Just a note: I’ll post a full review of UA in early August, as exigent circumstances require me to hold off on posting about this for a while. In the interim, don’t burn yourself out!
And the quote of the week comes from commenter Ray Moscow (#25 on the “Athiests are funnier” thread):
I’ve never understood why coddling religious beliefs is supposedly “respecting” the believers. Isn’t it rather treating them like mentally deficient people?
They didn’t!
» Jerry:
exigent circumstances require me to hold off on posting about this for a while.
Nothing to worry about, I hope?
In the interim, don’t burn yourself out!
I was thinking maybe we should pursue our line of inquiry somewhere else, as the Mooneybaum affair is plainly getting too silly.
I was kinda hoping for a breathless, “I’ll have much more on this soon” yet truly content free, Mooney-esque post.
Then you go and muck it up with that really spot on quote.
Still looking forward to your review, whenever it’s posted.
I’m betting** that M&K have managed to get you so out of your intellectual depth, (by virtue of their supported and reasoned diatribes), that you are scampering for cover in which to radically reconsider your quite unreasonable dedication to TRUTH.
____________________
** One Australian Cent.
Atheists are funnier!
Thanks, Jerry!
You run a good blog here.
If you like your discussions about science and religion a little meatier that what you get when Mooneybaum are involved, treat yourself to some Cosmic Variance, where Sean Carroll has a longish post on the subject.
If, on the other hand, you like to get some whining, self-congratulation, and plain dishonesty, there’s always some Mooney and Kirshenbaum for you. The last part of their “PZ rebuttal” is online. It’s hilariously pathetic, so go have a shufty.
Uggggggggh
That is one horrible post.
Wow. I think their book should be retitled, “In Defense of Jesus Crackers”.
Ouch …
Well, no, the fact is that theists want to prevent the treatment from becoming like that of mentally deficient people.
That’s pretty clear from their demands for “respect” for their beliefs, and not merely tolerance or some such thing.
There’s a whole constitutional aspect as well, that I won’t get into.
Glen Davidson
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
M & K’s argument seems to be that one should not be disrespectful to Catholics who threaten to kill someone who failed to swallow a wafer straight away, not because it will make Jesus cry but because it will make them cry.
Did M&K send some goons to threaten you? Blink twice if “yes”.
On the topic of who is funnier, I provide this in evidence:
Mooney’s Final Solution and this one:Stu’s Response.
I think it is hilarious that Mooneybaum stated that PZ drove them out of scienceblogs.
Their writing has degenerated into junior high arguing.
Next they will stick out their tongue, stomp their feet, take their ball and run home to mommy!
Kindergarten, actually. 😛
“I think it is hilarious that Mooneybaum stated that PZ drove them out of scienceblogs.”
My current pet theory is that Discover has terms that don’t allow their bloggers to criticize one another. No evidence, except for them switching locations while writing a manuscript that they had to know would be mauled by fellow Sciencebloggers for being made up mostly of unevidenced assertions and personal attacks, as well as lacking solutions to the problem they think is paramount. Still, the thought amuses and disgusts me.
Zimmer didn’t seem too jazzed about the book in his ‘bloggingheads’ discussion with Mooney, and he elaborated a bit about his disagreements when he posted the link to the discussion on The Loom. Of course it was all highbrow and substantial, and they both stayed clear of the PZ-bashing.
Discover? So Zimmer hasn’t given an opinion? (Really need to read his books, too …)
Have you been asked to do a review for a journal or something?
That’s my guess as well. I hope we’re right!
Josh Rosenau weighs in in a post that mirrors pretty closely M&K’s exceptional thinking. My take in comment #9.
Well written, Peter. Rosenau has not answered yet. He may not due to your strong arguments.
He did. I had to apologize for impugning his honour and his honesty.
So he does a half-assed review and will do a real one in the future? HA!
I’m wondering if Rosenau is Mooney. First he makes a patently false claim relating to Richard Dawkins, and then he parrots the main article of faitheist faith, that the Smart Atheists are hurting science literacy. These guys really are no fun anymore.