Periodic Table of Swearing

[Guessed]

I’m wonsdering, why aren’t people who apparently like Evo Psych not as upset as we are about the apparent bullshit in that field as we are, since it does kind of discredit the entire thing but instead they go after those who rightfully point out the bullshit?
Seriously, what kind of scientist takes two data-points (somewhere in the stone age and now), doesn’t bother to check if there’s a contiunancy, not even in different cultures around the globe (everybody who talks about the houswife thingy and man breadwinner thingy as traditional has obviously never seen a farm, not even the Little House on the Prairy) and then makes assumptions?
Be angry at them, FFS!

The point, you missed it.

[Spence]

Well, now my wit looks a little less witty after Spence beat me to that quote.

SAD

Ha ha, don't worry, I'm such a waffling windbag most people will switch off by the time they get to that bit of my comment, and will think you were the first to spot it :lol:

[KarlVonMox]

If Watson was only talking about pop-evopsych, did she run out of time? Did she forget to get to the 'Here is what EvoPsych really is' 'here is what we really have learned' part?

Exactly. If that is really the message behind the talk and you want to be taken serious as someone who is knowable about the actual science you would make it clear to your audience that you don't seek to indict the entire field of EP rather criticize specific elements. If you actually watch Rebecca's talk, she fails miserably at accomplishing this.

[KarlVonMox]

From PZs latest post:

...what I intend to do is dig into the substantive flaws in both Clint’s hatchet job and in that awful discipline of evolutionary psychology. Seriously, in the reviews Clint recommended to give the background on what evo psych is, I was appalled — do these people have any understanding of modern evolutionary theory at all? I think the answer is clearly “no.”

See, if Rebecca doesn't intend on shitting all over EP as a field, PZ clearly does. They aren't even consistent with each other in their frantic attempts to come to Beckys defense.

[KarlVonMox]

serious as someone who is knowable

ick, meant to say "seriously" and "knowledgeable". I understand why you cant edit posts, its just annoying when I make typos like that.

[SteveW68]

Linky to the blog Karl quotes from.

[Outwest]

From PZs latest post:

...what I intend to do is dig into the substantive flaws in both Clint’s hatchet job and in that awful discipline of evolutionary psychology. Seriously, in the reviews Clint recommended to give the background on what evo psych is, I was appalled — do these people have any understanding of modern evolutionary theory at all? I think the answer is clearly “no.”

See, if Rebecca doesn't intend on shitting all over EP as a field, PZ clearly does. They aren't even consistent with each other in their frantic attempts to come to Beckys defense.

So now Myers is an expert on evolutionary psychology? Since when? I started to read his post but it was so full of drivel and panting over Zvan, I couldn't make it through to the end.

[ERV]

Svan defending Watson on the topic of evopsych is like Casey Luskin defending Dembski on the topic of biochemistry.

[Tony Parsehole]

Linky to the blog Karl quotes from.

The very first sentence reads:

You may have already heard that Ed Clint, a guy who has been dedicated to bashing Skepchick and Freethoughtblogs for over a year

Ed Clint said in his post:

My aim here is not to attack Watson, but to challenge a few of her unnuanced views about science and skepticism with which I happen to have professional experience. If she wishes to produce a sound, more sophisticated criticism of evolutionary psychology (entirely reasonable to do) then I would call this a success. Moreover, motive is ultimately irrelevant to the validity of my criticisms here. They stand or fall on the evidence alone. I am sure that anyone experienced in skepticism knows this quite well.

Oh yeah, sure sounds like he is bashing the fuck out of Skepchick.
How the fuck did PZ become a scientist? Not only is he such a dense cunt but he seems to actively hate any scientific approach.
I can imagine him in a lab screaming at cultures on petri dishes for not behaving how he expected them to.

[Altair]

From PZs latest post:

...what I intend to do is dig into the substantive flaws in both Clint’s hatchet job and in that awful discipline of evolutionary psychology. Seriously, in the reviews Clint recommended to give the background on what evo psych is, I was appalled — do these people have any understanding of modern evolutionary theory at all? I think the answer is clearly “no.”

