Fabulous! I moved some later stuff up to the lede

Let's digress for a moment. Back in the dark days before the ubiquitous internet, disinformation was sustainable. When someone told you that Marilyn Manson is actually Paul from The Wonder Years, it would have been difficult to prove otherwise; one would have had to find someone's old VHS tape on which they'd recorded one of the episodes, check the credits to figure out what that actor's name was, and then find someone's copy of Antichrist Superstar and look for the same name on the liner notes. And it was unlikely that you would find old Wonder Years episodes and Marilyn Manson albums in the same place. It was easier to just half-believe that Paul was Marilyn Manson.

   Life is different now, if less interesting. Consider the aforementioned Dembski, a mathematician and theologian who rose to the top of the nascent intelligent design  pack in the late '90s after claiming to have proven that certain aspects of biology can be attributable only to the intervention of one or more intelligent entities. As for who or what those entities might be, Dembski is coy when addressing a potentially secular audience, claiming that there "are many possibilities." Among these possibilities, we may determine, is that Dembski is lying; in a 1999 interview with the Christian magazine Touchstone, Dembski stated unambiguously that "[i]ntelligent design is just the Logos theology of John's Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory." With ID being increasingly under attack as theology clothed in science, Dembski has since been more hesitant in giving due credit to either John or the Logos.

    Bits of information are no longer compartmentalized like so many sccattered (scattered) VHS tapes and gothic rock album liner notes, which is why Dembski and company can't get away with trying to portray ID as a scientific theory without religious intent while having already admitted that same religious intent to sympathetic Biblical literalists. But Dembski and his cohorts don't seem to understand this fundamental aspect of the internet. They are also famously incompetent, and thus it is that Uncommon Descent, Dembski's blog, is among the most interesting things that the internet has to offer. More importantly, it provides us with a sense of how the leaders of the ID movement would run things if they were ever to run anything other than a blog.

    Dembski began blogging in 2005, perhaps as a means of procrastination; 2005 was also the last year in which he and his movement colleagues bothered to put out a new issue of their own scientific journal (though their lack of output hasn't stopped them from criticizing mainstream journals for declining to publish their work, non-existent though it may be). Some choice moments in the years since:

* In conjunction with his friends at the pro-ID Discovery Institute, Dembski decided to commission a Flash animation ridiculing Judge John Jones, the Bush-appointed churchgoer who, despite being a Bush-appointed churchgoer, ruled in the 2005 Dover Trial (known more formerly as Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District and even more formally as something longer and more formal) that intelligent design could not be taught in public school science classes. The animation consisted of Judge Jones represented as a puppet with his strings being held by various proponents of evolution; aside from being depicted as unusually flatulent, poor Judge Jones was also shown to be reading aloud from his court opinion in a high-pitched voice (Dembski's, it turned out, but sped up to make it sound sillier). The point of all of this, as The Discovery Institute explained, was that Jones had supposedly cribbed some 90 percent of his decision from findings presented by the ACLU, and that this was a very unusual and terrible thing for Jones to have done. On the contrary, judges commonly incorporate the findings of the winning party into their final opinion, either in whole or in part, and Jones' own written opinion actually incorporated far less than 90 percent of the findings in question. For his part, Dembski agreed to reduce the number of fart noises in the animation if Jones would agree to contribute his own voice. Jones does not appear to have accepted the offer.

* One of Dembski's hand-picked blog co-moderators, Dave Springer, once received an e-mail to the effect that the ACLU was about to sue the Marine Corps in order to stop Marines from praying; outraged, Springer posted it on his blog in order that his readers could join him in being affronted. After all, the e-mail had told him to. "Please send this to people you know so everyone will know how stupid the ACLU is Getting [sic] in trying to remove GOD from everything and every place in America," the bright-red text exhorted, above pictures of praying Marines. "Right on!" Dembski added in the comments. It was then pointed out by other readers that the e-mail was a three-year-old hoax; the ACLU spokesperson named therein did not actually exist, and neither did the ACLU's complaint. Springer was unfazed by the revelation. "To everyone whos pointed out that the ACLU story is a fabrication according to snopes.com - thats hardly the point," he explained. "The pictures of Marines praying are real." Dembski himself had no further comment.

* Dembski has spent much time and energy pointing out that Charles Darwin made several racist statements back in the 19th century, even going so far as to call for a boycott of the British ten-pound note due to Darwin's picture being displayed thereupon. Incidentally, Dembski has spent most of the past decade working at universities within the fold of the Southern Baptist Convention, which was founded in the 19th century for the sole purpose of defending slavery.

