Paul Nelson Pontificates Over Oklahoma Airwaves

Ah, yes. We’re in Oklahoma now…actually for a few days now. Go Tulsa! A couple brief things before we get to Paul Nelson and Intelligent Design.

1. If you are a business in Oklahoma, don’t use the phrase “an OK __________” for your publicity. We’ve passed all kinds of “we’re an OK Inn”, “an OK place to stay”, “Bob’s Ribs, we’re OK “…. Stop it; it makes you seem mediocre. I know you mean you’re a great place to eat, state pride and all, but really. To outsiders it just seems funny.

2. Fix your highways. You’re not as bad as my home state of Missouri, but you’re getting there. Super bumpy for hundreds of miles.

Okay, now for Nelson. Driving to Oklahoma City, I was scanning the dial looking for NPR and instead came across 95.1 FM (I believe they’re out of Stillwater, but I could be wrong–never caught their tag). The on-air personality was interviewing Paul Nelson. What are the odds that I would hear his name during my brief pass through that frequency? Lucky me, huh?

Well, I certainly learned a few things, let me tell you. I learned that Judge John E. Jone’s decision in the Dover case will certainly be found “in the dustbin of history”. I learned that the case was not a setback for the ID movement, no! Rather it is a boon, a veritible guide to the promised land. A latern in the dark to show the way for the movement.

Now, you may ask, “the way to what?” I certainly did. Well, here’s the funny thing. After several minutes of listening to Mr. Nelson, I have no idea. At first I thought it might be “the way to legitimate research.” But then Mr. Nelson said that the evidence and research supporting ID are exhaustive and “overwhelming”. So, that way has apparently already been forged–no work left to do. Then I thought, “no, it’s the way into the mainstream consciousness and legitimate social and political dialogue.” But, dashing my hopes again, Mr. Nelson told me that the ID movement is accepted wholeheartedly across many (if not most) demographics. What then could the way be?

Finally, after teasing me for almost 15 minutes, I got my answer. The on-air guy at the station started to pontificate about the current state of biological science being so clearly wrong in almost every way that it was only a moron that would believe what scientists had to say. This was a point that Nelson also made frequently. Strange how Nelson never offered even a hint of what, where, or why that evidence is. And, more strangely, the interviewer–a journalist I would guess–never asked a question of him that would lead to finding any of that evidence. But then, al was clear–we don’t need to look for evidence, they were going to supply it to us. This is where the interviewer illuminated the way:

All I had to do was buy the DVD: “Unlocking the Mystery of Life“. Now, that’s all the evidence you need.

Why don’t we know these things in Missouri??? Why do I have to travel to Oklahoma to get an education??? Why??? Why??? Why??? Oh, the humanity…(uh, is that the right term?) of it all!

Advertisements

14 Comments

Filed under Education, Evolution, Science

14 responses to “Paul Nelson Pontificates Over Oklahoma Airwaves

  1. We are not at war with Oceana, we were never at war with Oceana. Buy our book, we’ll prove it. Or at least we’ll collect your money and tell you the same thing we just did.

  2. But should I buy the DVD? What should I do?

  3. I can’t make the decision for you, but if you do decide to get it, go for the unrated version. There are more boobies in it.

  4. The “Kitzmiller v Dover SB” didn’t do anything to ID because Judge Jones ruled against a strawman version of ID.

    And if the anti-ID position were so strong there shouldn’t be ANY scientists who are either a Creationist or an IDist. Yet there are thousands.

    I am still trying to figure out how saying “it evolved” is of any use when it is obvious that in most cases we don’t even know if such an “evolution” is even possible.

    For example did you know there isn’t any data that demonstrates single-celled organisms can “evolve” into anything but single-celled organisms? None. It is all faith. Faith that someday we will find the answer. IOW science done by promissory notes.

    Also ID would go away if the anti-IDists would/ could just substantiate their claims.

    As for ID research- read “The Privileged Planet”. It is full of scientific research that led to the design inference. And using their data we know where to look for complex organisms and also for possible future homes. They also make several predictions.

    BTW thanks to “Dover” I know I can get ID introduced to high school students, on school grounds and during class time. It will involve the video blipey mentioned and also the video of “The Privileged Planet”.