See, if Rebecca doesn't intend on shitting all over EP as a field, PZ clearly does. They aren't even consistent with each other in their frantic attempts to come to Beckys defense.

I think it goes beyond Rebecca now.

As movie trailers say, "This time, it's personal"

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/6118/pzwhiners.png

it's funny how PZ gets so riled up because Ed called him "small and vulnerable" after having made a name for himself by calling theists, creationists and anyone else who disagrees with him things way nastier than those two words.

You can see the butthurt in that post, almost hearing PZ mumbling "What? Small and Vulnerable? He dared speak like that against the Peezus? :evil: "

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Quack-quack Myers sayz:

do these people have any understanding of modern evolutionary theory at all? I think the answer is clearly “no.”

I wonder when was the last time Myers attended any conference given by specialists in the field, you know, to keep up to date. I mean, that's something MDs have to do regularily (my father goes to 4/5 a year just to keep up with the latest procedures).

As far as EP¨goes, I'm not familiar enough (yet) with this field, so I wouldn't judge anything for now, but Ed's piece seemed pretty solid. At least, orders of magnitude more solid than RW's presentation.

[Altair]

Ed Clint said in his post:

My aim here is not to attack Watson, but to challenge a few of her unnuanced views about science and skepticism with which I happen to have professional experience. If she wishes to produce a sound, more sophisticated criticism of evolutionary psychology (entirely reasonable to do) then I would call this a success. Moreover, motive is ultimately irrelevant to the validity of my criticisms here. They stand or fall on the evidence alone. I am sure that anyone experienced in skepticism knows this quite well.

Oh yeah, sure sounds like he is bashing the fuck out of Skepchick.
How the fuck did PZ become a scientist? Not only is he such a dense cunt but he seems to actively hate any scientific approach.
I can imagine him in a lab screaming at cultures on petri dishes for not behaving how he expected them to.

What he doesn’t mention is that he’s been sharpening an axe since the “elevatorgate” episode; together with a disgruntled ex-FtB blogger who left in a bizarre huff over not getting enough respect, he founded a competing network (which is fine, of course) which they proceeded to stock almost entirely with writers with an an anti-FtB and strongly anti-Skepchick slant — I’ve had to laugh at the lineup which looks largely drawn from the ranks of the Slymepit, a notorious anti-feminist/anti-Rebecca Watson hate site, and my list of banned commenters. And looking at the people who comment there, again, they seem to be largely driven by hatred of Watson and feminism in general.

It doesn't matter what Ed or anyone else say, he was bashing Rebecca and skepchick, because PZ says so. That entire post is a textbook example of "Poisoning the Well".

[KarlVonMox]

it's funny how PZ gets so riled up because Ed called him "small and vulnerable" after having made a name for himself by calling theists, creationists and anyone else who disagrees with him things way nastier than those two words.

Absolutely. He doesn't realize what a colossal hypocrite he is.

[welch]

What I love is how he never presents evidence up to the task of supporting his claim that EP is, in it's entirety, bullshit.

[Za-zen]

so the impotent keyboard basher is going to ride in on his donkey and save the damsel in distress from the ebil scientist who by calling out her shit is attacking her honour. Go Peezus!

teach that uppity science nerd a thing or two, how dare he show up one of your mistresses as a know nothing ideologue.

I can't wait to see this rebuttal. a blowhard will blowhard.

I just had a tune pop into my head

[youtube]h1fiPIhGXYA[/youtube]

[Altair]

What I love is how he never presents evidence up to the task of supporting his claim that EP is, in it's entirety, bullshit.

Well, he can't do that because he's going to be "tied up for a while". Following the link, we learn that he's going to be busy grading papers and exams, advising students, and, you know, working, but his choice of words makes me picture him being literally tied up while Rebecca whips him and he apologizes for being a bad white male.

Now I'm off to find the brain bleach.

[SteveW68]

[youtube]IaxZlZXlIOs[/youtube]

[Mykeru]

I've been thinking of buying some Hitchens books on Amazon (can't find them anywhere else for a good price), but for some reason, when I click the link, all I get to is a blank page. Which isn't supposed to happen, I imagine. Or am I doing it wrong? I do live overseas (Sweden) so maybe the location fucks it up.

