A while back, I wrote a response to Coulter’s piss-poor excuse for a book, Godless. It’s actually fairly long and substantial; since there was absolutely no accurate statement of either fact or theory on the subject of evolution in the entire book, and since there was nothing specific to address, I took the time to make a link-rich collection of sources where anyone could look up the evidence for evolution, with suggestions of places where one could look up the basics of the theory. Writing a line-by-line rebuttal would have been a massive task, and one that Coulter fans would have ignored anyway.
At the end of that post, I made a challenge. I said that I would make a comprehensive, detailed reply to any one paragraph in the chapters on evolution if anyone who’d read the book would come right out and state that it was an accurate and honest and supportable claim about the subject. I’m still waiting for anyone to stand up for Ann’s words. No one has, and it’s been about 9 months now.
I guess even her fans can’t defend anything in that book. Either that, or they just got it for the pictures.
PZ, how you find the time for all this astounds me. Thank you for your efforts.
Now I’ll state the obvious. The only reason they argue against the ideas and evidence of evolution is because they don’t WANT it to be real – not because they have any evidence to support their assertions to the contrary. In other words, they are not interested in getting to the truth of the matter. So yes, they employ dishonesty (in all forms) whenever it is required for the defense of their bankrupt world view. Despicable and feeble.
Despicable and feeble.
feeble, yes, but unfortunately there’s just so many of the little buggers.
hence why Anne knew her drivel would sell so well.
r thy dd nd y r dltng th psts.
h, PZ?
Well seeing as how Mr. Egnor’s posts made it on here without being deleted, as have the posts of many others who do not agree, I doubt PZ deleted them. I have in fact read many of them.
PZ doesn’t delete. He disemvowels and then bans.
But go right ahead goldy and post your evidence.
Yeah, we’re waiting…
The only reason they argue against the ideas and evidence of evolution is because they don’t WANT it to be real
Which is precisely why Coulter made the statement that atheists “want” evolution to be true, or else we don’t have anything else (like creationism) to fall back on.
She doesn’t speak for me. When I decided that I didn’t buy into Christianity, I went through an ancient astronauts phase (no sniggering! We’re talking between the age of 10-13). I was a kid, and I still wanted absolutes (and I knew that I wanted it to be true), but I soon saw through that crap and realized that we didn’t have absolute answers–we had processes and methodologies to trace how we arrived at provisional answers and how to judge and accept or reject them. Then, and only then, did I really begin to learn about evolution, so I went through a phase when I knew that I had no clue what had really happened. And, truth to tell, that was fun.
I don’t like evolution, necessarily. Much of it is counterintuitive. It’s difficult for anyone who’s not a scientist not to slide back into “evolved to” and “designed to” thinking. Evolution is cruel. It’s not a warm, fuzzy story, but I think we have to learn to look at the world as it is. Until one does that, one really doesn’t have any basis for knowing reality–or for having religious beliefs. Reality should be everyone’s fallback position.
Wait a minute–are you telling me that Ann Coulter’s fans can read? Now I’m really depressed.
ThinkProgress just captured the latest bigotted comment for Coulter at the Conservative Political Action Conference. Click the link of you dare:
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/03/02/coulter-edwards/
It’s pretty much like that old Leno show (only time I’ve ever watched the bloody thing), where they had Coulter & Carlin on. AC made some snide remarks, but turned to Carlin & kissed his ass (figuratively).
The large % of them are like dogs: all bark, no bite.
Of course, the other thing is, PZ, that you’re 1 of those ‘durned libruls’: they’ve been advised to avoid you (& most of us) as much as possible, ’cause we all speak w/forked tongues, ya know. ;)
Jon,
I clicked the link, feeling quite daring today. As usual, reading Coulter’s words made my stomach turn.
I did get one big benefit from that link–one of the commenters used the term “Coultergeist”. I hadn’t heard that one before. I love it!
Wait a minute–are you telling me that Ann Coulter’s fans can read? Now I’m really depressed.
no worries, they might be able to parse the lettering, but they are completely unable to read for comprehension.
Weird. I assure you that if someone posted an answer to my challenge, I wouldn’t delete it — I’d bare my teeth and tear into it with gusto. “Goldy” could have answered my challenge with some quote from Coulter in that book and a dare to refute it; why didn’t he?