  5. The “Kitzmiller v Dover SB” didn’t do anything to ID because Judge Jones ruled against a strawman version of ID.

    O RLY?

    Judge Jones saw the Intelligent Design Creationism Hoax exactly for what it was – a poorly veiled end run around Edwards v. Aguillard – and he ruled accordingly.

    And if the anti-ID position were so strong there shouldn’t be ANY scientists who are either a Creationist or an IDist. Yet there are thousands.

    Hardly. Maybe a few hundred engineers, a dozen scientists from non-biology fields, and a handful of religiously motivated biologists to be generous. As for your dumb assertion that there shouldn’t be any at all, well you’re right. There shouldn’t be any scientists who fall for such an empty headed idea, but the world will always have scientists who are intellectually dishonest, because scientists are people, and people have faults. Welcome to reality.

    I am still trying to figure out how saying “it evolved” is of any use when it is obvious that in most cases we don’t even know if such an “evolution” is even possible.

    For example did you know there isn’t any data that demonstrates single-celled organisms can “evolve” into anything but single-celled organisms? None. It is all faith. Faith that someday we will find the answer. IOW science done by promissory notes.

    Fortunately, reality doesn’t give a crap about your personal incredulity or your personal willful ignorance.

    Also ID would go away if the anti-IDists would/ could just substantiate their claims.

    No, Joe, ID won’t go away as long as people like Dembski can continue to sell it to the gullible rubes. Science has nothing to do with it. It’s all about money and stealing it from the ignorant.

    As for ID research- read “The Privileged Planet”. It is full of scientific research…

    Well see, this clears things up. If that’s what you call science, it’s no wonder you’re so damned pig ignorant.

    Try picking up a textbook sometime. Better yet, use that little computer you’ve got there to actually look up “Scientific Method” instead of wasting internet bandwidth on spreading your ignorance.

    BTW thanks to “Dover” I know I can get ID introduced to high school students, on school grounds and during class time. It will involve the video blipey mentioned and also the video of “The Privileged Planet”.

    hehe. g’head. It’ll fit nicely in a Comparative Mythology course. Or as a great negative example in a Constitutional Law class.

    Where you can’t put it is in a Science class. Wanna know why, Joe? Because it ain’t science.

    Thanks to “Dover”.

    “Waterloo! Waterloo! Waterloo!”

    Buh bye, Fluff-Fluff.

  6. JanieBelle, you can’t understand normal thinking.

    Intelligent Design Creationism only exists in the minds of the ID ignorant.

    See if you can follow this:

    ID and Creationism

    And it is a fact that there are THOUSANDS of scientists who are eiother a Creationist or an IDist. Dr Humphreys says there are 10,000 scientists who are Creationists in the USA alone.

    My personal incredulity has nothing to do with the fact there isn’t any data for what I posted. If anyone thinks this is incorrect all they have to do is provide the data and refute me.

    Oh and that was some refutation of “The Privileged Planet”. You do realize that several peer-revioewed papers came from that research?

    G. Gonzalez, D. Brownlee, and P.D. Ward, “The Galactic Habitable Zone: Galactic Chemical Evolution”, Icarus 152 (2001):185-200
    “Stars, Planets, and Metals”, Reviews of Modern Physics 75 (2003)101-120
    “Rummaging Through Earth’s Attic for Remains of Ancient Life”, Icarus 160 (2002) 183-196
    “Is the Sun Anomalous?”, Astronomy and Geophysics 40, no. 5 (1999):5.25-5.29
    “Are Stars with Planets Anomalous?”, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 308 (1999): 447-458
    “Impact Reseeding During the Late Heavy Bombardment”, Icarus 162 (2003):38-46
    “Parent Stars of Extrasolar Planets III: p Cancri Revisited”, Astronomy and Astrophysics 339 (1998): L29-L32
    “Stellar Atmospheres of Nearby Young Solar Analogs”, New Astronomy 7 (2002): 211-226

    JB it is obvious you cannot substantiate anything from the anti-ID position. Thanks for the demonstration in pure ignorance.

  7. JanieBelle, yopu can’t understand normal thinking.

    The Dover decision is only good in that one little PA district. Here in MA it is virtually meaningless.

