Links to this blog are in Wikipedia
I was reading the Wikipedia article about William Dembski when I was surprised to find links to this blog in the following excerpt from the article:
Links #49, #50, #51, and #52 are links to comments on this blog. LOL
I also found the following item in the Wikipedia article:
Unfortunately, Link #43 doesn't work, so I couldn't see what Ed "It's My Way or the Highway" Brayton actually said. But Brayton has a nerve criticizing Dembski for arbitrary censorship when Brayton himself practices such censorship -- Brayton kicked me off his blog "Dispatches from the Culture Wars" permanently because he did not like my literal interpretation of a federal court rule. I have now been banned from Panda's Thumb, Brayton's blog, and Wesley Elsberry's personal blog, Austringer. Well, folks, which blog would you rather visit: this blog, where you can see all sides to a controversy, or a blog where you can see only one side? To me, the choice is clear.
I found the Wikipedia article's other gossip about Dembski's blog "Uncommon Descent" very amusing because I saw many of the described events firsthand.
One of the moderators of Dembski's blog, DaveScot, speaking of the plaintiffs in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial, endorsed bullying their children and committing vandalism to drive them out of town for their role in the trial and claimed he intends to publish their names to that end.[49][50][51][52]
Links #49, #50, #51, and #52 are links to comments on this blog. LOL
I also found the following item in the Wikipedia article:
Dembski has been accused of censoring critics on his blog. Ed Brayton, a critic of Dembski, alleges that Dembski as a matter of course removes reasonable criticisms and questions left at his personal blog, uncommondescent.com.[43]
Unfortunately, Link #43 doesn't work, so I couldn't see what Ed "It's My Way or the Highway" Brayton actually said. But Brayton has a nerve criticizing Dembski for arbitrary censorship when Brayton himself practices such censorship -- Brayton kicked me off his blog "Dispatches from the Culture Wars" permanently because he did not like my literal interpretation of a federal court rule. I have now been banned from Panda's Thumb, Brayton's blog, and Wesley Elsberry's personal blog, Austringer. Well, folks, which blog would you rather visit: this blog, where you can see all sides to a controversy, or a blog where you can see only one side? To me, the choice is clear.
I found the Wikipedia article's other gossip about Dembski's blog "Uncommon Descent" very amusing because I saw many of the described events firsthand.
posted by Larry Fafarman | 9/05/2006 04:10:00 AM
3 Comments:
How appropriate. The links are where it refers to the idiot DaveScot. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia except for a few protected subjects, it is not surprising that this would happen. You might check references to your blog under "Lunacy".
Both your brother Real Dave and I have made frequent contributions to Wikipedia.
Voice In the Wilderness said --
>>>>>> Since anyone can edit Wikipedia except for a few protected subjects, it is not surprising that this would happen. <<<<<<<
Not that many people read this blog. What is surprising is that one of these people would bother to post such trivia on Wikipedia. A lot of other gossip about Dembski's Uncommon Descent was posted on Wikipedia.
Considering that most articles can be edited by the readers, the objectivity and impartiality of most of Wikipedia's articles is amazing. I found the following rare example of bias on Wikipedia in the following statement about PZ Myers' blog "Pharyngula":
As well as criticizing Intelligent Design creationism and other forms of pseudo-science, Pharyngula includes posts on a very broad variety of topics that interest Myers.
Any statement as to whether ID should be associated with creationism or whether they should be considered to be "pseudosciences" should be reserved for the Wikipedia webpages on those subjects, where different viewpoints can be presented.
> Not that many people read this blog. What is surprising is that one of these people would bother to post such trivia on Wikipedia. <
Anyone Googling the subject would find some extremely obscure stuff. There is probably not a lot of material around on Dembski so anyone wanting to find anything would be digging in the bottom of a very small barrel. It should be no surprise that this would appear there.
> A lot of other gossip about Dembski's Uncommon Descent was posted on Wikipedia. <
Now you are trying to redefine the word "gossip".
> Any statement as to whether ID should be associated with creationism or whether they should be considered to be "pseudosciences" <
ID is plainly creationism. It is a pseudoscience. The only controversy is whether one wants to adopt science or the anti-scientific ID and creationism.
Post a Comment
<< Home