A few things that amused me

Here's a bizarre miscellany.

  • Well, it's just Wisconsin.

    Two people have been arrested after a Juneau County Sheriff's deputy found one of them and her two children living in a home with the body of a 90-year-old woman decomposing on the bathroom toilet.

    Tammy D. Lewis, 35, and Alan A. Bushey, 57, both of Necedah are each charged with two felony counts of causing mental harm to a child, according to a criminal complaint filed Friday. Lewis also faces one count of obstructing police.

    The body was decaying for two months in their bathroom. How could they do that? It takes religion to be that crazy!

    Lewis told the deputy that "God told her Alvina would come back to life if she prayed hard enough." Bushey told the deputy that "Lewis was obedient and served the Lord just as she should."

    The 12-year-old boy later told investigators that after Middlesworth died, Bushey told him her appearance "was the result of demons attempting to make it appear that Alvina would not come back to life. The boy also reportedly said that Bushey told him that if Middlesworth's death was discovered, he and his sister would have to go to public school and get jobs because the woman, whom the boy referred to as his "grandmother," was paying the bills.

  • The ICR has put out an enemies list. There are three people on it: Richard Dawkins, Eugenie Scott, and … me! They noticed <sniff> — I'm so touched.

  • Adnan Oktar, aka Harun Yahya, the notorious Turkish creationist, has been convicted of "creating an illegal organization for personal gain", and has been sentenced to 3 years in a Turkish prison. Hooray! Justice at last!

Tags

More like this

Via The Corner, Turkish Islamic author given 3-year jail sentence: Controversial Turkish Islamic author Adnan Oktar was sentenced to three years in prison on Friday for creating an illegal organization for personal gain, state-run Anatolian news agency said. ... Oktar, born in 1956, is the driving…
Unbelievable. Adnan Oktar, aka Harun Yahya, the Turkish crackpot creationist, didn't like the fact that his critics wrote mean things about him … so he applied to a Turkish court to have all Wordpress blogs blocked. And the court accepted his argument, and no one in Turkey has been able to access…
I mentioned before that Richard Dawkins' site was banned in Turkey, by the legal actions of Harun Yahya/Adnan Oktar, the Muslim creationist. Now you can learn a little more: a spokesperson for Turkish creationism called up the editors of the New Humanist to explain their side of the story. As you…
No, that's not right. It would be selfish for us as individuals to take advantage of this incredible windfall. A controversial creationist who successfully campaigned for Richard Dawkins' official website to be banned in Turkey has offered a multitrillion- pound challenge to scientists. Adnan…

Congrats PZ, always nice to be noticed for your good works!!!

Ciao

ICR, I hope you realize that were it not for PZ posting this bit of hilarity, you'd simply be speaking to an empty room (empty tomb?).

We get it. Your kind doesn't like prominent atheists who speak out, just like at one time you didn't like black people that spoke out, or women who spoke out, or gays that spoke out, or any other number of groups marginalized by the idiocy of your belief-based wishful thinking.

Now, how about instead of spending your cash and time on ridiculous pseudoscience you actually do something that befits the character of Jesus - or would that be too selfless and non-entertaining for you?

The ICR has put out an enemies list.

there's a picture of a chimp at the top of that post.

Is that who wrote the piece?

first Hovind, now Oktar.

a little hope.

it shines on.

Ummm, re #2, Aegis, are your talking to anyone in particular, me for instance. If so, what are you talking about?

Ciao

Strike my #5 above, and Aegis, my apologies, only half read and responded while still in neutral. All better now.

Regards, JeffreyD

# Comment posted by PZ Myers to Pharyngula blog on April 3, 2008, 8:33 a.m.
# Comment posted by PZ Myers to Pharyngula blog on April 2, 2008, 9:14 a.m.

They go through all the trouble of listing the date and time you posted the comments, but they don't bother linking to them? Have they even used the internet?

S/he's talking to the second bullet point on P-Zed's list, JeffreyD.

Phhht! Easily amused. How about this one: The UN is going to make suicide bombing a crime.

Oh no! PZ is a neo-Darwinist! That sounds scary. And evil. And bad.

...wait. What's a neo-Darwinist? I haven't encountered that term in Scientific literature.

By BoxerShorts (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

Many of his postings are surprisingly puerile, often registering on the observational level of a newly-hormonal teenager.

"Puerile"? I think they're just jealous of your youthfulness, PZ. Many of them can no longer remember having hormones (which were probably invented by the devil anyway).

Hmmm Neo Darwinist PZ needs to change his picture to one with him in jack boots, black uniform with a squid arm band.

From ICR's page of dumbassery:

"Although using cruder language, Myers basically offers nothing new to the debate. He may state his case more brusquely than other evolutionists, but the argument essentially remains the same--evolution is fact, evolution vs. creationism is a case of science vs. religion, science and religion are anathema to each other, therefore scientific creationism should be banished to the lunatic fringe.

No matter where the evidence leads."

And where exactly does the evidence lead?

By BoxerShorts (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

What do you mean, "it's just Wisconsin?"

Shame on you, judging us on the basis of cases like that, and Nick Grunke, and Ed Gein, and Jeffrey Dahmer, and...

Well. We do seem to have a bit of a history of morbidity. :P

Homeschoolers Do Morbid Death Shit in Texas Too...These demented people aren't restricted to just Wisconson anymore...

May 8, 2008, 11:38PM
3 accused of using corpse head to smoke pot
By PEGGY O'HARE

The Kingwood teenager's story of decapitating a corpse and using the
head to smoke marijuana was so outlandish that at first Houston Police
Department senior police officer Jim Adkins did not believe it.

Yet, Kevin Wade Jones Jr., 17, appeared almost indifferent as he
relayed the bizarre description of his and two friends' activities at
an Humble area graveyard, Adkins said.

"I just doubted it because it's very morbid, and I couldn't see
anybody doing something like this," Adkins said Thursday.

Not until police went to the home of another Kingwood 17-year-old,
Matthew Richard Gonzalez, did the officer believe the tale.

"He regurgitated in his plate of food when I asked him about it,"
Adkins said. "So I knew there was some truth to the story."

Now, Jones, Gonzalez and a juvenile whose name has not been released
are each charged with abuse of a corpse, a misdemeanor. All three were
arrested Wednesday night.

Police said a fourth suspect is wanted for questioning.

Houston police believe the teens disturbed the grave of an 11-year-old
boy who died in 1921.

The child was buried at an unmarked cemetery believed to be reserved
for black veterans and their families, Adkins said.

Under the law, a person can be charged with abuse of a corpse simply
by vandalizing, damaging or treating a gravesite offensively ? even if
the human remains buried there are not touched, Adkins said.

The child's skull has not been found. If recovered later, however,
such a discovery will not change the charges filed against the three
suspects, Adkins said.

The teens first came to police's attention during a vehicle burglary
investigation. While being questioned, Jones told of desecrating the
gravesite a month or two ago. Adkins said he believes the tale was
intended to distract police from the vehicle break-in.

Jones claimed he and his friends used shovels to dig up the body and
removed the corpse's head with a garden tool, Adkins said. Jones also
revealed he and the other two boys took the severed head to the
juvenile's home, where they used the skull as a "bong" to smoke
marijuana, the officer said.

Police made three trips to the heavily wooded, snake-infested
graveyard near the Eastex Freeway feeder road and FM 1960 before
finding the disturbed grave several days ago.

"The grave was uncovered, and the headstone had been thrown off the
grave and broken," Adkins said.

Because the grave is flooded with murky water from recent heavy rains,
police have been unable to determine if the child's casket is still in
the ground.

