6 Responses to “Brought to you by the #1 Science Blog”

1. Bilbo Says:
   November 5th, 2006 at 9:36 pm

   I'm confused. Is this something Telicthoughts created for the New Atheists to use as their logo? Or did you see this somewhere else and reprint it here?

Comment by Bilbo — November 5, 2006 @ 9:36 pm

2. Krauze Says:
   November 6th, 2006 at 4:37 am

   Try clicking on it.

Comment by Krauze — November 6, 2006 @ 4:37 am

3. Bilbo Says:
   November 6th, 2006 at 8:54 pm

   Oh, I see. I left a message at their blog:

   "Hi, I just noticed your motto…the one ending in "godless liberal." Sigh…I'm a liberal who believes in God, and is watching our country being taken over by fascists, because they can get people to vote for them by making them afraid of people like you. Thanks for giving our real enemies a scapegoat. (That was sarcasm)."

   And thank you, Krauze, for taking advantage of the worst of the liberal side. (That was sarcasm, also).

Comment by Bilbo — November 6, 2006 @ 8:54 pm

4. Krauze Says:
   November 6th, 2006 at 9:33 pm

   Hi Bilbo,

   "And thank you, Krauze, for taking advantage of the worst of the liberal side. (That was sarcasm, also)."

   It's you who's mixing politics into this, not me. In fact, I've also pointed to those among the right who share PZ's perception of science and religion, like Timothy Sandefur.

   The point is this: Many critics will tell you that the "evolution disproves theism" message is just a canard cooked up by creationists to scare people away from evolution. But in fact, this is a message that's shouted from the rooftops by many atheists, among which we find such luminaries as the Professor for the Public Understanding of Science and the owner of Nature's Number 1 Science Blog. And every time this happens, the critics remain silent. This is the hypocrisy my post points out.

Comment by Krauze — November 6, 2006 @ 9:33 pm

5. Mesk Says:
   November 7th, 2006 at 12:57 am

   Krauze, the critics don't remain silent. You've even documented here in this blog instances of very public scuffles within the anti-ID camp between "Churchillians and Chamberlainites". Dawkins' book The God Delusion has been criticised for its anti-religion stance on many, many pro-evolution blogs.

   I could put together a whole blog posting excerpts from the most public extremist voices of the ID movement (such as, say, Dembski and Coulter), and then claim them as evidence that the ID movement is fundamentally extremist and hypocritical. You'd rightly attack me if I tried this; so why are you doing it yourself?

Comment by Mesk — November 7, 2006 @ 12:57 am

6. Krauze Says:
   November 7th, 2006 at 1:04 pm

   Hi Mesk,

   "Dawkins' book The God Delusion has been criticised for its anti-religion stance on many, many pro-evolution blogs."

   Yes, there were a lot of newspaper reviewers who felt alienated by Dawkins' hardcore atheism. But where are these "many, many pro-evolution blogs" criticizing him?

   "I could put together a whole blog posting excerpts from the most public extremist voices of the ID movement (such as, say, Dembski and Coulter), and then claim them as evidence that the ID movement is fundamentally extremist and hypocritical."

   First of all, I didn't say anything about ID critics being "fundamentally extremist". Yes, there are many extremist voices among the ID critics, but I have always acknowledged the existence of more reasonalbe critics like yourself and Ed Brayton.

   In a related vein, I didn't accuse all ID critics of being hypocritical. Obviously, PZ isn't hypocritical, as he's very consistent and forthright about his position.

   If you want to make a blog with nothing but extremist statements from ID supporters, go ahead. As I've said a couple of times, I think there are extremists on both sides of the aisle.

Comment by Krauze — November 7, 2006 @ 1:04 pm

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.