Afarensis takes on both Sal Cordova and Jonathan Wells on the subject of anthropology. Would you believe that those two creationist frauds are talking out of their hats and are readily spotted as dishonest kooks when they discuss anything in which their reader has any expertise? I know, I was so surprised myself.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
If one were asked who the very worst advocate for Intelligent Design creationism was, it would be a difficult decision—there are so many choices! Should we go back to first principles and pick PJ Johnson, the cunning lawyer who has the goal of undermining all of science? Smarmy and obtuse Sal…
I'm feeling left out. The mathematicians — Mark, Blake, and Tyler — are having so much fun bullseyeing a certain womp rat over there in Creationist Canyon. Yeah, Slimy Sal Cordova has poked his pointy head up and claimed that, somehow, Intelligent Design and Advanced Creation Science (whatever…
It's easy to forget what a repellent, sniveling little turd-speck Sal Cordova is until one is reminded by a reference on a blog worth reading (it's not as if I read Cordova's ugly little site myself, you know). The occasion this time is that Slimy Sal has just discovered that Joan Roughgarden, the…
If there's one undeniable aspect of "intelligent design" creationism advocates, it is their ability to twist and misrepresent science and any discussions of evolution to their own ends. Be it Dr. Michael Egnor's twisting of history to claim that eugenics is based on Darwinism, rather than the…
Would you believe that those two creationist frauds are talking out of their hats
I think you're being overly kind, as I'd have them talking out of something a bit lower on their anatomies. ;)
Something else that is round and inappropriate.
If their heads are where i think they are, pz was not too far off the mark.
Post a link, man! I want to see the Sal/Wells smackdown!
Afarensis, where the takedown is.
Both of the links in the article are to Afarensis's site.
Which explains why everything they say is so garbled.
j and eewolf - Thank you - I am now thinking of a Jim Carey in certain scene in Ace Ventura, Pet Detective... and if I were going to debate either of these two clowns, I would show the scene to the crowd while they were talking.
So that is what ass-hat means!
Oh. :-)
W cn thnk Gd tht frd s lmtd t crtnsts.
Y cn b dmn sr thr s n frd n mnstrm scnc.
N sr!
Y cn bt yr grnt mny n tht!
The funny part is, when fraud occurs in mainstream science it's exposed and denounced *by scientists*, generally pretty quickly. Meanwhile, fraudulent claims from Creationists are not only almost never exposed or denounced by other Creationists, but are generally repeated by Creationists not limited to the perpetrators of the initial fraud on many occasions and for a very long time after being exposed and denounced *by scientists*.
By the way, what does this have to do with elephants in spring?
In other news, I see that at uncommondisdain Denyse O'Leary is now admitting what the folks around here had long suspected: the Johnsonist mob consider the age of the earth to be more a political issue than anything else.
You can be damn sure there is no fraud in mainstream science.
Creationist/ID Fraud = a for-profit industry with constant stockholder demand for maximum financial growth and market expansion. Enron/TYCO-type management - stockholders look other way in vain anticipation of huge one time dividend.
Scientific Fraud = anomolous and destructive - to be exposed and rooted out with perpetrators punished.
Hmmm, the similarity boggles the mind.
f th rlgs bckgrps f Wlls, t l. r rlvnt nd clr thr thnkng, th thstc bckgrd f PZ. tc s ls bvsly ffctng thr thght prcsss nd th wy thy dl wth ppl.
Wh y ll kddng hr?
xcpt yrslvs, tht s?
Not only that, but there are even strong signs that the original study Wells and Cordova are citing is completely overstated anyhow.
As John Hawks notes this hugely altered reconstruction... consists of changing the angle of the image and an extremely minor alteration in the face.
What do creationist troll have against vowels?
On the other hand, it makes them easy to spot and ignore. So keep it up.
Oh. :-)