I knew the internet would come through with just the right clip and the relevant extracted words, so I wouldn’t have to sit through the wretched miasma of the whole O’Reilly Factor to see Krauss vs. Ham, and here it is.
Jason has a transcript, if you’d prefer to read text rather than watch some guys talk.
You’ve probably all read Glenn Greenwald’s withering dissection of a mock scandal ginned up by right-wing bloggers. If you haven’t, you should—the short story is that the fact of a war falling into ignominious failure is driving the apologists to desperate acts of rationalization, and the latest effort to save face involved a fairly inconsequential memo from Iraq that mentioned some temporary difficulties. That memo had to be discredited—I don’t quite see why, even if we were winning I’d expect occasional setbacks—and they turned to their usual tactic of peering at the profane text intently until they could find something that would justify their suspicions—in this case it was the discovery that the logo looked like a picture of a Hummel figurine found on the internet.
Like an entire cast of Keystone Kops, some of the loudest voices on the right-wing side of the blogosphere stumbled all over themselves to crow triumphantly over this ‘victory’…and then the U.S. Embassy in Iraq cheerfully revealed that the memo was authentic. It would be embarrassing for them if they had any shame.
Personally, I wouldn’t give a damn if that piece of paper were real or fake. The reality of the war does not hinge on the words in one memo or a thousand — the military produces memos like a blizzard produces snowflakes — but on the fact that people are dying. The dead do not walk nor are the wounded made whole if only some far right cheerleader for destruction can find vindication in a scrap of paper. It’s as if they hope their myopia gets even more severe, so the blood in the background will blur out of focus and text on a screen becomes the only reality.
That was a sigh of contentment. I went off to see the latest Pirates of the Caribbean movie with very low expectations—like the last one, I expected an extremely muddled plot, lots of random noise that didn’t carry the story forward, and many places where the movie could have been edited down a bit. I was right! But it also had wonderful naval battles, glorious swashbuckling, and finally, the lady lead acquired a bit of ferocity. I just sank down in my seat and savored the unabashed piratey goodness and didn’t worry about the details, and all was well.
Except for one thing: finding my favorite character washed up dead on a beach in an early scene in the movie was very disappointing. I wiped away a tear and just imagined that she’d left behind a swarm of progeny that were flourishing off-screen.
Dr Joan Bushwell makes a find: Mitch Benn’s rock anthem to Richard Dawkins. It is most excellent party music.
The DefCon Blog has announced a horrific event tonight: Lawrence Krauss — he’s the good guy — is going to be on Fox, with Ken Ham and Bill O’Reilly.
Sweet jebus.
The only reason I’d be curious to see that spectacle is to find out which side O’Reilly chooses to suck up to; my bet would be that he’ll try to set himself up as superior to both.
Fortunately, I am privileged to miss it. Skatje and I are going to attend the 7:00 showing of Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End, which promises to be the kind of flamboyantly ridiculous goofy story that won’t leave me gagging and nauseous.
I seem to have sort of accidentally won the Third Annual Satin Pajama Awards, in the category of Best Non-European Weblog. I really have got to be more careful when I sling my readership around—next time, I might put someone’s eye out. It’s gratifying to know the Europeans think I’m not bad for a non-European, even if (especially if?) it means Sadly, No! is going to have to impotently shake their fist at me.
Now I have to work on winning the Best non-Asian, Best non-Australian, Best non-South American, Best non-Antarctican, and Best non-African weblog awards before I move to an abandoned oil platform in the North Sea to win the Best non-North American weblog…and then I shall rule the world!
The delusional creationists are everywhere, and the funny thing is how many of them consider themselves brilliant, well-informed, and objective, when what you discover on examining their claims is that they are foolish, ignorant, and blinded by religious bias — and obviously, they don’t even know it. Take, for instance, this high school teacher who issued a debate challenge.
Ritter, 59, has taught chemistry and physics at Annville-Cleona High School since 1997.
Ritter says he has no religious motivations, and he was not arguing for intelligent design or creationism.
He said he was barely aware of the controversy about evolution and intelligent design in the Dover Area School District until the issue went before a federal judge in late 2005.
Hooray for high school science teachers, they can be terrific. Unfortunately, this one who has no religious motivations and doesn’t argue for ID creationism or plain old creationism, was arguing against evolution, calling it “bad science.” As for his lack of awareness of the Dover controversy…he’s from central Pennsylvania, about an hour’s drive from Dover. Shouldn’t that self-announcement of utter obliviousness be an immediate warning that either he’s rather unqualified to be discussing the issue, and/or he’s hiding his actual motivation?
I vote for both—he’s hiding his beliefs. Later in the article, he mentions a few of his reasons.
While he said he has no religious motivations, one of his criticisms of evolution is that it promotes atheism.
“When evolutionists say that a creator cannot exist, they are saying God cannot exist,” Ritter said.
I’m also voting for “obliviousness,” since you have to be a complete fool to trot those old claims out as arguments against evolution, while simultaneously trying to pretend you’re completely open on the question of religion. Oh, well, the good news is that he only teaches physics, so he doesn’t have much opportunity to mislead his students about biology. I hope.
(via Spanish Inquisitor, unexpectedly)
A couple of Los Angelenos visited Canada and found themselves feeling strangely relaxed…and they have an explanation.
Lovely Wife developed an excellent theory. The coffee at Tim Horton’s, Canada’s ubiquitous coffee chain, is heavily drugged. Canada would be a non-stop raging 28 Days Later apocalypse if not for the fact we’re kept sedated. She’s working on the screenplay now.
That perfectly explains the mellow reputation of the only Tim Horton’s addict I know. Whatever you do, don’t deprive him of his fix!
By “we”, I mean me and Richard Dawkins. I can’t even imagine the volume of tripe that has to be flowing into his mailbox, but sometimes people send their important missives to both Dawkins and me (of course, I’m just an afterthought; the body of the letter is usually addressed to you-know-who). I’ve put the latest example below the fold—it is mildly amusing and definitely weird.
The formatting of the text is exactly as received.
I have no idea what that crazy left-wing nutcase Tom Tomorrow is talking about in this week’s comic—it’s got these unrealistic aliens babbling unbelievable nonsense that just doesn’t belong in the real world. Someone explain it to me.
