Against my better judgment, I've read some posts by anti-accommodationists. If I decide I enjoy banging my head against a wall, I may even respond to some of them. Otherwise, I'll have to distract myself.
For the moment, I'm also playing with Twitter, so if you want to see what I've twat, check me out. The creative handle I chose is JoshRosenau. Thus far it's mostly reactions to AAAS. I may use it as a repository for articles and ideas that I want to write about but don't actually have anything to add to at the moment, thus clearing my RSS reader and my browser for more substantive tasks. Like learning to manage a Twitter account.
- Log in to post comments
I'd continue reading posts by those that counter the dubious "accommodationist" position...I'd also encourage looking up the meaning of the word "twat".
I sympathize - I am listening tonight when i get home to point of inquiry - victor stenger with d.j. grothe special guest re-hosting - on why blablablabla.
More seriously, how do you at NCSE maintain good relations, which people like Genie Scott do, for instance, with practically everyone?
I do think Nisbet, and Mooney to a degree, don't always model the exact kind of communication we want the other people to subscribe to.
I also note when my ox (climate science) is being gored by my nemesis religion (market fundamentalism), I am slightly more sympathetic emotionally to the confrontational radical viewpoint, but not in what I believe practice should be.
Is Mr. Rosenau going to comment on the latest brouhaha over Francis Collins that has been the subject of posts by PZ Myers and Jerry Coyne.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/02/francis_collins_is_up_to_the…
Remy: I know the other use of the word "twat," which is why I giggle at turning it into a verb. Childish, I know.
SLC: As part of my anti-anti-accommodationist fatwa, I stopped reading PZ and Jerry. I wish Jerry would stop trying to dictate what other people should or shouldn't talk about. He also might want to consider the fact that the NIH director isn't "the chief government scientist." At best, that would be John Holdren, the President's science advisor and the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. If Coyne didn't know that, he lacks credibility to comment on such matters, and if he does know it, he shouldn't be misleading his readers. As to whether NCSE or others should criticize his new book: I'll wait until I know what he says before denouncing it. It appears to be a collection of essays by other people introduced by an essay of Collins'. The only quotation offered from the essay is "faith and reason are not, as many seem to be arguing today, mutually exclusive. They never have been." That's not a radical position, nor does it exploit Collins' position at NIH. If he abuses that title, I'll criticize him, otherwise, I'll keep ignoring the anti-accommodationists.