* Springer, the aforementioned aficionado of e-mail forwards, once noted that he stopped reading an article by a critic of intelligent design because it contained a cartoon depicting the famous Black Knight routine from Monty Python and the Holy Grail. "Anyone who needs to resort to Monty Python in a scientific argument can be safely ignored as not having any legs to stand on," he announced. Springer can be forgiven for not being aware that Dembski himself has referenced Monty Python in the context of a scientific argument more than once. Somewhat more inexplicable is that Springer himself has done the exact same thing, making reference to the very same Monty Python routine and doing so in the very same context as did the article he was criticizing - twice. I mean, come on.

* Upon being told that University of Texas Professor Eric Pianka had given a speech in which he'd supposedly asserted that the world would be better off if most of humanity was killed via a global contagion, Dembski announced on his blog that he had just reported Pianka to the Department of Homeland Security out of concern that the elderly biologist was planning to somehow contribute to the destruction of humanity. The FBI interviewed Pianka but took no further action, having perhaps determined that the recipient of the 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist award was not actually planning on killing off the majority of the world's population.

* Seriously, it was the exact same Monty Python routine.

So, if you happen to be out at a metropolitan watering hole over the next few months and spot Hitchens huddling over a drink, you'll know he has been driven there out of sheer terror -- in await of his nemesis' latest work.





The funniest of these come from Peter Pajakowski, "who makes me appreciate the Polish jokes I heard growing up in Chicago."

http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/no-thanks-ill-take-two-fivers-dumping-darwin-from-british-currency/

"Unfortunately, that requires recalcitrant elements to be purged. Thats a price Im willing to pay."

* As much stock as he puts into anonymous e-mail forwards, Dembski has little regard for such other, more conventional mediums of information as The New York Times, presumably because the text therein is insufficiently multi-colored. In November of 2006, Dembski reported to his readers that "[t]heres a hilarious typo in the illustration accompanying the article on the recent Salk Institute evangelical atheism conference that appeared on the front page of the Science Times today. The fact that this got by the author and the editors at the NYT speaks volumes about the broader cultural illiteracy of the science-worshipping, liberal literary establishment." Though having been alerted to the existence of the typo and having been given a fairly strong hint to its nature by way of a blog title that basically spelled it out, at least one of Dembski's readers couldn't find the mistake and had to ask what it was; it was eventually explained that the Greek letter for "d" had mistakenly been used in place of the Greek letter for "a."

academic freedom

In between Expelled-themed attacks on those academic institutions which had been hassling those who disagreed with the prevailing views of their university employers, Dembski wondered aloud whether a certain professor was sufficiently Calvinist to maintain even his post-employment status as professor emiritus at Calvin College, insomuch as that the professor had apparently veered into the dangerous habit of "freethought."

reported Pianka to Department of Homeland Security. presumably concerned that he was plotting to kill off humanity. The Fbi interviewed him and apparently determined that he was not actually planning to kill off humanity.

racism

Yep "Now and again I receive irate emails. The funniest of these come from Peter Pajakowski, who makes me appreciate the Polish jokes I heard growing up in Chicago."

Mr. Scot did not let such silly mistakes discourage him from making further silly mistakes, and remained one of Uncommon Descent's most prolific contributors until earlier this year, when he suddenly ran afoul of Dembski by breaking party ranks on the subject of racism. Among other things, the blog had come to specialize in attributing racist views to early proponents of evolution and racist implications to materialist evolution as a whole. Scot, though, bucked the trend with a post noting that racism obviously exists outside of "Darwinian" circles, citing the Christian Identity movement as a notorious example. Dembski deleted the post and cracked down. "I expect your posts to have at least some tangential relationship to Darwinism, ID, or the metaphysical or moral implications of each," he wrote, addressing his contributors. "The purpose of this site is not to provide a place for you to jump up and rant on one of your pet peeves. DaveScot will no longer be posting at UD." Apparently, ascribing racism to proponents of evolution was relevant to a discussion on evolution and religion, whereas ascribing racism to proponents of religion was not relevant at all. Dembski should have at least been grateful that Scot refrained from pointing out that the Southern Baptist Convention for which Dembski works was founded solely in support of slavery.

attempts at attacking

Elsewhen, longtime contributor Denyse O'Leary attacked Nature and other "big science mags," quoting a lawyer friend who'd noted that the magazine's mission statement held that it was intent on "prompt publication of significant advances in any branch of science." Making use of his lawyer-logic, the unnamed fellow claimed that "[t]o report advances and serve scientists means not to report setbacks, or the exposure of fallacies in widely-held theories that would tend to put mainstream science in a bad light." O'Leary agreed, not having bothered to check and see if this was something accurate enough to warrant agreeing with, which it was not insomuch as that Nature does indeed report on "setbacks" and "the exposure of fallacies."

