BLAM! Oh, my, that was close, that shrapnel almost took my head off--hey, that's odd. What are the odds that a titanium irony meter would explode into red-hot fragments spelling "Darwin on Trial, pp. 12-13"? Well, I guess we better look it up. Turn your irony dampening setting to max:"Moreover, based upon the extensive expertise he [Judge Jones of the Kitzmiller case] professes to have acquired in the course of a six-week trial, he defined science and determined that the scientific claims of intelligent design were invalid, neither of which are exactly legal questions best decided by a single lawyer."
Maybe Phillip Johnson deserves a pass because he is the Program Advisor for the Discovery Institute "research" program, the Center forIn the chapters to follow I will look at the evidence to see whether a mechanism is known that can accomplish the large-scale changes which the theory of evolution supposes to have occurred, such as the change from single-celled bacteria to complex plants and animals, from fish to mammals, and from apes to men. [...] Before undertaking this task I should say something about my qualifications and purpose. I am not a scientist but an academic lawyer by profession, with a specialty in analyzing the logic of arguments and identifying the assumptions that lie behind those arguments. This background is more appropriate than one might think, because what people believe about evolution and Darwinism depends very heavily on the kind of logic they employ and the kind of assumptions they make. Being a scientist is not necessarily an advantage when dealing with a very broad topic like evolution, which cuts across many scientific disciplines and also involves issues of philosophy. Practicing scientists are of necessity highly specialized, and a scientist outside his field of expertise is just another layman.
— Phillip Johnson (1991), Darwin on Trial, pp. 12-13
59 Comments
Mr Christopher · 5 January 2006
Though not as ironic or even funny, it's odd that judges decide on cases every day for which they do not posess any expertise and no one complains.
They rule on medical matters (malpractice), business matters, and all sorts of subjects where they are not recognized experts. That is why we have expert witnesses.\
And let's ignore th judge and his ruling for a moment. Every single legitimate scientific organization in north america has come out saying that intelligent design creationism is not science. So you have every legit sci organization and a judge (who listened to 6 weeks worth of testimony and heard from the scientific leaders from both sides of the issue) saying intelligent design creationism is not science, what the hell do they need to accept the fact that IDC is not science?
And one need not have a degree in biology to conclude intelligent design creationism is not science. I suppose that is where the irony lies. A 7th grader could tell you intelligent design creationism has no scientific merit.
On an even more unrelated note, the new admin of the Intelligent Design Weblog of Theologian William Dembski is a freshman English and Philosophy major and has no scientific training or education. That says alot about how scientific intelligent design creationism is.
When the "experts" on intelligent design creationism start yapping under oath about how Astrology has made a contribution to science (I wonder if Behe's horoscope told him that), that a time traveller or space alien may be the intelligent designer, that the definition of science must change in order for intelligent design creationism to fit in, and that mouse traps are like biological entities, any reasonable person is going to reject those notions.
Anyhow, I think I am going to like your irony meter.
Praise the time travelling space alien!
RBH · 5 January 2006
For the benefit of those not lucky enough to have received one for Kitzmas, the Mark V Excelsior is being discounted for a little while, until Ohio and Kansas again drive up demand again.
RBH
argy stokes · 5 January 2006
Pastor Bentonit · 5 January 2006
Sir_Toejam · 5 January 2006
Gandalf of the West???
ROFLMAO!
Sir_Toejam · 5 January 2006
BWE · 5 January 2006
Ok, give me 6 weeks of solid lecturing by a variety of experts and I'm pretty well stinkin educated. The judge is a reasonably smart guy you'd expect, being a judge and all (Phillis Shafly notwithstanding), and he had the equivalent of two or 3 graduate level courses in the damn subject. I would argue that he is
Liz · 5 January 2006
What level do you think will be registered on the Mark V Excelsior irony meter for this latest pronounciation from Pat Robertson... (as just reported by the AP)
NORFOLK, Va. --- Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson suggested today that Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's stroke was divine punishment for "dividing God's land."
"God considers this land to be his," Robertson said on his TV program "The 700 Club." "You read the Bible and he says 'This is my land,' and for any prime minister of Israel who decides he is going to carve it up and give it away, God says, 'No, this is mine.'"
Sir_Toejam · 5 January 2006
Gees, Is Robertson suffering from syphillis or something? what a complete nutter!
Sir_Toejam · 5 January 2006
I wonder if his coannouncers at the 700 club secretly shake their heads when he says stuff like that.
Nick (Matzke) · 5 January 2006
Please note, the Mark V Excelsior is specifically not licensed for Kansas.
