Nick Matzke posted Entry 2665 on October 25, 2006 07:04 PM.
Trackback URL: http://www.pandasthumb.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.fcgi/2658

UPDATE: Ken Miller will be on Ohio Public Radio tomorrow, on 90.3 WCPN, 9 a.m. eastern. The program will also feature a face-off between Ohio State Board of Education candidates Deborah Owens-Fink and Tom Sawyer. The program, “Evolution’s Effect on Voters,” will start at 9 am Eastern Time on Thursday, and the station has live streaming. Questions can be asked at (216) 578-0903, or the show email, [Enable javascript to see this email address.].

Ken Miller speaking in Ohio: An announcement from Patricia Princehouse of Ohio is below. Kenneth Miller is evidently trying to break some sort of record – he is speaking seven times in three days, starting Thursday at Case Western Reserve University, in a talk which will be webcast.

Ken Miller in Ohio!
Oct 26-28
Science, God, & Intelligent-Design:
Why all three matter in the 2006 Ohio elections

As seen on the Colbert Report & YouTube!!!

Akron, Bowling Green, Cincinnati, Columbus, Cleveland, Kent, and Oberlin.

**FREE & OPEN to the PUBLIC**
Details at http://ohiohope.homestead.com/miller.html

Webcast Thurs 11:30 am!

Commenters are responsible for the content of comments. The opinions expressed in articles, linked materials, and comments are not necessarily those of PandasThumb.org. See our full disclaimer.

Comment #141432

Posted by Henry J on October 24, 2006 1:43 PM (e)

Once is not enough! ;)

Comment #141475

Posted by Patricia Princehouse on October 24, 2006 9:08 PM (e)

Henry J wrote:

Once is not enough! ;)

That’s for sure.

Collect all 7!

Comment #141479

Posted by dfdhs on October 25, 2006 1:24 AM (e)

test dfhfth dfhgfhn dfghdfg

Comment #141480

Posted by alskfhnaslh on October 25, 2006 1:26 AM (e)

yes

Comment #141484

Posted by Shalini, BBWAD on October 25, 2006 5:55 AM (e)

[Collect all 7!]

Anyone care to publish a 7-part series online?

;-)

Comment #141487

Posted by Grady on October 25, 2006 6:38 AM (e)

Good for Miller. Dawkins really despises him, though.

Does that say something about Miller?

Or Dawkins?

Comment #141493

Posted by hiero5ant on October 25, 2006 8:05 AM (e)

Got a cite for “despises” as against “disagrees with”?

Comment #141494

Posted by Raging Bee on October 25, 2006 8:19 AM (e)

It says the most about Dawkins. What has Miller done to offend Dawkins?

Of course, since Dawkins has shown his willingness to trash millions of innocent people without regard to their actions – or even a clear understanding of their beliefs – why should we care what Dawkins “thinks?”

Comment #141503

Posted by Nick (Matzke) on October 25, 2006 11:54 AM (e)

I once heard Ken Miller tell a story about a, um, vigorous (impromptu) debate they once had when they were both invited to the same dinner or something. I don’t remember the details unfortunately, but neither Miller nor Dawkins are exactly slouches when it comes to witty repartee.

Comment #141510

Posted by Anton Mates on October 25, 2006 12:56 PM (e)

hiero5ant wrote:

Got a cite for “despises” as against “disagrees with”?

Indeed, I haven’t seen either Miller or Dawkins make an unfriendly remark about the other. They just like to argue.

Comment #141517

Posted by Sir_Toejam on October 25, 2006 4:22 PM (e)

grady just loves dropping one-line strawmen as bait.

Comment #141570

Posted by Jason Spaceman on October 26, 2006 7:09 AM (e)

Scientists Endorse Candidate Over Teaching of Evolution:

By CORNELIA DEAN
Published: October 26, 2006

In an unusual foray into electoral politics, 75 science professors at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland have signed a letter endorsing a candidate for the Ohio Board of Education.

The professors’ favored candidate is Tom Sawyer, a former congressman and onetime mayor of Akron. They hope Mr. Sawyer, a Democrat, will oust Deborah Owens Fink, a leading advocate of curriculum standards that encourage students to challenge the theory of evolution.

Elsewhere in Ohio, scientists have also been campaigning for candidates who support the teaching of evolution and have recruited at least one biologist from out of state to help.

Comment #141584

Posted by Peter on October 26, 2006 8:28 AM (e)

So far, Miller is doing his usual bangup job. Ms. Fink really “finked” around some questions about the critical analysis issue.
Dr. Williams is also rather special. He said that in the business community people are more “open-minded” to good ideas. Too bad ID hasn’t yielded s*** in research for the business world. Lots of book sales. No R&D.

Comment #141589

Posted by N.Wells on October 26, 2006 8:57 AM (e)

I’m listening to it on the radio: it is a superb treatment. Miller is doing a fantastic job, and Tom Sawyer is doing a fine political wrap-up near the end.

Comment #141590

Posted by Pete Dunkelberg on October 26, 2006 9:00 AM (e)

Announced at RSR: http://redstaterabble.blogspot.com/

Michelle Goldberg to Speak in Overland Park
Mainstream Voices of Faith will co-sponsor a talk by Michelle Goldberg, author of Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism on Sunday, November 12 . There will be a brunch at 9:30 am, the program begins at 10:30.

To attend, make reservations by November 3rd by calling or stopping by the Jewish Community Center, 5801 W. 115th St., Overland Park, KS. 913-327-8000.

Cost is $12 per person.

Goldberg’s lecture will introduce you to the leaders behind the rise of Christian extremism in America, and give a how-to guide for preserving religious and civil liberties against the religious right. Goldberg will be available after the presentation to sign copies of her book.

Comment #141603

Posted by hiero5ant on October 26, 2006 12:36 PM (e)

OK, so at this point I’m provisionally going with “‘Dawkins despises Miller’ is unfounded tendentious nonsense,” subject to future correction.

Comment #141688

Posted by Jason Spaceman on October 27, 2006 5:09 AM (e)

Will the Miller webcast be archived anywhere?

Comment #141818

Posted by Scott Hatfield on October 28, 2006 2:40 AM (e)

Dr. Miller has received a good deal of grief of late from those who should know better.

These critics have lambasted him here and at other blogs for, among other things, having a peculiarly theistic take on evolution.

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you. Few people have been such a tireless advocate for evolution education. I’d like to see my friends in the community of the godless who have been so critical of Miller put either their time or their money on the line in the Ohio elections. Let’s come together, people!….SH

Comment #141819

Posted by Dean Morrison on October 28, 2006 5:51 AM (e)

The youtube thing has been taken down due to copyright infringement.

Dawknin’s no more despises people who hold sincere religious belief than Millar despises Atheists. He probably doesn’t have a lot of time for those that wish to exploit that belief and those in the religious industry who want to indoctrinate kids to improve their market share.

Miller is seriously good - I almost wish that there was a Catholic God as a reward for all his efforts. He was much better than Dawkins on the ‘Colbert Report’ - Dawkins seemed rather bemused by the whole thing, although at least he smiled a lot for a change.

Comment #141823

Posted by Diane on October 28, 2006 8:06 AM (e)

When Dawkins was here in Kansas he ridiculed both Miller and Gould for being accomodating to religion.

You all know that is Dawkins attitude.

Quit pretending.

Comment #141831

Posted by hiero5ant on October 28, 2006 11:08 AM (e)

I of course cannot speak for others, but I can say with all honesty and sincerity that I am not “pretending”.

I’m just asking for a citation that demonstrates that Dawkins “despises” Miller. Have you any?

Comment #141832

Posted by Torbjörn Larsson on October 28, 2006 1:00 PM (e)

We should distinguish between antiscientific and religious sentiments wherever we can, despite the conflation from creationists. This also makes it natural to criticise Miller’s theistic evolution as it is.

