Mike, you seem to have missed some of this story.

Dembski asked Harvard for permission to use a still from the video in a book. They turned him down, but we find out from lingering footnotes in the book that Dembski had already put the image in the book. It was subsequently replaced by a different image, but he didn’t do a terrific job of cleaning up after himself.

OK, that’s not such a big deal.

However, he has used the entire video in a public lecture, without permission or credit, and replacing the original soundtrack with his own voiceover. Now, that is not in any way, shape or form, fair use. He did not use the video as a “quotation”, he did not use it for the purpose of reviewing it, he presented it as the work of the DI. (To be fair, his words were “this is a state-of-the-art computer animation . . .” so he did not actually claim the credit. But by failing to acknowledge the actual creators of the video, he allows his audience to assume it is his work or the work of his DI colleagues).

AFAICT, that really is copyright theft.

This isn’t about me, it’s about Dembski. He claims to be a Christian, and he claims to be on the side of right, and he claims and claims and claims. But when he’s caught stealing, he lies about it. That’s two commandments he broke.

And as I pointed out as clearly as I possibly could, there are Fair Use issues here too. Maybe you should read about them before saying anything else.

BA

—————————————————————

What moral code prevents someone from using a SLIDE during a presentation? I understand “thou shalt not steal” — which is what I think you are using as a basis for critique… but this doesn’t apply, as Dembski would have to literally sit down and scheme the use of the harvard side for nefarious purposes..

Also you overlook the fact that Dembski and almost every other human on the planet has broken the “thou shalt not steal” commandment — thus making ANYONE who critiques theft a hypocrite as well.

I suppose it should be asked on the record… Phil.. have YOU ever stolen anything… even something “small” or “by accident”?

That’s just one of the rules we christians have to TRY to follow…

Of course NO ONE can follow all 10 commandments.. as we all have lied, looked at someone with lust other than our spouse, stolen something, or coveted our neighbors things… should I keep going?

This is why God finds everyone on the planet “unacceptable” to him… and this is why Jesus took our punishment for us.

Dembski didn’t commit any crime, unless of course you are willing to say that anyone who uses any material without the CREATORS permission is guilty of “theft”… in which case I think the pictures you “took” from NASA’s websites, or APOD’s Websites, PZ’s website etc… are all fair game!

If this is the case then you and PZ are literally felons at large.

Is this whole thing important, Phil? Not in the least. Not even a little bit. But “his own moral code”? Don’t we all have a moral code? Why is his so much more important than any of ours?

Sometimes it is hard for us to understand what drives a man to defend his beliefs in the face of overwhelming opposition. Perhaps it is because of the blind devotion of his peers. Perhaps it is deep-seeded indoctrination. Perhaps it is from a chemical imbalance. Remember that Percival Lowell was both a brilliant astronomer and a true nutjob. Even as his discoveries became more significant, it seems his nuttiness just got worse as he got older.

I’m writing a book of my own, which will surely never be published, on the strength of myths. Not society’s myths (that’s a topic well covered!) but the myths held strongly by students in my classroom. It’s amazing how a person with no direct experience can have such a strong opinion about a particular concept, like parachutes pull you up or blood is blue or microwaves turn water into poison. These misconceptions can root themselves so deeply that it can prevent me from being a good teacher.

What I’m saying is that I understand your feelings toward those who spread such misconceptions. It harms education and ultimately the children who might believe a convincing, if completely ridiculous, argument. I fight it every day. Sometimes the source of a myth is a forwarded email or even another teacher. What do I do then? Call her/him stupid in front of the class? That does far more damage than good. Logical dissemination of their arguments while treating them like they’re still intelligent is the best way I’ve found to make progress. Show them the process, and they’ll learn to think for themselves. Or, show off how much smarter and better I am than everyone else and make them bitter toward me and the lesson.

I’ve been watching Cosmos all the way through again. The Science Channel will show the entire series again starting in January. Before then I’m going to show the first episode to my physics class and introduce them to Carl’s way of teaching. I really wish I could present material like him. ) [I've been working on my bill-yons and bill-yons!] I teach in a country school where *all* my students are young-earth believers. It’s not an easy thing to teach something contrary to everything they’ve ever been exposed to. Good thing I’ve got Carl to show me the way!

In the end, the most important thing I ever teach my students is to not believe me, either. I don’t know what’s true. No one does. We take the evidence we have and make the best guess we can. It’s almost always wrong, but that’s what science actually is. The equations and models we use are…incomplete. And they always will be. But ultimately it is the search for the truth that matters. Don’t be complacent with your knowledge.

Hmmmph! I was about to complain about all the writing StevoR did, and I practically wrote a whole blog myself! Sorry about that. Let me go find a benign post to comment on…

–Terry

Is this a joke?

I mean… are you joking?

And I ask as someone who is so sick of the fumblementalist Evangelicals that I regularly float the idea of throwing Christians to lions as the next big thing in reality TV. I ask this as the uberskeptic who is sometimes skeptical of other skeptics.

So… are you [bleeping] JOKING?

Answer to question: Yes, they are *really* THAT [bleeping] removed!

ObSheesh: Sheesh!

— Religious fundamnetalism and bigotry is religious fundamentalism and bigotry. Whether its the Muslim fundamentalists and bigots doing the killing or the Christian fundamentalists and bigots the innocent people end up dead and suffering.

No one is arguing against that, but there are orders of magnitude to be considered. Seeing the world as pure black and white is bad. Seeing it as a single shade of the same color is just as stupid. If you can’t see the tortured “logic” of your statement, well, there’s little hope here.

Is this whole thing important? Not in itself, but we must remember that people like Dembski promote creationism because they are fundamentalist Christians, and so by his own moral code, Dembski is a hypocrite.

