Sunday, August 19, 2007

ID Creationists confused, frightened by the Google Machine

Add this to the list of things Deniers and Creationists have in common.

This morning Google News popped up the newest critique of 'Edge of Evolution' for me when I turned on the computer at ~7 am. Its a positive review, but it was from a layman, so I was going to give him the benefit of the doubt and send him a nice email pointing him towards reviews from SciBlogs and PandasThumb (which Blake Stacey cataloged for us!) where actual scientists working in the fields Behe molested universally dismissed 'Edge'.

Alas, before I got around to sending it, Denyse tipped Camerons hand:

Cameron Wybrow wrote me a while back wanting to know why most legacy Canadian mainstream media will not publish anything about the intelligent design controversy beyond the often incompetent or politically motivated stuff that the New York Times would put out.
Oops! So... the only way ID can get a positive review of 'Edge' out is to get a non-scientist with an ax to grind, who inflates his credentials as a 'science' journalist, and cant use Google to write one?

Niiiice!

Poor D cant even figure out how to use Google to link the review.

The Google Machine. So confusing. They should put up directions or something...

3 comments:

Israel Barrantes said...

Just a common thing between me & my friends is the "ungoogle quotes" concept: That currently is virtually impossible to lie or say anything stupid because it's so easy to google stuff! Did you believe it? Yeah, enough to google that later!

quantok said...

IB, have you also noticed that it has become almost impossible to watch a TV documentary in real-time if you have Google access in your living room?

Is Google killing books? I've been thinking of investing in 'Developmental Plasticity and Evolution' by Mary Jane West-Eberhard (as I haven't read any evo in print more serious than Sean Carroll's last book for some yrs). However, Amazon list all the keywords in the book which means...

So, can anyone recommend this book? Has it got pretty pictures? Shelf-presence? Does it make Cretinists mad?

Anonymous said...

I couldn't help tracking down what Wybrow's unspecified "doctorate from McMaster University" was actually in (hist. or philosophy of science seemed a possibility); according to his thesis, it's for religious studies.

Now, granted, it's an rather interesting-sounding thesis, and I wouldn't mind reading the whole thing sometime . . . .

Well, one can see how the Inquirer thought (if at all) that having a guy with a background in religion who also kindasorta wrote about science to review Edge would be a good idea. And I'm not even against fawning pro-ID reviews being published - it's a free country, marketplace of ideas an' all that - but they really should have gotten an actual biologist to write it.

Now, now, no cracks about how that would mean that the only person they could have gotten to review it then was Behe himself . . .

-Dan S.