All three teens gave written and verbal confessions admitting they
tried to dig up a body over a two-day period, Adkins said.

But the boys told conflicting stories about whether they actually
severed the head ? so police aren't sure if that gruesome detail
really happened.

Even so, HPD is working closely with Humble police to try and find any
surviving relatives of the child whose grave was disturbed. According
to court papers, the grave belonged to Willie Simms.

"The ultimate goal will be to put this body back to rest," Adkins
said.

Little is known about the graveyard. The Humble Bicentennial Museum
could not confirm that it was reserved for black veterans, but Adkins
said he observed "many, many headstones" for black soldiers killed
during World War I and World War II.

The three boys, all home-schooled, have also been charged in
connection with the vehicle break-in. Jones and the juvenile are
charged with credit card abuse, while Gonzalez pleaded guilty to a
charge of misdemeanor theft between $50 and $500

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/front/5764886.html

What? Ad hominem attacks? By creationists?

Surely not...

I not that they quoted you telling religious people not to let creationists speak for them... sounds kind of counterproductive.

Re #16

That story is so far out there I can't even think of a pithy comment. My brain is still trying to grasp the concept.

Interesting they were all homeschooled.

ICR wrote> Many of his postings are surprisingly puerile, often registering on the observational level of a newly-hormonal teenager.

Did they even stop to consider that may be why PZ is so popular? I see they chose to ignore the wicked wit, wry humor, and intelligent commentary. Oh, and the squids too.

"Please Sir, may I have another helping of surprisingly puerile postings?"

I see they chose to ignore the wicked wit, wry humor, and intelligent commentary.

By The Other Dan … (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

Yep, it's pretty clear they were causing mental charm to a child. Plus the corpse in the bathroom couldn't have been good for the kids' mental state, either.

Is the acronym ICR pronounced "ichor?"

I have no comment on the 90 year old dead lady in the bathroom other than, Huh?

I do extend my hardy congratulations on making the ICR list of despicable, god hating people. What the hell are they researching over there if they've already made up their minds? Jeeze.

By Jeanette Garcia (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

We're not all that nuts! Although we do have our share of idiots in Wisconsin.

Madison, the beloved liberal bastion, is as always a place of sanity, however.

And tell Connlann AHA exists! We'd be delighted to see him at meetings. (And we could totally make you the honorary AHA dad.)

Hmm. Creationist Adnan Oktar getting a jail sentence - what were the odds?

And will we similarly see a biologist facing jail sentence "for creating an illegal organization for personal gain" as regards science? History says "not likely".

They noticed -- I'm so touched.

Another noticeable thing is that ICR makes so bad arguments for confusing science with atheism (when they can, because in Scott's case they are silent) that they shouldn't have bothered. Nisbet & Mooney will be so disappointed that Dawkins & PZ can tell it as they see it.

By Torbjörn Larsson, OM (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

Dagnabbit! It is very rude of the ICR to put together such a short enemies list without a link to an application form. How are the rest of us supposed to get on it now? Huh?

(Mind you, if they were smart, Ben Stein would be on the enemies list too. He is working very hard these days to associate creationism with mind-boggling lunacy in the public eye - nice work Ben!)

I await the cuttlefish's take on this as well as the chastisement of Ichythic by the Chimpanzee Anti-Defamation League for comment #3.

PZ, I know you've gotten bizarre/threatening emails before, but this thing bothers me more than most. It IS an enemies list. And given the sort of people attracted to creationism, I could see one of them regarding it as a "call to arms".

I wonder if Oktar ever flew with Captain Oveur?

Does this mean he also likes movies about gladiators?

I could see one of them regarding it as a "call to arms".

it would be worth having Peter Irons take a quick look to see if it meets the requirements for "incitement".

I liked this bit in the ICR's "references" section:

16. Currently located at scienceblogs.com/pharyngula. Pharyngula refers to a stage in embryonic development in which all vertebrates appear to have similar features.

Those creationists, undermining the crediblity of evo-devo one equivocation at a time....

Congratulations on making the "enemies list" Dr. Myers! Good company as well I see. If I recall the last time an enemies list was in fashion was... Nixon's second term? One wonders if Ben Stein is now consulting for all creationists. What next the DI plumbers? At least it is not a Randall Terry style hit list... that might be somewhat disturbing. But as stated in another thread, something you should be aware of and perhaps even taking some precautions.

What most people, even your admirers on this blog, don't actually realize is that in academia, any sort of notoriety is frowned upon by colleagues. One is generally expected to restrain their expressions and views to their specific field and not dabble in the wider public debates. In many cases that kind of constraint is justified because the only plausible motivation is self enrichment. However, in your case, I think it is a different matter altogether. You did not originate the anti-science controversy that is intelligent design creationism, you simply chose to respond to it because to be silent would be to abet the subversion of the pursuit of knowledge.

I don't know why you started your blog in the first place but I am glad that you did. I am glad that there has been a convergence between yourself and other right thinking scientists in your own and other fields.

Science and atheism are separate issues. Since I happen to be an atheist as well as a scientist I can understand how frustrating it can be to have to contend with the narrow minded bigotry of absolutist dog botherers. I think of them as rude children. My advice to them is to grown up. Wishful thinking and fatasies of the all good big daddy in the sky are not going to solve anything. Hard work, hard headed materialistic reasoning, might, just might give our species an edge to overcome the genetic/biological imperative of uncontrolled population growth, which will other wise lead to our early and appropriate, extinction.

"- to strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield."

Ciao,

By Krubozumo Nyankoye (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

I like how the ICR censored the word "piss" when they quoted you. Hey, if it's good enough for the Bible, why isn't it good enough for the ICR?

By Wicked Lad (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

Well. We do seem to have a bit of a history of morbidity. :P

Sure, but we're always trying to stretch the tails of a normal distribution here. We've sent Joe McCarthy and Russ Feingold to the Senate. We have our share of religious lunatics and the Freedom from Religion Foundation.

Of course, 35 years ago, there was an album of old photos with the unusual title of Wisconsin Death Trip that has been honored in unusual ways. Maybe Lewis and Bushey were just trying to honor that book in their own special way.

By freelunch (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

PZ shouldn't take this sitting down! He should come up with an enemies list too! And deliberately leave the ICR off of it, just to show how relevant they truly are!

Congratulations, PZ!!
This is, without a doubt, the highest form of praise you could ever receive from the nuts at ICR!

Well, except for them actually listening to your arguments and realizing that their myths don't trump reality, but if that actually happened, I'd be forced to reevaluate my position on miracles...

wow, how about this for irony from the irc article:
"As was indicated in the October 2007 Acts & Facts, web surfers must be wary of "half-truths and hidden assumptions" on the sites that they visit."

there's a picture of a chimp at the top of that post.

Is that who wrote the piece?

Posted by: Ichthyic

Ichthyic, why do you slander the chimp?

By Janine ID (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

ICR Article:

The Internet has opened new avenues for research and for offering data of all kinds...as well as misinformation of all kinds. As was indicated in the October 2007 Acts & Facts, web surfers must be wary of "half-truths and hidden assumptions" on the sites that they visit.

Wow...if this isn't the perfect warning against believing anything from the ICR or Discovery Institute, I don't know what is. They quoted the study that points directly at the sites that offer historically and scientifically unfounded information -- theirs and those like them! Projection, indeed.

By brokenSoldier (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

I was just heading here to send a link to the article on the dead woman. Those poor kids...

PZ shouldn't take this sitting down! He should come up with an enemies list too!

