Comments on: A Pournelle Misunderstanding

By: Fshagan

Fshagan — Tue, 08 Jul 2008 00:08:03 +0000

Jerry seems to have made a mistake in calling Dawkins a “poseur” and perhaps was wrong about the title of the law and its reach. Dawkins is obviously qualified to speak about evolution and defend it as an expert. And the Scopes Law (er, Butler Act) did apply only to public schools.

But that doesn’t seem to be his main point in the blog post.

He seems to be reacting to the caustic approach taken by Dawkins and some others. It causes discomfort even among those that are not invested in the argument and familiar with the participants. Pournelle admits he is mostly an outsider. It is that “revulsion of the less informed” when exposed to the sometimes caustic reaction to people of faith that lends support to the Creationist cause.

In other words, Dawkins may inadvertently be helping the Creationists more than any of the Creationists.

By: Austringer

Austringer — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 03:36:08 +0000

Don’t forget Orson Scott Card and Scott Adams as literary types who get really touchy when people ask them to take responsibility for the nonsense they talk when discussing evolution.

By: j a higginbotham

j a higginbotham — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 21:52:29 +0000

Is this something afflicting science fiction writers these days? There’s James P Hogan, apparently a supporter of any loony idea http://www.jamesphogan.com/ and of course Michael “Federal Climatology Expert” Crichton.

By: RBH

RBH — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 06:34:27 +0000

Pournelle should stick to the “fiction” half of science fiction.

By: Austringer

Austringer — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 00:02:07 +0000

The first line in that section from Pournelle was, “I don’t usually get into the “Intelligent Design” argument, because I don’t have a lot to add to it; but once in a while poseurs like Professor Richard Dawkins jump into the fray with such outrageous aplomb that I feel compelled to answer.”

Jerry, (1) Dawkins is not a poseur, and (2) you have overestimated your ability to comment intelligently on “intelligent design” creationism. With regard to (1), it appears that you may be having a problem with projection. Dawkins hasn’t “jumped into the fray”; you have. Dawkins has been commenting and interacting with the IDC advocates since they announced themselves as enemies of science education back in the late 80s and early 90s.

I do sympathize with the health problems you are facing, Jerry; I started this weblog flat on my back in the hospital following major surgery, so I have been low myself. However, in reading various of your comments concerning the line you take with respect to the ADA and other issues, I find that vitiates the effect that the sympathy might otherwise engender. Good luck getting well again, Jerry, and maybe some of the cognitive issues so readily apparent in your outing on IDC will be revealed as side effects of your current poor condition.