Joined: Oct. 2009
|Quote (SLP @ Mar. 15 2012,09:36)|
|I came across an old article by Coppedge on a paper dealing with a new algorithm using large datasets to reconstruct phylogenies. It was primarily snarky insults and nonsense, but two things struck me - |
1. The program employed a heuristic search. Coppedge - supposedly knowledgeable about computers and such - declared this to mean that they were "just guessing"
2. He referred to the Maximum Likelihood search criterion as a "value".
IOW - he is completely ignorant of this stuff, yet felt qualified (if not compelled) to write a "take down" of this article.
The worst part is, so many lay YECs gobble his stuff up - they LIKE that he is obnoxious, rude, insulting, etc. Pity that they cannot see that his bluster is used to cover up his angry stupidity.
I read that same article and the critique of it... I think I happened to be reading another thread here at the time and followed the link.
The article and critique was years ago.
You know, in our modern, linked-in, facebooked, blogged society, it's really going to become interesting how one's personal life affects one's job.
No, it probably shouldn't, but it does and it will. Does it matter if you're gay, Christian, atheist, homophobic, or any of that. It shouldn't (it will, but it shouldn't).
On the other hand, if you are spouting views that are diametrically opposite that of your job and it's a critical part of your job, then maybe it should be taken into account. Especially those who directly influence the public in some way.
Like, for example, a science teacher teaching students wrong science. Or a priest being caught with drugs and hookers (of the same sex). His sexual orientation, even his drug use really shouldn't matter. But if I was going to a church that was intolerant to homosexuals, then I think I'd want to know if the priest was a homosexual.
It's a very interesting conundrum.
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.