The url on the link is gumbercules.com/assoc , which is the right one, yeah? I don't know.

When I bought my interim computer for $ 1,073 I tried my damnedest to do it through the link. But once I got that gumbercules splash screen I found it impossible to navigate to the item I wanted to buy certain that it was displaying the item with the right processor, video card, etc. and finally I had to do a straight shot through Amazon.

Missed opportunity.

[ERV]

Quack-quack Myers sayz:

do these people have any understanding of modern evolutionary theory at all? I think the answer is clearly “no.”

I wonder when was the last time Myers attended any conference given by specialists in the field, you know, to keep up to date. I mean, that's something MDs have to do regularily (my father goes to 4/5 a year just to keep up with the latest procedures).

As far as EP¨goes, I'm not familiar enough (yet) with this field, so I wouldn't judge anything for now, but Ed's piece seemed pretty solid. At least, orders of magnitude more solid than RW's presentation.

Well thats the crux of the matter, isnt it? When someone attends one of my talks, I want them walking away from the talk having *LEARNED* something. Anything. I want them to think 'Wow, I didnt know that! Thats cool!' even if they never think about viruses ever again.

After Watsons talk, I am in no better position to understand or judge EvoPsych than I was before the talk.

I have no training or education in EvoPsych. My undergrad degree is in biology and psychology. While I joke 'When you understand that humans evolved from viruses, a LOT of human behavior starts to make sense', there is an obvious grain of truth to that statement. Humanity is currently eating, consuming itself to death. Put some bacteria in a flask-- if they cooperated and organized and thought about their future, they could live in that flask of food for a long time-- but they mindlessly consume, replicate, eat their own shit, and die. Its a nice analogy for what humans are currently doing to this planet. But any organism would, given the opportunity.

And, our behaviors are obviously a product of our physiology (unless Myers is arguing for dualism?), and our physiology is obviously a product of our evolution. How can there *not* be a connection? Its a matter of studying the connection as best you can with the technology and methodology at your disposal. I dont find attempts at dismissing the entire field outright convincing (unless one is arguing from a position of dualism, which I do not find valid in and of itself).

After watching Watson, I learned nothing. I am in the same position I was pre-watch. It was a waste of time.

Contrast this with reading Eds post, I feel as if I learned something.

If Watsons goal was education, she failed.

[Notung]

You may have already heard that Ed Clint, a guy who has been dedicated to bashing Skepchick and Freethoughtblogs for over a year

Has he? I'm pretty sure he hasn't, actually. All I can remember is that he was accused of making 'Freethought Blahgs', and it's pretty clear that wasn't even him!

Well I guess the next time someone criticises creationism, we should check that they've been nice and supportive of creationists in the past, or else their criticisms can be thrown out.

[Guest]

Whining about somebody being 'condescending and smarmy' about you, eh, PZ? One moment while I check my Pharyngula Baboons' Handbook. Ah yes, here it is. This is called being a 'tone troll'.

[KarlVonMox]

You may have already heard that Ed Clint, a guy who has been dedicated to bashing Skepchick and Freethoughtblogs for over a year

Indeed, evidence please. Or as they would say - "citation needed".

Just another slimy cop out to use for them to avoid the actual substance of the points being made.

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

Yep, it does look like Myers et al. just lost even more credibility than I thought was possible. I really feel cognitively incapable of taking anything they say seriously anymore.

Well played.

Abbie: yes, Ed's post was a lot more enlightening than Watson snoozefest.

[d4m10n]

Svan defending Watson on the topic of evopsych is like Casey Luskin defending Dembski on the topic of biochemistry.

Thanks for that. Now wiping coffee off my screen.

[Lsuoma]

This won the IgNobel in Art in 1992. The prize was shared by Jim Knowlton, the poster creator, and The National Endowment of the Arts, for "encouraging Mr. Knowlton to extend his work in the form of a pop-up book".

I have one of the posters. Now I want the book.

How appropriate.

