PZ Myers posted Entry 2887 on February 7, 2007 07:45 PM.
Trackback URL: http://www.pandasthumb.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.fcgi/2877

And it's a dud. They've got two complaints against Randy Olson's Flock of Dodos posted, neither of which are particularly stunning.

Continue reading "Discovery Institute fires its first salvo in the War Against Dodos" (on Pharyngula)

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 #160171

Posted by Jedidiah Palosaari on February 8, 2007 4:44 AM (e)

Got to watch Flock of Dodos tonight, at the Pacific Science Center. Quite enjoyable, and much stronger in support of evolution than I was expecting. And bonus- got to hear from Randy Olson lead the Q&A afterward. Afterward a small group of us were entertained with stories of Stephen Jay Gould, who Olson was a grad student for. I asked Olson to respond to the accusation that PZ Meyers refers to, that DI is saying their budget is only 4.2 million/1.3 million instead of the 5 mentioned in the movie. Olson felt that the DI was focusing on trivia, but stated that the DI had refused to talk with him or verify anything until the movie was already produced. At that point he heard from them that his figures were wrong, and he went back and checked- and discovered the Discovery Institute was correct- there budget was only 4.2 million. But that would take $1000 to correct, and was rather a small difference.

He also had some interesting information to share about his interview with Behe. Continue reading at www.abdulmuhib.blogspot.com.

Comment #160220

Posted by Steviepinhead on February 8, 2007 6:25 PM (e)


If you’re in the Seattle area, you’d be welcome to join our After the Bar Closes group for a get-together:


Stevie P.

Comment #160274

Posted by PvM on February 9, 2007 11:25 AM (e)

Randy responds at Pharyngula Comment thread

At laelaps we learn:

Back to the original accusation posed by the DI: Is Randy Olson defending the accuracy of Haeckel’s ideas in the film? Not at all! The point Olson tries to make is that Haeckel’s Embryos are not as widespread in the literature (even older books) as is perceived by ID advocates. Putting the assertion that Haeckel’s Embryos are nearly ubiquitous in the literature to the test, he rightly challenges the creationist who espouses this claim and together they review the books in the man’s library, coming up (as I did) empty handed.

Much ado about nothing it seems. Now imagine all this creativity being put to use to present us with a scientific explanation relevant to ID…

Just imagine… That’s all one can do though.