCK was your blog doing in that presentation?
Me-- LOL It was an example of 'persecution' of Creationists. He had to sift through hundreds of my blog posts to find that one example, months ago, of how 'creationists are persecuted by evilutionists BAWWW!'.
Friend-- Just what kind of wuss meticulously hunts the internet for adjectives that people call him, and then complains like a kid? Ive been called much worse names than Luskin by 16 year old girls when I said i hated Twilight and thought Edward Cullen was a wuss. Oh, but Luskin 'forgives everyone'... that guy is full of spite.
Me-- HAHA! Thats our Casey!

Id like to introduce you all to Paul Burnett. Hes an older fellow who luvs his hybrid cars, cactuses, and being a pro-science activist in the E/C 'controversy.'

A couple days ago, Paul sent an email of to Mike LaSalle, the owner/editor/creator of Mens News Daily, where Luskin posts about ID and the evils of Darwinism. It was just a simple list of links to blogs pointing out Luskins anti-science and bully-ing tendencies. But, as the 'incident' with KKMS shows us, Average Joe Creationists are pretty clueless of the activities of Professional Creationists and wouldnt be giving a voice to these rats if they knew what was going on. It was great activism for Paul to point Luskins 'indiscretions' out to LaSalle.

Unfortunately, LaSalle didnt 'get it'. I thought his response to the link to me was incredibly odd:

ad hominem:
Casey Luskin doesn't have a real job like us well-paid but over-worked bio-science professionals who don't have the time to blabber on all day on their blog about what a damn fool Casey Luskin is...

Um... I get paid less than $20000 a year, and I work +60 hours a week, not including studying. Um... Well paid? Im not a science professional either. Im a student. And it took ~15 minutes to write that post, and it only took so long because I had to hunt down links. I will happily exchange 15 minutes of my time to make fun of a miserable failure of a bully like Luskin so everyone can laugh at him.

I myself still laugh, hard, every time I see that pic of him. Its wonderful!

*shrug* Well, okay. End of story. Another one of Luskins employers doesnt care that hes a bully and a loser, whatever.

Nuh uh.

Casey could NOT leave it at that. He wrote a letter to Mike defending his asinine behaviors. omg you guys, this letter, priceless. Its like a distraught toddlers tantrum "I dunno why everyone is so mean to me Im really nice and respectful and I volunteer at soup kitchens and Im really nice but people call me names and I dunno why they call me names and Darwinists are so mean but Im really kind and they call me names!!!"

Like, several paragraphs of that.



He also proclaims that he has 'debated' Mooney and Zimmer (and he was really nice and respectful but they called him names!!!!).

Then the letter gets *really* weird. Even though the original email from Barnett included links to Tim Sandefur, Red State Rabble, Pandas Thumb, etc, *I* am the focus of the rest of the email, starting with this:

I also treated Les Lane with respect when I e-mailed him recently; I simply asked him (nicely) to remove my picture from his website. Apparently Mr. Lane forwarded my e-mails around to others without my knowledge or permission (something I have not done to him). For example, read the page about this at:…

Hey, Casey, it doesnt matter that you were 'respectful' and 'kind' to Les. You were wrong. Though Les and I were not aware of this, as we are not lawyers, Tim Sandefur informed us that you were using your position as a 'lawyer' to bully people into doing what you want even though you had ZERO legal standing for your 'respectful' and 'kind' words to Les.

You, Casey Luskin, used your credentials inappropriately to bully someone who didnt know any better.

You. Are. A. Bully.

Additionally, what the hell did you think was going to happen when you emailed a 'legal' threat, especially one involving copyright, to a mentor of ERV? Did you honestly think I was going to let you bully a friend of mine, on this topic specifically, and not say anything? WHY? Because your 'friends' at the DI never seem to stand up for you?