Except that the people who read PZ aren't going to consider it a divine order to execute someone. I can't say the same about the nuts on the other side.

#39, #41

I also love how they cite Acts & Facts as if it were some authoritative source, instead of the ICR's monthly magazine.

Congratulations on this latest recognition of your evilness PZ. I think I speak for all of us here when I say "Ia! Ia! Myers ftaghn!"

Nice job making the unholy trinity, PZ. Now are you the father, the son, or the wholly smoke?

Bob

By Bob Carroll (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

Right - this "enemies list" discussion has put a certain song from a certain Gilbert and Sullivan operetta in my head. I cannot get it out, so I am going to infect others instead. This is a hastily-edited variation(it was a bit shocking to see how many lines I did NOT need to edit (line 7 is the same as the original and still works).

As someday it may happen that a strawman must be found,
As a creationist--one needs a little list
Of society freethinkers who tread on one's sacred ground,
Whose points we must have missed--we make sure all points are missed!
There's the pestilential nuisances who ask for common sense
All people who like logic and the search for evidence--
All children who are up in dates, and floor you with 'em flat--
All persons who in cross-exam, shake your beliefs like _that_--
And all third persons who on spoiling "exposes" insist--
They'd none of 'em be missed--they'd none of 'em be missed!

CHORUS. Just out them on the list--the vile evolutionist;
For they'll none of 'em be missed--they'll none of 'em be missed.

There's the sarcastic British comic, and the others of his race,
And the neo-Darwinist--I've got him on the list!
And the people who do real research and throw it in your face,
They never would be missed--they never would be missed!
The youtuber dissecting us, with numbers and with words,
Our knowledge of all sciences -(who cares? WE aren't the nerds!);
And the science prof from Morris, who dresses like a squid,
And who "doesn't think God did it, natural selection did";
And that singular anomaly, the lady anthropologist--
I don't think she'd be missed--I'm sure she'd not be missed!

CHORUS. Yet another for the the list-- a science "fundamentalist";
And I don't think she'll be missed--I'm sure
she'll not be missed!

Above all the "Rottweiler" nuisance, who just now is rather rife,
The evil atheist!--I've got him on the list!
All humourists who choose mockery instead of seeking strife--
They'd none of 'em be missed--they'd none of 'em be missed.
Evolution-touting Christians of a compromising kind,
Such as--What d'ye call him--Thing'em-Ken, and
likewise--Never-mind,
And 'That guy there'and What's-his-name, and also You-know-who--
The task of filling up the blanks I'd rather leave to you.
But it really doesn't matter whom you put upon the list,
For they'd none of 'em be missed--they'd none of 'em be
missed!

CHORUS. You may put 'em on the list--you may put 'em on the list;
And they'll none of 'em be missed--they'll none of 'em be missed!

Original at http://www.cs.rice.edu/~ssiyer/minstrels/poems/135.html and elsewhere.

Ichthyic, why do you slander the chimp?

unfair!

who said I thought the article was bad?

OK, OK, even I can't maintain that fallacy.

sorry chimps.

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoID=13…

scroll a minute or so in, until you get to the "chimpy child" song

Sean Cullen - the chimp and the woman

There was an old woman who lived alone
No one called her on the telephone
She went into the woods one day
Found a young chimp, who had gone astray
She took that little primate home
So she wouldn't have to be alone

They spent the winter together
Warm in their love, despite the harshness of the winter weather
The chimp and the woman
Living together in a house of stone
The chimp and the woman
They made that house a home

The chimp and the woman were happy there
The chimp was safe; the woman had found a friend
But when the townsfolk heard of this bizarre affair
They said how could she love a creature that is covered with hair?
They came with axes and torches
They burnt the front and back porches
They kicked in the door
Shouting "Death to the chimp-loving whore!"

But she was gone; no one knew where they went
Years went by, the world spun around
Then one day a strange creature walked into town
It came in from the wild
It was a half human half chimp hybrid child
And it said:
I am the chimpy child, on whom fortune has smiled
If we could live in peace, then all hatred would cease
If we could live with love, with blessings from up above
If we could just hold hands, then maybe we'd understand

And the people, the people...
They beat him to death with a rock.

PZ Myers: "The Institute for Creation Research is a treasure trove of sloppy pseudoscience.18"

Seems about right to me. Some things make sense even when quoted out of context.

Congratulations. You are certainly moving up in the world.

Are Turkish Prisons intelligently designed, or did they spontaneously appear through the hand of Go...Allah?

Maybe he can meet Capt Oveur?

"Neo-Darwinists often engage in a frustrating tautology, using the course of evolution to "prove" natural selection--and vice versa."

AGH! My brain. Warn us before you link to this kind of stupid, PZ!

By Ryan Cunningham (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

PZ is now the Kirk Cameron of evolution. (I meant that as a compliment.)

Wow...I clicked through to the Acts & Facts article cited, and now I kind of wish I hadn't. Here's the opening paragraph (in which the half-truths/assumption quote is made):

Forty million adults use the Internet as their primary source of news and information about science. But finding answers to questions of origins is fraught with danger on the Internet. Landmines of half-truths and hidden assumptions lay waiting for the unwary.

Well, the ICR is kind of telling the truth. Even something halfway true is anathema to their cause. As for their not-so-hidden assumptions, take this sentence from the article:

In this long war, our best weapon is the Word of God.

The battle rhetoric used throughout the article (they repeatedly refer to "war," "victory," etc) is actually kind of bizarrely frightening. They end with this call to arms:

Two thirds of Americans strongly believe or mostly believe in recent creation.3 In the coming years, with your assistance, ICR wants to reach these people with compelling evidences that support their convictions. The Internet is a powerful tool in communicating the vital truth that the Bible is scientifically accurate.

Ready for battle? Log on to icr.org!

Comparing PZ to Kirk Cameron can in no way be construed as complimentary. Take that back!

By John Nelson (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

The battle rhetoric used throughout the article (they repeatedly refer to "war," "victory," etc) is actually kind of bizarrely frightening.

Onward Christian Soldiers marching as to war...

Wasn't that the themesong of the Jesus Camp?

seriously, how many of us remember the tune, but never really bothered to look at the lyrics critically:

This hymn was sung at the funeral of American president Dwight Eisenhower at the National Cathedral, Washington, DC, March 1969.

Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war,
With the cross of Jesus going on before.
Christ, the royal Master, leads against the foe;
Forward into battle see His banners go!

Refrain

Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war,
With the cross of Jesus going on before.

At the sign of triumph Satan's host doth flee;
On then, Christian soldiers, on to victory!
Hell's foundations quiver at the shout of praise;
Brothers lift your voices, loud your anthems raise.

Refrain

Like a mighty army moves the church of God;
Brothers, we are treading where the saints have trod.
We are not divided, all one body we,
One in hope and doctrine, one in charity.

Refrain

What the saints established that I hold for true.
What the saints believèd, that I believe too.
Long as earth endureth, men the faith will hold,
Kingdoms, nations, empires, in destruction rolled.

Refrain

Crowns and thrones may perish, kingdoms rise and wane,
But the church of Jesus constant will remain.
Gates of hell can never gainst that church prevail;
We have Christ's own promise, and that cannot fail.

Refrain

Onward then, ye people, join our happy throng,
Blend with ours your voices in the triumph song.
Glory, laud and honor unto Christ the King,
This through countless ages men and angels sing.

Refrain

Bobby, have you ever been in a cockpit before?

Bobby, have you ever seen a grown man naked]

bobby, have you ever spent time in a turkish prison?

