You "see a lot of" that because that's what the creationists focus their PR on, to divert from the failures of their "science".
Right. The "But mommy, he started it" arguement.
Actually, what's really "funny" is that Meyer's article *has* been dissected minutely and countless errors and misrepresentations have been identified in it, BUT you guys will never know about that, because you spend ALL YOUR TIME WHINING ABOUT the personal stuff.
You sir have mistakenly lumped me into a category into which I do not belong. I laugh at both the rabid creationists and evolutionists. I expect some of the more crazy religious zealots to act like nutters, but I would like to think that the scientific community could handle itself in a more rational way. Instead, we see the same sort of witch hunt coming from the so-called rationalists. Perhaps they have become that which they hate the most.
>There's no excuse for this behavior, whether you agree that this man should have allowed the ID paper in the journal or not.
But don't pretend that the creationist side doesn't do it, and do it far more often.
Yes, the creationist stranglehold on our nation's scientific insitutions have created a hostile work environment for honest scientists.
[You "see a lot of" that because that's what the creationists focus their PR on, to divert from the failures of their "science".]
Right. The "But mommy, he started it" arguement.
Learn to read, kid. I said nothing of the kind.
What I *did* say is that is that you "see" a lot of "abuse" of creationists because the creationists HIGHLIGHT such "abuse" and publicize it a lot.
Reading comprehension is your friend.
[Actually, what's really "funny" is that Meyer's article *has* been dissected minutely and countless errors and misrepresentations have been identified in it, BUT you guys will never know about that, because you spend ALL YOUR TIME WHINING ABOUT the personal stuff.]
You sir have mistakenly lumped me into a category into which I do not belong. I laugh at both the rabid creationists and evolutionists.
Then I *was* right about you.
I expect some of the more crazy religious zealots to act like nutters, but I would like to think that the scientific community could handle itself in a more rational way. P> And they do.
Instead, we see the same sort of witch hunt coming from the so-called rationalists. Perhaps they have become that which they hate the most.
Congratulations, you've fallen for the creationist "spin" of the Meyer/Sterberg affair.
Yes, the creationist stranglehold on our nation's scientific insitutions
You *really* need to work on that reading comprehension problem...
have created a hostile work environment for honest scientists.
Actually, the creationists have created such a "hostile work environment", just not by the method you (mis)attribute to me.
How many examples would you like me to cite of museums and zoos and so on backing away from clearly presenting science to the public, because of their fear of being "controversial" (i.e., getting angry reactions from creationists)? How about all the schools that have scaled back on science because it irritates the fundamentalists? And so on.
well said.
The ad hominem nature of the attacks on von Sternberg suggests what ad hominem attacks always suggest -- lack of a refutation on the merits.
The problem here is the problem in all of academia -- tyranny of the left which is inimicable to learning, intellectual development, and diversity of knowledge. That is what is at work here and in all our universities.
David French of FIRE (http://www.thefire.org/) told of his experience as a professor on a university hiring committee. It was SOP to weed out any candidate with a disecernable religious background.