CBEB’s

I knew beforehand that some people would have a problem with the word “Douchebag” when I started BPSDB.org. Fortunately, those who would rather not add that word to their lexicon have been cool about it, and a compromise has been reached by creating a “Blogging on PseudoScience” graphic. No harm, no foul. Some people, however, feel otherwise.

Greg Laden’s Blog was the first ScienceBlog to officially join the BPSDB program (the concept had been earlier been endorsed by ScienceBlogger Green Gabbro), and it didn’t take long for the douchebag contingent to voice an opinion. Five comments into the thread, Scott Belyea chimed in with this:

Well, I continue to be puzzled why so many rational, well-educated, knowledgeable, liberal bloggers are still using references to female genitals and hygiene as the worst insults they can come up with.

Why?

For the love of Christ. There’s really no need to address this, because Stephanie Z came up with a brilliant response:

Let’s see, Scott. Transparent; full of stuff that’s at best useless, at worst harmful; and sold in coded language as the cure for a problem that doesn’t exist? Works for me.

A little research reveals that Scott Belyea is a one-trick concern troll. Look how he derailed this thread at the Panda’s thumb and tried to do the same at Recursivity.

It would appear that Mr. Belyea is still living in the pre-Dover era of “he said, she said” journalism that treated ID proponents as if they were doing legitimate science. That era is long gone, and it’s not because of Judge Jones’ ruling; it’s because it has become painfully obvious that Intelligent Design has only been pretending to be a scientific endeavor. If people want to think criticism of ID should be respectful and considerate, that’s their prerogative, but a growing number of observers have come to the realization that ID deserves nothing but mockery.

After Judge Jones’ ruling, did the “Isaac Newton of Information Theory” react by putting forth a testable theory of Intelligent design? No, he produced a cheesy flash animation. If that’s not a douchebag move on his part, I don’t know what is. If pseudo-scientists don’t want to be called douchebags, the solution is simple: stop acting like douchebags.

Incidentally, I don’t know why other people find the word “douchebag” funny, but I’ve always found it funny since the classic “Lord and Lady Doooooooouchebag!” sketch on Saturday Night Live. Plus, it - no pun intended - rolls off the tongue a lot easier than “enema bag” or “colostomy bag”.

Last week’s prediction contest is officially over, and we don’t have a winner. Apparently our prediction skills aren’t nearly as awesome as Denyse O’Leary’s. No one thought of the obvious DI Fellow to issue the press release: Dr. Geoffrey Simmons. For that matter, picking the dark horse, Anika Smith, might have been an acceptable choice, too. Oh well… the money I saved buying one of you fuckers a T-shirt payed for bpsdb.org, anyway. Better luck next time.

I’ve set up a basic Wordpress blog with a few items for discussion. The general plan is to go live with the site Tuesday, February 12 (Darwin’s Birthday). Until then, there are some posts up for ideas/suggestions.

After watching yesterday’s glorious Crash & Burn by Casey Luskin, I’m in the mood for something light. A wafer-thin mint, if you will. I realize that addressing anything posted at Reasonable Kansans is sort of like pulling the wings off of flies, but this burst of stupidity from “For the Kids” can’t go by unnoticed. Under the headline “Articles to Ponder“, FtK posted the following (I’ve quoted the post in its entirety):

Creation science and peer review

Are Creationists anti-science?

Creationism, Science and Peer Review

Do Creationists reject science?

Coming up with an original thought probably causes FtK’s ears and eyes to bleed, so it’s impossible to figure out what, exactly, she thinks there is to “ponder” about these links. The only thing those links make me ponder is how depressing it is to realize that it’s the 21st Century and there are still people who think creationism is the least bit scientific.

Creationists love to bring up the “Evolution is a religion” strawman, yet all the major Creation Science [sic] organizations exist solely to proselytize. Is Answers in Genesis seeking grants to conduct scientific research? No, they’re soliciting prayers and asking readers to “Support the Ministry“. Is the ICR producing any groundbreaking research? Sure they are; they’ve turned the world of botany on its ear with the stunning discovery that plants aren’t really alive.

