Monday, October 29, 2007

The Discovery Institute LOATHES smart college students

Can we cut the 'Creationists are jolly ol folks!' BS yet? Theyve done it again. After all their hooting and hollering about being persecuted, they 'retaliate' by attacking students.


PZ, always the gentle soul, failed to call DIs bluff to the necessary extreme. DI doesnt *like* smart undergraduates? Nononono, PZ, DI *hates* smart undergraduates, and they are doing their best to prevent more smart grad students from being generated. Their 'Gosh golly weza just care about da kids! Kids r so smart! Teach deh controversey and let da kids decide!' claims are complete bullshit, and their rank hypocrisy needs to be drug out into the street for all parents/aunts/grandfathers to see.

These supposed 'professionals' act nothing like real professionals. Though behind-the-scenes mentoring might not be intuitive to a layman, the actions exhibited by professional organizations should be. When is the last time you saw the American Physical Therapy Association release an official rebuttal of a college students opinion piece on her half-marathon training in her college newspaper1? Does Aaron Beck respond to his critics in a sexist, condescending manner on his 'Amazon blog'2? Does Sigma Xi send PR reps after students who critique the activities of a professor who happens to be a Sigma Xi member3??

The Discovery Institute, a group of grown men desperately wanting to be taken seriously as 'scientists', has engaged in all of those behaviors in the past six months. What the hell is their problem??

Their problem is that they are bad people. Stop repeating the line that theyre 'super dudes and omg so kooky and fun lets hava beer!' Professional Creationists are slugs oozing and trolling about the internet looking for students to attack, cause they sure as hell cant handle their own balls when confronted with professional scientists.

Theyre professional, pathological bullies, unable to stop themselves from attacking students, even when there is an entire auditorium of people watching them. Lets look at another Dembski Q&A:

Middle aged Creationist Man-- Im AMAZED that on a college campus, how CLOSED MINDED many of these students are! I would think that they would be more... wanting to know about what you have to say, rather than attacking you! You have one tough skin, buddy! Youve suffered a lot of injury!

My question is, Niels Bohr, Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking all believe in Intelligent Design...

(audience interjects with **BULLSHIT** coughs and general discontent)

What are Darwinists saying? Do they think theyre a bunch of pigs who dont know... whats the Darwinists reasoning for when Stephen Hawking, most recently, moved to supporting Intelligent Design?

Dembski-- Im not sure those are the people I would point to, necessarily, I would point to Issac Newton, who was CLEARLY an ID proponent.

In terms of the open mindedness of students... I dont know. In a sense I think some of them... have to play a part to please their professors.

(cant hear his final gurglings over the discontent of the crowd)


Young gentleman-- My question is less of a scientific one, and more of a tactical one. Do you think its appropriate that your movement, in general, attacks at the level of local school boards and the courts, as opposed to sticking with normal scientific channels?

Dembski-- So you think its inappropriate that citizens who think evolutionary theory is blind... and dont want their children to be taught that, should object to it.

Young gentleman-- High school...

Dembski-- The democratic process is a... is a problem?

Young gentleman-- High school students arent in a position to evaluate...

Dembski-- So theyre too stupid. Theyre too stupid to understand Intelligent Design and its challenges.

Young gentleman-- Thats a red herring.

Dembski-- No its not.

(rabble rabble)

Dembski-- The high school students I talk to are very interested.

Young gentleman-- Im personally not suited to evaluate the Big Bang theory or anything else in that particular realm. That doesnt mean Im stupid. The fact is some people have expertise in a field, and shouldnt the debate be going on there?

Dembski-- Wull... I would agree with you on this-- this program needs to proceed as a scientific enterprise. The thing is, what people are going to do with it, though. I mean Im not... doing public policy stuff... I was enlisted as an expert witness in the Dover Case... the entire Dover policy was terribly misguided.

(blithers on and on something about Communism, sick of typing)

Young gentleman-- So science should be put up to a vote.

Dembski-- Im not saaaaying that! Im saying, if people feel strongly about this, and want to influence their school board, thats their business!

Young gentleman-- You and Behe were involved in the case.

