Deep Subject

Louisiana, Back to the Past

2008-06-29T17:39:00.004-05:00

Louisiana is on its way back to the days before the Enlightenment and probably to the Dark Ages. Louisiana's exorcist Governor, Bobby Jindal, signed into law the latest Discovery Institute derived bill on Academic Freedom, paving the way for creationist teachers to offer their brand of creation science as an alternative to real science and confuse the hell out of the students.

We have our share of creationist types in Texas as well, and I fully expect that they will try to pass a similar law here when the legislature reconvenes next January. Hopefully there will be time for the opposition to rally its forces and save Texas the trouble (there surely will be legal battles if it passes and a teacher tries teaching the creationist pseudo-science "alternative viewpoints") of having this on the books.

Maybe Louisiana wants to become the magnet state for creationism. If so, they might try offering an incentive to the Institute for Creation Research to relocate there and get them out of our hair. Perhaps they'll also pass a law forbidding climate change while they're at it.

Don McLeroy, Master of Deceit

2008-05-25T00:19:00.002-05:00

This is incredible breaking news.

First, on Wednesday, May 21st, Texas State Board of Education (SBoE) member Mary Helen Berlanga called on Gov. Perry to replace Don McLeroy as Chairman of the SBoE, saying that he has "created havoc" and calling him the "Master of Deceit."

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5793570.html

And then, on Friday, May 23rd, McLeroy pulled this stunt.

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/APStories/stories/D90RHOOG0.html

What outrageous insolence. If he can pull this off for the English standards, there's no telling what he will do to the science standards which are in the works. McLeroy is a well-known ID proponent.

Get the word out. Don McLeroy is out of control.

Texas residents should write/call/email the governor and their representatives. They should express their outrage and demand that McLeroy be replaced as Chairman (Governor Rick Perry appointed McLeroy last year). Governor Perry's page is here: http://www.governor.state.tx.us/ and Texas residents can find their representative's contact info here: http://www.fyi.legis.state.tx.us/

For more on the Religious Right's influence on the SBoE, see the Texas Freedom Network's report "The State Board of Education: Dragging Texas Schools into the Culture Wars."

Richard Dawkins and PZ Myers discuss their experience with "Expelled"

2008-03-22T11:02:00.004-05:00

Professors Dawkins and Myers discuss their experiences in seeing (or trying to see) the preview of "Expelled: No intelligence Allowed."

You can access other video options here.

"Expelled the Movie" expells noted atheist

2008-03-21T09:59:00.003-05:00

You really have to read this to believe it. There is also a follow-up here.

Epic fail.

The AiG Museum from a Christian Perspective

2008-03-03T20:36:00.006-06:00

Jason Byassee of the Christian Century has toured the $27 million Creation Museum in Petersburg, Kentucky, and found it lacking.

Reconciling Christian claims about God, creation and humanity with the findings of Darwin and his successors is an important and daunting task, one that mainline theology has still not satisfactorily accomplished. AiG can hardly be faulted for attempting the task, though its effort is a spectacular failure.

See his report, "Dinosaurs in the Garden, A visit to the Creation Museum," here.

Hat tip to Jason Rosenhouse

Alternative Science?

2008-02-17T04:10:00.004-06:00

It would appear that one of the tactics being employed by the Discovery Institute (DI) and others interested in keeping evolutionary science from being taught in public schools these days is to claim that there are alternative scientific explanations for science. Huh?

Read what Steven Schafersman, President of Texas Citizens for Science, writes in "What Critiques of Darwin?".

Maybe they figure if it works for quackery (CAM) it will work for creationism.

Joseph Chikelue Obi: It's the Society of Homoepathic Thuggery all over again, or more abusive legal threats against a skeptical blogger

2008-01-23T12:25:00.000-06:00

Dr. Joseph Chikelue Obi (who bills himself as the "world's top expert in nutritional immunomudulation") has threatened Le Canard Noir's webhost with a lawsuit, demanding a £1 million a day penalty unless pages about him and his highly dubious activities are removed from their server. Once again, given the U.K.'s exceedingly plaintiff-friendly libel laws, Le Canard Noir had little choice but to capitulate, as his ISP demanded that he take down the offending pages.

It's time for every blogger who supports freedom of speech and skepticism to repost the article, and I call on you to do just that. Here are my copies of the offending articles:

Right Royal College of Pompous Quackery - Dublin, Thursday, September 28, 2006

I had to share this with you. Following on from my recent Quack Word 'Doctor' blog, I came across the Royal College of Alternative Medicine (RCAM) , a Dublin based - well, I'm not sure quite what it is...

What caught my eye was just the shameless aggrandisement of the site. It is quite hilarious, if not a little repetitive at times. Calling yourself 'Doctor' is somewhat pompous when all you have done is paid for some international postage. However, the man behind RCAM has absolutely no shame and titles himself as the:

Distinguished Provost of RCAM (Royal College of Alternative Medicine) Professor Joseph Chikelue Obi FRCAM(Dublin) FRIPH(UK) FACAM(USA) MICR(UK)

Wow! Probably, just Joe to his mates. Naturally, when you Google the qualification FRCAM(Dublin), there is only person who appears to revel in this achievement. I'll leave the rest as an excercise for the reader.

The distinguished provost looks like he is just another pseudoscientific nutritionist, his spin being "Nutritional Immunomodulation". This is obviously a lot more clever than Patrick Holfords mere 'Optimum Nutrition', but having only one 'omnipill' is probably a poorer commercial decision that Patrick's vast range of supplements.

Obviously, Professor Obi has had a few problems with what probably amount to bewildering comments about his site as the legal threats and press releases concerning his 'ethical' responses to criticisms cover more space than anything else. 'Ethical' is a favourite word on the site.

The most recent press release states,

7th September 2006 : The Distinguished RCAM Provost, Professor Joseph Chikelue Obi FRCAM(Dublin) FRIPH(UK) FACAM(USA) MICR(UK) has formally accepted appointment as Chief Professorial Examiner for the Doctor of Science (DSc) programme in Evidence Based, Alternative Medicine (EBAM) of a highly respected International University in one of the British Commonwealth Protectorates.

This new qualification is primarily aimed at Medical Graduates, Physicians, Surgeons, Pharmacists, Dentists, Osteopaths, Chiropractors, Opticians, Wellness Consultants, Herbalists, Acupuncturists, Naturopaths , Healers, Podiatrists , Chiropodists , Scientists , Healers ,Therapists, Homeopaths, Chinese Medicine Practitioners and Nurses wishing to ethically upgrade their current Qualifications in Alternative Medicine over an exceedingly intensive 12 - 36 month period of study.

British Commonwealth Protectorates? Could that be Dublin?

I really have no idea what this organisation is all about. But it looks like it could be getting quite big soon...

RCAM currently has International Vacancies for One Million (1,000,000) 'Foundation Fellows' ('Movers and Shakers') ; who will independently play a highly pivotal role in diligently mentoring (and regulating) it's future Global Membership.

So if you really think that you seriously have what it takes to become a 'Leader' in Alternative Medicine , then (perhaps) RCAM may definitely be exactly what the Doctor ordered for you.

One million. That's a lot of quacks! And they are just to mentor (and regulate) the wider quack membership! This man has ambition.

The Big J really hates real doctors. This is his most recent press release...

RCAM would like to warmly commend the various Chieftans of the National Health Service of the United Kingdom for ethically and appropriately ignoring utterly misguided calls (from a rather amusing Group of thirteen Clinical Yestermen) to compel Hard-Working (and Tax-Paying) British Citizens to additionally pay for Life Enhancing Alternative Medicine Interventions out of their very own pockets - rather than get such treatments free via the NHS. RCAM would like to also categorically state that such exceedingly flawed 'G-13? demands that the National Health Service of the United Kingdom expediently abandon Alternative Medicine altogether (in total favour of Conventional Medicine) be diplomatically treated with the very utmost contempt which such unguarded verbal flippance duly deserves ; as none of these 13 'Eminent UK Scientists' behind such calls has professionally attained Globally Acceptable Fellowship Qualifications in Alternative Medicine and as such cannot be deemed competent enough to make such sweeping 'Shilly-Shally' statements about the noble independent specialty of Alternative Medicine.