[Altair]

Some people on twitter are taking PZ to task for focusing in the personal aspects on his post about Ed Clint.

http://img831.imageshack.us/img831/8453/smarmy.png


You can read the rest of it here: https://twitter.com/pzmyers/status/275406942699139072

[d4m10n]

Chris Hallquist just jumped in: http://patheos.com/blogs/hallq

[Tigzy]

Ha-haaa - so out they come, Peezee and Svan, waddling over to their white chargers in order to defend the sanctified blue glob. Zvan goes for the 'My friend's intent is magic, and you're just a bunch of dicks for not getting it' angle, like she did with Greg Laden and the poisoned brains, whereas Peezee does a Greta - he really coulda woulda demolished the whole thing if he wasn't so busy - and simply dismisses Ed's piece cos Ed doesn't like Beckyboos anyways, and he's smarmy, so nyer!

More and more, I'm beginning to think we need an international Draw Rebecca day.

[Al Stefanelli]

Since we were posting musical shit, I thought I'd share this with you all:

[youtube]IGsY-z7RkIA[/youtube]

[Mykeru]

I know this has already been posted, but really:

[youtube]iARHCxAMAO0[/youtube]

The hysteria, and that is the right word, is appalling.

At the end, the woman pretty much spitting "scum" in that guys face for the outrage of wanting to hear Farrell speak and make up his own mind, is a nightmare. Mostly because she would no doubt scream harassment for the most mild of criticism.

[Altair]

Chris Hallquist just jumped in: http://patheos.com/blogs/hallq

That's an awesome article.

Rebecca's dislike for EP seems to stem from two reasons:

1. EP says that there are some differences between the sexes are biological instead of cultural, and that's something that goes against what she believes.
2. Some people have used EP to justify sexism and bigotry, so EP is bad.

They sound suspiciously similar to creationists' objections against evolution. "Evolution says we are all animals!" "Darwinism was the reason the nazis did what they did!".

[Jan Steen]

PZ is so busy white knighting that he can’t think straight anymore. First he calls EP “a field that has not and will not ever contribute much of substance.” Then, in the next sentence, he writes: “The good papers in evo psych are the ones that use the tools of population genetics well and avoid the paleolithic mumbo-jumbo altogether.” So there are good papers in EP after all, which, presumably, contribute something of substance.

His post is a textbook example of an ad hominem attack, flavoured with a hefty dose of fallacy of composition (if a subset of something is X, the whole thing must be X), served as an argument from authority. He has become what he fought against. He is foaming at the mouth and flinging mud like the twin brother of Ken Ham. It’s a sad spectacle.

[Altair]

I know this has already been posted, but really:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iARHCxAMAO0

The hysteria, and that is the right word, is appalling.

At the end, the woman pretty much spitting "scum" in that guys face for the outrage of wanting to hear Farrell speak and make up his own mind, is a nightmare. Mostly because she would no doubt scream harassment for the most mild of criticism.

Internet is becoming that kind of people's worst enemy, just as it happened with creationists and fundies in general. Internet now allows people everywhere to quickly expose and respond to anything, and to show this kind of thing to the whole world.

Before Internet, that protest would have been local news, but now that video has been seen 29525 times and has 859 comments. The only way to stop people like that woman and their hateful ideologies is to expose them as the bigots they are.

[Tigzy]

Chris Hallquist just jumped in: http://patheos.com/blogs/hallq

Clearly enjoying the free air he has found on, ironically enough, a network with a strong religious presence.

[Tony Parsehole]

I know this has already been posted, but really:

*snipped vid*

The hysteria, and that is the right word, is appalling.

At the end, the woman pretty much spitting "scum" in that guys face for the outrage of wanting to hear Farrell speak and make up his own mind, is a nightmare. Mostly because she would no doubt scream harassment for the most mild of criticism.

I know.
The way they were going on you would think he was coming to talk on the best way to lynch black people FFS.

[Za-zen]

I know this has already been posted, but really:

[youtube]iARHCxAMAO0[/youtube]

The hysteria, and that is the right word, is appalling.

At the end, the woman pretty much spitting "scum" in that guys face for the outrage of wanting to hear Farrell speak and make up his own mind, is a nightmare. Mostly because she would no doubt scream harassment for the most mild of criticism.

the world, it is full of crazies. That guy at the end, handled the fuckwit well. that was serious intimidation, and you just know what the outcome would have been if he'd have replied with "fuck off"

according to xtina, vanny, waddle and friends, this is their vision of the atheist movement of the future.

