Larry Moran: "Darwin was the greatest scientist who ever lived"

He said it right here.

Darwin never even got the title "Sir" whereas some other British scientists got the title "Lord," e.g., Lord Kelvin, Lord Rutherford.

I was originally tempted to start calling Larry "Larry Moron." However, to Larry's credit, he severely criticized giving Judge Jones credit for copied material in the ID-as-science section of the Dover opinion and at the same time Larry also thoroughly bashed Fatheaded Ed Brayton. Here is some of what Larry wrote:
.

Ed and his followers — a dozen or so at last count — are not happy. Apparently, I have violated one of the cardinal sins of the appeasers. I have questioned one of the good guys. They want to make sure everyone understands the depth of my ignorance. Thanks, Ed, I appreciate the lesson from such an expert. . . .

. . . .Enough, Ed. I never said that the validity of his ruling was in question. I'm in no position to judge the minutiae of American constitutional law. One of the things that I didn't know was that a judge can just copy the arguments of one side and claim them as his own. I also didn't know that in your culture this can be a sign of intelligence, even brilliance. It explains a lot. Thanks for the lesson . . .

. . . .Chalk it up to ignorance, Ed. I was ignorant of the way you do things down there and of your standards for brilliance. I'll try not to overestimate you again.

Larry also said in a comment,

Referring to Judge Jones, you say ...

He did not merely sign off on one side, but took the material from both sides and took a month to sort through what occurred at trial and put together a first rate summary of the issues from the materials he had been comparing and which had been debated before the bench. It was not all his own wording; but that's not a defect, nor is it a denial of the time he did spend sorting through the issues.

I find it incredible that you could say such a thing. Obviously, you have never taken the time to compare what Jones wrote to what's in the Plaintiff's submission. Any junior clerk could have copied the material in a single afternoon, making some minor changes of wording. This is not a case of picking and choosing from both sides and writing a summary that incorporates a few phrases here and there. It's wholesale copying, the order is the same and entire paragraphs are copied for 34 pages.

As I said, my biggest problem with Judge Jones is not his copying but is the one-sidedness of his copying -- his ID-as-science section was nearly entirely copied from the plaintiffs' opening post-trial brief while nearly entirely ignoring the other post-trial briefs. Also, I agree with Larry that a judge should not be given credit for what that judge copies.
.