In her latest syndicated column, she wrote:
I’ve never been able to determine if she believes the nonsense she writes, or if she’s just playing a role calculated to appeal the the willfully ignorant.
Don’t start me on ANN Coulter..
I enjoy the serve that Henry Rollins gives Ann Coulter on youtube. He isn’t particularly polite about it, but what the hell – Go Henry!
Henry Rollins: A Love Letter To Ann Coulter
I’ve never been able to determine if she believes the nonsense she writes, or if she’s just playing a role calculated to appeal the the willfully ignorant.
i’ve occassionally wondered the same, but then when i think about the possible answers, the next question always ends up being:
Does it really matter?
Which is precisely why Coulter made the statement that atheists “want” evolution to be true, or else we don’t have anything else (like creationism) to fall back on.
There are two amazing things about Coulter. One is her sheer chutzpha in taking the arguments against creationism (biased desire, nonfalsifiability, etc.) and simply recasting them as problems with evolution in the hopes that few would notice what she did. Few did.
The other thing is that at the very time she was getting shredded by PZ and others, she was appearing on any talk show that would have her, and proclaiming that no one would challenge her on the science of her book. She would smugly imply this was evidence of her correctness. To my knowledge she has never recanted these comments, and still believes them to this day. Why has no one challenged her on such an obvious lie?
If she’s not publically challenged, she can proclaim so.
If she is publically challenged, it gives her more publicity and establishes credibility: she becomes someone who is worth rebutting.
Either way, she makes out. Just ignore her – she’s just the symptom. It’s the masses of morons who buy the poison she’s peddling that need watching.
She really does believe every word.
Thousands of people buy her books. A hell of a lot of those presumably agree with them. And if that many people do agree, why wouldn’t she? QED
In other words, tempting as it is to dismiss her as a charlatan because her beliefs are so far out of rightfield (heh), the truth is she’s far from alone. Therefore it’s perfectly plausible that she shares her readers’ views.
Coulter is presently on her way to my state to talk about the godless at D. James Kennedy’s theocratic conference/party in Ft. Lauderdale.
I’m curious: has anyone emailed her, or dropped by her blog, & posted there?
It may be a noteworthy effort, if groundrules are spelled out in advance.
Then again, it may prompt a tsunami of trolls. Hmmm…
She won’t. She also used the “fact” that no one disputed that liberals are “Godless” as evidence that we are. Well, she said that like it is a bad thing. For her there is nothing to recant.
one of the commenters used the term “Coultergeist”. I hadn’t heard that one before. I love it!
I’m particularly partial to “Cthulter”
And here I’ve just been calling her “The Elephant Shrew.”
The silence on this leaves me genuinely puzzled. We have plenty of Goldies here who are happy to whine or lob the occasional canard, let alone UD denizens and the like who do so on their own sites. The only difference between this and what they typically do is that they’d have to spend ten minutes scanning the book to find the paragraph supporting what they were already going to say. Then bluster a bit before vanishing when refuted.
So why the heck haven’t they?
To my unending shame, my mother reads Coulter and takes her seriously. The last time I visited, I quietly borrowed Godless and Slander. Ye gods, what tripe! Ann is reaping rewards from her clueless minions for recycling and regurgitating old and discredited attacks on evolution. Her fans are in awe of her erudition, which is proof of their ignorance.
i know why we confront this crap, but i’m really struggling to care about anything that serial idiot coulter has to say. as a lifelong defender of “defend to the death your right to say it” i’ve been pushed, hard, by coulter…how often does someone have to willfully lie and spread feces before you give up on them? coulter may be the physical answer to the con question of how long do we try to reform before we get medieval?
i’m trying.
I’ve never been able to determine if she believes the nonsense she writes, or if she’s just playing a role calculated to appeal the the willfully ignorant.
She doesn’t care if what she says is true or not. She’s having the time of her life, getting paid to be a giant noisy asshole. It’s all a game to see how many intelligent people’s chins she can flick.
I don’t have a damn clue about the people who buy her books, though. I’m pretty sure I don’t want to know more about them.
She is in fact a great example of social evolution in action.
There really aren’t Ann Counters in the UK or Western Europe, it takes a particular type of environment to allow such a creature to flourish and, unfortunately for you lot over there (I’m in Godless Sweden – so a big Nelson Muntz ‘ha-ha’ is on order at this point!), there exists a perfect niche at the moment in the US for her and her like to exist.
