Denialism

How Dare They!

—

by

MarkH
in

Denyse O’Leary points us to an upcoming criticism of the New York Times from the crank journal First Things. Their great sin? Allowing Dawkins, a critic of Behe, to review his latest book.

He notes the curious fact that the Times should never have given the book to Dawkins to review anyway, without giving Behe the right of reply (which it would never dare to do):

You see, it’s only OK for critics to review their opponents when Behe does it for Time. How dare the New York Times allow Dawkins to then say something about Behe’s work?

Then in yet another example of the ID cranks’ stunning lack of insight, she accuses “Darwinism” of being the Enron of biology. If peer-reviewed publications are the currency of science, is it ID or evolutionary science that is spending money it doesn’t have?

Comments

  1. Nick Johnson

    You’ve got a typo in your link syntax.

    Reply
  2. The Professor

    Hey, you’ve got mismatched quotes in the first link of this post: double quote at the beginning of the URL and single quote after. It’s eating up a chunk of text.

    Fun post, though. Denyse is always good for a chuckle or two.

    Reply
  3. IanR

    Apparently, in the most recent edition of First Things, Fr. Richard Neuhaus defends Mike Behe

    Presumably that’s the John Richard Neuhaus, Catholic priest, neocon, director of the IRD and adviser to Bush on “abortion, stem cell research, cloning and marriage”?

    If he’s defending Behe, that’s quite a mark against Behe.

    Reply
  4. Drat

    I’d say that’s not a lack of insight, that’s a deliberate lie. Think of how twisted her mind must be to come up with that Enron angle. Wormy, yes, and scary-wormy.

    Reply
  5. blf

    The following is my (quick!) reconstruction of this massively botched posting (sans the hyperlinks, which I’ve omitted for three reasons: First, UD is currently publishing the home addresses and phone numbers of the Baylor regents; second, I simply can’t be bothered to unscramble the mess; and third, the SciBlogs server is acting cranky again!):

    Denyse O’Leary points us to an upcoming criticism of the New York Times from the crank journal First Things. Their great sin? Allowing Dawkins, a critic of Behe, to review his latest book.

    He notes the curious fact that the Times should never have given the book to Dawkins to review anyway, without giving Behe the right of reply (which it would never dare to do)

    You see, it’s only OK for critics to review their opponents when Behe does it for Time. How dare the New York Times allow Dawkins to then say something about Behe’s work?
    Then in yet another example of the ID cranks’ stunning lack of insight, she accuses “Darwinism” of being the Enron of biology. If peer-reviewed publications are the currency of science, is it ID or evolutionary science that is spending money it doesn’t have?

    Note to blog owner: Please review your postings!

    Reply
  6. MarkH

    I apologize. I actually fell asleep writing this, and woke up today not remembering if I had finished editing it. Scheduled posting can be dangerous.

    Reply
  7. llewelly

    I actually fell asleep writing this, and woke up today not remembering if I had finished editing it.

    Did you get abducted by aliens again?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *