Ptaylor
Posts: 1180 Joined: Aug. 2006
|
Dr 'That'sTwoDoctorsToYou' quotes someone quoting someone else: Quote | A biologist I know recently bleached his hair and changed his appearance in other ways so as to be almost unrecognizable. I’m being deliberately vague about his looks and identity because he was going undercover. When I last saw him, he was ready for a stint of researching and lab work on intelligent design at a university that he declined to name. On returning to the lab after winter break, he said he would adopt a different disguise? The purpose is to avoid being spotted by scientists hostile to intelligent design (ID). If Darwinists realized that this stealthy biologist was working in their midst, as the guest of a professor at the same university, they could make that host professor pay a heavy career price. |
This has to be called bullshit upon. Going undercover, donning a disguise to 'research' ID? Presumably also gaining a fake ID, a fake career background/resume in order to somehow persuade someone to employ you to do this research? What research do you actually do? How do you explain the absence of the real 'you' in the meantime? What do you do with the research data that you've collected? (Actually one of the commenters has touched on this). Quote | The purpose is to avoid being spotted by scientists hostile to intelligent design (ID). If Darwinists realized that this stealthy biologist was working in their midst, as the guest of a professor at the same university, they could make that host professor pay a heavy career price. |
Could it be that this story is coming full circle around to describe the Dembski and Prof Robert Marks’s Evolutionary Informatics Lab affair from September last year? Sure, the story mentions a biologist, and Dr2 D is not one, but the post says details have been altered, and what do facts mean to these people anyway?
The whole post seems so dimwitted that I feel that I may be the victim of a parody. Somebody put me out of my misery if this is the case.
-------------- We no longer say: “Another day; another bad day for Darwinism.” We now say: “Another day since the time Darwinism was disproved.” -PaV, Uncommon Descent, 19 June 2016
|