Am I the only one here who read the ICR article and found very little to disagree with besides the tone?
It was like taking a wikipedia article, putting scare quotes in every few words and then leaning back and waiting for the reader to be outraged.

In physics, Hawking radiation (also known as so-called Bekenstein-Hawking radiation) is a "thermal" radiation with a "black body" spectrum "predicted" to be emitted by "black holes" due to "quantum" effects. It is named after the self-styled "physicist" Stephen Hawking who provided the theoretical (theory - not scientific law) argument for its existence in 1974.No matter where the evidence leads.

Oh I'm outraged! outraged! And if I dare question the existence of black holes I'm expelled from the Academy!
Anyway, congratulations from me too.

Turkish prison is serious business. I wouldn't cheer if I heard that Dembski was getting raped, which makes me think twice about Poor Yahya. Good thing he's not publishing anymore, but I wouldn't wish Turkey's prisons on anybody.

Well, maybe except Chinese prisoners.

@#60 Ichthyic --

Wasn't that the themesong of the Jesus Camp?

Yeah, I was struck by the Jesus Camp-ish overtones of the article too. Maybe just because I'm rewatching JC right now, but still, the similarities are definitely there. It seems like they see all of their antis -- anti-evolution, anti-abortion, anti-homosexual, anti-atheist, anti-Islam -- as one big holy war, whether they happen to be using violence at this stage or not.

Harun Yahya is going to jail. Oh holy day. Three years isn't enough, but maybe he'll get shanked.

By Grammar RWA (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

I was browsing around ICR's site and looked at the short list of scientists and faculty. Now, maybe you've already pointed this out but it seemed to me that about half of them (including the founder) are geologists. Who better to know know about how old the Earth really is? Also, who better to NOT know about evolutionary biology and genetics?

as one big holy war, whether they happen to be using violence at this stage or not.

ayup.

and as they get more and more pushed into the "fringe" by the judiciary, science, and let's face it, plain 'ol reality, like a cornered cat, they will become exponentially more dangerous.

It's not necessarily inevitable, but history suggests it's something to be concerned about.

here's how to tell how close they are to going apeshit:

the more they accuse the darwiniofascistatheists of being the ones "militarizing", the closer they are to doing so themselves.

Damn it, Schwa, you've poked my conscience. Maybe it is worse than he deserves. It probably would have been enough to fine him into absolute poverty and then exile him.

By Grammar RWA (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

Am I the only one here who read the ICR article and found very little to disagree with besides the tone?

yup.

any other dumb questions?

#67: Oh come on, now, Grammar RWA - that's not very humanist of you. Let's not be hoping for anybody to get knifed in the can (or anywhere else, for that matter). You're gonna make us look like a bunch of religionists.

Beat you to it, JM Inc. It was just my RWA reactionary aggression boiling to the surface for a moment.

I'm off to flog myself for my sinful thoughts now.

By Grammar RWA (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

Here's another great passage from the ICR Acts & Facts Internet Battleground article:

The pace of scientific research is accelerating, from the outer reaches of the universe to the inner reaches of the genome, and with each new discovery comes an interpretation of origins that is inconsistent with Genesis.

Now to a sane, rational person, this would suggest that the Genesis story is wrong. But not to the folks at ICR, who just see it as another call to arms in their brave battle for the Truth. Glory, glory, hallelujah!

A Neo-Darwinist is one who displays exceptional abilities in cyberspace. Clearly, PZ qualifies, as this ICR endorsement demonstrates.

The ICR, on the other hand, displays a penchant for mediocre rhetoric, and an outstanding dedication to the care and feeding of its pet peeve persecution complex.

Yup, Etha, they've started with the conclusion, and always work backwards, distorting or ignoring whatever doesn't fit - and then have the vertigo-inducing nerve to grouse about evolutionists drawing evolutionary conclusions "no matter where the evidence leads."

Gotta love it. Medieval ostriches, all of them.

@76:

It's the freerepublic, home to the biggest losers in all of teh intarwebs.

what did you expect?

It's like asking us to go and comment on Uncommonly Dense.

Talk about praising with faint with damnation.

Hey guys wanna play a fun game?

Meh... I looked over there. It's too depressing. Take this quote, for example:

"In either case, a change in the gene for body hair would alter both beards and public hair."

And that was from one of the pro-evo commenters. Sigh.

(Either he's never seen a woman naked, or all the women he knows have beards...)

Clearly we need to go in and crash the thread! Remember cite your sources! Creationists hate it when you do that!

By Let's play a game! (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

public hair

freudian slip?

Wot? Prof. Steve Steve didn't make the list?!?

By minusRusty (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

The trouble with being overly fond of quote-mining is that it can always come back to bite you on the Dembski.
From the ICR article;
"The Institute for Creation Research is a treasure trove of sloppy pseudoscience."

I think we have in this list prima facie evidence that the capital H on the ICR's keyboard is broken. Why else would they have excluded Harris and Hitchens?

By Peter Ashby (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

They are right to consider Richard Dawkins to be an enemy. Here are the reasons, for everyone to see:

Here is how Richard Dawkins was transformed from a God-fearing man into the world's first super-atheist:
"Richard Dawkins: The Movie (Part One)"
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ECh1EnHBTos

Here is evidence that "Militant Atheist" is no longer a figure of speech:
"What Richard Dawkins doesn't want you to know ..."
http://youtube.com/watch?v=TqcNraF3vP8

Is PZ involved?

I always loved reading about the creation researchers mounting expeditions to Mount Arrarat to find Noah's arc. What ever happened to that evidence?
NOTE TO SELF; creobots don't look at evidence, they don't even know what the word means, so don't bother trying to point it out to them, it will just drive you crazy.

"Richard Dawkins: The Movie (Part One)"

LOL

love the helmet.

I do hope the charges against the Harun Yahya guy are more substantial than that article make them sound. His fans legitimately regarding him as a martyr can't possibly be a good thing.

By Andreas Johansson (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

mrjones #90: amazing that this little bunch of atheists think they are RIGHT while claiming the rest of the planet (5 billion believers!) are WRONG!!

jonesie, considering there are about 6.5 billion people on the planet, are you saying there are a 1.5 billion atheists? Cool! We're gaining on ya!

And hey, too bad those 5 billion "believers" don't all believe the same thing, huh?

Oh, and James Randi's Million Dollar Challenge? It HAS been going on for 10 years now, and no psychic has yet demonstrated authentic supernatural powers. I'd call that success. Assuming your interest in it is that you have psychic powers, it's being discontinued, yes, but only in March of 2010. So you still have 2 years to get in there and bend those spoons, talk to the dead, levitate or whatever, to win that money.

Ooh, did anyone happen catch this lovely piece of work while cruising the ICR website?

I just love how delusional you can get without actually being certified. Seems vaguely dangerous, somehow. Scratch that... not so vague.

Here are some interesting little titbits to grind your intellectual molars on:

Creationism can be studied and taught in any of three basic forms, as follows:

(1) Scientific creationism (no reliance on biblical revelation, utilizing only scientific data to support and expound the creation model).

(2) Biblical creationism (no reliance on scientific data, using only the Bible to expound and defend the creation model).

(3) Scientific biblical creationism (full reliance on biblical revelation but also using scientific data to support and develop the creation model).

These are not contradictory systems, of course...
-Is that so?

It is both legal and desirable, however, that scientific creationism be taught in public schools as a valid alternative to evolutionism.
-!

In a Christian school or college.... it is appropriate and very important to demonstrate that biblical creationism and scientific creationism are fully compatible...
-Thank goodness I learned that, just in case I ever had the inkling to send any one of my hypothetical spawn off to be functionally lobotomised, I can think twice about it now.

