Never get involved in a land war in Asia, never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line, and never try to compete with me in the crazy email category.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Each summer, the fair City of New York plays host to a cosmic convergence of bloggers within the ScienceBlogs.com corral. It's a great time to meet all the folks we know very well online, but perhaps not IRL. Moreover, we had a really nice reader meetup last year where - thank you very much - all…
Last night, the Australian media held their annual awards ceremony, the Walkley Awards. A somewhat funny event occurred when an iconoclastic blogger, founder of Crikey.Com, was presenting an award, and was physically attacked by an obviously drunk political editor from one of Murdoch's papers. He…
Kevin Drum is thinking about debate formats:
Now, there's nothing wrong with a few beachballs. Giving every candidate a couple of minutes to simply explain their healthcare plan -- or whatever -- without interruption is fine. But then what? Do we really want several months of "debates" in which…
I had considered writing an accounting of all the outlandish weather events of 2015, but that project quickly became a tl:dr list of untoward happenings which is both alarming and a bit boring, since it is so long. So, I decided to generate something less comprehensive, focusing more on the context…
It must suck to be a biologist in the US with right-wing political views. Almost as bad as being gay and right-wing.
LOL
that email was softcore really.....
Inconceivable!
Don't make us bring out... the Comfy Chair!
I think you've beaten his giant...
"Scarier than PZ"? ... nah!
Plus he's from Sweden, one of the most ungodly countries in the world. Sweden, with it's border neighbors Norway and Finland, make up a sandwich of ungodliness, filled with atheism, liberalism and socialism.
It's just simply too cold up here to believe in a loving personal god, that's my explanation for it. :)
(In the coldest months of winter we have mandatory cross country skiing classes in elementary schools gymnastics, which must be a contributing factor to unbelief.)
I think you should publicly announce that you will contribute money to Planned Parenthood every time you get a nasty email or Bill D rants on you again...
@ #8,
On a professor's salary? Not to speak for PZ, but I'm not sure he could afford it... Now, if only PZ could find some rich patron to make such a claim. Check one of those 'richest people' lists and see if any of them are atheists.
#7:
Oh yes. Not even the Christian god would be so cruel as to have forced me through that. I still have flashbacks...
@#9: Professor's salary plus payment per hit on this blog so Bill D's rants should themselves keep the cash flowing
"You keep using that word... I am not sure it means what you think it means..."
Don't these fuckwits realise that there would be a Nobel, easy, for anyone who came up with *real* evidence that discredited evolution?
Strangely, no-one has found any - in 150 years of looking. How odd. It's almost as though it's, like, TRUE or something.
CD
@ #11
Fair enough.
Nuh-uh. It's a vast atheist conspiracy! Godless scientists doing Satan's bidding to discredit the TRUTH of the Holy Bible. !!! You see, all the godless scientists are in league together. They have a secret cabal and they meet in secret to discuss how to discredit and sandbag Christian scientists like Behe. They also eat babies and kill kittens and puppies at their Satanic meetings after the buttseks initiation of new godless Bible Deniers; but I've revealed too much.... (who's that pounding on my door?) OMG... it's P-....aaaaaarrrrrrrrghhhhhhh
MAYNARD: It reads, 'Here may be found the last words of Joseph of Arimathea. He who is valiant and pure of spirit may find the Holy Grail in the Castle of aaarrrrggh'.
ARTHUR: What?
MAYNARD: '...The Castle of aaarrrrggh'.
BEDEVERE: What is that?
MAYNARD: He must have died while carving it.
LAUNCELOT: Oh, come on!
MAYNARD: Well, that's what it says.
ARTHUR: Look, if he was dying, he wouldn't bother to carve 'aarrggh'. He'd just say it!
MAYNARD: Well, that's what's carved in the rock!
GALAHAD: Perhaps he was dictating.
ARTHUR: Oh, shut up. Well, does it say anything else?
MAYNARD: No. Just 'aaarrrrggh'.
