Home » Culture, Humor, Intellectual freedom » NY Times slaps ID foes PZ Myers and other ScienceBlog authors

NY Times slaps ID foes PZ Myers and other ScienceBlog authors

The stench of non-science coming out of ScienceBlogs.com has gotten so bad that it has drawn the attention of the New York Times! See: Unnatural Science. It would appear that the opponents of ID must resort to means other than science to challenge the hypothesis of Intelligent Design. Rather than appeals to evidence, the foes of ID resort, in the words of NY Times, to “class warfare”.

Over at Pharyngula — which often ranks in the Top 100 blogs on the Internet— PZ Myers revels in sub-“South Park” blasphemy, presenting (in one recent stunt) his sketch of the Prophet Muhammad as a cow-pig hybrid excited about “raping a 9-year-old girl.”

Though Myers and other science bloggers boast that they can be jerky in the service of anti-charlatanism, that’s not what’s bothersome about them. What’s bothersome is that the site is misleading. It’s not science by scientists, not even remotely; it’s science blogging by science bloggers. And science blogging, apparently, is a form of redundant and effortfully incendiary rhetoric that draws bad-faith moral authority from the word “science” and from occasional invocations of “peer-reviewed” thises and thats.

Under cover of intellectual rigor, the science bloggers — or many of the most visible ones, anyway — prosecute agendas so charged with bigotry that it doesn’t take a pun-happy French critic or a rapier-witted Cambridge atheist to call this whole ScienceBlogs enterprise what it is, or has become: class-war claptrap.

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

10 Responses to NY Times slaps ID foes PZ Myers and other ScienceBlog authors

  1. For example, one has to wonder why an overtly political blog with almost zero science like Dispatches from Culture Wars is even hosted on science blogs!

  2. I agree; there is little science over there. I would say it’s more like a mob than anything else. PZ throws out the red meat and then the crazies come out of the woodwork. It doesn’t matter what is being discussed, from AIDS to UFOs, the regulars are nasty beond belief.

  3. Scordova,

    Any mention of Christian bashing by the Biased lady of all the news that fit to twist re: PZ Meyers blog? Because, usually, thats what his blog is doing. It is very rare for liberals to attack Islam with equal contempt. They’re usually to afraid of the backlashes by Islamic faithful or oddly enough, liberals that defend Islam and Mohammed’s followers with a greater apologetic than some Christians defend Christ.

    Or is their self-righteous take down of PZ only related to Mohammed bashing?

    Progressives seem to miss Christian bashing most of the time. It is a very queer thing since Islamic radicals usually target specific groups within the liberal demographic for death. Yet, liberals in Europe and America are constantly cozying up to radical Islamic followers and defend them with zeal.

    I’m just curious, when did PZ write the piece on Mohammed? Is it the only religion that NYT writer mentions?

  4. Anyone interested in the original issue should google Scienceblogs and Pepsico.

  5. Imagine if the whole world was devoid of religious people and it was made up solely of people like that! OK, sorry. I shouldn’t throw them all into the same category as I’m sure there are some who don’t agree with all the rhetoric and derision and vulgarity of the site, but it is hard to see how you can put up with it if you have any sense of morality at all. Oh, I forgot. In their eyes there is no good and evil. Keep that in mind next time you are tempted to think that PZ’s ideas have merit. I, for one, certainly would not want to live in a world filled with people like PZ who have no problems using condescending ridicule to bully his fellow men who do not believe as he does. What a scary world that would be!

  6. At the end of the article:

    Points of Entry: This Week’s Recommendations
    SEMPER SCI
    For science that’s accessible but credible, steer clear of polarizing hatefests like atheist or eco-apocalypse blogs. Instead, check out scientificamerican.com, discovermagazine.com and Anthony Watts’s blog, Watts Up With That?

    Wow. The newspaper of record is directing me to ;) hate-filled anti-science feverswamp of climate denial WUWT instead? The phones will be ringing with expressions of deep concern. Watch this space.

  7. I’m not sure that Heffernan’s dismissal of the Pepsi controversy is fair. For one thing, it seems that this isn’t really Seed Media Group’s first offense. http://twitter.com/EmilyAnthes/status/18131707104 Covering up Bhopal to appease Dow? In 2009? Really? http://www.guardian.co.uk/scie.....ienceblogs

  8. 8

    Honestly I’m more concerned about the South Park bashing. Historians will call those guys the Mark Twain of our era. Bet on it.

  9. Would the termination of PZ’s blogging help the world.

    Here is a quotation by Dean Esmay on Jonathan Witt’s blog (Witt was screen writer for Gonzalez and Richard’s Privileged Planet movie)

    I have a free suggestion for the Discovery Institute: put P.Z. Myers on your payroll, if he isn’t already

    Dean Esmay
    More Fallout from Dilbert

  10. 10

    NY times is no friend of Christianity or America.
    Beware motivations.
    Indeed there is hatred and venom against Christianity in most media outlets that would not be allowed if another target was being aimed at. establishments are not to be trusted. They simply do their work in the name of moral righteousness.
    Better to have it out on blogs then let it simmer beneath and be hidden when those in power make their moves.
    In causes that must overcome error all publicity is good.
    Let them rant and rage.
    gives a reason to answer before the audience.
    Two steps ahead folks.

Leave a Reply