Silly Rabbit, the DM is for Kids
by MikeGene
29 Responses to “Silly Rabbit, the DM is for Kids”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
-
Featured Books
The Design Matrix: A Consilience of Clues by Mike Gene 
Your Inner Fish: A Journey into the 3.5-Billion-Year History of the Human Body 
Catalyzing Inquiry at the Interface of Computing and Biology 
System Modeling in Cellular Biology: From Concepts to Nuts and Bolts 
The Plausibility of Life By Marc W. Kirschner and John C. Gerhart 
Agents Under Fire by Angus Menuge 
Life's Solution by Simon Conway Morris 
Information Theory, Evolution and the Origin of Life by Hubert P. Yockey 
The Fifth Miracle by Paul Davies 
Nature, Design, and Science by Del Ratzsch 
Origination of Organismal Form by Muller & Newman 
Biased Embryos and Evolution by Wallace Arthur 
Rare Earth by Peter Ward and Donald Brownlee 
The Privileged Planet by Guillermo Gonzalez and Jay Richards 
The Way of the Cell by Franklin Harold 
The Volitional Brain by Benjamin Libet 
Evolution in Four Dimensions by Eva Jablonka & Marion Lamb 
The Evolution-Creation Struggle by Michael Ruse
February 7th, 2008 at 6:09 am
She was wondering though: 'what is the use of a book without pictures or conversation?'
Comment by AdR — February 7, 2008 @ 6:09 am
February 7th, 2008 at 10:27 am
Obvious case of child abuse. Somebody should call Social Services. Mike Gene oughta be locked up.
That kid could still be rehabilitated or deprogrammed. He's only about a ¼ the way through the book. Thank God, so to speak, its not the Holy Bible!
(Homer Simpson: "Children are our future"¦ Unless we stop them now!")
Comment by Rock — February 7, 2008 @ 10:27 am
February 7th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Rock, it's 50% of my genes sitting there. It is one of my 'in vivo' experiments.
It's the lack of pictures that put her off. She did wonder though whether the universal genetic code was optimized for error correction, or that proteins adapted to a frozen genetic code, giving the appearance of genetic code adaptation. An internal error buffer in the proteins themselves, versus in the genetic code itself.
Comment by AdR — February 7, 2008 @ 10:43 am
February 7th, 2008 at 10:45 am
What a tragedy, AdR! Another kid lost to ranks of creationists.
They're oughta be a law!
Comment by Rock — February 7, 2008 @ 10:45 am
February 7th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
I'm assuming this is an open thread, so I thought I would report that the Iowa Board of Regents has denied Gonzalez's tenure appeal. Now there will hopefully be a lawsuit; unlike MikeGene, Gonzalez apparently is unable to discern the difference between doing his job and playing at his cranky hobby.
Comment by Aagcobb — February 7, 2008 @ 2:44 pm
February 7th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Aagcobb:
So then he was refused tenure based on his belief in ID. Gotta watch what you're thinking in a PC society.
Comment by Bradford — February 7, 2008 @ 5:15 pm
February 7th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Bradford:
I thought it had been amply documented by now that Gonzalez just hadn't delivered the goods per the requirements for tenure. It's tragic for Gonzalez, but par for the course.
You do realize that thousands of "Darwinists" get denied tenure every year, don't you? Just saying.
Comment by Raevmo — February 7, 2008 @ 6:11 pm
February 7th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Hi Bradford,
No Bradford, he was denied tenure because he didn't do his job, a big part of which is generating research funds, and asked Iowa to instead give him tenure because he wrote a neat book about his hobby. That would be like me asking to make partner in a law firm because I won my baseball fantasy league. It doesn't mean Iowa discriminates against IDists any more than it would mean the law firm doesn't like baseball; it just means that Iowa expects its associate professors to do their jobs before it will grant them tenure.
Comment by Aagcobb — February 7, 2008 @ 7:00 pm
February 7th, 2008 at 10:24 pm
So then he was refused tenure based on his belief in ID. Gotta watch what you're thinking in a PC society.
That's an oversimplification that might succeed with an uninformed jury. His case was based on more than the book but the book itself was loaded with scientifically derived data. Of course the imputation of design would be anethema to the thought police but that is unfortunately an indicator of where the USA is headed.
