At Bill Dembski's blog, Clive Hayden reads my law review article and finds it to be "inaccurate," "prideful," and "a kind of disconnected cluster of arguments that reads like a brainstorm (concerned with quantity of arguments over quality), that could only persuade the uninformed."
Meanwhile, an email correspondent affiliated with a natural history museum writes:
I wanted to write and congratulate you (and thank you) for the very concise and well-written "legal" paper on the trajectory of ID after Dover (in the Saint Thomas Journal). Very nicely done!
Given that Hayden inaccurately describes Dembski's papers as "peer-reviewed," and seems not to have read the parts of the paper which specifically address ID's status as creationism, I'm putting more weight on the latter assessment.
- Log in to post comments
Since the Asperger's vs. Accommodationists debate seems to be in a lull for a while, I have a strange question - is there an Ohio blog similar to Thoughts from Kansas?
Also, having read "Intelligent Design: The Bridge Between Science & Theology" and "Darwin's Black Box," I am now working my way through "Signature in the Cell."
Pity me.
Clive just mis-spelled. He meant that Dr. Dr. D's work is always "pier reviewed"... i.e. always fit to take a long walk off of a short pier.
ps: Clive is such a putz anyway. He is the new Official Keeper Of Dembski's tighty-whiteys at UD, and it would be hard to find a more slimey sorry creature.
For that slur, you will hear from DaveScot and his lawyers over at AtBC,JDog. He's not fit to oil Dave's Iron Maiden!