I have only been banned twice. Once a decade ago by the psychotics at Rapture Ready, and just today, by Nature magazine.
This account is banned · This account has been banned from commenting due to posting of comments classified as inappropriate or other violations of our Terms of Service.They originally gave no indication of what my terrible crime was, or how I might rectify it, or protest.
What I had started to post was a reply to the pathetic mystic bullshit from Brian Josephson. He had commented,
Brian Josephson said:
I do not recognise Gary Hurd's characterisation of Intelligent Design . Has he actually studied work in this field, such as that of Stephen Meyer (who has a Cambridge Ph.D. in philosophy, for what that is worth). Hurd seems typical of those who I suspect are scared of the possibility that there may really be a deeper intelligence at work in the natural, and are driven by these fears to avoid examining in a realistic way what experts such as Meyer are in fact doing.
I instigated the Mind-Matter Unification Project at the Cavendish Laboratory because, in my perception, orthodoxy fails in a number of ways. An example of our research is a collaboration with a musicologist arguing that conventional scientific attempts to explain music is are flawed, while alternatives that invoke deeper aspects of nature can account for a number of key facts. We are currently following up ideas of the quantum physicist John Wheeler to the effect that participating observers are the source of natural laws, and hope to gain a systematic account of how his 'observer-participation' operates (for a preliminary account, see this conference report ). I believe science has been seduced by a certain view of nature, and that the next great advance in science will follow when certain destructive influences on progress are superseded by the ideas of those who do not adhere to such tenets.
My first installment that Nature magazine blocked was,
Unlike Dr. Josephson, I use my experience and Google together before spouting off about others. I earlier referenced the excellent 2004 book by Professors Forest, and Gross, as well as the Federal Court’s decision in the 2005 Kitzmiller v Dover trial.
It was significant to me and others at the time that Professor Forest was the only plaintiff’s expert witness the creationists took the (unsuccessful) strenuous effort to block from testifying. They showed more intelligence than I had expected. Prof. Forest demonstrated categorically that the Intelligent Design Creationism movement owed its origin to the defeat of Scientific Creationism at the hands of the US Supreme Court in their 1987 Edwards v. Aguillard decision. That testimony is found in the trial transcripts, and the Court’s Decision. Judge Jones commented that the plea to ignore the evidence "lacks merit legally and logically."
That is the position that Josephson finds himself, without merit legally or logically.
Second Installment, 31 May, 2012
There are a number of false assumptions, and assertions made by Brian Josephson. He asked rhetorically, "Has he (Hurd) actually studied work in this field...?" I suspect I have far more familiarity with the ID crowd than Josephson does. If he had the sense, or courtesy to Google my name, and "intelligent design" he would have learned if I was familiar with ID. There are pages of links just from my critics whining about how I attack ID. Moving past those, he might have found reviews of my chapter in "Why Intelligent Design Fails" (2005 Rutgers University Press). Or with a little more effort, he could have found how this was used in the Dover "pandas trial."
Josephson asked particularly if I was familiar with Steve Meyer's "Signature in the Cell." I'd recommend he read my review.
3 comments:
Ban it all to Hell!
I am pondering my own reply to Dr. Josephson. Maybe I'll run it by you first?
Sure.
Post a Comment