• You may find search is unavailable for a little while. Trying to fix a problem.

Dover Penn ID trial

Yes, but he's not exactly doing his job as a researcher anymore, is he? His profession changed when he abandoned science and reason. The man who made those statements on a witness stand is a clown, not a scientist.
 
delphi_ote said:
Yes, but he's not exactly doing his job as a researcher anymore, is he? His profession changed when he abandoned science and reason. The man who made those statements on a witness stand is a clown, not a scientist.
Click to expand...
Ah, the joy of tenure!

Behe is a perfect example of why tenure should be removed. University faculty are still vulnerable to retaliation from the administration in a thousand other ways, so tenure doesn't make academics immune to persecution, and it makes it virtually impossible to get rid of utter fools.
 
In related news. NPR just ran a story on "Intelligent Design and Academic Freedom". Mostly centered around Sternberg publication of an intelligent design article...http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5007508
Sternberg was the editor of an obscure scientific journal loosely affiliated with the Smithsonian Institution, where he is also a research associate. Last year, he published in the journal a peer-reviewed article by Stephen Meyer, a proponent of intelligent design, an idea which Sternberg himself believes is fatally flawed.

"Why publish it?" Sternberg says. "Because evolutionary biologists are thinking about this. So I thought that by putting this on the table, there could be some reasoned discourse. That's what I thought, and I was dead wrong."

At first he heard rumblings of discontent but thought it would blow over. Sternberg says his colleagues and supervisors at the Smithsonian were furious. He says -- and an independent report backs him up -- that colleagues accused him of fraud, saying they did not believe the Meyer article was really peer reviewed. It was.
Click to expand...
 
Mercutio said:
In related news <snip>
"Why publish it?" Sternberg says. "Because evolutionary biologists are thinking about this. So I thought that by putting this on the table, there could be some reasoned discourse. That's what I thought, and I was dead wrong."
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Are evolutionary biologists really thinking about ID? In any other way than "it's religion, not science"? "Reasoned discourse" with ID supporters??

Eugenie Scott, the executive director of the National Center for Science Education, says her group did consult with Smithsonian officials and the museum's concerns were valid.

"Clearly people were annoyed, they were frustrated, they were blowing off steam," Scott says. "Some probably did speak intemperately. Their concern was that somehow the Smithsonian would be associated with supporting the creationist cause by being associated with this journal that published a creationist paper."

Anyway, she says -- echoing the comments of a Smithsonian official -- Sternberg did not really suffer.

"He didn't lose his job, he didn't get his pay cut, he still has his research privileges, he still has his office," Scott says. "You know, what's his complaint? People weren't nice to him. Well, life is not fair."
Click to expand...
Is that a reasonable summation, or has he really got a legitimate complaint?
 
bighairygoat said:
Are evolutionary biologists really thinking about ID? In any other way than "it's religion, not science"? "Reasoned discourse" with ID supporters??


Is that a reasonable summation, or has he really got a legitimate complaint?
Click to expand...


He should have known better than to publish that crap if he has two PhD's in biology.
 
Televangelist Robertson warns town of God's wrath

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Conservative Christian televangelist Pat Robertson told citizens of a Pennsylvania town that they had rejected God by voting their school board out of office for supporting "intelligent design" and warned them on Thursday not to be surprised if disaster struck.
...
"I'd like to say to the good citizens of Dover: if there is a disaster in your area, don't turn to God, you just rejected Him from your city,"
...
"And don't wonder why He hasn't helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I'm not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that's the case, don't ask for His help because he might not be there,"
...
Source: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1300761
Click to expand...

This man should be put away in a room with white walls where he can just sit a spew all this hateful garbage to himself. Give him a nice straight jacket too.

Edit to add: I thought the whole thing in Dover was about science, not religion. Is Robertson suggesting that there was a religious motivation behind the 8 people voted out?
 
thatguywhojuggles said:
This man should be put away in a room with white walls where he can just sit a spew all this hateful garbage to himself. Give him a nice straight jacket too.