The evolution model, as outlined above, is in very general terms. It can be expanded and modified in a number of ways to correspond to particular types of evolutionism (atheistic evolution, theistic evolution, Lamarckianism -(sic), neo-Darwinism, punctuated equilibrium, etc.).
-They know too much already! Let's bail out before our just a theory gets hijacked by some creationists with the intent to expand it into some heinous Lamarkianismist nonsense! Somebody get on the horn and inform the physicists that an attempt might be made to expand and modify a brief, uninformed summary of relativity back into pre-Newtonian falling! Notice how the world as viewed by a creationist tends to be subject to infinite semantic malleability enabled by gross ignorance and logical incompetence? Wait a minute - I think I just encapsulated their ideology!

Creationists, however, do not propose that the public schools teach six-day creation, the fall of man, and the Noachian flood. They do maintain, however, that they should teach the evidence for a complex completed creation, the universal principle of decay (in contrast to the evolutionary assumption of increasing organization) -(I'm assuming they're talking about entropy here, rather than decomposition), and the worldwide evidences of recent catastrophism. All of these are implicit in observable scientific data, and should certainly be included in public education.
-How lenient of them: Since those atheistic public schools are full of Bible hating Bible haters, we should restrain ourselves to merely filling their heads 99% of the way with untruths. It'll keep the atheists happy.

Principles of Scientific Creationism
1. The physical universe of space, time, matter and energy has not always existed, but was supernaturally created by a transcendent personal Creator who alone has existed from eternity.
-How many of you can spot the leap from logic ledge here? Not even two points in and already the impending splat is guaranteed.

7. The universe and life have somehow been impaired since the completion of creation, so that imperfections in structure, disease, aging, extinctions and other such phenomena are the result of "negative" changes in properties and processes occurring in an originally perfect created order.
-I can think of something that's definitely somehow impaired.

8. Since the universe and its primary components were created perfect for their purposes in the beginning by a competent and volitional Creator, and since the Creator does remain active in this now-decaying creation, there does exist ultimate purpose and meaning in the universe. Teleological considerations, therefore, are appropriate in scientific studies whenever they are consistent with the actual data of observation, and it is reasonable to assume that the creation presently awaits the consummation of the Creator's purpose.
-Unfortunately the evidence does not support the supposition that creationists are likely to make reasonable assumptions, or inferences, or rhetorical statements of any kind. Disregard that last point.

After that it was just some Scriptural hogwash - no comment.

Post Script: Sorry for threadjacking.

The stupid, it burns!

Post Post Script: Back to point #8 - anybody else feel a little bit reluctant to be consummated by the Creator? Seems vaguely painful, somehow. Scratch that... not so vague.

A neodarwinist is everyone who isn't a neolamarckist. In other words, every biologist of the last several decades. To describe someone of today, the term is meaningless.

We are not divided, all one body we,
One in hope and doctrine, one in charity.

ROTFL!!!

It seems like they see all of their antis -- anti-evolution, anti-abortion, anti-homosexual, anti-atheist, anti-Islam -- as one big holy war, whether they happen to be using violence at this stage or not.

As I said recently: they are Manichaeans. To them, there are not just exactly two sides to every story, there is a grand total of two sides in the entire universe and beyond. They cannot count to three. It is against their religion to count to three.

amazing that this little bunch of atheists think they are RIGHT while claiming the rest of the planet (5 billion believers!) are WRONG!!

Eat shit -- billions of flies cannot err.

More to the point, when have the believers ever agreed on anything?

Please vist:

http://nostradamus-usa.netfirms.com

to show you how we prove the atheists wrong

Nostradamus was a hobby comedian who is still laughing in his grave.

By David Marjanović, OM (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

Turkish prison = castigation... with benefits

By j.t.delaney (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

I just love how delusional you can get without actually being certified.

Easy: just never visit a psychologist.

neo-Darwinism, punctuated equilibrium, etc.

Punk eek does not contradict the modern synthesis in the slightest.

Has there ever been a cdesign proponentsist who knew what he was talking about?

(Hmmm. Is this a rhetorical question?)

stick to BIOLOGY........it is safer for you........

Is this a threat, Mr Markuze?

By David Marjanović, OM (not verified) on 09 May 2008 #permalink

Are you angry, mrjones? WWJD?

He's just hungry. Don't feed the trolls, though. Next think you know he'll be demanding our children.

ICR is a disaster for science education.

But then again, when Dawkins and Myers equate science with atheism, which they do so don't kid yourself, then so do they.

After all, as Dawkins said, evolution is just a skirmish in the larger war against the idea of the supernatural...i.e., he has established a falsce dichotomy between science and religion.

My concern is public education; Dawkins, as the eltist he is, sees this as just a useful part of the larger fight.

By James Fenton (not verified) on 10 May 2008 #permalink

The whole enemies list, while a compliment from such people, is a scary thing. Although the xtians claim to believe only their god can judge, it seems there is always someone willing to help with the punishment. Being an avowed enemy of these people is a compliment and an indicator that you are doing god's work (tongue firmly in cheek), but I would start screening my mail and letting my grad assistants open any packages. Both nature and those who feel they are doing god's work are "careless of the single life".

On another note, would someone please put the flat rock back on top of mrjones/markuze/mabus.

Ciao

Barry #86,

http://youtube.com/watch?v=TqcNraF3vP8

now I think we have some additional evidence to support the claim that there is indeed an "OPERATION TEAPOT" going on, ie plans to build a secret evil atheist military base in the Galapagos islands;

In the following post;
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2008/05/last_week_of_classes.php#more
PZ has admitted that he is planning an undercover trip to the Galapagos this summer.

This is not only solid evidence for OPERATION TEAPOT, but also seems to indicate that together with Richard Dawkins, PZ is one of the masterminds of the operation.
I would also add, if the ICR is correct, that Eugenie Scott is one of them...

And what about that giant squid found in New Zealand, is that also an advanced sign of OPERATION TEAPOT ?

So PZ, are you one of the masterminds of OPERATION TEAPOT together with Richard Dawkins and Eugenie Scott ?

By negentropyeater (not verified) on 10 May 2008 #permalink

re teh body in the bathroom, its funny that the authorities didnt believe their story about the praying/demons and all that, you can bet that the majority of the police involved believe in the ressurection.

when it comes down to it they KNOW its a crock of shit,simple denial.

By extatyzoma (not verified) on 10 May 2008 #permalink

Adnan Oktar founded the BAV, a creationist cult that has a long criminal/terrorist history. Needless to say the ICR has been supporting them.

extatyzoma,

you can bet that the majority of the police involved believe in the ressurection.

The majority of the police probably believes in the resurection of Jesus Christ, but of this grandmother, are you certain of what you are saying ?

By negentropyeater (not verified) on 10 May 2008 #permalink

Re: #7
Not only do they not link to them, but they're not comments. They're entries, posts, postings, whatever you want to call them; in the context of a blog, comments are these things here - people coming along and commenting on what the blogger has written.

Interestingly, in the article itself, they stated that PZ's presence is "mainly through blogs on his website Pharyngula" - which would imply that they consider Pharyngula to be a website, not a blog, and that they also call each post a blog. Why, then, do the references call them "comment[s] posted by PZ Myers to Pharyngula blog" rather than calling each one a "blog" in its own right?

They also failed to link the name "Pharyngula" to the blog - in either the article or the references. My guess is that they feel too threatened by the ease of access to PZ/Pharyngula, and didn't want to encourage people to visit the site. I don't even want to get into their sloppy punctuation and grammar, and their personal attacks (comparing PZ to a "newly-hormonal teenager," for example).

I, for one, would be honoured to sit down and dine with the fine people on the ICR 'enemies list'.

We could have erudite conversation and then watch the comedy cabaret featuring Kent Hovind and Harun Yahya - although we may have to wait some time for them to be available...

By DiscoveredJoys (not verified) on 10 May 2008 #permalink

But then again, when Dawkins and Myers equate science with atheism, which they do so don't kid yourself, then so do they.

I've never seen PZ or Dawkins do that, but the anti-science religionists routinely conflate them. Please, show us where either have done this.

By freelunch (not verified) on 10 May 2008 #permalink

After all, as Dawkins said, evolution is just a skirmish in the larger war against the idea of the supernatural...i.e., he has established a falsce dichotomy between science and religion.

The theory of evolution is part of the larger war against the idea of the supernatural. So is the meteorological theory of thunder and lightning, and the microbial theory of infectious disease. Science by its very nature opposes supernatural explanation -- there is nothing special about the theory of evolution in this regard, except that some religions have explanations for the origin of humans that are demonstrably not scientific. If powerful religions instead had supernatural accounts of gravity, then religious groups would complain that physics was establishing a false dichotomy between science and religion.

IRC.... Do they want everybody to become atheists? Lol.

I find it difficult to take pleasure in the conviction of Mr. Yahya. The Turkish government continues to send people to jail for their beliefs, and I fear that this may be a strong component of Mr. Yahya's conviction. Prima facie, it appears that this is not the case, that he is being convicted for the Turkish equivalent of using a non-profit organization for personal benefit. I very much hope that this is the only factor at work here. Moreover, it seems wrong to me to take pleasure in the punishment of a crime because of a something else. If the man committed financial crimes, then yes, let us all take pleasure in the progress of justice. But in this case, it appears that justice had nothing to do with the man's beliefs -- and so we have no ethical basis to take pleasure because of his beliefs.

By Chris Crawford (not verified) on 10 May 2008 #permalink

#115: Considering that Turkey is only second to the US among countries where the majority of the population prefers creationism to science, I don't think he's been jailed for his beliefs here.

For the record: Much as a loathe creationism, I'd never want to see anyone jailed for it. That's the difference between we atheists and religionists: we think the way to combat bad ideas is through education, not suppression, the lies of Ben Stein notwithstanding.

PZ, Richard Dawkins, and Eugenie Scott. Our very own axis of evil. Woo hoo!

I'm so proud of you!

By KillerChihuahua (not verified) on 10 May 2008 #permalink

There's one bit of research I bet the ICR aren't doing.

And that is: Where is the "line in the sand" which distinguishes microevolution from macroevolution? Given two samples of DNA, how would we determine whether the differences between them are attributable to microevolution (over one or several generations) or indicate that they were created separately?

Finding that simple distinction would make the Scientific Theory of Evolution untenable, and would undoubtedly win a Nobel prize.

Yet amongst the ICR's research papers, we find plenty of handwaving -- attempts to discredit radioisotope dating, credulity-stretching explanations for how the Genesis flood may have been possible and a bizarre attempt to correlate, or possibly conflate, moral standards with beliefs regarding origins -- yet there appears to have been no attempt to determine the limit which the Theory of Special Creation predicts must exist between micro- and macroevolution.

Could it be, perhaps, that they fear another Poisson's Bright Spot?

You don't really have to worry on what grounds Adnan was finally convicted imo, he was haunted already by accusations of child abuse and other criminal acts that didn't get properly investigated.

Many Turkish people (def. not all) would classify him as a shady leader of a cult-like organization who is known for violent intimidation tactics against critics, the guy even manages to get internet sites blocked in Turkey. I wouldn't be surprised if he manages to get scienceblogs.com blocked just for this article and it's comments.

With luck, him being in jail will allow proper investigation of the charges made against him in the past.

By Dutch Delight (not verified) on 10 May 2008 #permalink

ICR loses a point for either not understanding what an evangelist is, or for imagining that atheists are somehow preaching the gospel. However, ICR scores one point for recognizing that an evangelist is a bad thing.

You have to give credit where it's due.

The Adnan Oktar, aka Harun Yahya, book "Atlas of Creation" is totally wrong in all aspects of evolution. But ...

It has superb page design! I have studied it to see what I can learn to present my photographs better in competitions and exhibitions. I love the stark images on black, the thin borders to hold in the images, the superimposition of images.

I wonder where (and from whom) all of those came from?

Wow! ICR's Special List! I'm so envious!

"Although using cruder language,...."

I say fuck ICR and feed 'em fishheads!

Adnan Oktar founded the BAV, a creationist cult that has a long criminal/terrorist history. Needless to say the ICR has been supporting them.

Has the ICR's support been a shout-out, or actual money? And hasn't the US of A been coming down hard on citizens who provide financial support for known terrorist organizations, even in some ex post facto cases?

Or would our administration dismiss that label by saying the SRF/BAV are just "forcefully evangelizing"? After all, they're against Jews, Freemasons, and evolution...

From Dawkins' segment:
"What Dawkins proposes is not a faithless system. Instead of God, however, he enshrines science and reason. If something cannot currently be explained through natural means, it is only a matter of time before "miracles" will be satisfactorily transformed by science into 'natural phenomena.'"

Damn scientists, transforming all the best miracles.

By Citizen Steve (not verified) on 10 May 2008 #permalink

But then again, when Dawkins and Myers equate science with atheism, which they do so don't kid yourself, then so do they.

Seems to me that this is wrong. Myers and Dawkins point out that any religious claims that are amenable to scientific examination fail the test. But they don't claim that all scientists must be atheists, and will give credit to competent scientists who are theists. Note that I said "any religious claims that are amenable to scientific examination" -- many are not. True, Myers and other hardheaded rationalists will say that these other claims are examples of sloppy and fallacious thinking, but they recognize that this is a debate in the area of more general philosophy and critical thinking, not a scientific question. Scientific thinking is a subset of reasoning. However, when a person is outspoken on issues of both science and general rationality, it is hard to keep the two rhetorically distinguished (when people won't be paying close attention), thus the mistaken impression that they're "equating science with atheism".

Seems to me that this is wrong

It not only seems that way, it is.

nowhere has Myers or Dawkins ever stated that to be a scientist, one has to be an atheist.

never, ever.

nowhere has Dawkins or Myers ever stated that the many, many, scientists who also practice a specific religion are not scientists.

It's the science that dictates the label "scientist", the rest is all philosophy.

All either of them has ever said is that many aspects of religious belief are thematically in opposition to those of science (this is undeniable). Neither has ever said that humans do not have the ability to compartmentalize, but only ask "why bother?", as it seems like an extraordinary waste of energy and time to do so.

In case nobody noticed, there are some important facts in the Adnan Oktar case:

1) Turkey's government is notorious for being militantly secular -- that is, women are not permitted to wear the headscarf on university campuses, because it conflicts with secular values. In fact, you can be kicked off campus for practicing your religion in Turkey.

2) The story makes clear that the charges were dropped, only to be picked up again. In America, of course, this would be classified as "Double Jeopardy."

3) There are no facts in the story to substantiate, invalidate, or even describe the charges in any detail.

And yet, despite some tell-tale signs that the charges may have been trumped up (like double jeopardy and no facts about the alleged offense itself), and without any knowledge of what actually happened, you all jump to the conclusion that he's a criminal.

Why?

