You have to understand, Betty. When I point out that, with all the distortions and fallacies it contains, Meyer's paper might as well be a creationist pamphlet tacked up on a corkboard in a laundromat, I think I'm saying something bad about it.
Then I realize that I'm talking to someone whose response to such a charge would be "Well? So?"
Actually, my response would have been a short commentary, followed by a link to the rebuttal of the P-Thumb's pathetic analysis of the paper, written by people with scientific credentials, Ph.D's, even. Who should I believe? Vade, or actual scientists? Hmmmm...
One Long Bluff: The Gishlick, Matzke and Elsberry Response to Stephen Meyer's Peer-Reviewed Article
One long bluff...indeed.
From the paper:
First, their supposed rebuttal begins with -- and is characterized throughout by -- a condescending tone and personal attacks on Meyer's motives.
Hmmm...sounds strangely familiar.