More like this
There's a kerfuffle under way in which Jerry Coyne, PZ Myers, Richard Hoppe, and a host of others are debating whether NCSE is too nice to theists. Since I work for NCSE, I'm trying to stay out of this, and my comments about NCSE will be based on publicly available information, not any internal…
Attention conservation notice: A couple thousand words of reply to questions about why I think NCSE does what it does, delivered in my capacity as a random blogger not as an NCSE staffer. People who don't care about accommodationism or about how I read the NCSE website should probably just go…
Chad Orzel says Support the National Center for Science Education:
I try not to do any shilling for political groups on the blog, but I'll make an exception for the National Center for Science Education. Why? Three reasons:
1) They do good and important, if not always glamorous work, supporting the…
The NCSE has put out a press release congratulating Ayala for his Templeton Prize, and thanking him for his support of NCSE. It also parrots his defense of the compatibility of science and religion.
You know, I've been a long-time supporter of the NCSE, a vocal crusader for better science education…
She's gotten much better at this over time.
The host introduced it saying basically "neither side can prove their point nor can they disprove it". Could not go on!
Michael: He turned out to be totally wrong. That may be the last time such as dumb-ass thing was uttered by a professional in the business.
I assume that was sarcastic -- but I actually think that really was the most ridiculous statement about the creationism/evolution "debate" that I've seen made by a moderator (but obviously not a creationism proponent!)
Actually, if you want to see something worse, go to the end of the segment and look at his closing statement!
Another facepalm -- of course what makes it easy to get away with saying such statements before people who don't know much about evolution is that it has the cheap trick of making the speaker seem intellectual. It's the same trick as saying "it's certainly not black and white" which generates the cached thought of "profound idea" even if it's not applicable in this case. I can't believe Scott has been doing this for so long without losing it and going ballistic even once -- I think she needs to be canonised as a secular saint.
I'll be darned. Gish mentioned 'sudden emergence theory' before Edwards v. Aguillard and before the cross examination of Behe on a draft of "Of Pandas and People" in Kitzmiller. I wasn't aware of that term being used pre-Aguillard.