More Recent Comments

Friday, October 11, 2013

Three Senior Fellows of the Discovery Institute Will Discuss Criticisms of Dawin's Doubt on a Radio Show on October 23

Evolution News & Views (sic) will bring together David Klinghoffer and Stephen Meyer to discuss Darwin's Doubt on the Michael Medved show [The Closing of the Scientific Mind: Join Us on October 23 in the Medved Studio for a Special Edition of the Science & Culture Update]. The topic is the "closing of the scientific mind," surely an appropriate topic for three men who are not scientists.
Does science open minds, or close them? A "scientific view" is frequently taken as being basically synonymous with skepticism, questioning, and independent thinking. All good and wonderful things! Yet very often, self-proclaimed paladins of "science" are impatient with genuine skeptics, flee from debate, or find a variety of other creative ways to avoid having to confront challenges to their beliefs.

In the special October 23 edition of the Science & Culture Update on the Michael Medved Show, you'll have a chance to talk about science and skepticism, closed minds and open ones, live in the KTTH radio studio, with Mr. Medved, Darwin's Doubt author Dr. Stephen Meyer, and Evolution News & Views editor David Klinghoffer. All three are Discovery Institute senior fellows.

For the discussion, they'll take as a case in point the critical reception of Dr. Meyer's book, Darwin's Doubt: The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design, which has sparked furious debate -- and also a great deal of artful dodging of the relevant scientific issues by opponents of the theory of intelligent design. Why are critics of ID so determined to flee from a fair fight?
I think I'm going to try and listen in. I can't wait to hear how Medved, Meyer, and Klinghoffer respond to my scientific critique of Chapter 5: "The Genes Tell the Story?"


  1. Testable prediction: If people like you are mentioned at all, it won't be to deal with any of the technical details of your criticisms. You'll just be mentioned as an example of a closed-minded darwinist who didn't understand the book and who's just doing some kind of damage control propaganda.

    Stick my neck out prediction: I will not be proven wrong.

  2. I'm glad to hear Medved has invited Larry Moran, Nick Matzke, John Harshman and others who wrote critical reviews of Darwin's Doubt onto Medved's radio show to present their actual criticisms, thus ensuring that the DI non-scientist "guests" will not straw-man their criticisms and replace them with different, dumber arguments that are easier to refute.

    Because we know for sure that if Matzke, Moran, Harshman et al. are not actually on Medved's program, then the DI non-scientist "guests" would certainly straw-man their criticisms and replace them with different, dumber arguments that are easier to refute.

    Whew! We're lucky that's not going to happen


    1. That raises an interesting hypothetical. If I were asked to be on the show should I accept?

    2. Depends. How good are you at verbal debate, in its talking-head, Fox-News, how-loud-can-you-shout-over-your-opponent form?

    3. I'm pretty good at it. I've even been on the Medved show, opposite Hugh Ross of Reasons to Believe!

  3. My 2c: Should an opportunity like that be ignored? A carefully prepared approach and strategy might do some good. But that would have to be prepared out of sight.

    … artful dodging … determined to flee from a fair fight? Anyone seen that attitude from scientific quarters?

    I am withholding my thoughts on the subject.

  4. Medved is just another far right loonie. It's not going to be a serious scientific event, believe me - it's just one culture warrior interviewing another.