Uncommonly Dense just keeps getting denser
The winner of the IDURC Casey Luskin Graduate Award has been announced at UD, and aren't you all just waiting to know who this particular retarded ID-iot is? Here's what the ID-iots say:
The recipient of the 2007 Casey Luskin Graduate Award will remain anonymous for the protection of the recipient. The many students, professors, and scientists who have been denied degrees or tenure, and removed from positions and jobs for no other reason than acceptance of—or even sympathy to—intelligent design theory is very telling of the importance of keeping these bright young minds out of the crosshairs of those opposed to open-minded investigation and critical thought.
Anonymous for the protection of the recipient? People being hopelessly persecuted due to a mere acceptance of ID? Despite lacking a single shred of evidence for their outrageous claims, the ID-iots keep deluding themselves that there is a Darwinian Inquisition out to get
Anyway, my equally anonymous source tells me that the 'anonymous' winner is Hannah Maxson. I figured she could use a little extra publicity.
What would Uncommonly Dense be without the usual antics of its' IDiot-in-chief, William Dembski (or better known here as BillDumb)? He responds to Jerry Coyne about Behe's refusal to publish in scientific journals with the usual level of stupidity expected of the great BillDumb.
If Behe's theory is so world-shaking, and so indubitably correct, why doesn't he submit it to some scientific journals? (The reason is obvious, of course: his theory is flat wrong.)
Let me suggest another reason: Coyne is wrong and doesn't want Behe upsetting his applecart.
Next comes Sal Cordova with his attempt to rebut Dawkins' review of Behe's junk of a book. He makes this claim:
Deliberate dog breeding is an example of intelligently designed selection, not natural selection...
Intelligently designed selection? What the fuck?!
If dog breeding is "intelligent design" as opposed to "artificial selection", new traits could arise in a generation of dogs that are not a result of mutations. What this means is that a dog could suddenly produce offspring with particular trait better suited for a certain environment despite the fact that the instructions that lay out the preference for that trait were not genetically coded. The ID-iots strike out again.
All I see over at UD are the ghosts of extinct dodos. And that's really putting it mildly.