David Klinghoffer is one of the most entertaining bloggers at Evolution News & Views. His version of logic never fails to bring a smile to my face.
Klinghoffer's latest posting is: A Reason to Doubt the Real, Rather than Pretended, Confidence of Darwin Advocates.
Much of the debate about Darwinian evolution is conducted in public online forums. If interpreted with some care, these give a convenient way of measuring the real confidence of leading spokesmen on the Darwin side. I don't mean the level of bluster -- they're all full of bluster -- but rather what they really must feel at some level deep down.I really don't think this merits further comment by me.1 I'll let the words stand for themselves. I hope you were as amused as I am.
If you follow the top Darwin blogs you'll notice how eagerly and often they go in for mocking extremely marginal and daffy creationists. PZ Myers specializes in this. So too, in his books, does Richard Dawkins. How about answering the arguments of a real scientist who advocates intelligent design on scientific rather than Bible-thumping grounds -- a Douglas Axe or Ann Gauger, for example? How about a thoughtful critique of The Myth of Junk DNA or Signature in the Cell? A response to serious science bloggers like ENV's Casey Luskin or Jonathan M.?
Uh, no, thank you!
It's quite a contrast with intelligent-design advocates who, like them or not, wrestle with the top scientists and thinkers on the other side, while ignoring the small timers.
1. I assume those "serious scientists" don't read Sandwalk, Why Evolution Is True, Panda;s Thumb, Thoughts from Kansas, or dozens of other blogs and books that refute the nonsense spouted by those "serious scientists."
Image Credit: conservababes