   Dembski is a mathematician and theologian who rose to the top of the nascent intelligent design pack in the late '90s after putting forth what he claims to be a scientifically rigorous technique for proving that certain features found in biology can be attributable only to the intervention of one or more intelligent entities. As for the identity of those entities, Dembski is usually coy, often claiming that there "are many possibilities." Among these possibilities, we may determine, is that Dembski is lying; in a 1999 interview with the Christian magazine Touchstone, Dembski stated unambiguously that "[i]ntelligent design is just the Logos theology of John's Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory." In years since, with intelligent design being increasingly under attack as theology disguised as science, and with ID's proponents being increasingly reluctant to admit that this is the case, Dembski has understandably been more hesitant in giving due credit to either John or the Logos.






hard to see it - no labs, the journal they started hasn't been updated.
much of what they do involves film and animation
but they do have a blog.
actually one of the best blogs in the world. Serves as a de facto internet headquarters. here, you can see all the conflicts and goings-on play out.
there are many such goings-on...

The Dover trial (known more formerly as Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District and even more formally as something longer and more formal) ruled out ID
disappointing
"I'll wager a bottle of single-malt scotch, should it ever go to trial whether ID may legitimately be taught in public school science curricula, that ID will pass all constitutional hurdles." Luckily, the wager wasn't with anyone in particular.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/life-after-dover/

"less than a 10% probability"

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/judge-john-e-jones-iii-as-inquisitor/

called him an "inquisitor"

"suffering from a terminal case of delusions of adequacy."

http://www.uncommondescent.com/education/behe-responds-to-judge-jones/

http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/judge-jones-towering-intellectual-or-narcissistic-putz/

suggested that he was a "narcissistic putz"

"courts frown on decisions in which judges extensively copy and paste from other briefs which is exactly what Jones did!"

http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/the-motivation-behind-the-judge-jones-school-of-law/

As much as he puts into his blog, his professorships, and his voice acting, Dembski is still as prolific an author as ever. His latest effort, set for release later this year, takes on the wave of pro-atheist books that have seen publication over the past couple of years. Among the pundits whom he'll be countering is Vanity Fair's own Christopher Hitchens, author of God is Not Great. If you happen to spot Hitchens having some sort of alcoholic drink, it will almost certainly be out of sheer terror.


in the past, people never got to hear enough arguments. it was a rare thing, and you had to

Dembski started blogging,
you didn't used to get to watch scientists fighting amongst themselves like this.

1. Yep "Now and again I receive irate emails. The funniest of these come from Peter Pajakowski, who makes me appreciate the Polish jokes I heard growing up in Chicago."

2. expelled thing, reported Pianka to Department of Homeland Security. presumably concerned that he was plotting to kill off humanity. The Fbi interviewed him and apparently determined that he was not actually planning to kill off humanity.

3.

"Next, Scott and Branch try to identify the designer of ID with the God of Christian theism."

One notable incident went down in May of 2006, at which point Dembski had already recruited several co-bloggers to make regular contributions.

having received one to the effect that the ACLU was about to sue the Marine Corps to stop Marines from praying, an outraged Scot posted it on the blog in order that his readers could join him in being affronted. After all, the e-mail told him to. "Please send this to people you know so everyone will know how stupid the ACLU is Getting [sic] in trying to remove GOD from everything and every place in America," exhorted the bright red lettering above several pictures of praying Marines. "Right on!" added Dembski in the comments section.

    Of course, the e-mail was a three-year-old hoax; the ACLU spokesperson named therein did not actually exist, and neither did the ACLU's complaint. Scot was unfazed by the revelation. "To everyone whos pointed out that the ACLU story is a fabrication according to snopes.com -- thats hardly the point," he explained, referring to a website that catalogues and debunks hoaxes. "The pictures of Marines praying are real." Dembski had no further comment. Incidentally, Dembski does not trust The New York Times, perhaps because the text itself is insufficiently bedazzling.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/eric-pianka-time-for-an-interview-with-the-department-of-homeland-security/

http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/evolutionary-theory-and-monty-pythons-black-knight/

http://www.metanexus.net/Magazine/tabid/68/id/2667/Default.aspx

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/who-says-darwinists-dont-make-predictions/#comment-144711

Next September will bring the release of The End of Christianity, William Dembski's latest literary excercise. Dembski is a mathematician and theologian who rose to the top of the nascent intelligent design pack in the late '90s after putting forth what he claims to be a scientifically rigorous technique for proving that certain features found in biology, among other aspects of nature, can be attributable only to the intervention of one or more intelligent entities. As for the identity of those entities, Dembski is usually coy, often claiming that there "are many possibilities." Among these possibilities, we may determine, is that Dembski is lying; in a 1999 interview with the Christian magazine Touchstone, Dembski stated unambiguously that "[i]ntelligent design is just the Logos theology of John's Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory." In years since, with intelligent design being increasingly under attack as theology disguised as science, and with ID's proponents being increasingly reluctant to admit that this is the case, Dembski has understandably been more hesitant in giving due credit to either John or the Logos.