Dammit! why can't I have grown up someplace cold and snowy enough for compulsory x-country skiing! It just ain't fair! As a distance runner I have always wanted to try my hand at it. But not even being born in Scotland and raised in Southern New Zealand was quite cold enough (where I was). You can do x-country skiing here in Scotland but global warming means it's a real lottery especially wrt snow quality.
Just around from us is a small sunken park, it was pretty useless being really boggy but the council put in drainage and now its fine for dog walkers. it used to be a curling rink, but not used since the '60s because the winters became too unreliable. Now they curl in the local ice rink, indoors.
Almost as bad as being gay and right-wing.
ohhhhhh
you mean the "Log Cabin Republicans"
Or as I call them
The Uncle Tom's Cabin Republicans
Realistically, he hasn't tried to compete with you in the crazy email category. He's just calling into question your lefty-liberalism. I vote we get a public feud going among SB'ers to see who is the most lefty-liberal. GO!
He calls himself an "elitist suburban East Coast lefty liberal atheist" yet he's from Connecticut?
Wouldn't that mean he attends the New England chapter of ESECLLA (pronounced 'capecod') meetings? Yet I haven't seen him there. He's probably one of those elitist elitist suburban East Coast lefty liberal atheists that meets in NY, because it's so much bigger than Boston. Snob!
I love the idea in the original letter, that scientists could disprove evolution if they wanted to. I've encountered it a few times before.
Here is a technique I've tried a couple of times when someone pulls out the "Scientists could disprove evolution, but they are afraid/reluctant to" argument. I ask them to name three scientists. Any three they can think of, living or dead.
Odds are good that any scientist well known enough to be recognizable to the general public is recognizable precisely because they showed the general consensus of their time to be wrong. That is how you get your name in text books. That is where "fame and fortune" are to be found for a scientist.
Of course there are some exceptions. Many who popularize science, such as Carl Sagan, may have done solid work in their fields, increasing our understanding of a particular set of phenomena, but never actually "shifted a paradigm" so to speak. They have become recognizable more for their ability to communicate.
I also had one person list Stephen Hawking, who is arguably best known for his illness, then as a popular science writer. Few people in the general public have any idea what his ideas about black holes are.
But so far, most people list scientists like Galileo, Newton, Einstein, or Darwin. And that is the beauty of it. The person who is advancing the idea that scientists have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo only knows of scientists who have done the exact opposite.
I guess I've been fortunate, so far I have yet to encounter a deep fundie. Nobody has mentioned a Behe or a Hamm yet. I guess it's a technique best used on the more moderate or uninformed. As with most things, the true fundemented will be impervious.
I love the idea in the original letter, that scientists could disprove evolution if they wanted to. I've encountered it a few times before.
Here is a technique I've tried a couple of times when someone pulls out the "Scientists could disprove evolution, but they are afraid/reluctant to" argument. I ask them to name three scientists. Any three they can think of, living or dead.
Odds are good that any scientist well known enough to be recognizable to the general public is recognizable precisely because they showed the general consensus of their time to be wrong. That is how you get your name in text books. That is where "fame and fortune" are to be found for a scientist.
Of course there are some exceptions. Many who popularize science, such as Carl Sagan, may have done solid work in their fields, increasing our understanding of a particular set of phenomena, but never actually "shifted a paradigm" so to speak. They have become recognizable more for their ability to communicate.
I also had one person list Stephen Hawking, who is arguably best known for his illness, then as a popular science writer. Few people in the general public have any idea what his ideas about black holes are.
But so far, most people list scientists like Galileo, Newton, Einstein, or Darwin. And that is the beauty of it. The person who is advancing the idea that scientists have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo only knows of scientists who have done the exact opposite.
I guess I've been fortunate, so far I have yet to encounter a deep fundie. Nobody has mentioned a Behe or a Hamm yet. I guess it's a technique best used on the more moderate or uninformed. As with most things, the true fundemented will be impervious.
Doh!
Never argue with someone who buys ink by the barrel.
The key to human relationships is sincerity. Once you can fake that, you'll have it made.
Never go in against a caecilian when death is on the line.
That email is hate mail like "er, excuse me," is a battle cry.