hell’s handmaiden

I started reading the interview–Intelligent Design the Future: An Interview with David Berlinski: Part One– posted by Jonathan Witt one IDtheFuture. I’m not sure I’ll be able to finish it. Why? Well, lets look at what “Darwin scourge David Berlinski” has to say.

Like the San Andreas fault, the indignation conspicuous at blogs such as The Panda’s Thumb or Talk Reason is now visible from outer space.

Hyperbole… and backstabbing.

There is a lot at stake, obviously. Money, prestige, power, influence – they all play a role.

Backstabbing… poisoning the well…

Paul Nelson has a well written article up at IDtheFuture, “Ron Numbers, Methodological Naturalism, and the Rules of Baseball”. He is engaging and readable, and, I think, sincere, but the article rests upon one basic, and flawed, idea, summarized best in the last few paragraphs of the article.

Not a word from Howard Stein about the necessity of methodological naturalism. Russell’s “comparatively detailed considerations” were evidential, not in-principle, and naturalism as a provisional epistemology would work only if evidence, not metaphysics, were running the show.

I’d like more conservatives to read this, especially the second paragraph, part of which is below.

… Each of the book’s core chapters presents a series of vignettes about people who have adopted a slow, deliberate, and civilized approach to the mundane things that make up the fabric of human existence. … Though some of the causes the book examines have been appropriated by liberals of the fruit-and-nut variety, their most natural home is among those who perceive the organic and providential character of human existence. Dreher discerns a significant cultural trend in all this, and he rightly calls it conservative.

My new friend DaveScott, who posts at Uncommon Descent, has another post on the board over there and it exhibits what I am coming to believe to be characteristic lack of substance.

Myers whines about Witt’s rhetoric comparing evolution, Castro, and popularism. Meanwhile, Myers is perfectly happy to defend evolution via judicial fiat. When a scientist needs to play the constitution card to censor criticism of his pet theory you can rest assured the theory is one that’s in crisis.

Uncommon Descent � No More Establishment Clause for PZ Myers

Glenn Greenwald has a fine piece on the Washington Times’ FISA story which has gotten so much right wing attention. Apparently the deception is deeper than I imagined. Greenwald states that “So the Washington Times story is complete rubbish.” Not only was the report spun by the BlogsforBush guys, but the story itself was a pack of lies. Nice.

Their agenda, to the extent they had one, was to lobby for the continued relevance of the FISA court. If the DeWine bill passes, the FISA court will be utterly marginalized. These judges realize that some sort of legislation is likely to be passed, and they’d undoubtedly prefer something along the lines of Specter’s bill, which would at least require the court to approve surveillance on a program-wide level.