The Disco Institute’s Division of Legal Affairs screws the pooch again


Didn’t I tell you Casey Luskin would weigh in on the DI’s take on Judge Jones’ “plagiarism” in his own inimitably bumbling way? What do you know, he did, and he has already been shot down. John West has also floundered in trying to address the issue, and he too has felt Sandefur’s fists of fury. Poor Discovery Institute. Isn’t media management supposed to be their area of expertise? How can they be sucking so badly at it?

Comments

  1. Great White Wonder says

    But what do you think of Larry Moran’s opinion of the matter?

    Larry apparently grew up believing that Judge Learned Hand was normal.

    I can assure you: Learned Hand was abnormal.

    Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

  2. says

    Here’s my latest opinion Lessons from the Culture Wars.

    Not that it will matter very much. Most people seem to be quite incapable of figuring out what I’m trying to say. They’re too busy being appeasers. Judge Jones must be brilliant because he’s on our side. End of story.

    I wonder if he’s a Theistic Evolutionist? :-)

  3. les says

    Since the point of a judge’s order is to set out the facts in contention that were supported by evidence, it’s pretty easy to see how the DI types can’t make the connection.

  4. Steve LaBonne says

    Readers of Larry’s excellent blog will also find in the comment thread to his latest post my patient explanation of why he’s off base on this one. ;)

  5. les says

    Hmm. I missed that the point, at least in part, was the award of points for original writing. Each side is invited to present its findings of facts–the contentions they advanced and attempted to support through evidence and examination of witnesses. The only technical reason for the judge to rewrite or change them is his judgment that the submitted facts were not supported; that the evidence led to some other conclusion. To do it (that is, select which submitted finding of facts to include in his/her order), a conscientious judge has to fully understand both the facts in issue and the support given them (or not) by the evidence. Aside from a pure love of creative writing, what benefit is gained by rewording?

  6. Erasmus says

    it seems that some lawyerist type person could compile a short list of similar, preferably high-profile, cases just to shut these idiots up. i’m amazed at how quickly some fools (read UD, worldmagblog) will jump to conclusions that support their ideological agenda.

    but then i knew that when i was reading their bullshit anyway. PZ congrats for predicting the predictable. I’ll buy you a beer.

  7. Great White Wonder says

    Most people seem to be quite incapable of figuring out what I’m trying to say. They’re too busy being appeasers. Judge Jones must be brilliant because he’s on our side. End of story.

    Not even close, Larry.

    Let’s get this straight: Larry was confused about who wrote the section in the opinion about the scientific facts in the case. Larry apparently thought the Judge drafted each of those sentences de novo. Larry was wrong. Therefore, anyone who claims that the Judge got the science right and praises the opinion for setting the record straight is an “appeaser.”

    Man, that’s crazy talk.

    But I still luv ya, Larry. Partly that’s because you look like a constipated Robert Altman.

  8. says

    I would ask “Why on Earth are these yimmeryammering fopdoodles still going on about the Dover Trial? Don’t they know they LOST the Dover Trial?”, but, sadly, this is the sort of behavior one should expect from a subculture that regards physical facts as the Devil’s playing cards.

  9. damnthing says

    Must you tarnish the term “disco” with this abominable nickname? Painting an entire genre of wonderful dance music the same color as a buncha dimwittedly supertstitious paranoiacs is hardly fair.

  10. Graculus says

    The first time around disco sucked.

    Now? it swallows.

    Y’all can capitalize “disco” for added effect.

    If you read the comments that Judge Jones had made since the trial, it is obvious that he was applying the law as he saw it. Being as he believes in the rule of law as a value above and beyond politics, I think that puts him on “our side” no matter what his personal religious or political beliefs are.

  11. Robert says

    It makes me angry when I see creationists making ignorant evolutionist arguments based upon their irrelevant professions. Electrical engineers applying their expertise to decide that life is too complex and obviously mirrors
    their work don’t hold much weight for me.

    So hearing a biochemist make an ignorant attack on a judical decision based on his academic experience also holds no weight for me.

    I think the only thing that could really restore my respect for Larry (and I did have respect for him) would be for him to admit that legal rulings aren’t within his area of expertise, and that his criticism of it was based upon ignorance.

  12. MarkP says

    Let’s see:

    Substanceless
    Over-polished
    Little variation or innovation
    Impressive to the uninformed but laughable to everyone else

    “Disco” sounds like the perfect label to me.

  13. says

    Robert says,

    I think the only thing that could really restore my respect for Larry (and I did have respect for him) would be for him to admit that legal rulings aren’t within his area of expertise, and that his criticism of it was based upon ignorance.

    The law is not within my area of expertise. I know almost nothing about the law in general, and even less about American law. There, does that restore your respect? :-)

    I do know something about science. When I read what Judge Jones wrote about science I thought it was brilliant. I thought he deserved a heap of credit for getting it right. I believed such writing could only be produced by someone who had mastered the complex scientific issues.

    I was not alone. Many others praised the eloquence of Judge Jones’ science writing and his knowledge of science.

    Now I know that Judge Jones did not write those words. I only learned this recently because I was ignorant of common legal practices. (Proving, in case you’re interested, that I don’t know anything about law.) Jones copied most of that material from the Plaintiffs’ Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law. In other words, the “brilliant” parts were written by scientific experts.

    Because of my knowledge of science, I’m forced to admit that my previous evaluation of Judge Jones was probably wrong. His writings about science were not brilliant and his knowledge of the scientific issues has not been demonstrated.

    I have never criticized the legal issues and I have never questioned the ruling. That would be stupid since I am completely ignorant in that area.

    Now the most important question is where are all those other people who heaped praise on Judge Jones for his eloquent science writing and his profound understanding of the scientific issues? Have they changed their minds?

  14. says

    Great White Wonder writes,

    Let’s get this straight: Larry was confused about who wrote the section in the opinion about the scientific facts in the case. Larry apparently thought the Judge drafted each of those sentences de novo. Larry was wrong.

    This is correct. I was wrong. And you know what I find most amazing? Judging by the reponses from all over blogland, I was the only one who was wrong about this. Everyone else knew that what judges write in the “fact finding” part of legal opinions isn’t their own opinion. Do you realize how dumb I feel?

    Therefore, anyone who claims that the Judge got the science right and praises the opinion for setting the record straight is an “appeaser.”

    Partially right. Everyone who knows what I know but continues to praise Judge Jones for the eloquence of his science writing and his ability to master complex scientific issues is probably either an appeaser or just doesn’t understand what’s going on. (The latter seems to be very common.)