Hmmm. They’re arguing about teaching ID in Orange county and in Polk county. Both places have sensible people pointing out that Intelligent Design creationism is not science (and probably also sensibly have visions of $3 million court costs wafting through their heads), while a few clueless ignoramuses are whining that it isn’t fair, and that they need to give equal time to “the controversy”…the controversy that doesn’t really exist except in the pages of Discovery Institute press releases.

You know these people are reading the Discovery Institute’s propaganda — they’re using the same buzz phrases. In the next big creationism trial, I hope the creationist losers turn around afterwards and sue the DI for damages their bad advice is causing school districts.

Some people, after seeing the recent Dover documentary (now available online), have been wondering who the heck this Steve Fuller wanker is, and why he’s defending Intelligent Design. Here’s a philosopher to explain Fuller to you. You’ll wish you hadn’t asked.

The Discovery Institute is spreading misinformation again. They have a document that implies that it would be OK for schools in at least some states to “teach the controversy”, by which they mean that it is alright for teachers to promote Intelligent Design creationism in their classes. I wonder if the DI would also consider themselves liable if any teacher followed their advice, and discovered that they were costing their district an awful lot of money, as in Dover? Somehow, I doubt it.

On the front page of their screed, they quote Charles Darwin: “A fair result can be obtained only by fully balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question.” What they neglect to mention is the importance of that word “balancing”: we have been balancing the arguments, and the scientific side weighs tons while the creationist side is a puff of air. They also omit any mention of facts on their side, because they have none. Darwin’s quote is not advocacy for equal time for nonsense.

[Read more…]

I’m not a fan of the Huffington Post — I see too much support for clowns like Chopra and anti-scientific thinking like Robert Kennedy’s — so I guess I shouldn’t be surprised at this. Matthew Chapman posted his suggestion for a presidential debate on science there. This is the same issue I thought was a good idea, but cynically suspected none of the candidates would ever go for it. The response on HuffPo was to a large part deranged.

[Read more…]

The Canadian Cynic points out one of Denyse O’Leary’s less endearing habits: her penchant for constant self-promotion and linking profligately to herself. Reading it, what came to mind was the idea of a one-person circle jerk, and then I realized what that implied, and what we were seeing if we read any of her blogs where she’s … ack, snarfle … herself … yikes, beebadabeebada <tilt>. Doesn’t she know that’s a sin?

Well, I’m not going to look at those blogs anymore.

I checked out a few of the blogs by the usual suspects this morning, and noticed that the creationists are largely silent (so far, give ’em time) on the Dover documentary from last night…with one exception. The Discovery Institute’s Media Complaints Division is wound up over it. They have an eight-point “rebuttal” of the documentary that consists of many picked nits and regurgitated whines, and I thought about taking them on point by point, but then decided it wasn’t worth it. For one thing, it’s written by Casey Luskin, the DI’s small mammal mascot, who is something of an incompetent pipsqueak, so it’s hardly worth flicking him around any more. Most importantly, it misses the point of the program entirely.

[Read more…]

Remember: watch your local PBS station tonight for the premiere of the documentary on the Dover trial, Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial. Imagine how the creationists will writhe and squeak about all the people seeing their fraud and failure exposed.

Last June, we goaded science-fiction author, blogger, and professional wise-ass John Scalzi into promising to visit Ken Ham’s Creation “Museum” (actually we bought his attendance by sending him money, which he turned around and donated to Americans United for Separation of Church and State).

Well, Scalzi finally makes good on his promise. It was worth it. There’s both an essay and a photo tour. He was amused by it all.

Indeed, it’s over the top enough that I never could actually get angry with the place. Not that I was planning to; I admit to dreading coming to the place, but that’s primarily because I thought it would bore and annoy me, not make me angry. In fact, I was never bored, and was genuinely annoyed only by the “paleontologist” at the start of the walk-through. The rest of the time I enjoyed it as I suspect anyone who is not some stripe of creationist could enjoy it: As camp. At some point — specifically the part where the Scopes Monkey Trial was presented as the end of decent Christian civilization as we know it — I just started chuckling my way through. By the time I got to the Dinosaur Den, with its placards full of patent misinformation about how soft tissue fossilization strongly suggested a massive, worldwide flood, I was a little loopy. It was just so ridiculous.

There’s some understanding for why the silly place is popular (apparently, attendance is quite good), and a recognition that it’s all one big, ridiculous joke.