—————————-

PS. For any who are really wondering : _* NO * I am NOT Serious!

Yes its a bit of black humour joking. Know most people can tell humour when they see it but there is, alas, a few that can’t hence .. this.

“Zim posts:

[[While the actions of AlQ and the Taliban are more violent, are they *really* that far removed from those of the DI?]]

Yes, to any sane observer.”

Not to this sane observer.

Religious fundamnetalism and bigotry is religious fundamentalism and bigotry.

Whether its the Muslim fundamentalists and bigots doing the killing or the Christian fundamentalists and bigots the innocent people end up dead and suffering.

Never mind the “War on Terror” – lets have a war on stupidity & Religion being used as an excuse to committ murder.

Add to that all the Palestineans killed by Israel’s American-backed & funded wars of conquest&occupation (1948, 1967, 1973, first Intifadah, Al-Aqsa intifadeh, targeted extrajudical political murders and collateral damage, ad nauseam ..)

Not that its a contest though.

Intolerance, bigotry and wilful stupidity is wrong whetehrits doen by Osama or his brother George Dubya” Bush …

——

All In My Humble Opinion Naturally – but I know a lot of others also think and feel as I do.

# pcarinion on 28 Dec 2007 12:20 pm wrote :

“@ Michael Lonergan – I’d sure consider bombing an abortion clinic an act of terrorism, along with the various other murders of the staff at abortion clinics. ”

Indeed.

Add to that Tim McVeigh and the Militia-Xtians.

& add Pat Robertson calling for the assassination of the democratically elected President Chavez.

Oh yeah, & also add the Fundamentalist Xtian “President” told by God to illegally invade and occupy a sovereign nation that we know now actually posed no harm to America & didn’t have all the nasty WMD’s that Israel and the USA among others already have …

Yep The self-proclaimed “Christian”, unforgiving Pharises of the US Xtian fundentalist “Right” are every bit as bad and have arguably even killed and harmed more than their Muslim mirror images …

here we have a case of you, and PZ jumping on a trivial thing — that you most certainly have done on your blog and at live presentations – somehow giving the implication that Dembski was doing something “illegal”..

This is what is commonly known as “inserting a red herring” during a debate.. also could be considered an “ad hominem” attack— both are fallacies.

If this is what gets you skeptical atheists through the day, man thats sad..

I saved that Wedge article, just so I can refer to it and remind myself how penurious the opposition can be.

While in Saudi Arabia(1990) I had a discussion with Saib Al Ghamdi, a rather intelligent man, who said,”Einstein couldn’t have been very intelligent, because he was a Jew,,,”

That’s just another way of denigrating the opposition, but it has the effect of deminishing our awareness of their competency. Make no mistake, they are dedicated and intelligent in the pursuit of their goals. Truth is not always obvious. It can be shouted down by big lies told loud enough and often enough to convince the gullible.

The conflict between evidence based rationality and blind faith irrationality is no game. This is the real thing. If we truly desire humans to live to their full potential, to sing, dance and be joyful in their opportunity to exist, we must be as dedicated as our opponents.

GAry 7

@Bob Mulligan “The “stolen” slide changed what about his argument?”

The scientific credibility of the point he was trying to make, for one. Not that it didn’t already lack credibility entirely, this is just another data point. Using a source without crediting it, and in such a way that its message comes out entirely different is considered somewhat of a faux pas, if not deceiving and outright malicious.

Other than that, the ID and Creationist movements scare the bajeebus out of me. I fear that like in some cities, and even some states *cough* *Georgia* *cough* the political yayhoos would be forcing us to believe THEIR interpretation of religion by rule of law.

Not to mention the dumming down of American school children.

B-)

[[While the actions of AlQ and the Taliban are more violent, are they *really* that far removed from those of the DI?]]

Yes, to any sane observer.

Last night I had my son read PZ’s article and the links. You see, my son loves WWE “wrestling” and cannot understand why I get as much enjoyment out of watching Kreationists getting a good flogging.

Now he knows.

Unfortunately, he still loves WWE “wrestling”.

Still hoping for a cure….

The debate between creationism and the ToE in schools is more closely related to the tragedy in Pakistan yesterday than is immediatley apparent. In both cases the fundamental dichotomy is between religious extremism and a more secular worldview. Bhutto was targeted primarily because she was attempting to bring Pakistan into at least the 20th century, if not the 21st (the fact that she has a uterus was, for AlQueda, more of a bonus), and AlQ is dedicated to the proposition of remaining firmly in the 16th century.

While the actions of AlQ and the Taliban are more violent, are they *really* that far removed from those of the DI?

(One man’s opinion)

After all, they are the ones claiming that “Materialism” (whatever that means) is destroying the “moral fabric” (whatever that means) of our society.

And yet they feel free to ignore their own moral guidebook whenever it suits them. Surely that is hypocrisy of the highest order?

I did not see anything in Phil’s post that was malicious. If you follow Phil’s link to PZ’s blog, and read some of the comments, you will notice that, whereas Bill Dembski gets upset with a private individual politely (if gleefully) challenging Dembski’s illegal use of copyrighted material, PZ regularly receives threats of harm from creationists. Now, that is malice. Can you see the difference?

To those who appear confused over whether it was slide or the previously mentioned video used in a talks by the IDiots. In this case it was a slide or still from the Mystery of Life that was going to be used in a book but they were denied permission. While they apparently removed the slide/still from the proposed book they didn’t remove the footnote pertaining to the slide/still.

See;

http://endogenousretrovirus.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default

for more information about both issues, Abbie on top form as usual.

Last night’s commentary about Ron Paul
gave me some good LOL’s with some people bitchin’ and name-calling. Sometimes it’s good just to lurk. Seems like skeptics are just as normal as the rest of the species.