Just don't introduce those e-mails into evidence. Do administrators mail anti-baseball messages in Iowa?
Comment by Bradford — February 7, 2008 @ 10:24 pm
February 7th, 2008 at 10:28 pm
So then he was refused tenure based on his belief in ID. Gotta watch what you're thinking in a PC society.
And what goods would they be? Careful now. I know the pat response and it is incongruent with Aagcobb's glib remark.
Comment by Bradford — February 7, 2008 @ 10:28 pm
February 7th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Hi Bradford,
You wrote…
So where is the one nation under God, trusting in God headed?
Are you already getting prepared to blame the Democrat president that is about to get elected, or is this still all Bill Clinton's fault?
If only you could get in place some more God fearing, common sense Judges, university regents and school board officials with the backbone to interpret the constitution the RIGHT way.
Right?
Comment by Thought Provoker — February 7, 2008 @ 11:34 pm
February 7th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Hi TP,
How you do war on, Culture Warrior.
Comment by Pez — February 7, 2008 @ 11:46 pm
February 7th, 2008 at 11:48 pm
My position on freedom is invarient. It does not depend on party affiliation or who is president. Err on the side of freedom particularly when the "danger" takes the form of a challenge to your cherished views.
Comment by Bradford — February 7, 2008 @ 11:48 pm
February 8th, 2008 at 12:08 am
Hi Bradford,
You wrote…
How about the freedom of uncharged prisoners in Guantanamo Bay?
How about the freedom of the 100,000 men, woman and children killed in a pre-emptive war we started?
And Joy's favorite, how about the freedom of people who can't get the basic healthcare they need to survive?
Just how invariant is your sense of freedom?
Is it just reserved for those you deem deserving?
P.S. to Pez, all I can do is try to provoke thought
Comment by Thought Provoker — February 8, 2008 @ 12:08 am
February 8th, 2008 at 12:19 am
That's supposed to be thought-provoking?
You must mean to provoke group-thought.
I think your sermon could use some more talking points.
Comment by Pez — February 8, 2008 @ 12:19 am
February 8th, 2008 at 12:19 am
How about terrorist inclinations they might have? Is there a legal context within which they can be charged? I'm no expert on this but would prefer a trial to outright release of one who took up arms against US forces. If he is a terrorist detain him. If not release him.
Good question. Another one concerns the many times 100,000 who perished under Sadam. They were people too. I'm not trying to justify the invasion but the world is more complex than political platitudes allow.
Also a worthy topic. Do you know what the causes of rising health care costs are TP? Do you think we ought to be free of frivolous lawsuits and questionable medical and insurance practices? Nothing like tackling a problem at its root.
Comment by Bradford — February 8, 2008 @ 12:19 am
February 8th, 2008 at 12:39 am
Hi Bradford,
As much as I would like to continue our frank and open discussion of this, I will take Mike Gene's new thread as a hint and try to get back on topic.
Maybe you could take some time to look into what our government is doing, or more to the point, not doing about protecting the freedoms you say is invariant to you.
Comment by Thought Provoker — February 8, 2008 @ 12:39 am
February 8th, 2008 at 12:55 am
Bradford,
The goods Gonzalez didn't deliver were research grants. A few months back, Joy posted a link to a blog by an associate professor in Gonzalez's field. Speaking concerning his own situation, he wrote he was getting out of academia because he knew that big research grants would be very difficult to obtain, and without the grants he had almost no chance to get tenure. Since he wasn't pulling in the research grant $$, Gonzalez probably wasn't going to get tenure whether he was an IDist or not. Gonzalez's complaint about "academic freedom" then becomes a whine that IDists should be immunized from the tenure requirements everyone else has to satisfy. Since, as MikeGene points out, IDism is just a hobby which doesn't amount to science, there is no justification for awarding IDists such an exalted status.
Comment by Aagcobb — February 8, 2008 @ 12:55 am
February 8th, 2008 at 7:59 am
Aagcobb:
You would not know that based on some e-mail exchanges but let's assume you are correct for the sake of argument. These grounds have applied to others as some on your side of the fence like to point out. No problem there either. But your hobby sound bites have an unmistakable political tone to them. If others have been similarly denied based on the research issue then their "hobbies" are not brought into play. It is the added superfluous message that puts the thought police on alert. Don't say anything positive about ID if you know what's good for you.
