Home » Intelligent Design » Why the PZ Myers Affair is Really, Really Bad?

Why the PZ Myers Affair is Really, Really Bad?

An on line appeal for RD and PZ to make sacrifices in the interest of winning the “war on science”. Will they take the advice?

“Richard and PZ, when it comes to Expelled, it’s time to let other people be the messengers for science. This is not about censoring your ideas and positions, but rather being smart, strategic, tactical, and ultimately effective in promoting science rather than your own personal ideology, books, or blog.”

Go here.

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

22 Responses to Why the PZ Myers Affair is Really, Really Bad?

  1. The intersection point picks up the debate:

    Point of fact, Chris, you said:

    could you folks please try, just this one time, to check your highly developed critical faculties at the door, and accept that most Americans don’t see it your way, and won’t?

    Right, so we should stop trying to impress upon them scientific knowledge, and where they’re flat wrong? What’s the point of the National Center for Science Education, again?
    Posted by: Dan | March 22, 2008 2:31 PM

    “No, I suspect this is a gift to Expelled, a gift to Ben Stein. The controversy raises the profile of the movie, people…”

    So we should all just keep out mouths shut and let this bafoons carry on? If the vast majority already agrees with Stein and his ilk, then this seems like a silly strategy.

    Every second that can be taken when the idiocy of these positions is made public, and here it is done an extremely humerous way, seems to me an opportunity. Will there be fallout in terms of inriching the coffers of these film makers, yes, of course, but if that means 1 percent of people change their minds about intelligence design, I say money well spent.

    And, I would hope, the New York Times would stop letting Ben Stein write an op-ed column for their Business section.

    Posted by: Dave Bacon | March 22, 2008 3:10 PM

    Its also picked up by Entertaining Research Why Nisbet’s gag order reeks of authoritarianism

    . . . If this is how we have to make science palatable to the public, namely, by suppressing dissenting voices and opinions, pray, what is the use in promoting science? Wouldn’t the world (as Bharathiar put is so eloquently) laugh at us if we buy a painting by selling both of our eyes? Isn’t such monolithic points of view, in which, other voices and shades of opinion suppressed reek of authoritarianism and political extremes?. . .

    Links cite the NY Times

    No Admission for Evolutionary Biologist at Creationist Film,
    By CORNELIA DEAN Published: March 21, 2008

    Two evolutionary biologists — P. Z. Myers of the University of Minnesota, Morris, and Richard Dawkins of Oxford — tried to go to the movies at the Mall of America in Minneapolis Thursday evening. Dr. Dawkins got in. Dr. Myers did not. . . .

    CORNELIA DEAN apparently knows little about Intelligent Design, having categorized Expelled as “Creationist”. It appears the NY Times fact editors are on siesta.

  2. Wow! That is amazing the way they are biting and tearing at each other. That can hardly be productive for their side. Apparently, the Darwinists need their own big top strategy.

  3. “So we should all just keep out mouths shut and let this bafoons carry on?”

    What an endearing and lovely man.

  4. Well, looks like PZ is not to thrilled with Nesbit’s advice…

    PZ to Nesbit:

    “F**k you very much, Matt. You know where you can stick your advice.”

    PZ needs just a little more rope, and he’s going to eventually hang himself.

    He and Dawkins are *really* doing immense harm to the field of science.

  5. They must have Ms. Dean on speed-dial.

  6. Richard Dawkins is not keeping quiet. He has vented his spleen here:

    “The film goes shamelessly for cheap laughs at the expense of scientists and scholars who are making honest attempts to explain difficult points. Cheap laughs that could only be raised in an audience of scientific ignoramuses (and here Mathis’ propaganda instincts cannot be faulted: he certainly knows his target audience)

    Evolution by natural selection is the only known process whereby organized complexity can ultimately come into being. Organized complexity – and that includes everything capable of designing anything intelligently – comes LATE into the universe. It cannot exist at the beginning, as I have explained again and again in my writings.”