[mutleyeng]

I know this has already been posted, but really:

The hysteria, and that is the right word, is appalling.

At the end, the woman pretty much spitting "scum" in that guys face for the outrage of wanting to hear Farrell speak and make up his own mind, is a nightmare. Mostly because she would no doubt scream harassment for the most mild of criticism.

haha...owwww 4:27 was hilarious...princess didnt get her way.
Still, I found her even more .... interesting than black flag lady

[tinytim]

How the fuck did PZ become a scientist? Not only is he such a dense cunt but he seems to actively hate any scientific approach.
I can imagine him in a lab screaming at cultures on petri dishes for not behaving how he expected them to.

PZ hasnt been a research scientist for about 15 years. His last cited publication was in the last millennium (1998)

I think there's a reason why he teaches parochial back-water mid-american university. Morris university has less students than a typical Ivy League university has staff!
Morris students ~ 2000

Harvard Academic staff 2,107

Guess which league PZ is in!


Publications:
1)
Title: Healthy helpings of disrespect
Author(s): Marshall, Jessica; Myers, P. Z.
Source: NEW SCIENTIST Volume: 204 Issue: 2736 Pages: 32-33 Published: NOV 28 2009
Times Cited: 0 (from Web of Science)


2.
Title: Only a theory: Evolution and the battle for America's soul
Author(s): Myers, P. Z.
Source: NATURE Volume: 454 Issue: 7204 Pages: 581-582 DOI: 10.1038/454581a Published: JUL 31 2008
Times Cited: 0 (from Web of Science)


3.
Title: Ethanol teratogenesis in the zebrafish, Danio rerio.
Author(s): Myers, PZ; Larson, M; Hartwell, M
Source: DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY Volume: 235 Issue: 1 Pages: 245-245 Meeting Abstract: 339 Published: JUL 1 2001
Times Cited: 0 (from Web of Science)


4.
Title: Calcium signals monitored from leopard frog optic tectum after the optic nerve has been selectively loaded with calcium sensitive dye
Author(s): Dudkin, EA; Myers, PZ; Ramirez-Latorre, JA; et al.
Source: NEUROSCIENCE LETTERS Volume: 258 Issue: 2 Pages: 124-126 DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3940(98)00870-2 Published: DEC 18 1998
Times Cited: 4 (from Web of Science)

[ View abstract ]
5.
Title: LITHIUM PERTURBATION AND GOOSECOID EXPRESSION IDENTIFY A DORSAL SPECIFICATION PATHWAY IN THE PREGASTRULA ZEBRAFISH
Author(s): STACHEL, SE; GRUNWALD, DJ; MYERS, PZ
Source: DEVELOPMENT Volume: 117 Issue: 4 Pages: 1261-1274 Published: APR 1993
Times Cited: 360 (from Web of Science)

[ View abstract ]
6.
Title: CELL CELL-INTERACTIONS DURING THE MIGRATION OF AN IDENTIFIED COMMISSURAL GROWTH CONE IN THE EMBRYONIC GRASSHOPPER
Author(s): MYERS, PZ; BASTIANI, MJ
Source: JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE Volume: 13 Issue: 1 Pages: 115-126 Published: JAN 1993
Times Cited: 31 (from Web of Science)

[ View abstract ]
7.
Title: GROWTH CONE DYNAMICS DURING THE MIGRATION OF AN IDENTIFIED COMMISSURAL GROWTH CONE
Author(s): MYERS, PZ; BASTIANI, MJ
Source: JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE Volume: 13 Issue: 1 Pages: 127-143 Published: JAN 1993
Times Cited: 88 (from Web of Science)

[ View abstract ]
8.
Title: NEUROVIDEO - A PROGRAM FOR CAPTURING AND PROCESSING TIME-LAPSE VIDEO
Author(s): MYERS, PZ; BASTIANI, MJ
Source: COMPUTER METHODS AND PROGRAMS IN BIOMEDICINE Volume: 34 Issue: 1 Pages: 27-33 DOI: 10.1016/0169-2607(91)90079-9 Published: JAN 1991
Times Cited: 14 (from Web of Science)