But this isnt the weird part of the email. The rest and the P.S. is Casey begging Mike LaSalle to do a hit piece on me to avenge him. Why would LaSelle be interested in such a thing? Well, 9/11 opened LaSelles eyes to the fact he is a poor, oppressed rich white Christian man, which is what inspired him to start MWN (Note, Mike LaSelle is not his real name. If people knew his real name he would be persecuted even more, evidently, kinda like someone else...). A major part of LaSelles persecution is those damn women with education. Not a fan of the vajayjays.

It doesnt really bother me if people attack me personally; my main response is that their behavior is saddening. The ERV blogs page is all about attacking me personally-otherwise theres no substance to any of it other than trying to mock me and attack me. Like I said, it doesnt really bother me personally, but its clear that the claim that I am a bully is simply their latest /ad hominem/ attack against me. But its not a valid attack.

In any case, I have no ill will towards ERV and I will not retaliate against her in any way. Im not interested in attacking anyone personally. And I respect people who support evolution. But it is interesting, and saddening, how the pro-Darwin side often operates in this debate, isnt it?


CC: Paul Burnett

p.s. Like I said, I have no ill-will towards ERV (whose real name, I believe, is Abbie Smith). Thus, if you are interested in learning about Smiths behavior, here is some of what she has written in the past:

"I. Hate. Missionaries. Hate. Them." (Blogging for the Common
Good,B July 4, 2007, at…)

Im not necessarily a Jerry Falwell fan, but on her website she once gave death wishes that Jerry Fallwell's family would die, writing: "Falwell is an ass. His family is a bunch of little assholes. Im glad Falwells dead, and I wish he took his poor little family with him."

Smith subsequently replied to a commenter saying, "No-- Im creepy. Fantasizing about them all driving off a cliff a la 'Billy Madison'." (Hitchens, I like this guy!, May 18, 2007, at…)

Elsewhere, Smith suggests appropriate ways to take the Blasphemy Challenge, a pop-culture internet phenomenon where people are asked to send in videos denying the existence of God:

I dont care if you paint a picture of the Virgin Mary and shit on it. I dont care if you take your dogs to your old church and let them shit all over their parking lot (as long as you pick it up). I dont care if you act like a stereotypical 'teenage atheist' dress in all black and write songs about fucking Jesus in the ass. I dont care if you jump out of an airplane with 'GOD IS DEAD' written on your parachute. I
dont care if you plant a garden of tulips in the shape of a pentagram. I dont care if you put an Evolve Fish on your car and wear an Atheist Atom on your jacket lapel. Im not going to call someone an idiot for expressing their views and frustrations in a way thats appropriate for them, especially when they are doing nothing wrong. (Dawkins was only half right, March 2, 2007, at…)

Again: I do not write this to attack Smith in anyway; I have no desire to do that. I just thought that you might want to see what she has written in the past, in her own words.

Disgruntled husband to a hit man: "Sir, I love my wife. I wouldn't ever do anything to hurt her. Im not a violent person, Im kind and respectful. I volunteer at soup kitchens. So if something were to happen to her, I couldn't possibly be held accountable. If something were to happen to her, she drives a blue 2002 Honda Civic, and she leaves for work at 7:25 every morning. She is also allergic to shellfish. Here are several recent photographs of her and half of the $12,000 we agreed to. But I sure hope nothing happens to her."


Hey Luskin-- in the real world, being a smart atheist chick isnt an insult. Must you fail at everything?

More like this

*swoon* Casey Luskin is as breathtakingly sexy in person as he is on film. Im going to pass out. Hes like a WOW gnome. **SWOON!!!!** Update: Shit. Im hungry. Update #2: Casey is trying to justify 'cdesign proponentsists'. Srsly. Srsly. Update #3: The next time I hear someone say '…
I know you all read PZs blag, but I really need to take a moment to point out this bit of irony. Casey Luskin I mean, 'The Discovery Institute' *WINK!*, just filed a false DMCA claim against a YouTube user for criticizing Luskins appearance on some random FOX News show. Now, Im fairly certain that…
A while back, two ladies visited the Discovery Institute, and wrote about their experiences afterwards. They admittedly did so under false pretenses, acting as if they were fellow travelers in creationism, but they did get interesting and amusing responses from the inhabitants. They tried to do it…
So remember how last night Casey Luskin was all for freedom of speech? Academic freedom? This is what ID Creationists do to students that dare to speak out against them. Casey is allowed to post here to defend himself and his actions, but because he cannot defend his behavior, hes decided to lick…