Turkey's government is notorious for being militantly secular

unfortunately for that idea, Yohyo's own supporters strongly suggest that there were RELIGIOUS pressure groups influencing the Judge involved with the case.

Interesting that you rush to his defense.

why is that?

no facts about the alleged offense itself

what was the alleged offense again?

please detail it for us so we're all on the same page.

btw, I had no idea you were a practicing Muslim, ungtss.

please inform us all on the correct interpretation of Islam in Turkish law.

I'm sure it will be quite instructive*.

*uh, in case it isn't obvious, you're so transparent you could replace glass. That ID bigtop circus tent just keeps gettin' bigger and bigger all the time.

I'd like to see the ICR publish a statement explaining how "Creation Research" isn't an oxymoron.

I responded to the ICR's crap here:
http://www.care2.com/c2c/groups/disc.html?gpp=2192&pst=931504

"I don't think it's a coincidence that all three of these "Evolution's Evangelists" were featured in the propaganda film EXPELLED. Clearly this is an attempt to promote that movie too!

Plus, the article is full of lies (mostly strawman type claims) about the science behind evolution that have already been dealt with a million times over."

unfortunately for that idea, Yohyo's own supporters strongly suggest that there were RELIGIOUS pressure groups influencing the Judge involved with the case.

Source for your claim?

Interesting that you rush to his defense. why is that?

I'm not saying he's innocent, nor am I rushing to his defense. I don't know anything about him. I'm a prosecutor, and I work for the US Air Force. I've seen trumped up charges before. They usually smell like these: Vague allegations, procedural abuses, and an identifiable ulterior motive.

what was the alleged offense again?

According to Reuters, "using threats for personal benefit and creating an organization with the intent to commit a crime." Nothing more specific than that.

I wish I had more.

btw, I had no idea you were a practicing Muslim, ungtss.

I'm not.

please inform us all on the correct interpretation of Islam in Turkish law.

Turkey is not an Islamic country. It is a secular country.

ungtss does not understand the legal concept of double jeopardy. In US constitutional law, it means one cannot be tried for the same crime twice. It does not apply to cases where charges are dropped before a trial's conclusion. And the Turks have their own constitution and traditions anyway. But we already know the creationists are not fans of facts, history and the US Constitution.

Source for your claim?

the Reuters article, the same one you cite for the alleged offense list.

If you really are a prosecutor, you must be either retired or a very poor one.

A spokeswoman for his Science Research Foundation (BAV) confirmed to Reuters that Oktar had been sentenced but said the judge was influenced by political and religious pressure groups.

I'm not.

then why are you attempting to educate us on how Islam is regulated in Turkey?

you obviously haven't the slightest clue.

Turkey is an entirely secular country?

are you fucking kidding me??

have you even for a second considered WHY Yoyo located his Islamic creationism group there? Why it was so popular there?

my god, man, are you really THAT dense?

I want, nay NEED to get on the ICR list. Where do I apply?

dkew:

ungtss does not understand the legal concept of double jeopardy. In US constitutional law, it means one cannot be tried for the same crime twice. It does not apply to cases where charges are dropped before a trial's conclusion. And the Turks have their own constitution and traditions anyway. But we already know the creationists are not fans of facts, history and the US Constitution.

Duble jeopardy attaches in the US when the jury is sworn in. Talk about stuff you know about. Otherwise, shut up please. Thanks.

Of course Turkey doesn't follow US law -- but that's why they have so many abuses of justice over there. Double jeopardy is essential to protect defendant's from harassment by the government -- essentially keep the government from charging you over and over until they get a conviction.

In any event, I'm not going to waste anymore time with you trolls. I was hoping somebody might have a rational response.

Ungtss is correct: Turkey is a secular country, it is well known and you can check that in Wikipedia. He is also right when he says that one should not judge a situation when there are too few information about it.

I add that I am an atheist (catholic in education which I abandoned twenty five years ago).

As ungtss implies, IANAL, and he claims to be one. Yet we frequently read of cases of retrials for hung juries, without problems with double jeopardy. More commonly, people are indicted, but charges dropped before trial, when evidence and witnesses are missing, yet the accused are still liable later. Any real lawyers want to comment? Not that it's directly relevant to another country. Is ungtss closing his eyes to a good case against Oktar, in creationist fashion, or is the case weak?

I am not a lawyer either. When I said "one should not judge", I maint "WE should not judge". I am French, my English is not excellent and I am not sure I understood the whole situation, but if I understand well, the guy was convicted not for being a creationist but for creating an illegal organization.

The creationists often accuse atheists to be necessarily bandits. Let us not use the same argument for them. We cannot blame somebody to be a creationist (everybody has the right to be an idiot), except if his creationism leads to make crimes, or to make children believe stupidities.

The comedy show that keeps on giving: ICR - "No matter where the evidence leads.". This, of course, being the closing line in an evidence-free diatribe. Brilliant.

And the cherry on the icing on the cake is that The Other Side nearly always hide behind no-comments-allowed commentary. Eejits, the lot of them.

I don't care that the guy founded a creationist organization, the fact that he did should not be considered a crime, much less one to be punished by 3 years in a Turkish prison.

I don't know much about what harm there is in making "an organisation for personal gain" or if that is just a label for more nefarious deeds, but I would withhold my glee about his imprisonment until I knew he had done something demonstrably evil, and was not just jailed for breaking some authoritarian law in "it is a crime to insult turkishness" turkey.

Not that I agree with this guy's creationist bullshit, I just disagree with someone being jailed for being a creationist, least of all in Turkey.

Am I reading the ICR post right? Are they saying stupidity should be a Christian sacrament?

And they think you slander Christianity?

After underwhelming criticism, I withdraw my Kirk Cameron comparison. (But you've got to admit Kirk and Ray Comfort can do amazing things with bananas.)

Re: #34 Ichthyic

You just made my list!

Is that a good thing? ;-) Thanks for the link, ahhh the good times.... when congress had verterbra.

#69 GOD

...about half of them (including the founder) are geologists. Who better to know know about how old the Earth really is?

???

Geology is one of the fields the creotards love to claim expertise in because so few people really know anything about it and there is a widespread but erroneous impression that it is an "easy" science. So, are you serious? Do you actually think that the 'geologists' on staff at ICR are somehow better qualified to determine the age of the earth than all the other geologists in the world whose conclusion is that the age is actually almost 6 orders of magnitude older?

As to geologists to

NOT know about evolutionary biology and genetics?

Paleontology?

(General points) Myers and Dawkins never have conflated atheism with science to the best of my knowledge. The reason this claim is so common is that the creotards and many of the "honest believers" have a deep seated, visceral fear of atheism. I can only speculate, but it is probably because they actually know that the atheists are correct. Science gives the individual the courage to abandon the last of the childhood fairytales, because it affords a means of dealing with seemingly impossible and intractable problems. To those who would argue that science can only address 'tangible' problems such as how to extract the enormous energy bound up in atomic nuclei, I would advise them to read the complete works of B.F. Skinner, and particularly the book "Verbal Behavior".

One last question to Ichthyic - want some interesting photos
of Amazonian fish? I know zip about ichthyology - maybe you could identify some of them for me?

Ciao ciao,

By Krubozumo Nyankoye (not verified) on 10 May 2008 #permalink

ungtss (#129):

1) Turkey's government is notorious for being militantly secular...

However secular the government may be, the population is certainly not. Are you suggesting that Oktar is being oppressed because he is religious in a country where "99.0% of the Turkish population is Muslim, of whom a majority belong to the Sunni branch of Islam. [Wikipeda]"

The story makes clear that the charges were dropped, only to be picked up again. In America, of course, this would be classified as "Double Jeopardy."