Edit to add: I thought the whole thing in Dover was about science, not religion. Is Robertson suggesting that there was a religious motivation behind the 8 people voted out?
Click to expand...


I seriously hope he gets cancer.

That's hateful and I yelled at other people for saying that, but that jackass really has it coming.
 
I'd prefer Robertson be struck by lightning on a clear day. I think I'll see if I can recruit a mad scientist to make it happen, since there doesn't seem to be an omnibenevolent being intent on electroshocking that nutbar into sanity. Or ashes.
 
fowlsound said:
That's hateful and I yelled at other people for saying that, but that jackass really has it coming.
Click to expand...
I think it's well past time to acknowledge that this anti-hate movement that's become so popular in the last few decades is dead wrong. Hate has a purpose and a function, and to claim that any and all manifestations of hatred are evil is just plain silly.

Hate is not the problem. Unreasonably determining what to hate is.
 
Melendwyr said:
I think it's well past time to acknowledge that this anti-hate movement that's become so popular in the last few decades is dead wrong. Hate has a purpose and a function, and to claim that any and all manifestations of hatred are evil is just plain silly.

Hate is not the problem. Unreasonably determining what to hate is.
Click to expand...


In that case, I reasonably hate the following:

Fred Phelps
Pat Robertson
Kevin Trudeau
Psychics/Mediums/frauds
Cancer

And I unreasonably hate the following:

Kevin Federline, who can't spell his name properly.
Jell-o
Dr. Suess
mushrooms
wombat shaving
penis envy
Ford Taurus' made in the 1990's
reality TV
spandex
infomercials
ebonics


Looks like I have some work to do on rectifying my unreasonable hate.
 
fowlsound said:
In that case, I reasonably hate the following:

Fred Phelps
Pat Robertson
Kevin Trudeau
Psychics/Mediums/frauds
Cancer
Click to expand...
And just where am I on that list?! When a guy works this hard, he expects a little credit!

I now unreasonably hate the following:
fowlsound

:D
 
Mojo said:
Where does the effective removal of the old school leave the case? If the plaintiffs win, the new board will presumably not want to appeal the decision.
Click to expand...

The new school board is supposedly on record saying they will not appeal a ruling against the old school board. The old board members have no power.

Even if the plaintiffs lose, the newly elected board members will most likely reverse Pandas vote.

Where does this leave the case as a precedent? What other courts is Judge Jones's decision binding on?
Click to expand...

It would be persuasive only. Other district courts wouldn't be bound but would be encouraged to follow precedent.

Ideally this would have gone all the way up to the SC and set a proper precedent, binding on all courts in the US.
Click to expand...

Normally you can't go directly to the SCOTUS. It is especially weird if you just won your case.
 
thatguywhojuggles said:
Edit to add: I thought the whole thing in Dover was about science, not religion. Is Robertson suggesting that there was a religious motivation behind the 8 people voted out?
Click to expand...

It was about teaching religion in a public school. There's nothing in the Constitution preventing a Board of Education from teaching bad science. There is against teaching religion.
 
BillHoyt said:
Exactly. I think that comment is quite interesting and very suggestive of a creationist agenda. At the very least, it is suggestive of a clueless journal editor.
Click to expand...

Not clueless, no. He has a creationist agenda, plain as day. You'll find his name (along with several other familiar names) on this list:

http://www.iscid.org/fellows.php

He most certainly appears to have abused his position:

http://evolutionblog.blogspot.com/2004/09/sternberg-replies.html

His duplicity and persecution routine make me ill.
 
I found this article this morning bushwatch.net/uhler.htm (still to new to post proper links.

Who politicized the Kansas Board of Education and the recently ousted board members at Dover Area High School in Pennsylvania? Conservative zealots; some of whom have even admitted to not understanding intelligent design—and who certainly do not understand what constitutes genuine science.
Click to expand...

The site is very left wing, I would change conservative to religious, with that change it does still make it's point.
 
bushwatch.net?

That sounds positively like a porn site.

........