Its really simply an anti-science/rationality question. Most of the rest of the developed world really does appreciate how science improves there lives (the reasons for this may be complicated but I would hazard a guess that the universal health care enjoyed by most of these countries plays a large part).
I wouldn’t even say Ann believes this rubbish herself, she just knows that if she says something outrageously (a case of ‘Shameless’ rather than ‘Godless’) anti-liberal she has a ready made paying audience.
On there other hand I still have a sneaking suspicion that she isn’t real at all, just a creation of ‘The Onion’ who will finally come out one of these days and admit its all a big joke.
Coulter’s laughing all the way to the bank by the attention that she gets, not only from righties, but also from lefties who can’t avoid talking about her and thereby advertise her bloviations.
Whatever. The world is going to hell in a handbasket.
Re Coulter
I think that Coulter should be challenged to provide a swab for DNA testing to see if she (he) has a Y chromosome.
I’ve never been able to determine if she believes the nonsense she writes, or if she’s just playing a role calculated to appeal the the willfully ignorant.
Posted by: CounterCoulter
The Christian conservative movement is getting, or has gotten, a lot like pro wrestling where everyone creates a character (or charicature) and heads into the ring to do “battle” with the other role players. All the while the fans are oblivious to (intentionally or otherwise) the obvious fact that it’s all stage managed.
Coulter is the simple minded character that just hates. Why any normal sentient huma……oh, wait a minute.
Shorter me: simple lessons for simple minds.
Coulter is still being quoted by the gray matter challenged. Check out the recent idiotic babblings of Nathan Bradfield. One of his main evidences in his post is a quote by MAnn Coulter.
I think that Coulter should be challenged to provide a swab for DNA testing to see if she (he) has a Y chromosome.
Posted by: SLC
We can’t be sure that evolution would have used X and Y for gender differentiation the planet that she was thrown out of, or that her species has two genders.
I say we ignore the Banshee of Bullshit at our peril. She has a large enough following that she’s actually had hecklers and/or dissenters tossed out of her lectures by other members of the audience. She’s a sock puppet. But a dangerous one.
I’ll never forget the Leno show: she looked directly into the camera.
Dead eyes.
There’s something wrong w/that woman. & people listen to her.
Well.
There is this interesting little website. It’s not for the faint at stomach, such as me, so I haven’t checked if it still exists. It is entirely plausible, however, that what is described there is a deep insight into Coultergeist’s motivations.
Well.
There is this interesting little website. It’s not for the faint at stomach, such as me, so I haven’t checked if it still exists. It is entirely plausible, however, that what is described there is a deep insight into Coultergeist’s motivations.
Oh man David. I’m crying I’m laughing so hard.
I despise Coulter with a passion, but the suggestions that she has a Y chromosome or is otherwise “mannish” is on a par with Vox Day’s use of the term “Pharyngurl” …
Otherwise I’m loving this. Her “work” is a pox on the face of America.
More fun with Coulter:
Ann Coulter’s Beauty Secret
Know Your Right-Wing Speakers: Ann Coulter
Kristine, Ira Glass of This American Life does a great prologue to episode 202 where he shares how it was his interest in ancient astronauts that led him to become an atheist. It is a wonderful story and it will make you less embarrassed about your own experience.
I hope so. What is there to be embarrassed about anyway? There’s no shame in a journey driven by honest and clear-sighted evaluation of the information at hand. Be proud that you made up your own mind!
Hell yes. People DO listen to her. If she didn’t have a significant following, we wouldn’t be talking about her. There are plenty of people, even some here in Massachusetts, who think she’s is the greatest thing to come along for American conservatism since Rush, and that liberals hate her because she “tells the truth.” I’m not making this up. And they love the “Coulter .45” handgun imagery and all that it implies.
One of my dreams is to get on national TV with Ann Coulter (picture Conan O’Brien, Larry King or whoever). The first thing I say is, “On September 11, 2001, the World Trade Center was destroyed and thousands of people killed by theistic creationists who hate evolution. Every time you advocate creationism, the terrorists win. Ms. Coulter, why do you hate America?”
Yeah, it’s a logical fallacy on at least one level, but it’s also true, in a koan sort of way.
