OK, this is the final straw. The Intelligent Design creationists send out press releases, they peddle textbooks in our classrooms, they publish dishonest books of pseudoscience, and now … and now, they've come out with a popular magazine.
I'd complain some more but I'm afraid they'd kick sand in my face and beat me up.
(via ERV)
- Log in to post comments
More like this
The National Center for Science Education, where I work, has focused on fighting political attacks on evolution education for all of its 30 year history. When the group was founded in the early '80s, they didn't choose a name narrowly focused on evolution, hoping that they'd make quick work of…
I think one thing Razib says is exactly right:
One of the most interesting things to me is the nature of Creationism as an idea which evolves in a rather protean fashion in reaction to the broader cultural selection pressures.
Creationism has evolved significantly, but it's not exactly protean: it…
In yesterday's post, I remarked that the clear loser in yesterday's debate was the intelligent design crowd. They've been trying for years to persuade people that anti-evolutionism has nothing--nothing--to do with blinkered religious obscurantism. And in one widely viewed, widely covered, debate…
This is actually somewhat interesting, and I'm not going to reject all of it out of hand. The Fair Use Project of Stanford Law School is going to defend the use of Lennon's song "Imagine" in the movie Expelled.
On the one hand, they are using a very short clip — and I am not a fan of the kind of…
I can't imagine that's real. Wouldn't these evangelicals think the seductive model on the front is sinning? (Not that they're against hypocrisy or anything.. just seems too fakish.)
Hurk! *Freezes up, twitching an eyelid*
The brain you are searching for is busy or experiencing technical difficulties.
God will, PUMP YOU UP!
God wants you to abuse steroids! Hallelujah...
Apart from the title of the mag, it doesn't appear to have anything to do with ID. I think the "designers" they are talking about are the individuals who work out until they are so bulked up that their biceps get in the way of trying to drink from their bottles of powerade.
Thank you for the laugh, it made my day. I've had a really rough couple of weeks and when I read this post I laughed out loud.
Tom, I had the same thoughts about the seductive model on the cover. But the magazine is selling ID and sex sells!
Look, muscular Christianity.
ROFL! Now I dont think they have any religious affiliation (bodybuilders are usually rabidly atheistic... or rabidly theistic). I think its just a play on their supplements-- Intelligently designed supplements, intelligently design your body, etc.
Awesome cover, though. Oooh if someone Photoshopped Dembski onto the cover dude... hehehehehe!!
I remember eons ago when I was in college having a conversation with some youngster from Campus Crusades assuring me with a dead-straight face that being over-weight was sinful. I guess this is just the logical progression of that idea.
A Calorie is a Calorie...OR IS IT?
(I knew some of those Calories were BTUs in disguise!)
The Case for Casein: underrated no more!
(I've always felt that casein was kind of overrated...there are a lot of proteins that are just as good, just as complete, and yet they are constantly overshadowed by the big media hype over casein.)
It must really suck having a target audience that can't read...
I'd believe the "sex sells" thing if I thought for even a second that the cover model here was sexy. But...ugh. The lumpiness, the leathery skin, the ridiculous hair, ugh. I've always wondered if any women really go for the over-developed veins-sticking-out-all-over look.
I just got done skimming through the 131 page second issue of the magazine posted. Though humorous, the magazine is from a "fitness pill" company by the name of Designer Supplements (their site). So don't worry; IDiots won't resort to unnecessary violence yet.
It's tempting to put Dembski's face on the muscle man, though
(in muscle-head voice): "Look like this after 10 years of digesting this sh-err...good stuff".
Seriously, wouldn't it be like humping a pile of medicine balls?
Well,I don't know about the whole sand business but, if somebody would hand Jamie Eason some fur-lined handcuffs, the beating can begin!
Weight gain 4000
Beefcake! BEEFCAKE!!
Lee Priest (the model) is an intimidating 5'3"
Did you notice the text across the top of the magazine:
Synergy - Performance - Adaptation - Progression - Evolution
Maybe they are trying to the the DI all worked up...
This isn't all that surprising. They've been pretending to be science nerds for so long, trying to beat back real science. Now they're pretending to be beefy schoolyard bullies, trying to beat up real science. And yet, this Cargo Cult coolness will be just as effective as their Cargo Cult science.