RCAM therefore publicly advises the General Public to lawfully go about their normal Wellness-Seeking Behaviour as usual - without any unwarranted prejudice or fear resulting from such highly self-serving, morally unethical , abjectly crude , totally unprofessional, utterly unstatesmanly, morbidly barbaric, wantonly uncivilized, profanely undemocratic and unspeakably sacrilegious perpetual affronts on the therapeutically formidable institution of Alternative Medicine.

Now, I do not have 'Globally Acceptable Fellowship Qualifications' in Santa Clause Studies to know he does not exist. But hey. I must be a morbidly barbaric and profanely undemocratic, unethical duck.

So, struggling around the acres of pomposity I find one place where Prof Joe might be making some money. You can call him to seek his wisdom, after pre-booking an hour's slot (and handing over your credit card) for a mere 300 Euros. Alternatively, you can pay by the minute on the contact line for a trifling $10 per minute.

Its going to cost you $20 just for Joe to say Hello and to read out his numerous titles, qualifications and names. Not bad 'ethical' work.

Ethical Quackery, the Monarchy and Kate Moss - Thursday, October 12, 2006

No, this is not about our Defender of Quackery, our Quack-in-Chief His Royal Quackiness, Prince Charles, but about the Distinguished Provost of the Royal College of Alternative Medicine, Professor Joseph Chikelue Obi. And yes, it is just a rather lame story written solely to get a picture of Kate on my blog.

I've written a rather lazy blog on the distinguished professor before that was just a bit of a gawp at his quacktastic website and what looks like a health phone-line scam.

Well, I've done a little more digging with Google and it has revealed a few quack gems. It has been pretty hard work, since Google returns some 6,000 pages, the vast majority just appears to be Prof Obi's self-promotion. However, if you persist in digging a few interesting facts turn up.

So, what has the little black duck found out about the "most Controversial Retired Physician and 'A-List' Medical Celebrity, Dr Joseph Chikelue Obi"?

Here we go...

1. The Irish Independent reports that his college does not exist at the Dublin address given on the web site. There's a surprise! It's just a front.

2. The Independent goes on. "In January 2003, he was suspended by for serious professional misconduct at South Tyneside District Hospital. Among the allegations made were that he failed to attend to patients, wrote strange notes about colleagues and at one point gave a dating agency phone number to a psychiatric patient."

3. He was being investigated by the police for taking thousands of pounds of a 58 year old woman to in order to cure a long standing illness.

4. The GMC strike Dr Obi off their register for "serious professional misconduct". So much for him being retired.

5. On another tack, Dr Obi has been involved in a little cyber-squatting. This looks as if it took place while he was a doctor - always after a few quid!

6. Since then, now self-titled Prof Obi, a few new avenues have been opened, including trying to entice Kate Moss away to one of his 'safe-houses' in Ireland. Hat's off!

He is quoted as saying:

Under the European Convention on Human Rights, Miss Moss still has fundamental rights, just like anyone else out there, and as far as I am concerned, she is not guilty of anything until an Ethical Jury says so.

(I mentioned before that 'ethical' was one of his favourite words.)

7. Prof Obi has been developing a Penis Enlarger (watch out Kate) that his own Royal College has now endorsed.

8. At least one person (out of the targeted million) has paid Prof Obi the fees for his college to accredit them. Dr Michael Keet (8 Canards) of the Central London College of Reflexology handed over 'hundreds'. Do we feel sorry for out-quacked quacks? I guess we ought to.

9. For those of you wanting to see behind the grand titles and see the real human being, Joseph lists his interests as Comedy in London, Whole Food Nutrition and Christian Music. On this 'Meetup' site, he describes himself as "Just a very ordinary guy . . .". That's nice.

10. His name appears very often on the blog Abolish The General Medical Council (GMC), often reporting something he has got up to. The blog describes itself as:

An ethical blog for those who publicly feel that the General Medical Council (GMC) should be Statutorily Abolished in favour of a Medical Licensing Commission (MLC) to solely register and revalidate Doctors who practise Conventional Medicine in the UK. The Blog also recommends that the GMC/MLC hands all disciplinary functions over to an Independent Clinical Tribunal (ICT) in keeping with the EU Convention on Human Rights ; to avoid (both) Institutional Bias and Multiple Jeopardy.

Oooh. There is that word 'ethical' again. And 'European Human Rights'. No name is given for the blog author but the avatar is a portrait of the queen. Another apparent obsession of Prof Obi - royalty. Could the author be none other than the Professor himself, a little agrieved for his ticking off? I hope you all click through to the blog. Maybe we will show up in his stats and whoever the writer is can get in contact and confirm one way or another.

I rather hope it is, as the final thing I turned up would just be fantastic...

11. Is the Distinguished Provost of the Royal College of Alternative Medicine, Professor Obi now selling ethical ring-tones? I do hope so.

Watch out Crazy Frog! Here comes the Crazy Provost...

ADDENDUM:

If you want to see the whole letter threatening Le Canard Noir (and you really should read the whole thing; it's hilarious), it's here. One amusing aspect of the letter is that "Professor Dr." Obi hired an essay writer in the name of Tanja Suessenbach rather than a solicitor to write up the threat. What's not so funny is how fast Le Canard Noir's ISP caved in response to this.

Hat tip to Respectful Insolence.

Where is the new evidence for evolution?

2008-01-01T12:17:00.000-06:00

As explained in the new issue of Evolution: Education and Outreach, it hasn't been necessary to claim "new evidence" for more than a century.

Over the past 150 years, [Darwin's] initial list [of evidence] has been supplemented by countless observations in paleontology, comparative anatomy, developmental biology, molecular biology, and (most recently) comparative genomics, and through direct observations of evolutionary change in both natural and experimental populations. Each of thousands of peer-reviewed articles published every year in scientific journals provides further confirmation (though, as Futuyma (1998) notes, “no biologist today would think of publishing a paper on ‘new evidence for evolution’ ... it simply hasn’t been an issue in scientific circles for more than a century”). Conversely, no reliable observation has ever been found to contradict the general notion of common descent. It should come as no surprise, then, that the scientific community at large has accepted evolutionary descent as a historical reality since Darwin’s time and considers it among the most reliably established and fundamentally important facts in all of science.

Read the article "Evolution as Fact, Theory, and Path" by T. Ryan Gregory (pdf).

Santa Claus is just one part of the fairy tale.

2007-12-15T08:39:00.000-06:00

Just like Santa Claus, the Christmas story is fiction.

See The Christmas story didn't happen, an editorial by James Dee in the December 15th edition of the Austin American Statesman.

An Open Letter to the Texas Education Agency

2007-12-12T19:40:00.000-06:00

The Society for the Study of Evolution has weighed in on the topics of science education and the termination of Chris Comer by the Texas Education Agency (TEA).

The Society for the Study of Evolution (SSE) was founded in March, 1946. The objectives of the Society for the Study of Evolution are the promotion of the study of organic evolution and the integration of the various fields of science concerned with evolution. The Society publishes the scientific journal Evolution and holds annual meetings in which scientific findings on evolutionary biology are presented and discussed.

The following is the text of the SSE letter.

An Open Letter to the Texas Education Agency regarding science education and the termination of Chris Comer

As representatives of various scientific societies, we write to express our deep concern about the recent termination of Chris Comer from her job as Director of Science Curriculum for the Texas Education Agency (TEA). According to press reports, Ms. Comer was forced to resign for political reasons, directly after she forwarded an email announcement about a lecture critical of Intelligent Design (ID). These reports are deeply troubling. Not only has Ms. Comer suffered an apparently grave injustice, but it appears that members of the TEA administration are willing to sacrifice standards of science education in the state of Texas to partisan political ideology. This is just the kind of purging employed by Trofim Lysenko and other ideologues within the Soviet Union during the Stalin era, when rejection of well-established principles of Mendelian genetics set Soviet biology back by 50 years. We fear that the stage is now being set for a similar erosion of science education for a current generation of Texas students.

