Baseball writer suspended from Twitter by ESPN after defending evolution against famous pitcher

November 22, 2014 • 10:26 am

I got this from a gazillion readers, but the first two to inform me were Jason and Scott, with thanks to all the rest. But the story isn’t pretty.  Curt Shilling was a great pitcher who played with the Red Sox, the Arizona Diamondbacks, and the Philadelphia Phillies. Since 2010 he’s been a broadcast analyst for the sports network ESPN, with a break for treatment for mouth cancer, caused by his constant use of smokeless tobacco (the powdery stuff you use like chewing tobacco).

He may have been a great player and now a good broadcaster, but he doesn’t know squat about evolution. Nevertheless, he’s been tw**ting about it constantly, getting into something I cannot abide: Twi**er fights. Here are some of his tw**ts, and you can see more at Deadspin.

Screen Shot 2014-11-22 at 6.27.55 AM

Oy gewalt, he’s fallen for that old chestnut? Why are there still apes?

Screen Shot 2014-11-22 at 6.28.31 AM Screen Shot 2014-11-22 at 6.28.20 AM Screen Shot 2014-11-22 at 6.28.48 AM Screen Shot 2014-11-22 at 6.29.00 AM

 

I’m not sure what he means by “misses,” but there are plenty of fossils of creatures that went extinct without leaving descendants (trilobites are a famous case). And of course we have gazillions of transitional forms; you should all know about these by now.

Well, Schilling’s clearly an ignorant creationist (I’d like to send him my book), and so deserves some correction.

Unfortunately, that correction came from his ESPN colleague, senior baseball writer (and Harvard grad) Keith Law, who engaged in a twi**ter battle with Schilling and others, ardently defending evolution. Here are some of the exchanges, and Deadspin has another article showing more of them:

Screen Shot 2014-11-22 at 6.32.44 AM

Screen Shot 2014-11-22 at 6.32.05 AM

 

Law’s last comment is very good, but of course if Twi**er allowed more characters he could have explained about transitional forms, like “dino-birds” with teeth and feathers.

But after this social-media fracas ESPN suspended Law from using Twi**er (we don’t know how long the ban will last).  Now it’s not clear whether evolution had anything to do with this: as awfulannouncing.com reports, ESPN denies it:

ESPN has issued the following statement to AA on Law’s suspension:

“Keith’s Twitter suspension had absolutely nothing to do with his opinions on the subject.”

But that wording suggests that ESPN suspended him simply for squabbling with Schilling.  What other reason could there be for a Twi**er suspension? But that’s not fair, either, for Schilling was also engaged in that squabble. Right now, it’s a mystery, but if “squabbling” is the cause, Schilling should be suspended—and longer, because of his science denialism and embarrassing ignorance!

If you still want to complain to ESPN, or defend Law’s right to tw**t about what is, after all, scientific truth, there’s a simple form here (you needn’t register, just fill in the form and give them a piece of your mind). I think it’s important to let this important t.v. network know that defending good science is not something that deserves censorship.

h/t: Jason, Scott

69 thoughts on “Baseball writer suspended from Twitter by ESPN after defending evolution against famous pitcher”

  3. I’ve known for a long time that Schilling was a right-wing nut job, and from that presumed that he was religious. So, I’m not really surprised to find that he’s a creationist (“you can find religion without creationism, but you never find creationism without religion” as one sage put it).

  4. Wow – That is bad and the other guy actually did have the best advice for Schilling which was to stick with baseball.

    I’m afraid the book would do little good at this point. don’t think reading is his specialty.

    1. ‘Stick with baseball’ was addressed to Law (I gather, I don’t really do Tw***er)

      My suspicion is he was punished for saying science was more important than sport. I doubt a candidate would get away with it either.

      1. ‘Stick with baseball’ was addressed to Law . . . .”

        And so he must acquiesce to his private corporate tyrant masters. At the least the guvmint can’t so order one (in theory).

      1. Clearly trying to get himself back in the limelight. My tablet keeps kicking me out when I try to read the article – divine intervention?

    3. Why does Aslan make a point of declaring himself a scholar of religion in every article and interview he does? Clearly, he’s impressed with arguments from authority and can’t seem to grasp that people who defend Harris and Dawkins are not defending them on authoritarian grounds.

  6. That is pretty bad that he was silenced. They are probably worried they’ll offend all those sports watching Creationists out there!