And what about Creation Science [sic] and peer review? Answers in Genesis recently started their own “peer-reviewed” journal with laughable results. This, ladies and gentlemen, is what is passed off as “science” in the world of creationism:

Mutations in the ebg system are clearly not an example of evolution but mutation and natural selection allowing for adaptation to the environment.

Yes, and a BLT is clearly not an example of a sandwich; it’s nothing but bacon, lettuce and tomato stuck between two pieces of toasted bread.

Personally, I have a hard time accepting the concept of gravity because the thought of a battleship falling out of the sky and landing on my head scares the crap out of me. So if someone doesn’t want to accept the theory of evolution, that’s fine and dandy with me. But to think that creationism is somehow a viable alternative to modern biology requires a buttload of cognitive dissonance.

The really amazing thing is, that while vociferously denying evolution, many creationists simultaneously endorse some brand of hyper-evolution.

In other FtK news, I fucked up and invoked her name on the Casey Luskin thread at AtBC and like a bad penny, she showed up and proceeded to try to take a bullet for Casey. How did FtK defend Casey’s “honor”? By trying to create a diversion, of course. Rule #1 in the For the Kids Playbook: If they’re talking about Casey Luskin, mention Eugenie Scott. Rule #2 in the FtK Playbook: When people point out how stupid you sound, say something even stupider:

Hey, Dave, is your favorite bird the “red herring”. Just curious.

Heil Darwin!!!

Remember, this is a woman who operates a blog named “Reasonable Kansans”. A woman who tells people to “shut the fuck up”, “drop dead” and says this about Abbie at ERV:

You have got to be the most hateful, foul mouthed, frothing bitch in the biosphere.

Always keep this in mind when reading anything written by FtK: to her, the Golden Rule is “Do as I say, not as I do”.

Because Intelligent Design provides us with a never ending cycle of asshattery, because there are so many variants of woo available on the internet and because there are those of us who love vivisecting all forms of pseudoscience, it had to be done.

Inspired by Casey Luskin’s recent bout of Douchebaggitude, I created a little graphic “riffing on” - as Denyse O’Leary would say - BPR3’s “Blogging on Peer-Reviewed Research” icon. Here is the “Blogging on Pseudo-Scientific Douche-Bags” graphic, Mark II.

Note the URL: I registered bpsdb.org earlier today (don’t bother visiting the link - there’s nothing there at the moment). I might not do anything at all with the domain, but if others are interested in participating, it might be worth the effort. I’m not looking for writers or anything; if you’ve already got a blog and like to read and/or write about Pseudoscientific Douchebags, then bpsdb.org might possibly serve as a Clearinghouse for all sorts of anti-woo blogging.

This is just a germ of a thought at the moment; it was only 10 bucks to register the domain, so if nothing happens, it’s no major loss. But if any of you think this is something worth pursuing, let’s hear it.

UPDATE: I think at least one ScienceBlogger is on board with this, so the idea is becoming more appealing. As soon as bpsdb.org propagates, I’ll set up a basic Wordpress blog where interested parties can discuss all the pretty details. Plus, if a majority of people think my photoshopping skills suck, I’ll have a contest to produce a suitable BPSDB graphic.

It would be kickass to be able to get this thing off the ground by Darwin’s birthday.

In the meantime, if anyone wants to help spread the word, here’s the code for the current bpsdb.org graphics

Large Graphic (250×196 pixels)
<a href=”http://www.cbebs.org/”>
<img src=”http://media.cbebs.org/bpsdb_01.png” alt=”BPSDB” align=”left” height=”186″ width=”250″ />
</a>
Small Graphic (125 ×93 pixels)
<a href=”http://www.cbebs.org/”>
<img src=”http://media.cbebs.org/bpsdb_01s.png” alt=”BPSDB” align=”left” height=”93″ width=”125″ />
</a>

Also, feel free to host the image on your own site, if you wanna save me a little bandwidth.

I was going to post a couple of Devo videos and call it a day, but after being tagged as an Enemy of Intelligent Design, I figured it would be best if I remain vigilant.

Over at Bloggers for Peer-Reviewed Research Reporting, they’re discussing whether or not uberdouchebag Casey Luskin’s theft appropriation of the BPR3 graphic is acceptable. Survey says… hell no!