No, it wouldn't. I am not a lawyer, and I can't understand how you would claim to be either with that kind of misunderstanding. Double jeopardy protects against being tried again for a crime using the same facts where a verdict has already been delivered. You imply that dropping charges before a case reaches trial protects the accused from those charges forever more, which is ludicrous.

I know nothing about this case, but based purely on your own statements it looks like you're trolling again.

P.S.

Of course Turkey doesn't follow US law -- but that's why they have so many abuses of justice over there.

I hope that was merely an unfortunate choice of words.

@146:

actually, I was complimenting James F on his astute link in #15

Turkey: Scientists face off against creationsists:

[Adnan Oktar's Atlas of Creation] goes on to blame evolutionary principles for Communism, Nazism and - under an A3 photo of the Twin Towers in flames - Islamic radicalism and the September 11 terrorist tragedy. "Darwinism is the only philosophy which values conflict", the text says.

I think I'll skip reading it, I saw the movie*.

*No, I haven't actually seen Expelled. Poetic license.

One last question to Ichthyic - want some interesting photos of Amazonian fish? I know zip about ichthyology - maybe you could identify some of them for me?

sure.

If I can't, I have a buddy at a University in Nicaragua who can.

send them to:

fisheyephotosAThotmailDOTcom

or post them at one of the free picture hosting sites (there are a lot of them; I use flickr.com for example)

Harun Yahya, hahahaha. Oh dear. Our secretary dug out his 'book' (which was apparently sent to all biology units throughout the country) a few weeks ago before journal club. Everyone went *headdesk* upon the text but admittedly, the pictures were rather nice.

But it's good to know he's off the stage now for a few years, less annoyance for us.

The Reuters article about Adnan Oktar, aka Harun Yahya, says "Oktar, born in 1956, is the driving force behind a richly funded movement based in Turkey that champions creationism, the belief that God literally created the world in six days as told in the Bible and the Koran."

To be pedantic, he is a Old-World Creationist. (The Koran is less specific than Genesis). The Atlas of Creation claims that fossils demonstrate that species haven't evolved in millions of years. (The Atlas largely comprises comparisons between fossils and recently-living creatures).

It is always worth remembering, when having a discussion with a Creationist, that there are many types of Creationist, from various religions. They disagree with one-another as much as they disagree with evolution! (They want to get rid of evolution so that they can get back to fighting with one-another and with other Christians and/or Muslims!)
http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/evo/blfaq_cre_types.htm

Turkey's government is notorious for being militantly secular - ungtss

Ungtss is notorious for being militantly ignorant. The governing party in Turkey is the Justice and Development Party (initials AK in Turkish), which is led by former members of the banned Islamist "Virtue Party" and "Welfare Party". The Turkish Army, which sees itself as the protector of Ataturk's secularist legacy, has not been at all happy about the AK's election victories, but has so far refrained from the coups it has historically been fond of.

By Nick Gotts (not verified) on 11 May 2008 #permalink

To those who would argue that science can only address 'tangible' problems such as how to extract the enormous energy bound up in atomic nuclei, I would advise them to read the complete works of B.F. Skinner, and particularly the book "Verbal Behavior". - Krubozumo Nyankoye

Please! Skinnerite behaviorists form a small, closed, cult-like group within psychology. If people are going to read Skinner's works, they should at least also read Noam Chomsky's review of "Verbal Behavior" (Language, 35, No. 1 (1959), 26-58.), and Keller Breland and Marian Breland (1961) "The misbehavior of organisms", American Psychologist, 16, 681-684. The dates of these articles show just how long ago the "blank slate" hypothesis of Skinnerite behaviorism was refuted. Skinner himself, to judge by his "novel" Walden Two, seems to have shared the misapprehension of many creationists that if you repeat something often enough, it must be true. He is at least consistent in this regard, since his philosophical position makes it impossible to distinguish truth from falsehood, since it treats linguistic utterances simply as "stimuli" and "responses", having no way of discussing any meaning they might have.

By Nick Gotts (not verified) on 11 May 2008 #permalink

Correction to last sentence of #155 "...impossible to distinguish truth from falsehood in terms of a claim's content..."

By Nick Gotts (not verified) on 11 May 2008 #permalink

Fenton @#101:

After all, as Dawkins said, evolution is just a skirmish in the larger war against the idea of the supernatural...i.e., he has established a falsce dichotomy between science and religion.

How is it a false dichotomy? There is a real dichotomy between science and religion. A position of "I don't know, I'm waiting for evidence pro or con" versus "I know, I go with the voices in my/my pastor's head".

My concern is public education; Dawkins, as the eltist he is, sees this as just a useful part of the larger fight.

What is wrong with being elite? Dawkins is undoubtedly one of the "l334" and uses his knowledge and position as a bully pulpit.

And don't kid yourself: there is a larger fight between a modern rational world and centuries-old pre-rational world.

Congrats, PZ!

Re: # 150 and 151

Okay I will get them up on the web, it might take me a day or two because I have a very slow connection from here. So you don't have to keep checking back I will put them at:

http://64.249.34.162/fish/index.html if I can do the ftp
without it timing out. Check that url in a day or two and if you get a 404 try again in 24 hrs.

Ciao ciao

By Krubozumo Nyankoye (not verified) on 11 May 2008 #permalink

Re #161. It is entirely consistent with Skinner's own approach that this lengthy Wikipedia article includes just two sentences noting the existence (but not content) of Chomsky's critique, and completely ignores all other criticism.

By Nick Gotts (not verified) on 12 May 2008 #permalink

The freaks in Wisconsin have finally been charged with stealing the dead ladies Social Security checks.

http://tinyurl.com/5hrq5o

At least they had some mortal sin to ground them. I was afraid they might have been truely insane in hoping the lady would come back to life.

It appears that the woman may also have been alive and left for dead.

She said she propped Middlesworth on the toilet and left the room to call Bushey, who told her to leave the woman alone and pray for her, the complaint said. He said he had received signs that God would raise her from the dead with a miracle.

Lewis went on to say she thought Middlesworth was still breathing when she put her on the toilet and called Bushey, instead of an ambulance.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080510/ap_on_re_us/decaying_corpse

Re: #150 and #151

The photos are on the web server, I hope you can see them. This thread is now buried so deep probably no one will come back and check so I might post an OT message to Ichthyic and Monado in a more recent thread to let them know.

Meanwhile, I will try to figure out how to get an email account working here to expedite communications, I am actually quite curious about identifying these fish. Its a long story.

Ciao

By Krubozumo Nyankoye (not verified) on 13 May 2008 #permalink

@166:

got it.

I'll check more closely tomorrow, but just for quick ID:

1: is a type of piranha (yes, Pacu is correct, I think)

2: looks like a species of croaker, my guess would be Pachyurus schomburgkii

3: ? too dark

4: I think you got that correct. nasty looking buggers, eh? if you catch another, when you take the pic, make sure you have a dark background for the head, so the teeth have some contrast:

http://www.thejump.net/id/Payara.jpg

5: ditto, also correct.

If you are anywhere near Nicaragua, let me know and I'll point you in the direction of a fellow ichthyologist/gamefish enthusiast.

these sites you might enjoy:

http://www.acuteangling.com/Reference/SAFishArt.html

http://www.fishbase.se/search.php

edit:

for #4, I meant that the first species you mentioned was correct, namely Hydrolycus scomberoides.

btw, "It's a long story"

I got time, let's hear it!