    I find it especially bad that a broadcaster would do that. Free exchange of information is integral to a successful democracy & broadcasters are supposed to stand behind this principle.

    1. This was my reaction too.

      Nobody cares about upsetting the non-Creationists because they know we won’t do anything. The Creationists, on the other hand, will kick up a big stink and turn it into a War on Christianity, with a side serving of a War on Religion. Fox News will get involved, and before you know it there will be calls to boycott ESPN. The financial benefits to Fox Sports are, of course, purely incidental.

      1. You may be just a little hasty, Heather. Given the season, Fox may be too busy talking about the War on Christmas to jump into the discussion. 🙂

  7. Shame.

    The guy was a brilliant pitcher, but clearly otherwise is too stupid to be able to understand the difference between cousins and grandparents.

    b&

  8. For those with the intestinal fortitude…here’s the YouTube video Curt linked to. Less than four minutes in and he’s already spewed all the usual nonsense about fine tuning this and second law of thermodynamics that and no new species the other…I couldn’t take any more of it, especially considering the incredibly annoying soundtrack.

    Cheers,

    b&

    1. I’ve tried to watch this before, and it’s just ghastly. Kudos to you for managing four minutes!

      I managed to watch all of Banana Man’s “documentary” but this one is too bad, and the bloke too irritating, which is saying something.

      1. Well you’ve definitely got one up on me…I didn’t manage to make it more than a minute or three into the Banana Man’s rant, either….

        b&

  9. Years from now, after religious belief is as popular as a raging case of herpes, the last vestiges of believers will be found in our sports arenas. Christianity has infected all major sports in this country and it will be difficult to excise. Hopefully, the acceptance of evolution as fact will come sooner.

    1. You wanna know something really scary?

      Christianity has an even stronger hold on the US Air Force than it does in major league sports.

      Not scary enough?

      Save for a small percentage on Navy vessels, the Air Force controls the entire US nuclear arsenal.

      b&

      1. True, but with one executive order, that situation could come to a crashing halt. Since there is no single over-riding authority in sports, christianity will continue to fester there until it finally dies a slow, malodorous death. Not in my lifetime.

        1. Yeah, God is a HUGE sports fan. In fact, God cares more about sports than any other human activity…except maybe be-headings.

          6. Nah — as far as directions go, that’s too specific; gotta be general. Maybe major, but certainly not colonel — and palm kernel is right out! You can never get the grease from that stuff off your palms, let alone the monkey’s — and he’s the one with the wrench. I had a wench once, but she left me for a new world in a different direction, to be specific….

            b&

  10. Well he is wrong about one thing. By criticizing anti-science he _is_ criticizing many people’s faith. Anti-science is a central tenet of creationism. So that may well be the real reason for the ban.

  11. Baseball players have always been a superstitious bunch, I think, because much of their success or failure is due to luck, more so than in other major sports. And superstition is next door to religion.

    1. I don’t know how many will know of the long-running British detective series ‘Midsomer Murders’. One of my favourite lines from that show is a minister proclaiming, “There’s no room for superstition in MY church.” The look on detective Barnaby’s face is priceless.

  12. I had my two bits worth with Mr Schilling on twi**er early on. I had NO idea who he was other than someone who clearly didn’t understand science or evolution at its most basic levels. Only later when it went viral did I learn who he was. [I’m still not impressed] I’m surprised Olbermann didn’t chime in. Or perhaps he’s learned to avoid toxic controversy finally.
    It’s a shame about Mr. Law. Hopefully he gets sorted out before long.

  13. “But that’s not fair, either, for Schilling was also engaged in that squabble. ”

    Well, socially, the person who first contradicts a rant is the one making the faux pas. In polite company, you avoid direct confrontation. (I don’t, but you can’t take me anywhere…)

    1. Well, that faux pas needs to change. Surely the first person to contradict, say, a racist rant would be lauded.

      Seems to me that ranters are spoiling for a confrontation anyway.

      1. These days, the first person to upload someone else’s racist rant may get lauded. It’s the new heroism.

        1. Well, of course. It represents so much effort. And bravery. And then there are those who forward it to all their friends.

          We’re drowning in heroes!

  15. I had to send a comment; I have learned to be strident in the face of evolution ignorance because of WEIT. Though Schilling’s name didn’t come up under the list espn provided, so I had to send a generic rant with “Curt Schilling is a fool” as the subject line. I was happy to plug WEIT. I feel better now.