Desperate to make his bullshit seem legitimate, Discovery Institute shill and all-around assclown Casey Luskin simply did a right-click and “Save Image As” on the BPR3’s icon and used it to prop up his DI propaganda.

Casey Luskin - who recently sent out one of those cease-and-desist letters that are usually issued under the Church of Scientology’s letterhead - actually lifted a graphic from an another website. What a douchebag.

Perhaps the ignorant rubes at Uncommon Descent think Luskin is actually “Blogging on Peer-Reviewed Research”, but the rest of the world knows he stamped that graphic on yet another quote-mined Discovery Institute press release in the futile hope of lending authenticity to his douchebaggery.

If you think that Luskin will remove the graphic until he goes through the proper channels to get BPR3’s approval, think again. If he takes down the graphic at all, look for him to write a 500-word press release bitching about how he’s being persecuted by “Darwinists”. Through the lens of Luskin’s douche-colored glasses, there will need to be a sequel to Expelled focusing on his rough treatment at the hands of the evil materialists.

I swear, every day it’s something new with these nitwits. They complain about how they’re being shut out of academia, yet every single thing they do seems to be a calculated move to make themselves look like crackpots. How deluded does one have to be to still think that Intelligent Design is anything other than a perpetual motion machine that produces an endless supply of idiocy? Although that was a rhetorical question, here’s a rhetorical answer: Salvador Cordova.

p.s. - if anyone wants to use the “Blogging On Pseudoscientific Douchebags” graphic, here’s the code:

<a href=”http://www.cbebs.org/”>
<img src=”http://media.cbebs.org/bpsdb01.png” alt=”BPSDB” align=”left” height=”87″ width=”117″ />
</a>

It must suck to be Denyse O’Leary. I mean really, really suck. Denyse has her granny panties in a knot about how some of us “Darwinists” are mean to her.

Looking at the big picture over the past seven years (when I first started to take the intelligent design controversy seriously), one item stands out: The behaviour of the promoters of Darwinian evolution.

It is exactly what one might predict of people who think they don’t have a good case.

That’s right, Denyse. We mock Intelligent Design because we secretly know that evolution is a house of cards that will come crumbling down as soon as Michael Behe publishes Darwin’s Black Box William Dembski sets up shop in the Baylor’s Michael Polanyi Center Judge Jones rules that Intelligent design is science the new issue of Progress in Complexity, Information, and Design is published William Dembski and Robert Marks set up the Evolutionary Informatics Lab Micheal Behe publishes The Edge of Evolution William Dembski and Johnathan Wells publish The Design of Life Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is released in theaters.

I’m sorry, Denyse. What was that about somebody not having a case?

Is it any wonder that people mock Intelligent Design? William A. Dembski - the supposed “Isaac Newton of Information Theory” - actually posted the following headline at his blog, Uncommon Descent:

Flatulence removed from “The Judge Jones School of Law”

Denyse writes for a blog that gets taken in by urban legends. Her overlord, William Dembski, reacted to Baylor putting the kibosh on his non-existent lab by publishing the phone numbers of Baylor’s Board of Regents. When the Weblog of William Dembski, Denyse O’Leary and Friends consciously attempts humor, it is so painfully unfunny that even their normally sycophantic readers roll their eyes in disgust. Intelligent Design’s Next Big Thing isn’t a research paper, it’s a fucking movie. A fucking movie narrated by a former game show host and speech writer for Nixon. A fucking movie whose promoters are bribing churches to go see said fucking movie. And worst of all, Uncommon Descent thinks putting Denyse O’Leary’s name on their blog will attract readers.

And she wonders why we mock?

It’s not as if Intelligent Design is producing any actual science for anyone to refute. When one of them tries, it’s not a pretty sight to see. Face it: there’s no media conspiracy to mock Intelligent Design. Such a thing would be superfluous at this point. Intelligent Design has become like 200 clowns getting out of a Volkswagen Beetle and simultaneously slipping on banana peels, then simultaneously falling face-first into 200 piles of dog shit. Are we supposed to marvel at the timing and precision required to pull off such a feat?

