RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

  Topic: Thus Spoke The Church Lady, she does book reviews too dontcha know< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 17 2006,07:22   

Over at Christianity Today the Church Lady (tardette) reviews Johnson's latest...Bold emphasis mine.

Every few months, a wise head predicts the end of Intelligent Design

Yeah, kinda like you and Dembski and the rest of the wingnuts who predict the demise of "Darwinism" every other week.  

—in time for the next uproar. Darwin's Nemesis, a collection of essays in honor of Phillip Johnson—the Berkeley law professor whose Darwin on Trial started the controversy in 1991—helps readers understand why id cannot simply go away. Long before Johnson, many scientists objected to Darwinism, but lacked a framework for their objections in an academic environment committed to reductive materialism. Johnson's legal approach provided that framework.

No kidding, when your ideas are clearly unscientific skip the lab and go for the courtroom.  That approach was a real humdinger in Dover and later in California.

Steve Meyer's analysis of the Cambrian explosion, reprinted here, should have interested only the few paleontologists who really care about extinct organisms from half a billion years ago. His paper instead became headline news, because it challenged Darwinism.

Odd, as I recall it made a blip and mainly because most everything Meyer's wrote was false.  Or perhaps we're talking about a different Steve Meyer?

Mathematician William Dembski, Johnson's successor as informal leader of the id community, offers reflections on how a small, beleaguered band of scientists succeeded in bringing their issues to the front page. One reason he suggests is that id is not a top-down community and thus is less vulnerable to politically correct scientific orthodoxy. As this volume demonstrates, we can expect more such uproars in the coming years.

I love it when you call Dembski a "mathematician" but probably not as much as Dembski loves it.  What a laff riot!  And what's this, Dembski is now in charge of the ID fiasco?  Cool.  Does this mean Dave Tard is the #2 man in charge?

Hey Church Lady, what's it like to be such a lying baffoon?  Will misleading Christianity Today readers get you into heaven quicker?

(yes I know baffoon is spelled buffoon but I prefer pronouncing it with an "a").

Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson


Posts: 308
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 17 2006,08:27   

small, beleaguered band of scientists

One of the many things I've come to love about our tardly friends is their sheer chutzpah in redefining common words.  You take some retired engineers, lawyers, technical writers and second- or third-rate mathematicians, and by a wave of the magic wand they become "scientists."

I say we pay them back in the same kind.  How does this sound:

"Today, Christianity suffocates under a stifling orthodoxy, which insists that God exists.  However, many leading Christians, such as Richard Dawkins, have bravely asserted the contrary - that there is no God.  There is, in fact, a longstanding, though overlooked tradition within Christianity of atheism.  Other famously devout Christians in history like Epicurus, Bertrand Russell and H. L. Mencken (and, most recently, the presiding Lutheran bishop PZ Myers) have argued for the absence of a deity - yet still Christianity denies the voice within."




Posts: 337
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 17 2006,12:13   

I have written for Christianity Today and several of their sister publications and I found the folks at CTi to be sincere and not simply interested in publishing "the party line."

But here's the problem:  Once they fact check and see that Dembski, et. al. seem to be who they claim to be, the editors don't have the science background to know whether what they publish has any real scientific base.

I would encourage those who see scientific flaws in what they publish to send a "letter to the editor"--if they get several with the same types of criticism they will publish a representative one or two in their next issue.


Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 17 2006,12:26   

sorry, but if a periodical intends to publish articles putatively about "science", it behooves them to hire somebody to be a "science" editor.

CT is being irresponsible in publishing columns they have no ability to legitimately review themselves.

It's not the readers responsibility to point out blatant and obvious errors to the publication; it's the publication's responsibility not to print them to begin with.


well done.

"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."


  3 replies since Oct. 17 2006,07:22 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]