Brad Delong has some excellent nominees, but Casey Luskin takes the cake.
Casey culminates a three part critique of an article about evolution in a popular magazine by asking:
Was the Ford Pinto, with all its imperfections revealed in crash tests, not designed?
Apparently, the vertebrate eye is backwards because God decided it was cheaper to settle the lawsuits than make the cheap fix earlier implemented for the cephalopods.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Casey Luskin has been posting a series of articles to argue with Carl Zimmer, and has finally posted his last attempt, which Zimmer has dealt with. We have a new catch phrase, thanks to Luskin, in reference to the shortcomings of the vertebrate eye:
Was the Ford Pinto, with all its imperfections…
The Discovery Institute's Evolution News and Views blog neither reports news on evolution nor offers interesting views. One of their bloggers, Casey Luskin, is notorious for misunderstanding and misrepresenting science -- which is par for the course at the Disco. Casey recently decided to attack a…
I have to admit, even as a research scientist, used to reading dozens of scientific papers a day, I have a really hard time keeping up with the huge volume of research coming out of the Intelligent Design laboratory, Biologic Institute.
With one PR release every other month, ID will be For Realsies…
Things have not been going so well on the political front for the advocates of intelligent design (a k a the progeny of creationism). This election season their allies on state boards of education in Kansas and Ohio went down to defeat. On the scientific front, things have never really gone well.…
Young Casey is merely recycling Behe's argument that "intelligent design" need not be "perfect design." In other words, the IDer (aka "God") might have been a bumbler.
That doesn't really cohere with most people's notions of "God," but hey, whatever works for Behe. And keeps criticism of ID at bay.