[ View abstract ]
9.
Title: PRIMARY NEURONS THAT EXPRESS THE L2/HNK-1 CARBOHYDRATE DURING EARLY DEVELOPMENT IN THE ZEBRAFISH
Author(s): METCALFE, WK; MYERS, PZ; TREVARROW, B; et al.
Source: DEVELOPMENT Volume: 110 Issue: 2 Pages: 491-504 Published: OCT 1990
Times Cited: 183 (from Web of Science)

10.
Title: DEVELOPMENT AND AXONAL OUTGROWTH OF IDENTIFIED MOTONEURONS IN THE ZEBRAFISH
Author(s): MYERS, PZ; EISEN, JS; WESTERFIELD, M
Source: JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE Volume: 6 Issue: 8 Pages: 2278-2289 Published: AUG 1986
Times Cited: 275 (from Web of Science)

11.
Title: PATHWAY SELECTION BY GROWTH CONES OF IDENTIFIED MOTONEURONS IN LIVE ZEBRA FISH EMBRYOS
Author(s): EISEN, JS; MYERS, PZ; WESTERFIELD, M
Source: NATURE Volume: 320 Issue: 6059 Pages: 269-271 DOI: 10.1038/320269a0 Published: MAR 20 1986
Times Cited: 256 (from Web of Science)


12.
Title: SPINAL MOTONEURONS OF THE LARVAL ZEBRAFISH
Author(s): MYERS, PZ
Source: JOURNAL OF COMPARATIVE NEUROLOGY Volume: 236 Issue: 4 Pages: 555-561 DOI: 10.1002/cne.902360411 Published: 1985
Times Cited: 121 (from Web of Science)


13.
Title: CHROMPAC-III - AN IMPROVED PACKAGE FOR MICROCOMPUTER-ASSISTED ANALYSIS OF KARYOTYPES
Author(s): GREEN, DM; MYERS, PZ; REYNA, DL
Source: JOURNAL OF HEREDITY Volume: 75 Issue: 2 Pages: 143-143 Published: 1984
Times Cited: 22 (from Web of Science)

[Guessed]

Whining about somebody being 'condescending and smarmy' about you, eh, PZ? One moment while I check my Pharyngula Baboons' Handbook. Ah yes, here it is. This is called being a 'tone troll'.

Hahaha, word.

It's so ironic seeing these "paragons of skepticism" who are so quick to turn the comment sections of FtB et al. into a Latin phrase jerk-off when they see fallacies in the arguments of their opponents, but seem completely unperturbed when someone on their own side utilises them in an entire blog post.

[mordacious1]

I don't know who Frank Boyd is, but I'm beginning to like him. How long before he gets banned from FfTB?

[Phil_Giordana_FCD]

I don't know who Frank Boyd is, but I'm beginning to like him. How long before he gets banned from FfTB?

Well, one sure-fire way to get him banned over there is to say over here that you like him.

Anyway, screen caps or quotes of his contributions?

[cunt]

Nice hit piece from PZ. Here's why this guy is an asshole... i'll tell you later in the week why he's wrong. Just a classic bit of well-poisoning.

Again, that’s fine — we have biases here at FtB, too, in that we tend to be pro-feminist and when we founded it, I specifically told Ed Brayton that we needed to be sure to include more than just old white guys like us — but what isn’t fine is to lie about your motives. Any day, I’ll prefer open antagonism from an avowed enemy than fair and dissembling words from an Iago.

Imagine somebody suggesting that PZ is lying about his motives in defending Watson's talk. Not only because he has a personal friendship with Watson, also because they are involved in a business venture together (skepticalrobot), and that he has a vested financial interest (however slight) in making sure that her reputation isn't tarnished.

Make that kind of suggestion in Myers blog and they'll throw a passive-aggressive shit-fit.

[Guessed]

By the way, I was published in Nature once,

Read it. Nice book review. Or do you mean the second-author paper?

Hahahahahahaha, so good.

Also,

http://i47.tinypic.com/w8ufbr.png

http://i46.tinypic.com/35kmq1h.png

It really does pay to bother reading a comment carefully if you meant to critique it, doesn't it? Where again did frankboyd say that "being published a journal rarefies your work to a point where it cannot be criticised"? Derp.

Oh, and "adorably naive"?

Condescending and smarmy, isn’t he? Ick. He won’t call me names, he’ll just call me “small and vulnerable.” Man, I despise that kind of sliminess.

Come on guys, let's at least try for a little consistency every now and then.

[cunt]

PZ Myers calling somebody condescending and smarmy.

[mordacious1]

Being banned from there is a good thing, so I'm doing him a favor. I didn't give any quotes because he has posted several comments, all of which are good. He's not being an ass to PZ, just speaking calmly with facts. PZ jumped on him right away with condensation, which is his usual MO. I'm surprised Chas Peterson is taking Clint's side in this.

[Notung]

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-503341

How about proving evidence that Evo psych isn’t just a sexist’s most recent convenient excuse?

Seriously suggesting that the field of evolutionary psychology is just a 'sexist's convenient excuse'. I'm sorry, but that is science denialism, just as credible as

How about proving evidence that Evolution isn't just an eugenicist's most recent convenient excuse?

[Tigzy]

Oh blimey. I - ah, Peezee, you couldn't even be a fictional character:

There is respectable work published under the banner of evolutionary psychology. It’s just that the respectable stuff seems to be an interesting fusion of genetics, molecular biology, and anthropology that identifies and quantifies measurable genetic traits. I’ve got absolutely no beef with that.

Zvan's apologetics aside, you do realise that the pasty-faced blue-topped wub made no distinction between the respectable and not-so-respectable areas of evo-psych, don't you? In fact, she pretty much labelled it all as superflous.

[Clint's] outrage isn’t aimed at the people who do bad, commercially influenced hackwork for commercial interests and fluff magazines, it’s against the person who dares to expose the stupidity.

Oh that's funny, I thought his piece was all about exposing a hack doing some bad, commercially-interested fluffwork. :lol:

http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/ ... ent-503336

[mutleyeng]

By the way, I was published in Nature once,

Read it. Nice book review. Or do you mean the second-author paper?

hit for 6

well played Sir, well played

[Tigzy]

according to xtina, vanny, waddle and friends, this is their vision of the atheist movement of the future.

This is their vision of the future, full stop. Except that in their view, all those screaming pencilnecks and peckertitties would be the ones wearing the uniforms.

[HoneyWagon]

http://i.imgur.com/uLcGL.png

Amy has enough time on her hands to be this petty?

[mordacious1]

Oh, NerdofRedhead informs me about Frank:

Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls
3 December 2012 at 11:59 am
Isn’t FrankBoyd one of the MRA dudes with nothing but attitude when they post here? The attitude is certainly familiar.

Glad I know all about him now.

[cunt]

As the majority of Myers' criticism of evolutionary psychology is mostly to do with the reporting of it in the british tabloid press, you'd think they'd have have something to say about the recent Leveson enquiry. Despite great evidence being presented by people like Ben Goldacre on the horrific state of science reporting in our mass-media, we ended up with nothing you could call strong, on that subject, in the reports recommendations.

I nearly forgot, Myers game is whack-a-mole. He'd be banging the side of the machine if those critters weren't popping up.

[soldierwhy]

I seem to recall that Denyse O'Leary from that bastion of scientific credibility Uncommon Descent used to go on long rants about the evils of Evolutionary Psychology.

Well done RW you are now on the same page as the pseudo-scientists.

[Outwest]

I seem to recall that Denyse O'Leary from that bastion of scientific credibility Uncommon Descent used to go on long rants about the evils of Evolutionary Psychology.

Well done RW you are now on the same page as the pseudo-scientists.

I don't think RW rises to the level of pseudo-scientist. You should aplologize to them. :)

[Tigzy]

Still, here's hoping Becky carries on in a similar vein, and ridicules the entire field of quantum physics because of the shitloads of quantum woo that's out there.

Becky herself, it has to be said, is always an expert when unobserved.

[fascination]

I think it goes beyond Rebecca now.

