Dan

I call on ALL those who support ID to bring their evidence to scientific conferences and such…and then I will try my best to help them out when they do so and come back to find that their jobs are in jeopardy, such was the case with Stenrberg, who merely had the audacity to support an article from someone he didn’t necessarily even agree with! We all know what happened to him. I have to wonder why these people always claim IDers never provide evidence, yet refuse to mention that anyone who puts forth evidence or even says they support the idea soon find themselves in job limbo, shunned by others in their field, attacked by fellow professors, etc.

I’ve said this many times- it’s quite obvious that one side of this debate finds honesty a virtue, the other lacks it everytime they speak and seem to be okay with it…logically when one side cannot be honest, they’re probably wrong about their ideas to begin with. When you know you’re right and have the facts to back up your claims, you have no reason to lie…you only lie when you have no other choice.

“…“Doubting Thomas” Cal’s nihilistic suggestion to subject the Bible to scientific analysis is too big a project for this event…” [Argument by demonization (ID is really "the bible")]

“…an hour or so sounds like just about how long it should take to dispatch any scientific claims for intelligent design.” [Argument from removable ignorance.]

“The question is, will the designists show?” [Argument by bluster.]

“Calls go out every day to present scientific data at scientific conferences.” [Argument by obscure reference.]

“The designists are always busy that decade.” [Argument by omission (of relevant mention of numerous debates previously held (Miller vs. Nelson, for example)]

“Meanwhile, the scientific data supporting evolution continue to pour in on a daily basis….” [Argument by definition (What is meant by "data"? just-so stories that show dinosaurs becoming birds?] [Argument by obscure reference (where does one find the {real} data flowing in on a daily basis?)]

“…and produce spinoff applications that create new medicine, more productive crops, cleaner water and better living for billions of people worldwide.” [Argument by confusion of terms (micro vs macro evolution)]

“The Darwinists show up to work every day in thousands of labs around the globe.” [Argument by omission (only "Darwinists" show up for work?]

“January. Cleveland. The “science” of ID. Put up or shut up.” [More argument by definition (if it is science, it is Darwinism; if it is "science", it is ID]

“Patricia Princehouse, Department of Biology….” [Argument by misdirection]

You will have your work cut out for you, Dr. Dembski.

Regards
Dan

On your blog, you wrote:
“Princehouse is in the Philosophy Department (not the Biology Department, as she claims below)” http://www.uncommondescent.com.....chives/581

Although she is not listed on the Biology Faculty page, she is listed here:
http://admission.case.edu/pdfs.....ryBiol.pdf

She is listed as “Visiting Assistant Professor of Biology.”

Elsewhere, she is listed as “Lecturer in Philosophy” and “Lecturer in History and Philosophy.”
http://admission.case.edu/pdfs.....cience.pdf
http://admission.case.edu/pdfs.....osophy.pdf

[This is useful additional information, but it seems to me that this position in biology has merely been given to assist her in combat with ID proponents. I've never known Princehouse to be anything other than a philosopher. --WmAD]