Yep. Political porn. ;)
 
Ok, so it turns out that Sternberg (poor little victim of all those nasty scientists) is a Fellow of the International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design ... along with Behe, Dembski and others whose names you will probably recognise.

Barbara Bradley Hagerty (author of the NPR story) is the NPR's religion correspondent and turns out to be a member of the World Journalism Institute

Have you heard of the "World Journalism Institute"? Probably not. It's an organization of journalists committed to helping members "accurately" report "the work of God in today's world." In other words, they are committed to reporting events from a conservative, evangelical Christian perspective.

<snip>

What was that again about the "liberal media elite" and how the NPR is a bastion of "liberal news coverage" that fails to give adequate consideration to conservatives - especially to conservative religion? One of the members of the WJI is Barbara Bradley Hagerty, NPR's religion correspondent. Curious.
Click to expand...
Quote taken from -
http://atheism.about.com/b/a/2004_03.htm?iam=dpile_100 (ETA - the post marked 09:00)

Explains a lot methinks.
 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9995578/
Conservative Christian televangelist Pat Robertson told citizens of a Pennsylvania town that they had rejected God by voting their school board out of office for supporting “intelligent design” and warned them Thursday not to be surprised if disaster struck.
Click to expand...

*cough* I thought ID "was science" *cough*

So, here we have IDiots contradicting themselves again. *ID is science* they try to tell us.

Then when they get mad, they forget their little mantra.

Oh, and somehow natural disasters are punishments for us puny mortals by this "loving god".
 
Melendwyr said:
I think it's time to start writing letters to NPR.
Click to expand...

Make sure you read my second link there if you're steamed. It'll put you into the red.

As managing editor it was my prerogative to choose the editor who would work directly on the paper, and as I was best qualified among the editors I chose myself...
Click to expand...
 
KingMerv00 said:
%&#@!

You know, of all of the IDers I think Behe bothers me the most. Unlike alot of them *cough* HOVIND *cough* the man has a real scientific education yet the scientific method is lost on him.
Click to expand...

I read somewhere, I think in the Dover trial transcripts, that Behe has sold more than 400,000 copies of his Black Box book. Therefore ID = serious financial gain. The ID leaders all seem to be quite well off.
 
I had wondered why the NPR stories kept referring to the controversy over "the origins of life". Now I know: NPR's religion correspondent is a member of an organization specifically dedicated to spreading Christian Fundamentalism through the mass media.

Expecting a religion correspondent to lack religious opinions is unreasonable, but a certain amount of dispassionate objectivity is called for. How is actively trying to promulgate the "Christian viewpoint" conducive to that requirement?!
 
fishbob said:
I read somewhere, I think in the Dover trial transcripts, that Behe has sold more than 400,000 copies of his Black Box book. Therefore ID = serious financial gain. The ID leaders all seem to be quite well off.
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that he doesn't believe what he is saying? Behe is in it for the bling?
 
KingMerv00 said:
Are you suggesting that he doesn't believe what he is saying? Behe is in it for the bling?
Click to expand...
If by "bling" you are including "power", yes, absolutely.

The Discovery Institute wants nothing less than a complete theocratic state with themselves as the head.
 
tsg said:
The Discovery Institute wants nothing less than a complete theocratic state with themselves as the head.
Click to expand...

If I hadn't read them saying essentially just that myself, you'd sound like a conspiracy nut.

And just to go back over our recent conversation topics, we've been discussing a journal editor that acted questionably in order to push through a flawed intelligent design article because he sympathized with their cause, and we've also been discussing a journalist who covered the journal editor's story in an biased way because she also sympathizes with the intelligent design cause. Both are members of religious organizations that publicly endorse intelligent design. Both actions were in some way furthered by government actions and political appointments. The organizations these folks belong to are funded by and allied with fundamentalist religious groups. All involved have the same goal: keeping unpleasant scientific facts from a generation of children.

Why do people invent conspiracy theories? I find reality has enough intrigue...
 
ETA: I misread your post (I thought you were accusing me of being a conspiracy nut), but I'll leave it anyway since I think it's important for people to know exactly where ID is coming from and so I can back up my own claim.

delphi_ote said:
If I hadn't read them saying essentially just that myself, you'd sound like a conspiracy nut.

