He should study Sun Tzu

Egnor is really misunderstood. He isn't evil like Deepak Chopra. He just wants to find where altruism is.

Louis, I do think his reluctance towards naturalistic explanations of altruism is based in a dualistic worldview and a belief in an immaterial soul... but I agree he's not among the most dishonest of the creationist bunch.

What? Egnor IS as bad. He's just has a better vocabulary.

Ever seen the National Geographic Antarctica Open? The one where two orca are playing tennis with a seal?

The seal's name is Egnor.

uhg. HE just...

Oh, I don't know. As long as the war in Europe is going so well, why not open an eastern front by attacking the Soviet Union? That sounds like a pretty good idea.

(Did I just violate Godwin's law?)

I'm sure Egnor's altruism is in the brain like everyone elses. All he needs is to go to the doctor with the rubber glove and little flashlight to find it.

Please don't kill for me saying this, but in a way they have a point about the "Marketing Problem."

Now, don't take that as support for ID'ers, I'm no loon. But hear me out.

Earlier today I was debating with a Creationist on my blog. He went through all the typical crap you hear from them, "Creationism is just as credible as Science, and there's just as much evidence for Creationism as there is for Evolution, yadda yadda yadda."

Then he asked me, "What science is there to support Evolution?"

I thought, "A-ha! I'll send him to Pharyngula's blog, specifically the post about the Creation Museum. That'll learn'em."

My thinking was all that information was in one place for him to look at if he chose to do so.

But then I remembered something. At times, even I have difficulty with some of the science. My degrees are in English and Sociology, and I don't have much background in the "Hard" sciences.

This guy didn't even graduate High School. He isn't going to understand 3/4 of those articles, at least.

He'll start to read one, get confused and then dismiss it because he's never going to admit he didn't understand them.

There needs to be a book "Evolution for Dummies" or something. Maybe in the end it won't matter, but I do think the complexity of some of the science simply overwhelms people.

Remember the I.Q. of most people hovers around 105, give or take a few points. Not exactly Mensa material.(Possibly Densa).

My thinking was all that information was in one place for him to look at if he chose to do so.

TalkOrigins.org

Did I just violate Godwin's law?

Nope. You fulfilled it.

Remember the I.Q. of most people hovers around 105, give or take a few points.

By definition the average IQ is 100.

Of course, some say the IQ measures the ability to complete an IQ test, and not necessarily intelligence...

I have to agree with Fairlane on the issue of the Darwin "Marketing Problem". Many people won't (can't?) admit that the science is too complicated for them to understand. Another problem is that once you get out of the cities into the rural (real) America, all you see is christianism. I visited my mother recently in rural Virginia. The menu in the restaurant had bible verses, the sign above the salad bar had "BELIEVE". Even the billboards along the highway advertised "JESUS SAVES". This kind of thinking is pervasive in our country, and a few educated folks like us absolutely cannot stem this tide. Children are force-fed ID every day by their families and religious community. It takes a lot of education, dedication and willingness to open the mind and reject this kind of thinking. It's my belief that most people go with their gut feeling and easily understood religious childhoods rather than grow up into educated adulthood.

SG

My guess is that somewhere along the line, Egnor heard the joke that the efficacy of a group of ninjas is inversely proportional to the number of ninjas in the group. Then, he misinterpreted this as a law, and got ninjas mixed up with skeptics. Thus, he thinks he'll have an easier time if he attacks multiple skeptics at once.

fairlane @ #8

The basics of evolution are easy enough for a child to learn... it's the Creationists who make it seem complicated by setting up strawmen.

Some of the evidence needs a bit of mental work, but there is a mass of evidence thta is also pretty straightforward. Again, it's the Creationists that make it seem hard, mainly by lying their asses off.

Note to everyone, I was being sarcastic.

David Marjanović wrote: "Of course, some say the IQ measures the ability to complete an IQ test, and not necessarily intelligence...."

Two books I highly recommend - The Mismeasure of Man, by Stephen Jay Gould; and None of the Above, by David Owen.

#8, #13: The recommendations for early-teen readers in evolution and atheism which are volunteered right here (recent pharyngula thread) are pretty impressive. And I'll second talkorigins' utility - it's comprehensive, mostly comprehensible, and its tone isn't inappropriately confrontational.

Hey Zeno! As long as we are winning on the eastern front, let's fulfull our treaty obligations and declare war on the Americans in support of our little asian brothers.
Who is next on Egnor's agenda?

Re #15: If you read 'The Mismeasure of Man' or much of anything else where Gould aired his social conscience, don't forget to take an antidote for the excess rhetoric. I recommend Pinker's 'The Blank Slate'.

Did I just violate Godwin's law?

Nope. You fulfilled it.

Remember the I.Q. of most people hovers around 105, give or take a few points.

By definition the average IQ is 100.

Of course, some say the IQ measures the ability to complete an IQ test, and not necessarily intelligence...