The last paragraph of your post sums it all up! Casey Luskin in pretty much the disgruntled husband. After watching what he did yesterday, I can confidently say he is a wolf in sheep's clothing; a spiteful wretch who faps to persecution fantasies about himself, like a form of SM. Oh yes he is also a bully and a backstabbing wuss. As morally decrepit a man as any I have come across. (Hey Casey! If you're reading this, you may want to add this to that slide of yours that bears the meticulous collection of profanities that anyone has ever directed at you for being a pussy. Go right ahead! By the way, you do realize that you are a public figure voicing an opinion on the internet and ridicule is inevitable? Anyone that has ever posted an opinion about anything online has been called names. For fuck's sake Casey, act like a man, not a 5 year old!)

wow, for a science blog, im surprised. this is some of the most innane rubbish i have ever come across. won't be visiting this site again.

Aseem - please don't call Casey Luskin a pussy.

Pussies are fun.

By Pierce R. Butler (not verified) on 21 Feb 2009 #permalink

"wow, for a science blog, im surprised. this is some of the most innane rubbish i have ever come across. won't be visiting this site again."

On the other hand I'll be visiting your mom tonight.

Science blogs are supposed to be dry and stuffy, not snarky and fun, apparently. THERE WILL BE NO SNARK! Because, see, it's unprofessional (unlike your mum).

Also, lawl @ misspelling inane.

Hey Arnold, if you really want to demonstrate your intellectual superiority, you might want to start by spelling the word "inane" correctly. Just a thought.

By The Chimp's Ra… (not verified) on 21 Feb 2009 #permalink

@ arnold (#3): Yes it is "inane rubbish" - yes indeed, that's what Luskin spews all the time as erv points out above in a quite devastating manner.

What? That's *not* what you meant..?

Oh.. then: BALLS or GTFO
(sorry Abbie, "arnold" requires a non-TITS reference)

Peirce: Casey is *exactly* like a pussy: it's fun to f@$k with him, too

Abbie: I think Casey might have a crush on you. Why is he paying so much attention to you rather than all the male biologists?

Aseem said:
As morally decrepit a man as any I have come across.

Aseem, you said on Friday night that you are a naturalist, correct?
Please explain to what standard of moral comparison you are appealing when you call someone "morally decrepit", and more importantly, why anyone else should think that this carries a more substantive message than "I think you're bad, much like I think vanilla ice cream on top of habanero hot wings is bad". Thanks!

As much as it may confuse you, RhoBot, there *are* standards for moral behavior that have nothing to do with your magic sky-fairy. As a matter of fact, most of (wo)mankind's moral standards predate Xtianity by quite a bit.

Special pleading for your magic sky-fairy carries no weight with people who do not believe.

This is really basic stuff, Rho. Do try to keep up.

By LanceR, JSG (not verified) on 23 Feb 2009 #permalink

Abbie, you gave him da finger? Gasp! I weep for the injury to his poor, fragile psyche.

@Tyler: "A fractal of fail" - Damn, that's good. Gonna have to steal, err I mean quote with full attribution, that.

By John the Skeptic (not verified) on 23 Feb 2009 #permalink

As I've explained before to Rhology (and he of course ignored), we appeal to our common humanity (values, goals, self-interest, logic, etc.) to resolve our moral disputes. And if that doesn't work, ultimately they are resolved by violence (thus our colorful history of waging wars).

Rhology implicitly assumes an absolute standard is necessary for these things. Let him defend that assumption, or STFU already.

Would it be fair to say something like 'Casey Luskin is made of FAIL'?

(evil chuckle)

Hey, if he can't take a little heat, he should stop lying his ass off in public where people might call him on it.

The MadPanda, FCD