Honestly, I really just feel sorry for them. I mean, it's as if someone polled the DI and put all their insecurities onto one page. Yes, Bill Dembski, tell me about your workout regime.
What this shows is that after all the millions the DI has spent, the only thing they've managed to achieve is to get the phrase "intelligent design" into the popular lexicon--unfortunately wholly detached from the meaning they intended it to have.
Humbert: I think it's more than that. If you type "intelligent design" or "evolution" into a search engine, you get a zeitgeist of what PZ and the rest of us are all talking about every day. This magazine (if it's real) is trying to get to the top of the search engine pile by piggybacking on very popular terminology. It the SEO equivalent of plastering the neighborhood around a popular bar with your posters.
Besides, did you notice the advertisement for the magazine on the supplement site? "Intelligent Design is a evolution of Internet reading!" [sic]
Yeah, that's literacy at its finest.
I like the design of that Jamie Eason! I think I could talk to her about design all night long.
And I'm sure that people get magazines like this to read the articles and check out the advertisements for nutritional supplements, not to look at the pictures of the body builders.
Do realize that Mr Priest is also about 5' across the shoulders, and is 265 lbs of muscle.
Proven - every theory known to any species! SEX SELLS! So we see just how "fundamental" IDists really are - procreation (in a very sexy format) to sell ID. No way can I keep a straight face. Is this for real? The Playboy/Playgirl of IDists. LMAO!
What about those species that reproduce asexually?
He must be compensating for his tiny cross.
Actually, soteos, it was a lot bigger before he started using the steroids...
Surely this is an Onion-esque joke, right? RIGHT?
Stanton #26
Honestly, did not think about the "absolute" I used, i.e., any species.
Any species which reproduce asexually may really have the right idea!
I saw this magazine at the bookstore the other day, and had to do a double-take:
https://secure.palmcoastd.com/pcd/document?ikey=0768VIN17
Isn't it weird that an I.D. magazine would have a pirate on the cover?
The bodybuilded guy on the front cover obviously suffered some irreducible complex early in his ontogeny.
Future articles:
Locusts and Honey, Bulk Up Now!
Catholic Mass- Kneel, Sit, Stand. Kneel, Sit, Stand. 23 Psalms to Stunning Legs!
Vinegar- Is a Rag The Best Way?
Confidential: God Says- "Yes, I can lift that rock that I made that is so big that I can't lift it. But I couldn't always do it." Do It Yourself! In Six Days!
Haw haw.
Thats pretty much all I can think of.
I'm sure it'll sell very well.
phat
Depends on what they say, if the say God created the world in 6 days instead of six epochs then they are full of BS otherwise ok.
I gave the omnonivore 2 extra days for his rebuttal, if he don't answer it why don't you give it a shot PZ, you know everything. Friday is zero hour. http://topicaloctagon.blogspot.com/
You couldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole either, I don't expect much out of 22 year old, but 50 year old biologidt couldn't rebut it either. You said Physics is a subset of biology, now your learning that is BS. Each specialty has its own place.
You Lose!
This kind of supidity makes my day.
Catholic Mass- Kneel, Sit, Stand. Kneel, Sit, Stand. 23 Psalms to Stunning Legs!
The Catholic Mass isn't about sitting and standing it is the book of Revelation.
Confidential: God Says- "Yes, I can lift that rock that I made that is so big that I can't lift it. But I couldn't always do it." Do It Yourself! In Six Days!
First a day means an epoch ask any Jewish scholar. And as far as rock lifting goes, God can do anything that is not intrinsically impossible. He could make it where none us would die, but he decreed we would all die therefore God cannot make man immortal. You people have a third grade philosophical education. "Can I have some more sir"
Hey, it's "The Physicist." Hi, Gregg!
"a day means an epoch...God can do anything that is not intrinsically impossible. " Ah, now I see! I guess that's Teh Physics.
"He could make it where none us would die, but he decreed we would all die therefore God cannot make man immortal." Man,you're right, that makes no sense to me at all...sure wish I had moved on to 4th grade philosophy.
.sure wish I had moved on to 4th grade philosophy.
