Posted: Jun 20, 2014 7:07 am
Hi Bob.
I'm glad that you're not actually wasting your time and are writing as little new material as possible for this discussion. Instead, you appear to just be satisfied to recycle parts of years-old blog posts from your radioshow website instead.
As evidence, I'll point the forum to this blog post on your website, which has a last update as of August 17, 2012 ( http://kgov.com/PZ-Myers-trochlea-challenge ).The content in the seventh paragraph down is almost identical to that of your fifth and sixth paragraphs in post #250 in this discussion.
However, I am a little upset that Oldskeptic, Kali, Calilasseia, ADParker and willhud9, among others, have taken the time out of their days to answer what essentially amounts to a canned response.
For shame. At least put some originality into it.
While you're at it, you might like to adjust the wording of your post #250 (or maybe not, seeing as your account is currently in suspension). It’s no longer accurate.
While Massimo Pigliucci isn't a creationist (although you've also wilfully and dreadfully/tragically misinterpreted his blog post regarding a self-assessment of the online skeptics, atheists and secular humanists community), Virginia Heffernan, who wrote that little opinion piece diatribe in the New York Times against ScienceBlogs, is.
She publically came out as a creationist in 2013 (link for the interested http://news.yahoo.com/why-im-a-creation ... 07217.html). As a result, I suspect he she had some ulterior motives in her writing about the prominently atheist and decidedly anti-creationist PZ Meyers.
Her reasoning (for lack of a better word) as to her creationist belief is that she has “never found a more compelling story of our origins than the ones that involve God” – something that flies in the face of the masses of evidence that is available and has been built through decades of patient and intelligent work. It’s also deeply worrying in someone that used to work as a science and technology writer. I make that comment as someone who has worked as a professional writer in a couple of fields.
She concluded that a story with a god is better than one without. I suspect that she just lacks imagination. Even if I was to be a creationist, the Judaeo-Christian creation story is pretty dull and would not be what I chose. Give me the Australian aboriginal dreamtime myths (rainbow serpent) or the Norse myths, at least those contain something interesting.
I'm glad that you're not actually wasting your time and are writing as little new material as possible for this discussion. Instead, you appear to just be satisfied to recycle parts of years-old blog posts from your radioshow website instead.
As evidence, I'll point the forum to this blog post on your website, which has a last update as of August 17, 2012 ( http://kgov.com/PZ-Myers-trochlea-challenge ).The content in the seventh paragraph down is almost identical to that of your fifth and sixth paragraphs in post #250 in this discussion.
However, I am a little upset that Oldskeptic, Kali, Calilasseia, ADParker and willhud9, among others, have taken the time out of their days to answer what essentially amounts to a canned response.
For shame. At least put some originality into it.
While you're at it, you might like to adjust the wording of your post #250 (or maybe not, seeing as your account is currently in suspension). It’s no longer accurate.
While Massimo Pigliucci isn't a creationist (although you've also wilfully and dreadfully/tragically misinterpreted his blog post regarding a self-assessment of the online skeptics, atheists and secular humanists community), Virginia Heffernan, who wrote that little opinion piece diatribe in the New York Times against ScienceBlogs, is.
She publically came out as a creationist in 2013 (link for the interested http://news.yahoo.com/why-im-a-creation ... 07217.html). As a result, I suspect he she had some ulterior motives in her writing about the prominently atheist and decidedly anti-creationist PZ Meyers.
Her reasoning (for lack of a better word) as to her creationist belief is that she has “never found a more compelling story of our origins than the ones that involve God” – something that flies in the face of the masses of evidence that is available and has been built through decades of patient and intelligent work. It’s also deeply worrying in someone that used to work as a science and technology writer. I make that comment as someone who has worked as a professional writer in a couple of fields.
She concluded that a story with a god is better than one without. I suspect that she just lacks imagination. Even if I was to be a creationist, the Judaeo-Christian creation story is pretty dull and would not be what I chose. Give me the Australian aboriginal dreamtime myths (rainbow serpent) or the Norse myths, at least those contain something interesting.