The Austin America-Statesman (Nov. 20, 2007) reported that the call to fire Ms. Comer came from TEA’s senior adviser on statewide initiatives, Lizzette Reynolds. We are shocked by Ms. Reynold’s statement that the email in question is “highly inappropriate” in assuming that evolution “is a subject that the agency supports.” We are further shocked by the purported rationale for termination in the published memorandum from Monica Martinez: that Ms. Comer's email “implies endorsement of the speaker and implies that TEA endorses the speaker's position on a subject on which the agency must remain neutral," and that this "creat[es] the perception that TEA has a biased position." And we are dumbfounded by TEA spokeswoman Debbie Ratcliffe’s implication, reported in the New York Times (Dec. 2, 2007), that evolutionary science is a matter of “personal opinions and beliefs.”

Such statements betray an astonishing lack of understanding about not only about basic biology, for which evolution is fundamental, but also about the nature of science generally. It is not a matter of “personal opinions and belief” to include well-established scientific findings, such as Mendelian genetics or evolution, in science classes. It is not “biased” to exclude unfounded pseudo-scientific ideology such as Lysenkoism or “Intelligent Design” from science curricula. Indeed, for a science educator or agency to “remain neutral” about such critical matters — which go to the very heart of science education — would be the height of professional irresponsibility.

In 1987 the Supreme Court ruled that teaching creationism in science classes violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. Since that 1987 ruling, the creationist movement has “evolved” into “Intelligent Design” in a thinly veiled attempt to avoid the issue of separation of church and state. Intelligent Design has been exhaustively discussed in the academy and its claims to scientific status have been carefully examined and thoroughly dismissed. Its specious arguments against evolution have been considered and soundly refuted. The recent Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School Board Federal Court case only confirmed what scientists and philosophers of science had long before concluded — “Intelligent Design” is not a scientific theory but a narrow religious view that aims to establish itself above other, mainstream, religious faiths. It has no place in the science classroom, neither explicitly nor disguised under the false pretence of teaching “controversy” in science. Any responsible educational agency should exercise careful oversight to ensure that such religious ideology is not included in the science curriculum.

Indeed, scientists and science educators should be even more pro-active. As part of its 6 November 2002 Board Resolution on Intelligent Design, the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) expressed the general conclusion of the scientific community that “Intelligent Design” creationism was not science. Moreover, it explicitly called upon its over 260 affiliated scientific societies “to assist those engaged in overseeing science education policy to understand the nature of science, the content of contemporary evolutionary theory and the inappropriateness of 'intelligent design theory' as subject matter for science education."

SSE concurs with the AAAS Board’s conclusions and its recommendation. Professional ethics demands that one not “remain neutral” when science is deliberately misrepresented by creationists. Chris Comer thus acted responsibly and professionally in forwarding the announcement about an educational lecture regarding “Intelligent Design” creationism.

In contrast, the administrators who called for her termination and who forced her resignation acted irresponsibly and in direct opposition to the professional standards expected of those who oversee science education. Their comments, quoted above, make it clear that they have sacrificed not only a dedicated public servant but also the facts and the very nature of science to partisan political ideology. It is a sad day for Texas when TEA administrators resort to Stalinist-style purging to suppress the truth about the bankruptcy of “Intelligent Design” arguments.

The TEA loses considerable stature and credibility in making Ms. Comer a martyr to political interference in the teaching of science. We urge the TEA to instead immediately reinstate Ms Comer in her position as TEA’s Director of Science Curriculum. We also applaud Ms. Comer for her distinguished career in science education and her dedication to defending sound education for the children of Texas.

Robert T. Pennock, Chair, Education Committee
Johanna Schmitt, president-Elect
Donald Waller, President
All, Society for the Study of Evolution
Rick Amasino, Past-President, American Society of Plant Biologists

The SSE letter is available as a pdf file here.

Don't Mess with Texas Education

2007-12-05T17:09:00.001-06:00

As recent developments have shown, evolution denialist elements of the Texas State Board of Education (SBoE) are about to try and screw over the Texas science education standards which are due their 10-year review in 2008. This report makes it clear that there is an effort underway by some Texas Education Agency (TEA) administrators and some members of the SBoE to distort and diminish evolution instruction in Texas public schools by requiring that the "weaknesses" and "controversies" of evolutionary biology be presented. These are strategies which the Discovery Institute advocates and they dovetail with their Intelligent Design Creationism advocacy as part of their objective to subvert science education in public schools.

We are at a critical juncture in this process since there is currently a conservative majority on the SBoE and half of the SBoE seats are up for (re)election. At least seven members of the fifteen-member SBoE support the Discovery Institute's "teach the controversy" and teach the "strengths and weaknesses" of evolution strategy. I urge anyone willing to defend science education in Texas and eligible to run for election to the SBoE in their district to unseat some of these folks and help bring sanity to science education in Texas. Please help us avoid the inanity of another Dover-like federal trial over the teaching of religious pseudo-science.

The districts up for (re)election in 2008 are:


SBOE       Name                         City
District
2          Mary Helen Berlanga (D)      Corpus Christi
6          Terri Leo (R)                Spring
7          David Bradley (R)            Beaumont
8          Barbara Cargill (R)          The Woodlands
11         Patricia Hardy (R)           Weatherford
13         Mavis B. Knight (D)          Dallas
14         Gail Lowe (R)                Lampasas

To enter the election you must file an application for a place on the ballot with your respective party by Jan. 2, 2008. The filing fee is $300. The primary election will be on March 4, 2008, the general election will be in November, 2008.

Republican Party (512)477-9821
Democratic Party (512) 478-9800

For more details on the election process, go here: http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/candidates/guide/demorrep.shtml

For more on the Chris Comer story, go here: http://www.wikio.com/news/Chris+Comer.

Barbara Forrest on the Chris Comer affair: http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articles/ForrestComer.pdf.

Read Judge Jones's opinon on the Dover trial here: http://www.pamd.uscourts.gov/kitzmiller/kitzmiller_342.pdf

Homeopathy is Worthless -- Mostly

2007-11-25T18:07:00.000-06:00

Ben Goldacre, a UK medical doctor who is also employed by the media as a commentator on pseudoscience and the sociology of medicine, has an article in the Lancet discussing the efficacy of Homeopathy (free registration).

Ben says that even though five large meta-analyses of major homeopathy trials have shown that homeopathy produces no statistically significant benefit over a placebo, homeopathy may have a clinically useful role and that banning it would be an over-reaction.

Food for thought.

(The article is also available on his blog here.)

The Pseudo-Science called Intelligent Design

2007-11-25T10:04:00.000-06:00

According to Mike Elzinga, it doesn't take a judge to tell the difference between pseudo-science and real science -- anyone can tell the difference by simply comparing the activities of those who work on them.

As an example, he provides a comparison of ID to real science over here.

Answering Creationist Challenges to Evolution

2007-10-28T09:38:00.000-05:00

Science, and in particular evolutionary theory, is under attack by creationists (mostly Young Earth Creationists). Even though there is no doubt about the fact of evolution within the scientific community, the number and diversity of the objections to evolution raised by creationists can put even well-informed people at a disadvantage. Over at the Scientific American blog, John Rennie has compiled 15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense which can be a useful resource for those encountering such people.

Here is a list of the challenges Rennie addresses:

Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law.
Natural selection is based on circular reasoning: the fittest are those who survive, and those who survive are deemed fittest.
Evolution is unscientific, because it is not testable or falsifiable. It makes claims about events that were not observed and can never be re-created.
Increasingly, scientists doubt the truth of evolution.
The disagreements among even evolutionary biologists show how little solid science supports evolution.
If humans descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?
Evolution cannot explain how life first appeared on earth.
Mathematically, it is inconceivable that anything as complex as a protein, let alone a living cell or a human, could spring up by chance.
The Second Law of Thermodynamics says that systems must become more disordered over time. Living cells therefore could not have evolved from inanimate chemicals, and multicellular life could not have evolved from protozoa.
Mutations are essential to evolution theory, but mutations can only eliminate traits. They cannot produce new features.
Natural selection might explain microevolution, but it cannot explain the origin of new species and higher orders of life.
Nobody has ever seen a new species evolve.
Evolutionists cannot point to any transitional fossils--creatures that are half reptile and half bird, for instance.
Living things have fantastically intricate features--at the anatomical, cellular and molecular levels--that could not function if they were any less complex or sophisticated. The only prudent conclusion is that they are the products of intelligent design, not evolution.
Recent discoveries prove that even at the microscopic level, life has a quality of complexity that could not have come about through evolution.