Yeah you must, because Hod made man immortal until the fall, and unlike you he isn't a liar, God cannot sin. therefore you will die. Goodnight.
But since you are your own God, save yourself. Just a little addition there.
Who's Hod?
Man, I miss that "they'll know we are Christians by our love, by our love" stuff they *used* to do...
"God cannot sin. therefore you will die.
uh...what? Is that kind of logic covered in 5th grade philosophy?
and...what was I lying about, again?
Pseudorandom comments:
Hod is the god of bricklayers.
LOL@ Bronze Dog! (#2)
Rich (#33): I thought it was "Lean to the left, lean to the right, stand up sit down FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT!"
Any creature that can reproduce asexually must be a budding genius!
Hello, Tom Foss! Long time no see?
Don't you people understand that it wasn't for the fall there would be no free will, no freedom of choice, just robots. I'm s poor Catholic,but I try. and this obsessive thinking of Hell (which there is) is way over used. Jesus came to save the non believers, not the faithful. This isn't rocket science, its so easy a fool could find his way.
what was I lying about, again?
You misunderstood, we are all liars including you, and you know you have lied at one time or another.
ThePhysicist wrote:
Please don't take this the wrong way, but you really need to go, learn archaic Hebrew, and read the damned book before commenting on it. "Hayah erev vehaya boker yom echad" is pretty unambiguous in meaning.
It's also what we call literary device. It's not clear how much the Genesis author actually believed the cosmology put forth in the introduction to the Moses epic. In fact, there is some scriptural evidence to suggest that the Genesis author was at least skeptical about the existence of God.
I'm not sure which is more deplorable; the fact that IDists aren't familiar with science, or the fact that IDists aren't even familiar with the book they worship.
The Physicist wrote:
Interesting trivia: Original sin wasn't introduced into Catholic doctrine until Augustine of Hippo wrote On the City of God Against the Pagans subsequent to the sack of Rome in 410 by Alaric I. Prior to Augustine's influence, Christians did not consider humans doomed to commit evil acts.
its so easy a fool could find his way.
you're living proof.
The Physicist wrote:
Really? The Christian gnostic movement of the 1st through 4th century CE would strongly disagree with you.
Er...didn't the Fall happen after Adam & Eve's exercise of free will? How would it have turned them into robots if God had simply given them a spanking instead?
For that matter, are the unfallen angels robots? Is Jesus? Is God? If not, why is a fall necessary for free will?
For that matter, what's your definition of free will? We could build a robot which took data from a geiger counter as an input; its behavior would then be unpredictable. Is it free?
Please don't take this the wrong way,
Oh. I don't take it personally until I am hacked, and everyone takes that personally, say say ever you eant, just leave my machine alone.
I'm not depending on my knowlege of Hebrew, but I can do Latin. I am depending on Jewish scholars for my answers. Like Jacob Nuesner A Rabbi Talks with Jesus Instead of fools on the Internet like yourself. Get the friking book and read it and come back and tell me how much smarter you are than him on the Torah.
Geeze you people. don't you know what you are looking for is right in front of your face. But instead we get people who make fun of misspelled words and claim to be Hebrew scholars that know more about Genesis than anyone else.
You people are ignorant, because you won't get out of your rut.
Really? The Christian gnostic movement of the 1st through 4th century CE would strongly disagree with you.
Gnosticism was a heresy,
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06592a.htm
And that's AD and BC, Common era has no meaning. Don't you know how colanders were constructed. Did Jesus death on the cross become CE, well if so you acknowledge it any way.
Mine's made out of aluminum, but I'm going to buy a ceramic one one of these days.
LOL!
(Stainless steel, here!)
Suggested caption: "We are absolutely not gay!"
First, year 1 of the Julian (and later the reformed Gregorian) was interpretaed as the first year of Jesus' birth. Though now it is shown to be off by ~4 years, the point doesn't matter. It wasn't based on the year of Jesus' death, as you implied.
Second, a calendar is only constructed from a reference point. It is easier to adopt a single calendar for academic purposes in order to ease communication. Other calendars do exist in different regions which have their own origins set around a specific event in history. Like in mechanics, the origin is arbitrary and only affects the time passed since the event. America could be egotistical and say year 231 of independence.