If we need to compare Colbert’s interviews of Miller vs Dawkins instead of what they are saying, I think it is hard to say who come off better, since it is also a matter of taste involved - personally I enjoyed Dawkins’ spare and witty style, which influences me apart from that I agree with Dawkins’ worldview and disagree with Miller’s.

I think Miller come over as smoother and at least as sure of himself, especially since Dawkins had a wobbly start before adapting to the format of the show. Miller also parsed his answers admirably. I’m pretty sure he may be the good public speaker everybody says.

But on the other hand Dawkins made Colbert loose the thread at times, perhaps since Colbert seems to be a catholic and have opposed views which must have made it hard for him when Dawkins returned strong points.

So IMO both made a good job on their points. And Colbert was terrific too - the format he uses is personally friendly and fun while intellectually provocative, exactly the devious style that one may think is needed to reach some groups.

Comment #141833

Posted by jeffw on October 28, 2006 1:18 PM (e)

When Dawkins was here in Kansas he ridiculed both Miller and Gould for being accomodating to religion.

I watched the speech. He didn’t “ridicule” Miller or Gould. Sure, he strongly disagrees with their positions, even calling NOMA “nonsense”, but there were no personal attacks. Actually, I think he’s fairly polite. He could be a lot nastier, if he wanted to be.

Comment #141836

Posted by Anton Mates on October 28, 2006 1:40 PM (e)

jeffw wrote:

I watched the speech. He didn’t “ridicule” Miller or Gould. Sure, he strongly disagrees with their positions, even calling NOMA “nonsense”, but there were no personal attacks. Actually, I think he’s fairly polite. He could be a lot nastier, if he wanted to be.

He’s made personal attacks on Gould in print before, and vice versa, but they were sniping over evolutionary theory before the religion issue ever came up.

Comment #141852

Posted by Al Moritz on October 28, 2006 10:31 PM (e)

Hiero5ant wrote:

OK, so at this point I’m provisionally going with “‘Dawkins despises Miller’ is unfounded tendentious nonsense,” subject to future correction.

I guess it is unfounded tendentious nonsense, no future correction of your point likely in any way. On page 131 of The God Delusion Dawkins writes:

“In fact, molecular biologists have no difficulty in finding parts functioning outside the whole, both for the flagellar motor and for Behe’s other alleged examples of irreducible complexity. The point is well put by Kenneth Miller of Brown University, for my money the most persuasive nemesis of ‘intelligent design’, not least because he is a devout Christian. I frequently recommend Miller’s book, Finding Darwin’s God, to religious people who write to me having been bamboozled by Behe.”

(BTW, I find Dawkins’s book quite entertaining, and I can understand his point of view, even though, as a Christian, I obviously do not agree with him. I do agree with him on evolutionary science though, what is there to disagree?)

Comment #141882

Posted by hiero5ant on October 29, 2006 8:46 AM (e)

Well, your citation which conclusively disproves the claim that Dawkins “despises” Miller may have truth on its side, but the idea that atheists must be snivelling bigoted hate-filled golblins has truthiness.

Comment #142025

Posted by Popper's ghost on October 30, 2006 11:05 PM (e)

It says the most about Dawkins. What has Miller done to offend Dawkins?

Ah, so not only do you believe anything that you read as long as it fits your preconceptions, but you also ascribe to argumentum ad ignorantiam. That is, you accept that Dawkins despises Miller, but you know of no reason why he should, and this says something to you about Dawkins. Rather, I think, it says a lot about you (not that it says anything that wasn’t already well known).

Comment #142028

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on October 30, 2006 11:12 PM (e)

Gee, Popper, it sure was quiet while you were gone.

Comment #142030

Posted by Popper's ghost on October 30, 2006 11:27 PM (e)

What, and it suddenly changed? I see, Lenny, that you’re as intellectually dishonest and as much of a dick waver as I remember you to be.

Comment #143892

Posted by beepbeepitsme on November 13, 2006 7:46 AM (e)

Ken Miller - On Apes and Humans
http://beepbeepitsme.blogspot.com/2006/11/ken-mi…