Head on over and check it out.

Goobernor Rick Perry

2007-10-22T20:56:00.000-05:00

Let's see,

What else?

Texas deserves better.

Dembski Debunked

2007-10-15T21:29:00.000-05:00

Mark Perakh has an article at Talk Reason, Errors not corrected for three years point to incompetence, discussing how the ID advocate and pseudo-mathematician William A. Dembski has misled the public. He says, among other things:

This, in turn, allows one to assert that to all intents and purposes Professor Shallit was right in defining Dembski as a pseudo-mathematician and therefore that all the alleged "Mathematical foundation of Intelligent design" so vigorously and triumphantly trumpeted by Dembski and his acolytes, is pseudo-mathematics. It can't serve as a foundation of any reasonable conceptual set.

Far from being the "Isaac Newton of Mathematics," as some have claimed, one has to wonder how Dembski could have gotten a PhD and become a supposed expert in this particular field of mathematics without being familiar with the work of the prominent mathematician Alfréd Rényi who has been widely published and heavily referenced for over forty years, as stated in the article.

ED = { CS, ID, ... }

2007-09-27T08:40:00.000-05:00

Since Dover it has been obvious that the creationists would morph their attacks on Evolution once again. We've seen Creation Science (CS) turn into Intelligent Design (ID) and now speculation is on what the next instantiation will be called. CS, ID, and whatever the next one will be called fall into the category of Evolution Denial (ED).

Thanks to folks like those at the Discovery Institute in Seattle, Washington, the evolution deniers are being supplied with more and more material to bolster their "teach the controversy" propaganda campaign. The upcoming film Expelled will yet again try to put some lipstick on the ID pig and portray some fifth column scientists as victims of scientific oppression, thus fanning the "controversy" flames where there is no controversy.

Unfortunately, as long as there are those who persist in taking ancient texts as equivalent or superior to modern knowledge, we will be pestered by these deniers, as has been the case each time science has shown them to be wrong.

Uncommon Subversion

2007-09-03T16:01:00.000-05:00

The blog Uncommon Descent holds that ...

Materialistic ideology has subverted the study of biological and cosmological origins so that the actual content of these sciences has become corrupted. The problem, therefore, is not merely that science is being used illegitimately to promote a materialistic worldview, but that this worldview is actively undermining scientific inquiry, leading to incorrect and unsupported conclusions about biological and cosmological origins.

In actuality, however, it is the Intelligent Design Creationism ideology promoted by the Discovery Institute and William Dembski, who runs the Uncommon Descent blog, that is attempting to subvert the study of biological and cosmological origins so that the actual content of these sciences will become questionable and amenable to the notion of a supernatural explanation. The problem, therefore, is not merely that ID is trying to subvert science to promote a creationistic worldview, but that this worldview is intended to undermine scientific inquiry, leading to conclusions about biological and cosmological origins which incorporate supernatural explanations, setting the scientific clock back to the middle-ages.

Holocaust caused by Darwin? Not even close.

2007-08-25T13:20:00.000-05:00

While we do not deny that evolutionary theory was a factor in Nazi ideology, it is a mistake to see it as the main or only factor, given the long history of Christian anti-Judaism. Christian anti-Judaism has a continuous history from its earliest days (see John 8:44), and so it is absurd to say that Darwinism was even necessary or sufficient to explain the Holocaust.[10] The Holocaust was simply the latest and most violent spasm of repeated Christian anti-Judaism.

Excerpted from the article Creationists for Genocide by Hector Avalos.

The Unlightenment

2007-08-17T18:54:00.001-05:00

Welcome to a dangerous new era - the Unlightenment - in which centuries of rational thought are overturned by idiots. Superstitious idiots. They're everywhere - reading horoscopes, buying homeopathic remedies, consulting psychics, babbling about "chakras" and "healing energies", praying to imaginary gods, and rejecting science in favour of soft-headed bunkum. But instead of slapping these people round the face till they behave like adults, we encourage them. We've got to respect their beliefs, apparently.