The "calendar argument" is detrimental to the apologist. if we take it for granted that the origin is used because the event actually occurred, does this also mean that the days and month names truly give honor and appease the various deities they are named after?
wow, Gregg, you're a lot lairier over here than you are at my place. am i some sort of favoured heathen? =]
Lepht
Rey Fox @ 12 and 14:
Agreed, the veins in particular are ewwwww.
But I'm amused at your taking eight minutes to think about it after the first question, only to be so puzzled that you had to ask it again.
I don't know about you lot, but I'm living in 2760 AUC (ab urbe condita, after the founding of the city of Rome) so I take that as clear, unambiguous proof that Romulus and Remus existed, and were begot of Mars with the whole existence of the Roman pantheon that that implies.
I made the mistake of clicking through to the debate, and the first sentence of the Einstein section had me shouting "This is so f-ing stupid!" It tells me that the person who wrote it, by thinking that the observer is a 'constant' cannot think outside the basic textbook problems they were given. At the universities I've attended, that sort of basic conceptual problem would be fatal (unless amended) to progressing in the class, let alone getting a degree.
Physicist, I distinctly remember reading yesterday in one of your weirder post (if such a distinction can be made) that you would leave this blog and not post again. Please tell me why you've changed your mind.
It's obviously not to give any new insights into theology, that's for sure. Or maybe you're not doing it out of free will, and god is guiding you to enlighthen us. In that case, ask him to give you new material because the stuff you're using now is decidedly unimpressive.
"a kilocalorie is a kilocalorie" will be about the endless feud on how to define one calorie. I bet.
And that's AD and BC, Common era has no meaning. Don't you know how colanders were constructed.
Personally I still use the Christian colander. It's not very good, though. It's only got five holes in it, but they're pretty big. It's like someone pounded nails into it or something, I dunno.
Likewise. Mr Physicist, please stop using that handle. You don't deserve it. I strongly advise you to pick up introductory texts on GR and cosmology before you pontificate further on subjects you know absolutely nothing about.
The muscles are all in their head....
Some of us are humor impaired. Could someone tell me if this is real or a satire?
Dianne; as far as I can tell, the magazine is real, but it's not actually related to Intelligent Design creationism.
Whew.
Question: doesn't it cramp up your fingers to constantly type out the silly phrase "intelligent design creationism?" (Ow ow ow!)
What's silly about it? Concept, yes. Phrase, no.
What's silly about it?
1. According to most Creationists, they aren't IDers.
2. According to most IDers, they aren't Creationists.
3. According to you, "Intelligent Design" and "Creationism" mean the same thing anyway, so you're just being redundant.
That's what's silly about it.
Physicist:
"didn't" does not equal "couldn't"
unless you just forgot to include "waste the time to" between "couldn't" and "rebut".
DSM, your three reasons cancel out quite nicely. Were it generally accepted that ID is a form of creationism, the term IDC would indeed be unnecessarily redundant.
"your three reasons cancel out quite nicely."
By what leap of [il]logic did you come to that conclusion?
That would be what the second sentence of my post explains. Try reading it.
Funny, any time you form complete sentences it's most likely a copy and paste.
FREE! WWJB (what would Jesus bench?) bracelet inside this month's issue!
What are people so upset about? That's certainly not Behe or Dembski on the cover. Hell, I think we should come out with dueling cheesey-beef calendars! We'd win, especially if GilDodgen balks. I'd like to get a gander at some of these ID folks (not the ones who've splashed their photos all over, thanks, enough, and Denyse, the new look is better, but please). Then, put them on a dance floor and make them shake it. Yeah, that would rawk. We have nothing to worry about. ;-)
On a serious note, I find it amusing that "intelligent design" is invading the larger culture to signify anything but science.
#60:
Actually, I was waiting out the buffer period during which you cannot post a second time, and I got distracted with something else. :P
Rey, as if we needed more proof of your quick wit? It would have taken me at least eight minutes to come up with a "medicine balls" quip. ;-)
#38 - The Physicist scribbled..."And as far as rock lifting goes, God can do anything that is not intrinsically impossible."
