The problem with Intelligent Design is the plausibility of their claims to the uninformed; closer examination of details by trained scientists reveals details the average reader doesn't understand or recognize. This new book, Science and Human Origins, by Gauger, Axe, and Luskin, from the Discovery Institute, reveals the problem. Paul McBride discredited their theory of "scientific" evidence for creation. Gauger, Axe, Luskin, and David Klinghoffer revealed their lack of understanding of principles of evolution.
"An analogy: imagine a red Ford Mustang and a blue BMW X6 are in a head-on collision, and both have totally wrecked front ends, with bumpers and radiators and headlights interlocked and everything about their grilles in tangled confusion, and with bits and pieces torn loose and flung about. You’d be able to look at the crash and still tell by everything in and behind the engine compartment that Car #1 was a Mustang and Car #2 was an X6.
"Bergman and Tomkins are the bewildered and incompetent investigators who ignore every other factor in the crash, look at a few particularly mangled bits of the wreckage, and declare that they can’t identify it, therefore…the two vehicles were assembled at the factory in this particular configuration, and no crash occurred. But they use lots of sciencey language to explain this at tendentious length, which is sufficient to convince non-scientists that the interpretation of an obvious historical event has been refuted. And that’s all they need to do to accomplish their goals: fling about unfounded fear, uncertainty, and doubt to win over the ignorant."
"And my quest for an honest, scientifically competent creationist continues, fruitlessly."
~ PZ Myers
It is worthwhile to read PZ Myers' link, The Mystery of the Missing Chromosome (With A Special Guest Appeara..., by Carl Zimmer.
Heh, yeah, I think a lot of us read the subject line that way, initially. We could use a comma in there, at the very least.
At the very least! Thanks for noting my misleading title. I need an editor, want to apply?
Oh dear! Not another atheist brouhaha. Thanks for calling my attention to it. I adore PZ! He not only tickles my non-existent funny bone, he tickles my thinking as well.
Many years ago, I worked on a magazine with about a 50,000 issue print run. Not massive but not small. On month the entire editorial staff (including the Managing Editor) missed a spelling mistake not only on the front cover, but actually of the magazine title!
Few red faces at that issue's post mortem, I can tell you.
Yes, red face describes my response.
This minor grammatical error shows just how important correct punctuation is in our language - but the fact we can understand the meaning is also testament to its redundancy. I spotted the mistake upon reading it and chuckled a bit - as it brought back memories of the mistakes I've made - sometimes in print!
I love the irony that more people might have read this than otherwise did simply out of the effectively intriguing title. Snappy titles are a full-time job in the newspaper business and they have competitions for the best ones.
Reminds me of a joke about a non-English speaker sent for a bottle of liquid soap. The bottle (which he would find in the toiletries) had pooh bear on the front.
I'll leave you to work out this filthy, but hilarious shaggy dog story for yourself. x
I love the irony that more people might have read this than otherwise did simply out of the effectively intriguing title.
Yeah, I actually started reading it think SHE was disappointed in PZ. I know of anti-theists who couldn't say a good word about PZ if their lives depended on it.