Great web resource!

Yowza — Afarensis got put in charge of maintaining the links page at the Panda's Thumb, and he has put together a huge collection of various resources for the evo-creo wars. It even includes pseudoscience links — you've got to appreciate a cataloging scheme that lumps Uncommon Descent and the Intelligent Design Network with Time Cube and the Raelians.

Tags

More like this

We have a more complete demolition of the odious Mr Wells wretched book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Darwinism and Intelligent Design, on the way at the Panda's Thumb. Different chapters were farmed out to different contributors (as you can see, I got the chapter on idiotic embryology), and…
Joe Felsenstein has a guest post on the Panda's Thumb in which he dissects a totally bogus statistical game some intelligent design creationist was playing. In a few short paragraphs he shows clearly and plainly how wrong the creationist is, which is why he is Joe Felsenstein, I guess. Meanwhile,…
The annual Gallup Poll on how dumb Americans are has come out, and they got less dumb. A new Gallup poll on public opinion about evolution hints at a slightly higher rate of acceptance of evolution in the United States over the years. Asked in December 2010 "[w]hich of the following statements…
In my review of the embryology of Jonathan Wells in PIGDID, I made a specific example of the abuse of a quote from Bill Ballard; I pointed out that he selectively edited the quote to completely distort Ballard's point in the cited paper, and used that to show how dishonest all of Wells' work was.…

Time Cube: best site ever! Can someone fill me in on the time cube ratings I see here (Pharyngula) from time to time?

Caledonian, who came up with it, still hasn't explained if the scale is linear or logarithmic or whatever... 1.0 Tc is the amount of insanity displayed by the TimeCube guy's websites, 0.0 Tc is complete sanity.

By David Marjanović (not verified) on 16 Oct 2007 #permalink

Excellent resource for journalists!

I was a little disappointed that this was not included:

http://www.mnscience.org/

It wasn't, was it? I couldn't find our Minnesota Science org listed on there, anyway.

By Greg Peterson (not verified) on 16 Oct 2007 #permalink

Wow, I had completely missed the original timecube. Truly potent concentrations of crazy.

Thanks, David, but surely you have that backwards - wouldn't 1.0 TC be awarded to those exhibiting the same level of brilliance and incisiveness displayed by Gene Ray, Wisest Human, and 0.0 TC be reserved for those who categorically deny his Truth?

"God worship only needs a snot brain, but it takes Opposite Brain Analysis to know Harmonic Life. The masculinity Sun and femininity Earth - form a Binary of Harmonic Opposites at Center of Universe - Greater than either Sun or the Earth, debunking all fictitious Oneism Gods taught by religious/academic Word Animals." - Time Cube

I mean, who can argue with that?

Gene Ray, Wisest Human

You forgot "Greatest Thinker". And his self-awarded Doctor title. "Forgot"? You must be an educator/liar, and it is not immoral to kill you.

The masculinity Sun and femininity Earth

Well, in French anyway.

By David Marjanović, OM (not verified) on 16 Oct 2007 #permalink

David - Tetrapod Zoology is linked to under ScienceBlogs (we Borg have our own section in the links).

Greg - No, it somehow got overlooked, but rest assured I will be adding it...

By afarensis (not verified) on 16 Oct 2007 #permalink

Great Scott..., list.

I guess I'm still missing out a link to Shroeder's ev program, since it is so often discussed by creationists, and right now by Dembski and Marks.

still hasn't explained if the scale is linear or logarithmic or whatever...

I assume an insane scale is highly nonlinear?

A measure on a fractorial set like a Menger sponge perhaps, on the unit cube of course. The Lebesgue measure would make it 0 everywhere except on the solid (Time)Cube where it is 1.

Btw, there is a new proposal for the Dembski.

A Dembski would be an error of about 65 orders of magnitude as proposed by Wesley Elsberry, which is usable to describe the order of error that Marks and Dembski made in their analysis of ev.

It seems the Panda's Thumb regulars have agreed on defining it as:

Δ = | ln (E/R) | / B,

where E = Error value, R = Right value and B = Bill's Constant. B = 150 by normalizing to Dembski's 'Universal Probability Bound'. I hasten to add that no one expects a similar bound on this measure.

The proposal is to abbreviate the Dembski as Dmb, and designate it with Δ. Reed Cartwright:

It represents the 'd' in dembski. It is already often used to denote distance and perhaps error. And it looks like those hats that teachers put on students who screw up one too many times.

By Torbjörn Larsson, OM (not verified) on 16 Oct 2007 #permalink

Caledonian, who came up with it, still hasn't explained if the scale is linear or logarithmic or whatever... 1.0 Tc is the amount of insanity displayed by the TimeCube guy's websites, 0.0 Tc is complete sanity.

By David Marjanović (not verified) on 16 Oct 2007 #permalink

Gene Ray, Wisest Human

You forgot "Greatest Thinker". And his self-awarded Doctor title. "Forgot"? You must be an educator/liar, and it is not immoral to kill you.

The masculinity Sun and femininity Earth

Well, in French anyway.

By David Marjanović, OM (not verified) on 16 Oct 2007 #permalink

Great Scott..., list.

I guess I'm still missing out a link to Shroeder's ev program, since it is so often discussed by creationists, and right now by Dembski and Marks.

still hasn't explained if the scale is linear or logarithmic or whatever...

I assume an insane scale is highly nonlinear?

A measure on a fractorial set like a Menger sponge perhaps, on the unit cube of course. The Lebesgue measure would make it 0 everywhere except on the solid (Time)Cube where it is 1.

Btw, there is a new proposal for the Dembski.

A Dembski would be an error of about 65 orders of magnitude as proposed by Wesley Elsberry, which is usable to describe the order of error that Marks and Dembski made in their analysis of ev.

It seems the Panda's Thumb regulars have agreed on defining it as:

Δ = | ln (E/R) | / B,

where E = Error value, R = Right value and B = Bill's Constant. B = 150 by normalizing to Dembski's 'Universal Probability Bound'. I hasten to add that no one expects a similar bound on this measure.

The proposal is to abbreviate the Dembski as Dmb, and designate it with Δ. Reed Cartwright:

It represents the 'd' in dembski. It is already often used to denote distance and perhaps error. And it looks like those hats that teachers put on students who screw up one too many times.

By Torbjörn Larsson, OM (not verified) on 16 Oct 2007 #permalink