I suppose repelling iron chariots is intrinsically impossible.
"Judges 1:19
And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the
inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron."
It appears your god isn't as powerful as the Greek phalanx. That must suck.
The Phys posted between 12:45 am and 3:04 am. I'm guessing he sneaked out of his room and had free run of the office before the attendants tranqed him.
Make sure he actually swallows the pill next time. Or give his meds intravenously.
-- CV
Wow. God is on anabloic steroids?!
Roid rage might explain some of his biblical behaviour.
Is it me, or does that look like a freakishly pumped up William H Macy?
Homo erectus + HGH = Homo sapiens?
Not knowing what you look like, Evan, I'm going to have to go with the freakishly pumped-up Macy.
LOL
Don't you people understand that it wasn't for the fall there would be no free will, no freedom of choice, just robots.
You gotta problem with that, Phyzzie?
Hehe. The free will concept is hysterical.
"God created us to be fallible, so he could demand us to bend to his will or otherwise perish in hell."
God is a sick fuck then.
"Obey or Die" gives the tyrant an out: "The poor things chose their doom. I tried to save them from an eternal agony, but they wouldn't let me."
The Physicist wrote:
Only in retrospect, after Constantine redefined Christianity in a manner which would support his reign subsequent to the Nicean Council.
The Physicist wrote:
I don't claim to be a Hebrew scholar. I claim to be a phylogeneticist studying paleontological taxa. However, I do have some knowledge of archaic Hebrew and some knowledge of a few other early semitic languages. I also have a great interest in the function and evolution of the epic literary form, and thus, I've read quite a few epics from various nations. This includes biblical precursors, such as the Akkadian epic poems Enuma Elish and Gil-Gamesh. And while you may think that an opinion (other than your own) posted on the internet is inherently worthless, I can assure you that there are many people on the internet who actually do know what they're talking about.
As for Jewish theology, I will point out that not only do most Jewish theologians consider B'reishit highly metaphorical and not in fact a chronicle of actual events, but that the theologians who do consider it accurate, even metaphorically accurate, are highly biased in the reading of the book. One must read the Torah as an Ancient Hebrew would have, not as a modern scholar 3500 years later would have.
Dont youo understnad JDP the resto f you that you're detaisl an fact don';t mean aanything with your science beecause only the tRuth matters that is God so if you deny that God is good and Jesus Died for us because we have all sined then it is hersey,
Its so simple that's why you wont tryu to understand it because you dont want to see the truth if randmo considnece is real then how can we see teh evidence in ffront of your faces.
Your to close-minded to try you wont try to understand so this is my last post since your to dumb to realise its not your faulte its the schools which ahve Aids and Rape drugs and the rest sicne we'er NOT ASLOWED to pary in school and this is the world you wanted now you got it.
I wont say more becayuse your not interensted in debate just insulfts sicne thats all your feeble minds can do but God is lvoe so love ya all....
The Physicist wrote:
First, BC and AD stand for Before Christ and Anno Domini, and set the zero at the Birth of Christ, not the death. Additionally, this date was adopted as the "birth date of Christ" for unrelated reasons, and the actual date of Christ's birth was several years prior. So, all we have is an arbitrary date (January 1, 0000) and an increment (365.25 solar cycles = 1 anno) and then an indication of whether or not we're before or after the zero-date. We could name it "Era of the Slug" or "Post-Classical" and it wouldn't matter. All we need to know is the zero-date, the increment, and the direction from the zero-date.
Sorry about that folks.
I seemed to have been afflicted with religious ferver for a moment. Mine eyes were opened, and the truth was revealed via the Holy Spirit.
Unfortunately, the Holy Spirit's grammar and spelling are so poor I am at a loss to be able to read just what the hell the truth was.
Great. I guess that's just more divine wisdom lost to the ages.
JDP, I may be mistaken, but I have always thought that there is no year zero: December 31, 1 BC is followed by January 1, 1 AD.
Steel Rat wrote:
Funny, every time I bring up a well-documented objection to the validity of Catholic doctrine, you completely ignore it.
That was, by the way, not copied and pasted, but even if it were, it's still a serious objection to The Physicist's blathering.