Sir_Toejam · 5 January 2006
right, i'll prepare some extra sets of irony divining rods.
or i suppose you could buy your own and modify as needed:
http://www.naturesprite.com/
the pro from dover · 5 January 2006
I read "Darwin on Trial" and I clearly remember that passage from the book (it's in the preface) and I thought that anyone who believes that this is what lawyers do will believe anything Mr. Johnson tells them. I showed it to my wife (a district court judge) who was appalled at this hubris and deception. Lawyers are highly paid advocates for a particular point of view and their job is to maximally inflate what benefits their clients and maximally discredit that which does not. There is no logic involved here. Lawyers who do nothing but logically figure out what happened based on evidence will be pounding the pavement in their daddy's wing-tips pretty darn quick. Their only connection to logic is to make their client's position to be the only logical one (if the glove dont fit you must acquit). I dont know who or what Gandalf is but Johnson is the Sam Wilberforce of the 20th century (if the fish has lungs you must babble in tongues?)
Bob Maurus · 5 January 2006
Pro from Dover,
You don't know who Gandalf is? Where have you been the past several years. Peter Jackson's "Lord Of The Rings" film trilogy swept the Oscars last year.
Sir_Toejam · 5 January 2006
CJ O'Brien · 5 January 2006
at least 40? why, ol' Gandalf's first appearance is in The Hobbit, IIRC 1933. Old boy's pushing 80.
btw Johnson = Wormtoungue
Gandalf should never be so maligned.
Ginger Yellow · 5 January 2006
If scientists outside their field are just laymen (which is to a certain degree true), why does the DI shout so loudly about the non-biology scientific credentials of its fellows?
neuralsmith · 5 January 2006
With regard to Dembski reopening his blog and giving his regular posters admin status, the first thing I thought was that now the patients are running the asylum. Then I remembered that Dembski was not much better. Oh snap!
Sir_Toejam · 5 January 2006
most of their followers have been convinced scientists in general are evil, and biologists are the worst of the bunch. ergo, they HAVE to make clear that they also don't support any real science or biology.
simple.
the pro from dover · 5 January 2006
sometimes the pro just sees the world pass him by. just yesterday i went to buy shelly fabres latest 78 rpm record and the tattood young man with the 20 earrings looked at me like i was from mars.
theo · 5 January 2006
So will Dembski's new collegiate factotum be doing most of the damning -- I mean banning -- on Dembski's blog now? His warning "I have very little tolerance for brazen rudeness" is *very* intimidating.
Seriously, though, I can't wait to see what depths DaveScot etc. will sink to. As well as being a notable troll, he also stoops to random insinuations like like "[John] Derbyshire was an abused child."
Sir_Toejam · 5 January 2006
Sir_Toejam · 5 January 2006
btw, uh, who is shelly fabres?
Henry J · 5 January 2006
Re "Practicing scientists are of necessity highly specialized, and a scientist outside his field of expertise is just another layman."
That's interesting. A scientist out of his field is just another layman. That makes me wonder something - what's a lawyer who's out of his field?
Henry
Michael Hopkins · 5 January 2006
Sir_Toejam · 5 January 2006
hmm, do we get Eugenie to slay him then?
naw, i see Johnson more like Saruman, deceived and deceiving, with a masterful forked tongue.
Sir_Toejam · 5 January 2006
uh oh, it's starting to look like the ID movement might be ripe for a LOTR parody...
who's game?
Eugene Lai · 5 January 2006
Merry and Eowyn slayed the chief Nazgul...
Sir_Toejam · 5 January 2006
so... Eugenie Clark = Eowyn?
Eugene Lai · 6 January 2006
hmmm. I don't know who Eugenie is until now
Sir_Toejam · 6 January 2006
sorry, I'm tired. I'm also an ichthyologist who studies sharks, so you can forgive my mislabel.
I meant Eugenie Scott, who is one of the leading ID opponents:
Eugenie C. Scott is Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education
http://www.ncseweb.org/
Eugenie Clark is one of the most famous ichthyologists of all time, and i'm sure also a staunch anti-ider.
Eugene Lai · 6 January 2006
Yeah I googled Eugenie Clark and found out who she is. Eugenie Scott is closer to Gandalf, I think.
steve s · 6 January 2006
Sir_Toejam · 6 January 2006
oh, and it's a daily double...
how much money will you wager, Steve?
David Wilson · 6 January 2006
dale · 6 January 2006
at least 40? why, ol' Gandalf's first appearance is in The Hobbit, IIRC 1933. Old boy's pushing 80.
Gandalf was in middle earth at least 2000 years, and was around pretty much from the beginning of it all. Tolkein's creation myth had him as one of the original lesser angels.
Renier · 6 January 2006
Uh, just nitpicking, but Gandalf first appeared in the Elder Edda (Poetic Edda - Viking Sagas), though it was the name of a dwarf, thus the "alf" in the name...
I am really disgusted with the way the IDiots have been handling their defeat in court. Talk about a bunch of bad losers! The worst though is the way they attacked the character of judge Jones. What a bunch of malicious people, and then they feel they have the right to dictate what OUR children should learn in school.
but · 6 January 2006
"alf" means, obviously, "elf", and gandalf means "wand-elf".