In April of 2005, he established Uncommon Descent as a means of responding to his critics, of which he has plenty, and defending his various strange undertakings, of which he has plenty more.

There was, for instance, the time when he and his friends at the pro-ID Discovery Institute decided to make a Flash animation ridiculing Judge John Jones, the Bush-appointed churchgoer who, despite being a Bush-appointed churchgoer, ruled in the 2005 Dover Trial (known more formerly as Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District and even more formally as something longer and more formal) that intelligent design could not be taught in public school science classes. The animation in question consisted of Judge Jones represented as a puppet with his strings being held by members of the American Civil Liberties Union, which had represented the plaintiffs in the case; aside from being depicted as unusually flatulent, poor Judge Jones was also shown to be reading aloud from his court opinion in a high-pitched voice (Dembski's, it turned out, but sped up to make it sound sillier). The point of all of this, as The Discovery Institute explained, was that Jones had supposedly cribbed some 90 percent of his decision from findings presented by the ACLU (in fact, they were composed by a separate law firm), and that this was a very unusual and naughty thing for Jones to have done. On the contrary, judges commonly incorporate the findings of the winning party into their final opinion, either in whole or in part, and Jones' own written opinion actually incorporated far less than 90 percent of the findings in question; it turns out that The Discovery Institute had included common words like "the" and "of" into their calculation of the similarities. For his part, Dembski agreed to reduce the number of fart noises in the animation and to allow Jones himself to supply his own voice. Though no doubt grateful, Jones appears to have declined the offer.

One notable incident went down in May of 2006, at which point Dembski had already recruited several co-bloggers to make regular contributions.

having received one to the effect that the ACLU was about to sue the Marine Corps to stop Marines from praying, an outraged Scot posted it on the blog in order that his readers could join him in being affronted. After all, the e-mail told him to. "Please send this to people you know so everyone will know how stupid the ACLU is Getting [sic] in trying to remove GOD from everything and every place in America," exhorted the bright red lettering above several pictures of praying Marines. "Right on!" added Dembski in the comments section.

    Of course, the e-mail was a three-year-old hoax; the ACLU spokesperson named therein did not actually exist, and neither did the ACLU's complaint. Scot was unfazed by the revelation. "To everyone whos pointed out that the ACLU story is a fabrication according to snopes.com -- thats hardly the point," he explained, referring to a website that catalogues and debunks hoaxes. "The pictures of Marines praying are real." Dembski had no further comment.

The intelligent design-favoring documentary Expelled, which starred the otherwise lucid Ben Stein and dealt with the alleged purges faced by intelligent design supporters in the realm of academia, was released in 2008. In between Expelled-themed attacks on those academic institutions which had been hassling those who disagreed with the prevailing views of their university employers, Dembski wondered aloud whether a certain professor was sufficiently Calvinist to maintain even his post-employment status as professor emiritus at Calvin College, insomuch as that the professor had apparently veered into the dangerous habit of "freethought."

Elsewhen, longtime contributor Denyse O'Leary attacked Nature and other "big science mags," quoting a lawyer friend who'd noted that the magazine's mission statement held that it was intent on "prompt publication of significant advances in any branch of science." Making use of his lawyer-logic, the unnamed fellow claimed that "[t]o report advances and serve scientists means not to report setbacks, or the exposure of fallacies in widely-held theories that would tend to put mainstream science in a bad light." O'Leary agreed, not having bothered to check and see if this was something accurate enough to warrant agreeing with, which it was not insomuch as that Nature does indeed report on "setbacks" and "the exposure of fallacies."

On another occasion,

Whereas the overhearing of arguments was once a rare treat limited by one's luck and earshot, the internet provides the unabashed eavesdropper with the ability to follow every online dispute, past and present, from beginning to end, or from beginning to eternity as the case may be. And these online Akashic Records of ours are much more unforgiving than brick-and-mortar life. Say something stupid in a bar and your words will be heard by a few and confirmed by none, but type the same thing online and it's there for all to mock and counter. The columnist who contradicts himself from week to week is now called out by a hundred blogs, and the senator who attacks an enemy for behavior that he'd earlier defended in an ally will find his hypocrisy spliced into a YouTube clip. It is an age of danger for the disingenuous, with Google

Perhaps more noticeably, Dembski has also been blogging.

   Whereas the overhearing of arguments was once a rare treat limited by one's luck and earshot, the internet provides the unabashed eavesdropper with the ability to follow every online dispute, past and present, from beginning to end, or from beginning to eternity as the case may be. And these online Akashic Records of ours are much more unforgiving than brick-and-mortar life. Say something stupid in a bar and your words will be heard by a few and confirmed by none; type the same thing online and it's there for all to mock and counter.

Meanwhile, the world kept turning.