over the cliff, onto the rocks.: creationism

Showing posts with label creationism. Show all posts

Sunday, November 11, 2007

Judgment Day

On Nov 13, Nova will be airing a re-enactment of Kitzmiller v. Dover, the trial that exposed [Un]Intelligent Design as Creationism wrapped up in the fine feathers of [pseudo]science. Interesting factoid: the judge in the case, who sounds like a pretty smart dude, was appointed by Dubya.

I think I'll skip the TV show and read some more of the blog, which is geeky to the max on paleoanthropology, genetics, and evolution, but ya gotta wonder about somebody whose only non-science blogroll entry is Ann Althouse.

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

lolcreationist

In the grand new tradition of lolcats, O’DonnellWeb mashes up the lolcreationist just for the Creation Museum Carnival. Hosted by PZ Myers at Pharyngula.

Sunday, April 01, 2007

I'm still confused.

Oooookkkkkaaaaayyyyy.

Apparently Michael Egnor is just an elaborate April Fools joke. Apparently I'm supposed to be mortified for believing that IDers are the same thing as YECies, or perhaps I'm supposed to be mortified for believing that a respected surgeon and medical school professor could be a YECie.

Bad on me for falling for that last one, believing that a respected surgeon and medical school professor could be a Young Earth Creationist, but the thing I'm still unclear on: to me it still looks like Egnor does in fact believe in Intelligent Design.

I don't have a problem with scientists, engineers, doctors et al, believing in God or believing that a supernatural Intelligent Designer does indeed exist and did create all of us.

I already know that YEC and ID aren't the same thing. YEC denies evolution entirely, and ID believes that antibiotic resistance in bacteria evoles but that flagella did not. Yes, that was facetious and simplistic, but not unfair.

The problem with both philosophies is that they want science to stop asking questions, to stop looking for natural explanations for the world around us when we reach points that we don't have answers for [yet], to teach in schools and colleges that [whatever] is so because God said so.

That's Philosophy, not Science, and the real joke they're going to play on us is if we let them get away with muddling the two.

UPDATE 4-2-2007: I need to just stop paying attention to these people. It's turning my brains to mush. Thanks for the tipoff, sparky.

Sunday, March 25, 2007

Anything in the service of science...

Wednesday, February 14, 2007

Piled higher and Deeper

Marcus R Ross, PhD

Ordinarily I find Slate to be just plain annoying [read: stupidity and sensationalism masquerading as reporting] on the subject of anything scientific, but just this one time I'm glad I read their article.

So, the $13 question today is: should a YECie be granted a PhD from a reputable secular institution in the field of -gasp!- paleontology?

Yes.

If a person does the required work, and does it well, the degree should be granted. Plenty of young scientists do well in grad school, under the watchful guidance of experienced scientists, then go on to make fools of themselves once they get out in the real world. It's the responsibility of scientists and scientifically-literate citizens to keep an eagle eye on them and be ready to bash them for any slop in their scientific work.

Under no circumstances should we be applying religious tests to a person's fitness for study at a secular and publicly-funded university. In any subject.

addendum 2-15-2007: Just in case you were wondering, yes I do believe that this is an attempt to legitimize "creation research" in the eyes of the gullible.

Sunday, November 05, 2006

Some days I wish my name were Steve.

Alas, none of my names, given or assumed, remotely qualifies.

But it would be fun to twist the tails of the creationistas just a bit. Oh, wait. Somebody just did. Figures it'd be the Irish. 'Zat you, ZB?

You may have heard of the lists of scientists that the creationists are circulating, scientists who publicly claim to doubt evolution. Project Steve is a countering list of scientists who have credentials, all named Steve [in honor of Steven J Goulding**], who support the following statement:

Evolution is a vital, well-supported, unifying principle of the biological sciences, and the scientific evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of the idea that all living things share a common ancestry. Although there are legitimate debates about the patterns and processes of evolution, there is no serious scientific doubt that evolution occurred or that natural selection is a major mechanism in its occurrence. It is scientifically inappropriate and pedagogically irresponsible for creationist pseudoscience, including but not limited to "intelligent design," to be introduced into the science curricula of our nation's public schools.

So, if you are a Steve of one stripe or another, and you have a science PhD, the world is waiting to see your name on a T-shirt.

Meanwhile, I'll continue to subvert the minds of the children around me [I've given up on their elders] with my volunteer work: tutoring them in the four Rs -- Readin', Ritin', 'Rithmetic, and Reason.

Correction: Stephen Jay Gould! I meant Stephen Jay Gould! Will whoever stole my brain please return it? I'm obviously in need of one that works.