Comment by Bradford — February 8, 2008 @ 7:59 am
February 8th, 2008 at 10:31 am
Bradford,
It was Gonzalez who brought his hobby into play by submitting his book to the tenure committee in support of his tenure application. As I said, its as though I told a law firm that even though I didn't bill many hours for the firm, they ought to make me a partner because I won my fantasy baseball league! I suspect that Gonzalez knew his tenure application was doomed by his lack of research grants, and he was already angling for martyrdom to enchance his position in the ID community. Unlike all the other associate professors denied tenure because they were unable to land a big grant, Gonzalez is now a celebrity, and should have little problem finding a position at a fundamentalist college or university.
Comment by Aagcobb — February 8, 2008 @ 10:31 am
February 8th, 2008 at 10:46 am
Have you read the book? It contains scientific facts and depictions of the physical uninverse that are sound from an empirical perspective. That alone and the educational value associated with these things is noteworthy. If he did not express his view that design is implicated in cosmology nothing negative would have been attached to this by the metaphysicians of your persuasion. The facts detailed in his book are not fantasy and if ID critics are threatened by design comments, that are expressly the author's own views, then we better have some serious meditiation directed at the value of freedom of expression.
Comment by Bradford — February 8, 2008 @ 10:46 am
February 8th, 2008 at 11:22 am
Hi Bradford,
Have you read the book?
Does the movie accurately communicate the facts and arguments Gonzalez made?
Comment by Thought Provoker — February 8, 2008 @ 11:22 am
February 8th, 2008 at 11:24 am
That's beside the point. It would not have mattered if the book were pro-ID, anti-ID, or did not mention ID. It's a popular book, with Gonzalez getting the royalties, which adds nothing to the reputation of ISU. YOu need research grant and graduate students. Tenure is granted because a university thinks a person will bring in additional prestige.
Regardless of ID content, writing a general public book adds nothing positive to Gonzalez's tenure case.
Comment by One Brow — February 8, 2008 @ 11:24 am
February 8th, 2008 at 11:50 am
OB:
I thought it was about money. Can you ID crtics keep your story straight? If it is about prestige then any old subjective standard will do.
Comment by Bradford — February 8, 2008 @ 11:50 am
February 8th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Bradford,
Prestige and $$ are pretty much the same thing. But, please, tell us, what do you think an IDist has to do to qualify for tenure, since, apparently, you think he doesn't have to obtain research grants, lead grad students through their dissertations, or do original research. If one simply announces one is an IDist, is that sufficient to automatically qualify for tenure? Or does one have to at least become a DI fellow and market an IDist book through their website?
Comment by Aagcobb — February 8, 2008 @ 12:03 pm
February 8th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Aagcobb:
Remind researchers to include that line in grant applications.:grin:
Aagcobb, I don't object to the association of grants to tenure. I do have a problem with pretending the hostility that was clearly in evidence played no role in what happened. And if this is all about grants then Gonzalez's ID views are irrelevant right?
Comment by Bradford — February 8, 2008 @ 12:15 pm
February 8th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
That's pretty much what I've been hearing from the usual anti-IDers. They say that joining the ID movement seems to be a research-stopper for many people, but that the ones who do accept ID and also perform research, graduate students, etc. should be jusdged only on the latter, nor the former, for matters of tenure, professional recognition, etc.
Comment by One Brow — February 8, 2008 @ 1:51 pm
February 8th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
But we're supposed to believe they ignored it, you know, as in ID was not a consideration in the decision to deny tenure.
Comment by Mung — February 8, 2008 @ 2:30 pm
February 8th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Bradford,
I have no idea to what extent Gonzalez's ID views played a role in his denial of tenure, and neither do you. His lack of productivity while at ISU almost certainly would have resulted in tenure denial anyway; his ID book, which Gonzalez apparently hoped would count in his favor, was insufficient production to support his tenure application. Let me know when an IDist professor pulling in millions in research grants, mentoring lots of grads students and publishing novel research in peer-reviewed journals is denied tenure; then you might have a case of discrimination. All Gonzalez has is a fine whine.
Comment by Aagcobb — February 8, 2008 @ 3:40 pm