[...]

Why do people invent conspiracy theories? I find reality has enough intrigue...
Click to expand...
Don't take my word for it. They've said so themselves. Look here and make up your own mind.

A few choice quotes:

Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture seeks nothing less than the overthrow of materialism and its cultural legacies.
Click to expand...
From their "Five Year Strategic Plan Summary":
The social consequences of materialism have been devastating. As symptoms, those consequences are certainly worth treating. However, we are convinced that in order to defeat materialism, we must cut it off at its source. That source is scientific materialism. This is precisely our strategy.
[...]
Design theory promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.
Click to expand...
From their "Governing Goals":
To defeat scientific materialism and its destructive moral, cultural and political legacies. [emphasis mine]
Click to expand...
And from their "Twenty Year Goals"
To see design theory permeate our religious, cultural, moral and political life. [emphasis mine]
Click to expand...
And this gem from their "Five Year Objectives":
Design becomes a key concept in the social sciences Legal reform movements base legislative proposals on design theory. [emphasis mine]
Click to expand...
Pay particular attention to that last one. They want laws to be based on Intelligent Design, a religious view, for which they are the primary source of "research" . That is a theocratic state with them in control. This is no conspiracy theory, these are their own words.
 
bighairygoat said:
Ok, so it turns out that Sternberg (poor little victim of all those nasty scientists) is a Fellow of the International Society for Complexity, Information, and Design ... along with Behe, Dembski and others whose names you will probably recognise.
Click to expand...

what is the ISCID? Does it have an avowedly anti-evolutionary or pro-ID agenda?
 
JamesM said:
what is the ISCID? Does it have an avowedly anti-evolutionary or pro-ID agenda?
Click to expand...
Take a look at the website that delphi_ote linked. Fascinating. Very carefully does not mention anything that would allow one to pin them down in such a category...until you look at the Journal. Then it is crystal clear--this is an intelligent-design group. Not only are the usual suspects there, writing the usual things, but lesser players are contributing additional ID materials.

So even though their stated purpose is to provide "a forum for free and uncensored inquiry into complex systems", their de facto purpose is to provide a forum for Intelligent Design.
 
Mercutio said:
look at the Journal. Then it is crystal clear--this is an intelligent-design group.
Click to expand...

Wow, you're right. I hadn't looked at the journals.

I just noticed Henry Schaefer's name on the list of ISCID fellows. And he's a fellow of the Discovery Institute, too. He is a very very big noise indeed in quantum chemistry. I hadn't realised he was an IDer.
 
Mercutio said:
So even though their stated purpose is to provide "a forum for free and uncensored inquiry into complex systems", their de facto purpose is to provide a forum for Intelligent Design.
Click to expand...
And by "free and uncensored", they mean "will tolerate whatever pro-ID arguments are put there and otherwise ignore modern biology".
 
delphi_ote said:
Brilliant!

You just need to add the occational Greek in the background yelling "We're Greeks! We're Greeks!" while the lead Greek tries to keep them quiet.
Click to expand...
I hope the judge has read Pat Robertson's remarks on the subject. I should think they'd help him make his mind up.

My little playlet continues...

Act II

Enter Pat Robertson.

PR: We're GREEKS, I tell you, GREEKS! We like retsina, sodomy, and right angled triangles!

[Sings]:

Se gnoriso apo tin kopsi,
Tou spathiou tin tromeri,
Se gnoriso apo tin opsi,
Pou me via metra tin yi.
Ap' ta kokala vialmeni,
Ton Ellinon ta iera,
Ke san prota andriomeni,
Haire, o haire, Eleftheria!

I AM SO F***ING GREEK THAT IF YOU LOOK UNDER "GREEK" IN THE DICTIONARY THEY HAVE A PICTURE OF ME TALKING ABOUT PHILOSOPHY AND BUGGERING A SLAVE BOY! Oh, and Zeus will use his magical powers to smite everyone who rejects our gift of a wooden horse.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom