Title Author Date

What's all this got to do with ID anyhow? Frank, Mark Apr 08, 2006

What I can't understand (and I have asked this on UD) is what has this got to do with intelligent design? I can't see anything in what Pianka was accused of saying, or what he really said, that is relevant.

It seems like it is entirely to do with personalities and nothing to do with content.

write a reply Related Article(s):
Forrest Mims: 'crazy kook', says Pianka

Title Author Date

Shaversman remembered Eaton , Keith Apr 07, 2006

The hysteria, dogmatic assertions, anger and hubris displayed by Steven S. is tpyical of the evo community. It is one of the major reasons that the American public is in sympathy with the opponents of Scientific Mysticism (Darwinian evolution).

I once offered to pay 100% of the expenses involved if Steven would debate Duane Gish on the Rice campus. At the time (1986) SS was on their faculty.

He refused of course because he was afraid to defend his beliefs.

I think after one reads the Biotic Message and the other DI materials they can never again have an ounce of confidence in the Scientific Mysticism called evolution.

read replies (2)
write a reply Related Article(s):
Texas Citizens for Science Responds to Latest Discovery Institute Challenge

Title Author Date

Is academic freedom really the issue? Cothran , Martin Apr 08, 2006

It seems to me that Wesley R. Elsberry's characterization of the Mims/Pianka blow-up is completely mischaracterized. If Mims's charge is true (has Elsberry checked it out?), then it has nothing to do with academic freedom. The issue would simply be one of a false accusation. But that's not the same as academic freedom.
The only way you could say this was an issue of academic freedom is if you believe that advocating the extermination whole populations of people is to be considered allowable discourse in the academy. That is obviously Elsberry's assumption. Does he really hold this position? I can't believe he does. But if he doesn't, why is he assuming it in his argument against Dembski?

read replies (1)
write a reply Related Article(s):
Now in the "Do As We Say, Not As We Do" Dept.

Title Author Date

Steve Fuller Gallagher, Alex Mar 30, 2006

In his excellent article debunking Steve Fuller, Norman Levitt states;

"Fuller's connection with the ID crowd is a rather old one. He signed on as a fellow-traveler as early as 1998, embracing Intelligent Design Theory as a ploy in his more general campaign to challenge the hegemony of standard science and to compel scientists to accept the legitimacy of "local knowledges" of the sort that fail when confronted with scientific standards of rigor."

It might be of interest that in this article in the Daily Telegraph (UK), he is claiming to be "one of the architects of the theory".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/01/28/do2803.xml

Is Fuller correct? Is he actually an architect of ID?

read replies (3)
write a reply Related Article(s):
Steve Fuller and The Hidden Agenda of Social Constructivism

Title Author Date

theistic rant Lamberth, Morgan-Lynn Apr 03, 2006

Theists [creationists in wide sense] try to apply the four categories of cause to the cosmos, contending that mind is a cause, but they are begging the question [see my blog @skeptics. Causality is the cause that we have an account of; when theists can account for a mind as a cause they must do so on basis of evidence - not phony design as the author rightly demonstrates. As I put it in skeptics.org, creationism is cretinism.

t in skkkkkkkkkk

write a reply Related Article(s):
An account of how we detect design

Previous | | Next