No, we’re supposed to laugh.

With all the excitement over the PZ Myers/Geoff Simmons debate, this little morsel by Denyse O’Leary managed to fly under the radar.

The universe is clearly fine-tuned for life, and - as I like to say - if God didn’t do it, his replacement from the celestial temp agency is pretty Good. If Richards made that clear, it is a nice change from the “no-conflict-between-science-and-religion” piffle we so often hear.

Piffle? Yes, because ,as another friend notes, in much of academic life today the terms are decided in advance by functional atheists - you know, facts support atheism but feelings support theism, and we all respect each other’s feelings … UNTIL any theist actually cites facts that support his view. Then watch the temperature drop 50 degrees Celsius in, like, a second..

Poor Denyse O’Leary. She fancies herself a writer and journalist, but she’s never learned to write. Never mind that she can’t even properly write an ellipsis. Never mind that she insists on using the word “like” as if her readership consists of 13 year-old girls still stuck in the year 1983. No matter what Denyse O’Leary writes, it’s a given that someone else has said it before, only more coherently. A few years back, someone summed up Denyse’s thoughts in one sentence.

We’ve been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture.

At this point, I’m beginning to think Denyse is just pulling our collective leg. Whose side is she on, anyway? If she’s trying to make the Intelligent Design movement look even more ridiculous than it already appears in the public eye, she’s succeeding wildly. Dembski, Wells, Behe and all the others might be screaming, “ID is science!” from the mountain tops, but Denyse isn’t going to be happy until our flu shots are made with water from Lourdes.

Not long after this post went up, the post-debate wrap-up thread at Uncommon Descent disappeared. I guess it was one of those UD posts composed of Tardium 404. While the thread announcing the debate is still up as of this writing, this link gets you nothing. Nada. Zip. Zilch. Wanna know why? Uncommon Descent, Ceiling Cat is watching you. Do you think UD will post link to the mp3 of the debate?

A commenter in the debate thread at Pharyngula brought up the subject of T-shirts commemorating the debate. In honor of the debate - and to memorialize the fallen thread at Uncommon Descent - I’m going to hold a contest.

The folks at the Discovery Institute can never let well enough alone. Sooner or later, someone’s going to have to spin the debate, if only to give a DI Fellow an opportunity to engage in some atheist bashing. Here’s my proposal:

Whoever correctly names the DI Fellow who authors the press release and comes closest to guessing the date the press release is published will win one of the “Ignorance is not Evidence” T-Shirts, courtesy of CBEB’s. For example - and I’m going to use this as my official prediction - I’m going to say that Robert Crowther will author the press release, which will be put online Monday, February 4, 2008.

The rules are simple: the press release must be authored by a DI Fellow (or DI CSC Fellow), which means no Denyse O’Leary, DaveScot or Salvador Cordova spin will qualify. Furthermore, with one exception, the press release must be published under the auspices of the Discovery Institute. The sole exception is a William Dembski-authored post at Uncommon Descent. In other words, if Casey Luskin spams Pharyngula with debate-related spin, it won’t count. It should go without saying that Discovery Institute employees and their relatives and/or people with posting privileges at Uncommon Descent are ineligible. Citizens of Antarctica are also ineligible. If two people guess the same author/date, the first person to guess gets the T-shirt. If two people guess the same author, the person closest to the publishing date will win. If both guesses are the same amount of days apart, the person guessing the earlier date will win.

One guess per person, and the only dates within the month of February 2008 will qualify (I don’t want to have to keep track of this for 5 years…)

If someone wins, but no “Ignorance is Not Evidence” T-Shirts have been printed, I’ll leave it up to the winner to either wait or they can pick out an “I’m With The Banned” T-Shirt, Jersey or mug.

Let the predictions begin!

The PZ Myers/Geoff Simmons debate is making the rounds and even the cdesign proponentsists are admitting that things didn’t go their way. Over at Uncommon Descent, commenter bfast offers advice on how to deal with it:

In my opinion we should just close our eyes and pretend that this debate never happened.

It was only a dream… it was only a dream… it was only a dream…