  8. Tell it to the judge, Joe. Why doncha ask the folks in Cobb County, Georgia what they think about that whole “that ruling in that jurisdiction won’t play here” thing?

    ID ain’t creationism? History would seem to indicate otherwise.

    A pile of crap re-named is still a pile of crap, and it smells exactly the same on the bottom of your shoe.

    You can bullshit all you like, Joe, but nobody’s buying it. You can point to all the peer reviewed literature you’d like, but NONE of it supports the ID Creationism Hoax. Not one. Not even an iota. You can point to all the ID Creationism Hoax literature you’d like, but NONE of it is peer-reviewed scientific literature. Not one.

    They are mutually exclusive sets. The little place on a Venn diagram of the two contains no papers.

    Zero. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Nyet. Nothing.

    You’re pissin’ in the wind.

    TTFN

  9. So, I’m just wondering, Joe. Have you read ANYTHING other than The Priveleged Planet?

    You do realize that actual research would require you to read and comprehend a wide range of materials from a wide range of disciplines, authors, and data sets?

    And, yes, I have read Planet, as well as Behe, Johnson, and Dembski…still waiting for actual RESEARCH.

    I notice you didn’t link (or quote) any of the TONS of OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE available in the book.

  10. JanieBell, you can’t understand normal thinking.

    What am I supposed to tell to what judge? Judge Jones’ruling ONLY applies to that one little district in PA. That is a fact.

    And why is it that only the people who know the least about ID and Creation conflate the two?

    History does not demonstrate that ID and Creation are the same. Only morons say idiotic shit like that.

    The peer-reviewed literature I posted is the scientific research that led to the design inference. But if you think otherwise I will gladly listen to your PoV pertaining to the data presented in TPP.

    To blipey,

    Yes I have read many books other than TPP. The research is in the book.

    I also noticed that no one on this blog has done anything to either refute the design inference or substantiate their anti-ID materialistic PoV of sheer-dumb-luck.

    You morons can spew as much as you like. However it is obvious that is all you have.

  11. Refuting the entire ID movement has not been the topic of any thread here at Clowning. I can start a thread discussing the design inference if you’d like, but there are far better places for that, and they’ve already been doing that for a long time.

    But, just in case you’d like to open another one, I’ll start here:

    Provide me with the exact words of a design hypothesis. Please don’t use Dembski’s babble; it has been cussed and discussed ad naseum. Provide me with whatever you think the best Design Hypothesis is.

    I’ll post it in another thread and we can discuss its merits. I’d rather not, but what the hell.

  12. JanieBell, you can’t understand normal thinking.
    You keep saying that. To everybody. Does it occur to you that perhaps it’s not everybody else, but rather you who “can’t understand normal thinking”?

    Nah, probably not.

    What am I supposed to tell to what judge?

    The one that will be calling your decision to put the Intelligent Design Creationism Hoax into science classrooms “Breathtaking Inanity”. That judge.

    And why is it that only the people who know the least about ID and Creation conflate the two?

    The people who know the most about the Intelligent Design Creationism Hoax are not conflating. They’re exposing.

    History does not demonstrate that ID and Creation are the same. Only morons say idiotic shit like that.

    Only morons print things like “cdesign proponentsists” and then say “ID isn’t creationism” and expect intelligent people to believe it, dolt.

    The peer-reviewed literature I posted is the scientific research that led to the design inference.

    The notion that actual research inspired Dembski’s scam in no way supports the notion that the research supports The Intelligent Design Creationism Hoax.

    You can’t understand normal thinking, dipshit.

    Yes I have read many books other than TPP. The research is in the book.

    Well apparently you haven’t read that one, because there is exactly zero research in it.

    Handwaving and personal incredulity are not research.

    I also noticed that no one on this blog has done anything to either refute the design inference or substantiate their anti-ID materialistic PoV of sheer-dumb-luck.

    Refute what? Refute “Goddunit”? Ok, here ya go.

    No he didn’t.

    I have just produced exactly the same amount of research in 10 seconds as The Intelligent Design Creationism Hoax has in its entire existence of 15 or 20 years.

    Get it now?

    You morons can spew as much as you like. However it is obvious that is all you have.

    Your ignorance betrays you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s