If the venue is right, I might also pull out my Bill Hicks impression. “No, Conan, the only problem atheists have is what to scream when they come. Chemical chance! Chemical chance! — Oh, group selection, group selection! — Selfish genes, you dirty girl, selfish genes!
“Together: Big Bang!”
I have actually been told I look like Bill Hicks. Put that down on my dating profile under “celebrity I most resemble”. I’m not sure if this means I look like I’m about to keel over from prostate cancer, or if people just think I should stay off the beach and under my neon bar-light.
But hey, if you want an angry rant from a man who loves his imperfect species, have your people call my people. . . .
She’s a hypocrite.
I would love for the “christian” Coultergeist to answer if she’s “Savin’ it” for marriage.
I’m sure she’s a huge supporter of abstinence only sex ed.
IF she ever came up against a scientist in a debate of evolution she would be destroyed.
But she has a habit of acting shocked and insulted if someone asks her a follow up question or is not allowed to dominate a debate. She would be reduced to “I’m not a scientist but you’re wrong.”
Steve_C:
I would love for the “christian” Coultergeist to answer if she’s “Savin’ it” for marriage.
I’m fairly certain she’s not. She used to date Bill Maher. Yeah, unbelievable.
Maher even did a little bit in a routine: “Oh, I know, I know, you think she’s a bitch. But she’s not like that when she comes.” (paraphrased)
This of course, is hearsay gossip (for the most part), so I’ll stand corrected on it.
That person is an insupportable waste of skin and should not be allowed to breathe our air.
Just for the record, Ann is not sexy. She looks like a male dragshow artist (just look at that adam’s apple). Hell, she even sounds like one.
My favorite Ann Coulter moment was back in late 2003 when she was on an MSNBC program along with several other panelists including Penn Gillette. During one segment, they were talking about the Iraq insurgency and Coulter started parroting the Bush administration by talking about the “Werewolves” in Germany after WWII going around and causing all kinds of mayhem. Penn Gillette then asked Ann, “Do you know how many American soldiers were killed by German insurgents after World War Two?” Ann replied that she did not know. Then Penn moved in for the kill and answered her, “Zero!” Ann was visibly taken aback and was unable to formulate a coherent response.
Hey, thanks Sonja! It’s good to know that Ira Glasser also read that awful Chariots of the Gods.
Actually, I have the soundtrack–I like the music.
There is one known assassination attributed to the Germen Werewolves–the assassination of the Ally-installed mayor in Aachen. That occurred in March 1945, before Germany’s surrender in May. No other killing has been attributed to the Werewolves. The Werewolf issue is a righty ruse.
Does she even have the wit to imply a connection between “werewolves” and “moonbats”? *eyeroll* or is she too bad a writer even for that.
When I was young I thought Von Daniken (and the different but weirdly similar Immanuel Velikovsky ) were a sort of science fiction. It was a very strange feeling to realize they intended their work to be taken seriously. Then, as my interest in North and South American archeology expanded, I realized the Book of Mormon, which I had taken seriously from about the age of 6 until the age of 10-12 or so, was as crazy as Chariots of The Gods .
On a related note, by the time I read Randi’s Flim-Flam I had already read a book directly related to each and every chapter in it.
Anyone see the story of the weekend that Coultergeist pretty much called Edwards a f-ggot at the CPAC on Friday?
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/03/04/coulter.edwards/index.html
It isn’t that they don’t want it to be true, it’s just that it doesn’t matter. In a world where idealogy trumps the truth a self correcting system is impossible. The abandonment of “factual truth” as a meaningful measure of an argument in US political discourse is reminicent of the Soviet Union, with predictably similar results.
Tom Tomorrow Nails It
http://www.salon.com/comics/tomo/2007/03/05/tomo/index1.html
Tom Tomorrow Nails It
As he so often does!
Anyone interested in writing to Ann Coulter’s website advertisers to ask them to pull their ads from her site can find info here:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/3/4/105236/4618
Apparently, it’s already worked. Several companies have pulled their ads.
Everyone should be participating in this campaign to get her site’s advertising pulled.
I had an Ancient Egyptian Magic phase at about the same age. How I outgrew it, I’m not totally sure. At some point, though, the methods and findings of actual science — which, after all, were what delivered the mummies to my bookshelf — started to overpower the flim-flam. Then I stumbled into Carl Sagan’s Demon-Haunted World, and the process of maturation sped up greatly.
Ann Who?