In addition to their constant whining about us "Stalinist" evolution supporters oppressing them, it seems the ID crowd has a new complaint: anti-ID "bigotry". Dembski's latest whine declares "Anti-ID bigots -- they're everywhere in the academy, and your tax dollars support them!" He then posts part of an email from an anonymous ID supporter complaining of opposition among the scientists he works with. I'm sorry, Bill, but disagreement is not the same thing as bigotry. Victim chic is annoying enough when it's engaged in by people who have historically faced oppression; it's downright ridiculous when engaged in by the wealthy and well-connected.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Some of you who watch Dembski's blog may have read his false accusations aimed at Kevin Padian over the last couple weeks. As it turns out, the whole thing was nonsense. Someone sent him an email about a paleontologist from Berkeley who allegedly singled out a church in the area that is…
Our old friend and favorite state senator, Chris Buttars, is back in the news again. This time he's appearing before the Eagle Forum to be praised by a group that is right about at the same intellectual level (which is to say, vacuous and ignorant):
Singing to the choir, Sen. Chris Buttars sought…
I know there are a few fans of Peter Irons out there — and maybe some of you agree that he ought to have a blog. Since he doesn't, though, I'm posting a little email exchange he had with Denyse O'Leary and William Dembski, by his request and with the permission of the participants.
There's a…
We're getting signs that the Discovery Institute is going to be shifting their strategy a little bit.
Thoughts from Kansas has an excellent discussion of the subject. Basically, they're going to embrace more of the actual science, and focus their dispute on finer and finer points. What does this…
Not to mention the fascistic astronomers that refuse to let Behe teach astrology in the Astronomy Dept.
Ahh, the more things change, the more they stay the same.
I had a few tussles with YE creationist Jonathan Sarfati at TheologyWeb (he using the handle Socrates) a few years ago and he was making then the exact same complaints. In this post he's actually responding to another commentator named RufusAtticus:
It's a phrase he's used many times.
It's even more annoying when the way they became and remain wealthy and well-connected is by whining about being oppressed. Wasn't it $20,000 Dembski wanted for his Kansas appearance?
"Anti-ID bigots -- they're everywhere in the academy, and your tax dollars support them!"
I'm sure he said this with a straight face despite his awareness that religious groups benefit from some of the most inappropriate tax breaks on record. Dembski and those like him have paradoxically managed to render themselves beyond criticism; when you're a hypocrite about virtually everything you say in public, people in a position to maraud you are often at a loss as to just where to insert the rhetorical-logical knife.
That looks like fun, I'll join in too.
"Anti-murder bigots - they're everywhere in the Police, and your tax dollars support them!"
"Anti-arson bigots - they're everywhere in the Fire Deparment, and your tax dollars support them!
You're not bigoted if you're opposed to something demonstrably wrong.
I have two problems with Dembski's article. Firstly, we have only his word (and he is notorious for frequent misrepresentations and the occasional outright lie) that anything happened at all, let alone that it happened like he says it does. The man is quite simply a grossly unreliable witness.
Secondly, why do ID Creationists think their idiotic theory is any more worthy of respect than Alien Abuductions, Black Helicopters or claims that Elvis is alive? By all means treat the believers with civility, but the unsubstantiated beliefs warrant nothing less than derision.
I'll admit to being a bigot: I have a strong prejudice against stupid and dishonest people. They don't belong in the teaching profession, they shouldn't be ordained as priests, I don't want them flying large airplanes, or representing Our Great Country to others, and I'd rather they not breed either.
Tim Makinson - I suspect you are right, and I also suspect Buffalo Bill of sock-puppitry, excuse me, "street theater".
Slightly off topic..
I like the use of the word misotheism. I had to look it up in OED. However, atheists can't be misotheists as hating God or gods must assume that it/they exsist in the first place.
C'mon now! Elvis is alive! He was abducted by aliens flying black helicopters over Loch Ness!
I tend to be sceptical of charges that involve an anonymous person claiming they were going to be fired for [insert reason here] but weren't because Human Resources/Legal, etc. informed them that they couldn't because of [insert bogus legal reason here]. I worked on a trio of EEO cases, generally administration remains clueless because legal departments and HR departments are often just as clueless OR they don't bother to consult with them.
There's a serious question somewhere in the morass here: how does one distinguish between an academic who's being screwed over on the basis of campus politics from one who's being screwed over on the basis of his/her own cluenessness, credulity or ineptness?
Where possible, I generally try to learn something about the subject matter (Information Theory, for example) and then review a chunk of the individual's work. Another approach would be to see what response the individual's work got from academics from a range of different cultures (for example, if even AiG says the Paluxy Tracks constitute a bad argument, it's probably true). Are there any other reliable yardsticks?
The persecution complex that runs rampant in the religious horde these days would be histerical if they weren't wielding so much power.
Lan Cat writes:
Yeah, Old Soc (Soc for 'Socrates', and 'sock puppet' as he often presented Sarfati articles in the third person and acted as if they were different individuals) had a lot of little phrases he'd toss out all the time...elephant hurl...so-and-so, the non-scientist...nice ipse dixit...so-and-so the whinger! (note Aussie spelling). Those were classics.
The worst victimizers tend to be people who insist on seeing themselves -- rightly or wrongly -- as victims. The ID whiners are not to be trusted. At all.
For some reason this reminds me of an old episode of The Waltons, where Erin wanted to marry the deliriously handsome son of the batty old lady neighbor's old beau - he was in the Navy, and he came home from a brief, nasty encounter with the Japanese (WWII, remember) hating God.
Erin's mom wouldn't let her be engaged to him any more because he didn't believe in God.
I remember yelling at the screen - Dimwit! You can't hate someone you don't think is real! Of course he believes in God!
But then again, I thought he had a lucky escape. From Erin and her mom, I mean, not the Japanese!