Kristine
Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006
|
| Quote (Kattarina98 @ Dec. 06 2011,15:29) | | Quote (midwifetoad @ Dec. 06 2011,15:00) | You forgot to include a category for new ID research results.
Or one for Designer sightings. (Do crop circles count?) |
They have a new poster, AMP, the aspiring next generation. He will certainly churn out those research results by the truckload. He's an American studying biology at the University of Glasgow and has recently celebrated his first public appearance by harassing PZ Myers, thereby embarrassing himself and ID in one fell swoop. It's out there on YouTube for all to watch; I'll try and find the link.
Edit: I got the initials wrong, it's Jonathan A.
Here is the link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...._AkdhsQ
He comes up at 0:53 |
Oh - that guy. *Groan* His technique is not new, but the problem is he takes even more words that most cranks to get to his nonpoint.
Testable hypothesis: we can look forward to the kind of dingbattery that often goes on when self-styled historians take on major popular works, such as when nobodies attacked William L. Shirer's Rise and Fall of Third Reich because Shirer had not read some obscure Hungarian's paper. (Now, I'm not saying that there is nothing to criticize in Shirer's work, but that scholarly works, like all evidence, must be examined in context.)
What strikes me, as a nonscientist academic, is that this sort of "questioning" mirrors both what passes for discourse in popular culture and the utter silliness and crap that passes for "academic research" in the humanities and social science, particularly in literary criticism and in history, and particularly in cultural anthropology, disciplines that I do consider worthy of study and enjoy very much. Really, scientists have to battle on two fronts, and the people that they really have to "thank" for this are their fellow academics for living in a fantasy world that only enables logical fallacies both in popular culture and at bastions of babble like UD.
So, I guess it's best that UD continue, because we will continue to have a clearinghouse for such new (old) tricks from new blood. It's just sad that the social sciences and humanities are moving toward science in such a manner as to try to foist the utter irrationality presently pursued in these fields upon the "hard" sciences. But perhaps this is the means by which we finally get all disciplines grounded in the physical sciences.
The minute I first clapped eyes on Mr. Jonathan M I thought, "Oh no, just when I think I'm out, they pull me back in!" (And if I'm not making myself clear right now with my drawing parallels with the shenanigans history and lit, it will become clear in time.)
And yes, welcome back, Kattarina.
--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?
AtBC Poet Laureate
"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive
"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr
|
