Dilbert vs. P. Z. Myers

_{William Dembski

February 4, 2007

Culture, Philosophy, Science}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Scott Adams offers some insights on P. Z. Myers, prefacing them as follows:

. . . Some people are quite certain that I am misusing my minor celebrity status to confuse the masses and turn them into creationists or pyramid worshipers. Is it intentional, they wonder? Do I really believe the things I write? Or am I simply stupid, as it appears. . . .

MORE

Comments

PZ Myers is actively becoming the Dawkins of the web - as in, a living example of how you don't need to be a theist of any stripe to be an irrational zealot. Keep in mind that Scott Adams is not only an atheist, but one who has dismissed ID (He argues that Judge Jones 'heard both sides, weighed them equally, and found ID lacking') and generally had a personal attitude consistent with materialism & atheism. But now and then he asks thoughtful questions in his blog, or worse, has thoughtful words about people he disagrees with - and PZ Myers can't stand that. If you don't tow the party line, turn in your atheism card!nullasalus_{February 5, 2007
February
02
Feb
5
05
2007
11:05 AM
11
11
05
AM
PDT}

I'm pretty sure that acronym will be making its way into common usage shortly.thechristiancynic_{February 5, 2007
February
02
Feb
5
05
2007
11:05 AM
11
11
05
AM
PDT}

A question on the comments associated Dilbert's blog. Most of his articles get somewhere between 300 and 500 comments. Does anyone actually read that many comments? If you think the answer might be that very few people will bother reading that many comments then you'll understand why I'm so ruthless in managing the comments here. I want the comments here to be an important part of the blog instead a quagmire so large no one wants to wade through it. That means someone has to separate the wheat from the chaff. It's largely a thankless job but someone has to do it.DaveScot_{February 5, 2007
February
02
Feb
5
05
2007
06:32 AM
6
06
32
AM
PDT}

I just have one thing to say to Myers on this topic. SHAAH!DaveScot_{February 5, 2007
February
02
Feb
5
05
2007
05:55 AM
5
05
55
AM
PDT}

I've been reading Scott Adams's blog daily for over a year, and he does not come off to me as someone who is biased in favor ID. He seems to be the opposite to some degree. But Adams seems open to it, if that's where the evidence leads. I doubt Myers reads his blog every day. Myers's latest blog comments about Adams seem very ignorant of Adams to me. Anyway, Adams certainly does not seem to be comitted to either side of the ID vs Blind Watchmaker debate. He simply laments the "more heat than light" that he perceives from both, and that he cannot seem to find any expert reliable enough to trust. One thing Adams have over Myers is that Adams is not married to either side. On the other hand, reading Myers, I get the impression that Myers simply *hates* the very idea of a higher intelligence having anything to do with life on this planet. And he's annoyed that anyone like Adams's, who has such a large blog readership, would dare question the likes of Myers. Too bad.mike1962_{February 5, 2007
February
02
Feb
5
05
2007
05:45 AM
5
05
45
AM
PDT}

:-)tribune7_{February 5, 2007
February
02
Feb
5
05
2007
04:36 AM
4
04
36
AM
PDT}

tribune7, Okay, let's not go there. ;)Douglas_{February 5, 2007
February
02
Feb
5
05
2007
02:26 AM
2
02
26
AM
PDT}

First time I ever heard anyone imply PZ was flexible in some way.tribune7_{February 4, 2007
February
02
Feb
4
04
2007
08:34 PM
8
08
34
PM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply