PZ Myers vs. Scott Adams
Well, since I'm stuck at work and totally disinterested in doing any, well, work, I'll take this opportunity to do a little write up on an amusing and unexpected spat I came across on the internet.
It all started with Scott Adams. In case you don't know, Scott Adams is the author of the comic Dilbert. I like Dilbert. I appreciate the cynicism and amusing satire of what is, more or less, my life from 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM every weekday. Scott Adams made a post in his Blog about Intelligent Design. This is what started things off.
Now, I was a bit dismayed at this post, I have to admit. He gets some facts wrong, and seems to kind of waffle a bit. But at the same time, he does make a point about credibility and percieved bias. Now, Scott Adams is a popular guy. Lots of people read his comics, and his blog.
Because of this, news about his recent entry filtered back to a guy named PZ Myers. He runs a site called Pharyngula, which is basically a science/evo blog. The guy knows his shit, although you don't have to tak my word for it, go ahead and look at his credentials.
So PZ Myers rips Scott Adams a new one in his blog. Now, I'm not entirely sure what to make of his response. Some of the criticisms seem spot on, but at the same time, a few seem to take the ball and run with it, assuming Scott Adams is just another plain old dimwitted creationist. Hmm.
Well, it gets better. Commentors on both boards start going berserk, and some of the remarks are pretty amusing. And a lot of them get out of hand and start making assumptions about things. And a lot of them make valid objections. So the spat continues:
Scott Adams complains about people's lack of reading comprehension. Then he goes on to talk more about ID, and the shit storm he seems to have stirred up. So then PZ gets annoyed and talks about how Scott Adams is digging himself in deeper. then he finally ges fed up with the Dilbert commentors attacking him, and takes a warning shot across the bow, lambasting one of them. And Scott Adams waxes philosphical about who has credibility and why.
So far that's all that's happened. I'm not sure if it'll die down or not, but I guess I'll give my impression of the whole exchange.
1) I think Scott Adams may have kind of bitten off more than he could chew and is backpeddaling now. I don't really get what his point was in the initial post, but I understand what he means about credibility and percieved bias. The problem is, he seems to be asking for a type of unbiased person that doesn't exist in reality.
2) PZ Myers just may know more about Scott Adams and the people on his blog than I do. He seems to have kind of jumped at a percieved Republican anti-science slant there, which I'm really not sure was warranted. However, after reading through a lot of the Dilbert Blog comments, he may have some well founded reasons for his hostility.
I guess I give the "win" to PZ in this one. I really can't tell what the hell Scott Adams was trying to convey, and frankly, I'm not really sure he was trying to make a serious point at all. PZ Myers seems to have over reacted quite a bit, but then, I know what it's like slogging away with Creationists who have the analytical capabilities of a turnip. Patience can wear thin very quickly.
I'll post more as I uncover it. This whole thing is relatively new and amusing to me.
It all started with Scott Adams. In case you don't know, Scott Adams is the author of the comic Dilbert. I like Dilbert. I appreciate the cynicism and amusing satire of what is, more or less, my life from 7:00 AM to 4:00 PM every weekday. Scott Adams made a post in his Blog about Intelligent Design. This is what started things off.
Now, I was a bit dismayed at this post, I have to admit. He gets some facts wrong, and seems to kind of waffle a bit. But at the same time, he does make a point about credibility and percieved bias. Now, Scott Adams is a popular guy. Lots of people read his comics, and his blog.
Because of this, news about his recent entry filtered back to a guy named PZ Myers. He runs a site called Pharyngula, which is basically a science/evo blog. The guy knows his shit, although you don't have to tak my word for it, go ahead and look at his credentials.
So PZ Myers rips Scott Adams a new one in his blog. Now, I'm not entirely sure what to make of his response. Some of the criticisms seem spot on, but at the same time, a few seem to take the ball and run with it, assuming Scott Adams is just another plain old dimwitted creationist. Hmm.
Well, it gets better. Commentors on both boards start going berserk, and some of the remarks are pretty amusing. And a lot of them get out of hand and start making assumptions about things. And a lot of them make valid objections. So the spat continues:
Scott Adams complains about people's lack of reading comprehension. Then he goes on to talk more about ID, and the shit storm he seems to have stirred up. So then PZ gets annoyed and talks about how Scott Adams is digging himself in deeper. then he finally ges fed up with the Dilbert commentors attacking him, and takes a warning shot across the bow, lambasting one of them. And Scott Adams waxes philosphical about who has credibility and why.
So far that's all that's happened. I'm not sure if it'll die down or not, but I guess I'll give my impression of the whole exchange.
1) I think Scott Adams may have kind of bitten off more than he could chew and is backpeddaling now. I don't really get what his point was in the initial post, but I understand what he means about credibility and percieved bias. The problem is, he seems to be asking for a type of unbiased person that doesn't exist in reality.
2) PZ Myers just may know more about Scott Adams and the people on his blog than I do. He seems to have kind of jumped at a percieved Republican anti-science slant there, which I'm really not sure was warranted. However, after reading through a lot of the Dilbert Blog comments, he may have some well founded reasons for his hostility.
I guess I give the "win" to PZ in this one. I really can't tell what the hell Scott Adams was trying to convey, and frankly, I'm not really sure he was trying to make a serious point at all. PZ Myers seems to have over reacted quite a bit, but then, I know what it's like slogging away with Creationists who have the analytical capabilities of a turnip. Patience can wear thin very quickly.
I'll post more as I uncover it. This whole thing is relatively new and amusing to me.
Comments
Nice encapsulation. I wonder
Nice encapsulation. I wonder as the Internet lurches forward how many sites will eventually become pure news/summary sites for other blogs because of how common, complex, and extended these sorts of feuds will be.
Here's a footnote: Scott Adams's mother, Part 1.
Post new comment