  7. “Organized complexity … comes LATE into the universe. It cannot exist at the beginning, as I have explained again and again in my writings.” Dicky Dawkins

    Thus prior to organised complexity, according to the sage, was DISorganised complexity. And prior to that was DISorganised NONcomplexity, or was that organised NONcomplexity? I’ll have to do some more toilet reading so I can make some sense of his oh-so-eloquent ramblings.

    “… as I have explained again and again in my writings” – Yes, Richard, and they STILL don’t all believe it. More handwaving may help…

    “The film goes shamelessly for cheap laughs at the expense of scientists and scholars who are making honest attempts to explain difficult points.” This seems similar to Dawkins own career on film where, instead of the so-called ‘cheap laughs’, we had the oh-so-sincere lines about science will forever be stunted or spoiled by anyone who may question Darwinism. [audience is now meant to start baying for IDers blood,... light the torches] When addressing the scientists and scholars, do you mean those IDists “who are making honest attempts to explain difficult points.”? What happens to IDists who try to explain the difficult points? Oh, that’s right, they get EXPELLED!

    Someone should make a movie about that …

  8. “And, I would hope, the New York Times would stop letting Ben Stein write an op-ed column for their Business section.”

    The irony. :P

  9. I have one request for PZ: Substantiate your assertion, PZ

  10. Hear Richard interviewiing PZ using at least 2 cameras and wired microphones shortly after the incident. Hear their side of the story. They insist that Expelled has shot itself in the foot.
    http://video.google.com.au/vid.....;plindex=1

  11. Dawkins insists that the film is very poor quality and that it is very boring. Why would he worry about a poor quality boring film? Something doesn’t add up.

  12. idnet.com.au: You must have a really fine tuned worry detector.

  13. This doesn’t bode well for Myers’ upcoming tenure review. If enough of his peers start viewing him as a liability to science and the University of Minnesota then they’ll give him the bum’s rush just as quick as they did Guilliermo Gonzalez. And PZ Myers’, unlike Guilliermo Gonzalez, has no impeccable publication record to fall back on in protest so it won’t be difficult or unseeming for the tenure committee to give him a thumbs down.

    This is very, very bad for us. If PZ Myers didn’t exist we’d have to invent him. Myers does more to give Darwinists a bad name than any man alive. If he’s denied tenure we might be forced to put together a “Save the Myers” foundation to solicit donations to keep his blog alive.

  14. dnmlthr

    Anger is usually preceded by fear. Most of us hide our fear behind our anger.

  15. DaveScot -

    You mean the DI isn’t already paying Myers a hefty salary?

  16. 16

    I was telling my parents about this yesterday, when we went out to eat for Easter Sunday.

    They were both shocked, particularly my mother who is involved in biological research.

    Obviously, the Darwinists must know that there theory is pure fluff, otherwise why won’t they allow a free and vigorous debate on the subject?

  17. 17

    At # 3..

    JP you just made my day. Ha.

  18. This doesn’t bode well for Myers’ upcoming tenure review. If enough of his peers start viewing him as a liability to science and the University of Minnesota then they’ll give him the bum’s rush just as quick as they did Guilliermo Gonzalez.

    Don’t get your hopes up. Myers is a leader in the Darwinist movement to suppress any dissent in academia. My guess is he will get tenure because he will unleash the hounds of war on anyone who stands in his way. He probably has the entire University of Minnesota power structure dancing to whatever tune he calls.

  19. 19

    Doesn’t Myers already have tenure?

  20. 20
    Horace_Worblehat

    Myers had had tenure since 2003.

    Why speculate when the facts are readily available?

  21. larry and horace

    Apparently I’ve been misinformed about Myers tenure. My mistake.

    But where are the facts “readily available”?

  22. 22

    Well, both his department and his blog (Pharyngula) identify him as an Associate Professor. “Associate Professor” virtually always means “tenured.”

    It’s an easy mistake to make. I’m curious about why you thought he wasn’t tenured. Did someone tell you his tenure review was “upcoming”?

Leave a Reply