As movie trailers say, "This time, it's personal"

http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/6118/pzwhiners.png

it's funny how PZ gets so riled up because Ed called him "small and vulnerable" after having made a name for himself by calling theists, creationists and anyone else who disagrees with him things way nastier than those two words.

You can see the butthurt in that post, almost hearing PZ mumbling "What? Small and Vulnerable? He dared speak like that against the Peezus? :evil: "

LOL, Ed was replying to me with that quote. If we are going with movie quotes,then PZ "drew first blood" when he bashed Ed on Twitter. So, suck it PZ!

[d4m10n]

Chris Hallquist just jumped in: http://patheos.com/blogs/hallq

That's an awesome article.

Rebecca's dislike for EP seems to stem from two reasons:

1. EP says that there are some differences between the sexes are biological instead of cultural, and that's something that goes against what she believes.
2. Some people have used EP to justify sexism and bigotry, so EP is bad.

They sound suspiciously similar to creationists' objections against evolution. "Evolution says we are all animals!" "Darwinism was the reason the nazis did what they did!".

What kills me is not that certain dogmatists have ignored the bulk of EP, which has little to do with sex and gender, but that when they do critique that one small part of EP, they promulgate as an article of faith that sexual dimorphism magically ends at the blood-brain barrier in our species. Why? Because the alternative would be offensive.

[sacha]

From Skepsheik http://skepsheik.blogspot.se/2012/12/get-in-sack.html

http://i.imgur.com/mb0Vt.jpg

that just may have to be my favourite.

[Pitchguest]

Hahaha, the last two pages have been absolute gold!

So first of all we have Stephanie Zvan defending Watson by strawmanning Ed Clint, and then making the assumptions that she was *really* talking about evolutionary psychology in the popular media. (This despite the fact that the 12:30 timestamp on her talk, she clearly says she's talking about the field as a whole, in fact she uses the phrase "as a whole" to refer to the science.) This is compounded by people like (surprise surprise) LeftSidePositive who say you must be "willfully ignorant if you refuse to see that this talk is CLEARLY about EvoPsych as it is presented in the media and as it is used to prop up prejudices." This (from LSP) is a response to Justin Griffiths, who criticises the talk but can't seem to cast away his fears of a backlash as he thinks Watson is "obviously an excellent communicator, and she is professionally trained after all." Indeed. Imagine when Hitchens spoke passionately about the horrors of religion that he would oft-times giggle and laugh at his own jokes, and he would do this throughout the entire talk? Would that be the telltale sign of a good orator?* The jury's out on that one, I guess. (Fuck sake, Justin, get it together.)

Then we have PZ Myers -- who apparently haven't chatted it up with Stephanie beforehand so they could get their stories straight -- utterly blasts Ed Clint and defends Watson by both saying that evolutionary psychology is a field that "has not and will not ever contribute much of substance." And then contradicting himself straight after in the next sentence. Classic PZ. But essentially he's saying it's bunkum, pseudo-science, mumbo-jumbo and such phrases. So which is it? Is Watson talking about evolutionary psychology as described in the popular media, implying that it's been misinterpreted and isn't a failed science as asserted by PZ, or was she saying it's a load of shit? Apparently since she made this post here on Stephanie's blog, thanking Zvan for her contribution and acknowledging that it was indeed what she was talking about (pop-EP), what's PZ on about? Since he's obviously misunderstood Watson's "true intentions" about the talk, is he going on a tangent? Is he speaking for Watson, that she wasn't actually dissing just pop-EP, but EP in general? What the fuck is he on about?

I'm amazed. Amazed. Their followers must be clinically insane. Lastly, I just want to reiterate a previous point about Sean Faircloth's speech at AA, and the woman that was offended for the use of 'females' to refer to her as a gender. (Read this post from HoneyWagon to get more in-depth). I seriously can't stop giggling to myself about it. It just makes so much sense now why the guest blogger on BlagHag was so upset: she was the one who ran after the woman who got offended! There was a show of hands to see who else was offended by it, and only one other woman raised her hand! That's her! Hahaha!

[Al Stefanelli]

I am shaking my head at the utter depth of the rabbit hole these people have fallen into. Apparently, it's bottomless...