  17. When I saw this I immediately thought of Law, whose tweets I saw as they were coming out. I had no idea it was Schilling he was bickering with. I was wondering why I hadn’t seen Law’s (usually very swift) takes on some of the more recent off-season contracts. This explains it. Disgusting display by ESPN.

  19. Carl Zimmer told me he offered to show Schilling the facts on fossil evidence but Carl declined the opportunity. From my end, I probed Schilling on twitter to find out where he was getting his own information from, and silence ensued. Had Schilling been an avid creationist he might have tried throwing some authority source from ICR or even the Discovery Institute at me, but he did nothing, suggesting he can be filed in the broad grassroots antievolution category of secondary glee club (those who are antievolutionist not by even slight investigation but by glib reflection of nothing more than catch phrases picked up from peripheral hearing). The outrage is that Law should be taken to account for doing some research and using his direct knowledge to call to account someone whose study in this area was flatlining.

  20. Law likely got suspended because one of his tweets was along the lines of “if someone is begging to see transitional forms, grab one and hit him with it”. Though he did not direct this comment at Schilling explicitly, this is the only reason I can see why Law (who is likely a reader of Coyne’s work in some way based on his comments on other topics) was given a timeout and not Schilling.

    1. Threatening to hit someone with a transitional fossil is one of the more unusual forms of violence I’ve seen threatened on twitter.

    2. If Schilling argues that transitional fossils don’t exist, he can’t have felt threatened by it. 😀

      Bert

  21. Following Jerry;s link to ESPN, I sent them this comment on the Law matter:

    It was troubling to learn that Law appears to have got flack for calling to account Curt Schilling’s scientifically inane claims about evolution. I attempted to find out from Schilling on twitter (where he was repeating his claims) where he was getting his understanding from. He recommended only one of creationist Trey Smith’s rambling fact free video lectures, and showed no inclination to investigate any of the resources made available to him (including an offer by Carl Zimmer to show up more on the fossil evidence for evolution). The sports world ESPN covers is not disconnected to the bigger world, from the taxpayers who bankroll the stadiums to the science behind their construction and improving athletic performance by better understanding our human biology and how that came to be what it is. Looking the other way when it comes to a figure like Schilling who promotes the worse class of troubling anti-science thinking is not serving the public.

  22. At risk of sounding ‘rural’ (I do not tweet at all), what is ESPN? I gather they have some control over Twitter, but what is it?
    How can they shut down a completely reasonable and polite Law? What is their pretext?

    1. ESPN is a big sports broadcasting conglomerate, and they can get away with punishing Law because they employ him.

  27. ESPN’s action is an affront to freedom of speech. I sent the following complaint to them:
    Dear Sir/Madame,
    Your suspension of Keith Law from Twitter is a gross violation of the principle of free speech. Such action is all the more worrying when no investigation or action appears to have been taken against Curt Schilling with whom Law was debating the issue of evolution. This is worrying because Schilling, who appears to have been the initiator of the debate, was espousing a profoundly ignorant, irrational and anti-scientific creationist view of evolution which Law was not only right to challenge but morally and scientifically justified in challenging. Schilling recommended watching creationist Trey Smith’s banal and fact-free video rambles. Such ideas are so intellectually moribund and so bad as to require challenging. For ESPN to apparently support Schilling’s backward ideas and at the same time curtail the freedom of expression of Keith Law for challenging them, suggests a ‘dark ages’ political/religious world view held by the managers of the station.

  28. If old people used to be babies, why are there still babies? If furniture used to be trees, why are there still trees? I had to read Moar science, or just give thanks to Jeebus for magicking old people and tables into the world.

  29. I wonder if Schilling let his oncologist know that he thinks basic biology is bullshit. But I guess in his mind it wasn’t the oncologists who cured his cancer….

  30. I recommended WEIT, Inner Fish, Greatest Show and On the Origin to ESPN. I challenged them to test Germ Theory and the Theory of Gravity.

  31. I’m not sure which thing imbues an idiot with greater confidence in his views: money, fame, or religion. In Curt Shilling’s case, all three combine to produce a world class jackass.

  32. I responded to ESPN and tried to educate them about evolution, and how it is widely accepted throughout the world by people with an education … or anyone who can read and has even the smallest shred of intellectual curiosity…. Thanks, ESPN, for celebrating ignorance and stupidity !

Comments are closed.