Comments on: Luskin on Information: Part 0

By: Heliopolitan

Heliopolitan — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 13:50:35 +0000

I have observed that a lot of creationists are what I call “verbal thinkers” – they cannot manipulate concepts in their brains (like “visual thinkers” can) – only words. Therefore, things like papers that don’t contain specific phrases, like “new genetic information” cannot possibly have anything to *do* with new genetic information. It’s a very rigid ontological way of thinking (if “thinking” is the right descriptor).

You will never convince such a person by arguing with them – it is a specific defect. They really *are* retarded.

But try it out. Look at some cdesign proponentsist screed, and imagine that words are *things*, indivisible atoms of thought, little discrete lego bricks that cannot be changed or substituted, and you will gradually see how their strange logic operates. It is as far removed from real thinking as it is possible to get, and I would imagine it is more common than many people realise.

By: Gary Hurd

Gary Hurd — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 06:01:09 +0000

Wesley, You are far more qualified than I am for this task, for which I am grateful.

Excellent start, only 7 more to go.

By: Karen S.

Karen S. — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 15:14:46 +0000

Once their funding for the next year is secure they will go back to making animated video of Judge Jones doll making fart noises.

Actually, they’ll seek even more even funding and make an IMax 3-D film on the same topic.

By: Austringer

Austringer — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 07:59:49 +0000

OgreMKV,

Yes and yes.

By: Karl Haro von Mogel

Karl Haro von Mogel — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 01:25:15 +0000

“Maybe Casey should find another school district and offer his services to them.”
Well we may have a bit of that if school board elections in West Bend result in a couple of creationists getting on the board. They want to teach straight-up creationism!
Primaries are Tuesday!
http://wbsbinfo.blogspot.com/search/label/west%20bend%20school%20board%20candidate%20candidates%20stepanski%20stark%20knepel%20beaver%20questionnaire%20vote

By: Paul Burnett

Paul Burnett — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 00:46:23 +0000

Doc Bill (#6) asked of Casey: “Are you paid by the word?”

Oddly enough, he is. As an apologist and spokes-shill for the Dishonesty Institute, he’s just doing his job, like any good German.

By: Ravilyn Sanders

Ravilyn Sanders — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 23:45:11 +0000

Inspired by a post in Pandasthumb:

If facts are on your side, bang on the facts. If law is on your side, band on the law. If neither is on your side, bang on the table. If there is no table, bang on the internet!

The aim of all this exercise is show their paymaster that old fundie millionaire, Abrahamson or whoever that guy is, who funds the Dishonest Institute that these guys are working hard and producing voluminous “research”. These guys would not be above renting a botnet for an hour or two and get “hits” on their “publication”. Full traffic report from their ISP would show that everybody in China and his brother are avidly reading these research papers, hanging on every word with bated breath. That rich old guy could
not tell the difference between a headline from The Onion and the one from New York Times.

Recently the Supreme Court ruled that money is speech, restricting expenditure is restriction on speech. Well, millions of dollars buys tons and tons of speech, like this series.

Once their funding for the next year is secure they will go back to making animated video of Judge Jones doll making fart noises.

By: OgreMkV

OgreMkV — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 21:36:07 +0000

I think it’s funny that Luskin mentions Explore Evolution. Am I right in thinking that is the book that’s nothing but a long string of incorrect attacks on evolutionary theory?

Are they still trying to get that book in schools?

By: Austringer

Austringer — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 15:54:46 +0000

The US system holds judges to mostly honor precedent. Out-of-court commentary, such as that engaged in by Luskin and other DI fellows and fellow travelers is pretty much unconstrained. They apparently would love for other communities to share in the joy that was Dover, Pennsylvania’s embrace of an “intelligent design” creationism policy.

That last was sarcasm, by the way. I realize that wordplay in English is sometimes misread.

By: sparc

sparc — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 07:21:44 +0000

I am not familiar with the US really system but doesn’t it require to finally accept decisions after the last opportunity to apeal has past even if those decisions may not be in favor of ones own opinions?