Read more at Charlie Brooker's screen burn

The Evolution of Denial

2007-08-12T13:44:00.002-05:00

I think this is spot on.

(click for full size version)

See more of Non Sequitur by Wiley Miller.

Update: The original comic is no longer in the archive, sorry.

An Open Letter to Governor Perry

2007-08-10T10:37:00.000-05:00

Dear Governor Rick Perry,

As a long-time resident of Texas, I am appalled by your appointment of Mr. McLeroy as the Chairman of the State Board of Education.

I was hoping that Texas would be able to avoid the embarrasment that states like Kansas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania have endured at the hands of the Discovery Institute and the Intelligent Design Creationism movement, but your appointment has almost certainly placed us in that camp.

How much are you willing to sacrifice the future of our children, our economy, and our self-respect to take us back into the dark ages of pseudo science? That is surely where Mr. McLeroy wants to take us.

Please, replace Mr. McLeroy with someone more moderate. Do it for our children. Do it out of respect for Texas. Do it before we are all tainted by the fiasco of another Dover-like trial.

Above all, please do it now, before it's too late.

Controversy? What controversy?

2007-07-28T22:25:00.000-05:00

The ID movement is down but not out. The Discovery Institute (DI) is still out there pushing their "teach the controversy" wedge program.

As Dr. Barbara Forrest states in her latest paper,

[T]he only real controversy is the one that the ID creationists have fabricated for the precise purpose of advancing their agenda. There is no legitimate scientific debate between ID and evolution, and there is no controversy within the scientific community concerning the status of evolutionary theory.

Furthermore,

Because ID is a religious belief, allowing it to be inserted into the public school science classroom violates the constitutionally protected separation of church and state. Just as significantly, introducing ID into the classroom is detrimental to the teaching of real science. The methodology of modern science has consistently produced notable scientific achievements for more than three centuries. To ensure that American scientific progress continues—especially if American students are to contribute to it as scientists—we must ensure that our children have a proper understanding of science.

See her complete paper: Understanding the Intelligent Design Creationist Movement: Its True Nature and Goals here (pdf).

Dr. Barbara Forrest is a professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University. She testified for the plaintiffs in the Kitzmiller trial, and Judge Jones wrote in his ruling, "Dr. Barbara Forrest ... has thoroughly and exhaustively chronicled the history of ID in her book and other writings for her testimony in this case. Her testimony, and the exhibits ... admitted with it, provide a wealth of statements by ID leaders that reveal ID's religious, philosophical, and cultural content."

The Theocracy Delusion

2007-07-01T21:55:00.000-05:00

Recycling my older post...

A delusion is an erroneous perception of reality.
There is no scientific evidence to support the existence of anything supernatural.
Belief in the supernatural is thus a delusion.
A theocracy is government based on a deity or divine power.
Deities and divine power are based on belief in the supernatural.
A theocracy is thus a government based on delusion.

Do you want a government based on delusion? Not me, I'm against it. I'll take the democracy that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights provide.

Help ensure that we do not have a theocracy. Blog against Theocracy!

To read what others have to say, go to the Blogswarm Site:

Also check out the First Freedom First site.

Resistance to Science in America

2007-06-03T11:15:00.000-05:00

[The] developmental data suggest that resistance to science will arise in children when scientific claims clash with early emerging, intuitive expectations. This resistance will persist through adulthood if the scientific claims are contested within a society, and will be especially strong if there is a non-scientific alternative that is rooted in common sense and championed by people who are taken as reliable and trustworthy. This is the current situation in the United States with regard to the central tenets of neuroscience and of evolutionary biology. These clash with intuitive beliefs about the immaterial nature of the soul and the purposeful design of humans and other animals — and, in the United States, these intuitive beliefs are particularly likely to be endorsed and transmitted by trusted religious and political authorities. Hence these are among the domains where Americans' resistance to science is the strongest. P. Bloom & D. S. Weisberg

From WHY DO SOME PEOPLE RESIST SCIENCE? By Paul Bloom and Deena Skolnick Weisberg

Well worth a look.