Dembski-- I do not want to see Intelligent Design mandated. (more blithering)

  1. Ignore the humor in that even the Creationist noticed that Dembski got his ass handed to him on a platter in the Q&A. I know its funny, but try to stay on topic :P
  2. Dembski, with a face that betrayed he had no recognition of the irony passing through his lips, said that undergraduate/graduate science students who were creaming him were just doing it 'to impress their professors' and in the next breath proclaimed that high school kids were in a position to evaluate claims Creationists make. You know, like these.
  3. **SQUAWK!!** "Democracy is a problem?" **SQUAWK!!** "Teach the controversy!" "Teach the controversy!" "Let the kids decide!" **SQUAWK!!** "Its what the parents want!" **SQUAWK!!** (My apologies to Shelly)
  4. One side of the mouth, high school savants. Other side of the mouth, retarded zoology grad students. Give me a break. Evaluating this behavior requires no specialty in quantum mechanics or retroviral evolution. Anyone can recognize this hypocrisy, and everyone should be offended. Bring this stuff up all the time. Kill that damn Creationist good-ol-boy fr*me.

1. Evolution News and Views hit piece on Taylor.
2. Lilos fart in my general direction.
3. PR Luskin attacking Jon.


Tyler DiPietro said...

Billy Dumbshit holds your status in esteem in direct proportion to how much alignment your views find with his. If you're a high school student who doesn't know dick about biology but buys his ID bullshit, you're in the know. If you're a grad student bashing your head up against real problems faced in biology for dirt fucking pay, you're just a puppet in the evil Darwinist system.

The stupid fuck is just trying to cover for the fact that he's irrelevant. An initially promising career in the toilet because he devoted himself to pseudomath and religious charlatanry. Couldn't happen to a better guy.

Ian said...

Yeah, I think you hit the nail on the head. High schoolers good (preferably home schooled ones), college students bad. As long as they're under your parents roof, most of them are still eager to please. Creationist parents = creationist children. When they get to college they have to deal with new ideas. Suddenly they're, as they say back home "ownwayish", no longer reliably ideologically pure.

Jacob Wintersmith said...

Dembski-- Im not sure those are the people I would point to, necessarily, I would point to Issac Newton, who was CLEARLY an ID proponent.

Woah. I've believed in evolution since I first learned about it, but now I'm not so sure. If Newton didn't accept evolution, well, maybe we should just trust his judgment, since he was the smartest person ever. After all, how many other people can critically evaluate and reject a scientific theory more than 100 years before it is first proposed? That takes true genius. I guess all these modern-day biologists must have made some sort of mistake.

Shelley said...

Hehe, look how you've maligned parrots! :D Comparing their lovely squawking with the DI babble. Why Pepper is practically *beside himself.* LOL

John said...

When that silly Creationist fellow said that Stephen Hawking recently became an ID advocate, he was probably referring to this:

Of course, it is blatantly obvious that this isn't real (the person who made it even specified that it is fake), but you shouldn't expect a Creationist to know that.

Ken Salter said...

"Professional Creationists are slugs oozing and trolling about the internet looking for students to attack, cause they sure as hell cant handle their own balls when confronted with professional scientists."


Torbjörn Larsson said...

Faking the synthetic voice of a mute quadriplegic with a deadly disease is bad.

Especially bad since Hawking discusses the consequences of his, Hartle's et al no-boundary cosmologies for religion in quite another light (on the background of having presented it at a conference in the Vatican (Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time, Bantam 1990, p 136):

... So long as the universe had a beginning, we could suppose it had a creator. But if the universe is really completely self-contained, having no boundary or edge, it would have neither beginning nor end: it would simply be. What place, then, for a creator? - Stephen Hawking, A Brief History of Time, Bantam 1990, pp 140-141.

Btw, to make up to Shelley for maligning parrots we could present Snowball, a cockatoo that like ERV has the voice, the rhythm, and the moves.

James F. McGrath said...

I'm a religion professor who posted things critical of Intelligent Design on the Uncommon Descent blog and was banned. I also had the Discovery Institute respond to something I wrote on my blog, and I think in the process they let slip a significant admission.

Anyway, having been banned from Uncommon Descent, the next time I hear supporters of ID say they are being censored, should I talk about pots and kettles, or should I just say "hahahahahahahahahahahahaha"? :)