You might be right about that one, actually. My mistake.
Uh-oh. Rationality under attack! Header for the lockers! Watch out for wedgies!
Looks like we'll have to start cloning an army of genetically engineered super-soldiers. Strictly for defensive purposes, of course.
And that's why I so nerdishly celebrated the start of the new millenium on Jan 1, 2001.
Brownian, you cracked me up out loud.
Twice.
I'm curious to know if any gastropodologists (what's the real term, malacologist, I think?) know what year this would be (approx.) in the Era of the Slug. Answers for pulmonates or nudibranchs acceptable.
Brownian... I am in awe.
C'mon, fess up. You copy-pasted that from another thread.
Yeah, I tried to explain to people that the new millenium couldn't start until 2001 because 2000 was the LAST year of the 2nd millenium.
It went over most people's heads. It was frustrating.
From what I have seen and read regarding anything from "the physicist"... anyone who reads pharyngula must understand that this person is mentally ill, obviously off their legally prescribed medications, and probably drinking and/or ingesting perhaps illegal mind altering substances pretty heavily. Can anyone say schizophrenia?
The physicist's "discussions" are full of grammatical and typographical errors, hardly holding any semblance of logical order, and are quite inane, perhaps bordering on the insane.
Aren't you confusing generic creationism with YEC? There's all sorts of creationists: old earth, gap, day-age, theistic evolutionists etc. ID is one of the flavors, so calling it IDC is perfectly fine if you want to accentuate that it's religious by nature.
Brownian,
Thank you for post 94. I was laughing so hard I had tears in my eyes. That was a beautiful satire of the Physicist's writing. Either that or you were typing during an earthquake.
I think we all need to give the Physicist a little break here. If what LeeLeeOne says is true, "probably drinking and/or ingesting perhaps illegal mind altering substances pretty heavily," then he (assumption) may be on steroids, too. Steroids are known to shutdown the productions of the testes and cause shrinkage. In the Physicist's case it probably just shrunk a different organ.
JDP,
I don't know about you, but I found the history behind the Akkadian epic poems Enuma Elish and Gil-Gamesh to be very interesting, but reading those epics was another matter. I hope the movie versions never come out unless Jessica Alba's in them.
And, I think Brownian is correct about there being no zero year. I just went and googled year zero and in wiki it states; "The year zero does not exist in the predominant Western Gregorian calendar nor its predecessor, the Julian calendar. However, it does exist in ISO 8601:2004 and astronomical year numbering (where it is equal to the Gregorian year 1 BC) as well as in all Buddhist and Hindu calendars."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Year_zero
Ooh. Another Jessica Alba fan. Are you aware that, in the eyes of most species of arthropods and nematodes, she and I are virtually identical?
Dema, I don't think Brownian was lampooning The Physicist.
The Phizz has a different style. His problem is mostly with typing, not so much with spelling. A quick glance at the keyboard will often reveal that gibberish like (for example) "bibawbauxK" is really the word "nonsensical" shifted one key to the left. The Physicist's more cryptic prose often can easily be decoded by such methods.
Content is another matter.
The Physicist aside, what Brownian's spoof does evoke, perfectly, is the style and message of a particular breed of blockhead that drops in here fairly regularly. The Physicist isn't one of them. A "peace out i ll pray 4 u" sign-off just isn't his style at all. He is... unique.
Regarding LeeLee's speculations, I will say (with some reservations about doing so) that I have shared one or more of them.
Kseniya,
Thank you for lessen in ("bibawbauxK" is really the word "nonsensical" shifted one key to the left). But, if you look back at the Physicist's Hod (God) post (one key stroke right) I thought Brownian was playing on that. BTW-I loved you comment about "Hod is the god of bricklayers!" Way funny.
Also, you made the Jessica Alba reference to before except it was "she and I are virtually identical because we are both female" (slightly paraphrased).
Yup, well, I am alwasys casting about for increasingly favorable points of view. ;-)
Kseniya, get out of my head! Get out of my head!
It's true; much as I disagree with Physicist and think his grasp of logic is about as poor as his attention to spelling and grammar, he is certainly among some of the more cogent god-botherers here.
It's easy to be cogent when you plagiarize.