Dave Thomas · 6 January 2006
I vote for Dembski as Smeagol/Gollum, and DaveScot as Wormtongue.
djmullen · 6 January 2006
I think Johnson is a better Goodgulf, the fraudulent wizard in the Harvard Lampoon's "Bored of the Rings", written by the great Henry Beard and Douglas Kenney as a warm up before they launched the glory days of the National Lampoon.
"Do not mock powers beyond your knowledge, impudent hairfoot," he said, as five aces materialized in his hand, "For you see the efficacy of my enchantments!"
djmullen · 6 January 2006
Oh yeah, and speaking of "Bored of the Rings", here's the map of Lower Middle Earth that graced the first edition:
http://boredoftherings.150m.com/bored_map.html
Artwork by William S. Donnell
k.e. · 6 January 2006
Which fits DJ
I met all the characters in Bored where (I must now decloak)
I grew up in Jackson's land of country hobbits elves goblins and gandalfs coming out of my ears. Which is why I had to get away.As far a catholic/universal apologists go I prefer E.Waugh/Green/J.Joyce who were masters of idiom plus in Waugh's case a sarky SOB. Waugh was unkind to the yanks in a brilliant English sort of way but they loved him for among others "The Loved One".
Don't get me wrong about our colonial cousins give me "The Great Gatsby" Joe Campbell and Intel over LOTR any day.
"A real book is not one that we read, but one that reads us."
W. H. Auden
the pro from dover · 6 January 2006
shelly fabres was a 50s teen queen not far removed from annette funicello. you would never mistake her for brittany spear. Ive always wondered; is she the daughter of burning spear? Shelly was the daughter of nanette fabres i think (but really dont care). I never got past the 1st chapter of the hobbit.
Mark Duigon · 6 January 2006
Some Creationists place all their faith in a literal reading of the Bible; some place their faith in the other Creationist bibles: "Darwin on Trial," "Darwin's Black Box," "Of Pandas and People."
Being a scientist is a disadvantage? When you're an outsider, you try to put the insiders outside, in an effort to make people think the outside is inside, but what would you expect from the Bizarro World of ID where Up is Down?
Johnson is an intellectual Luddite who wishes to tear down a very effective means of knowledge production in order to preserve his lifestyle of wishful thinking and shifting of blame for society's ills.
Corkscrew · 6 January 2006
Mr Christopher · 6 January 2006
k.e. · 6 January 2006
yah Kinky!!
IIRC he said sumt'n like "if you see me go by in a long black limo I'll be on my way to the guvnors house or a funeral"
Henry J · 6 January 2006
Is there such a thing as an incomplete Bozo? Or would that be like half a wing?
(Don't mind me; I'm short on sleep today.)
Henry
Dene Bebbington · 6 January 2006
Nick, no irony meter ever made can ever withstand the IDers.
Sir_Toejam · 6 January 2006
having just read the complete course syllabus of WD's over at the "seminary", I challenge anybody's irony meter to gauge the following course title:
28970 Critical Thinking and the Art of Argumentation
it gets better:
Course Description:
This course examines the means by which we convince ourselves and others that
something is true. Of special interest here are the pitfalls to logical thinking that prevent
us from coming to the truth.
yikes.
lies about even the definition of critical thinking.
bill is one scary dude.
george · 6 January 2006
As to Pat,
I think Pat is so far off the deep end that he is actually a blessing. While it is truly a shame that he will twist the minds of some poor souls, he will push many more back to a more rationale place.
... and, well, my 8 year old son loves to mock him. Sure, he is such an easy target it is child's play, but a good source for the young skeptic to cut his teeth...
i like latin · 6 January 2006
Marek 14 · 7 January 2006
A modest suggestion: How about making stickers "Warning: May contain nuts" to put on school board doors?
Bob O'H · 7 January 2006
steve s · 7 January 2006
the pro from dover · 7 January 2006
Many at the thumb seem confused about what exactly is wrong with Pat Robertson. So in the spirit of Billy Frist who diagnosed Terry Schiavo without examining her the pro ventures a diagnosis for Pat: hypozyprexemia.
steve s · 7 January 2006
Lol. I really think at some point his family's going to intervene and get him off the air, because all he's doing right now is transmitting the meme "People who say religious things are nuts"
which i'm down with.
Dean Morrison · 7 January 2006
.. all Trolls look the same to me after a while.... remind me? how do you tell a 'Holocaust Revisionist' from a 'White Nationalist'?
I know, neither of them agree with: 'White Supremacists' or 'Holocaust Deniers'....
but apart from that; .. how on Earth do we tell them apart?
... perhaps by asking them their views on astronomy?
Ron Okimoto · 8 January 2006