The ICR has an enemies list? Well, of course the usual suspects are on it: Dawkins, PZ, Eugenie.
What am I, 6000+ year old chopped liver? Cripes, what’s a guy gotta do to be on a creationist hit list?
Sniff. Nobody hates me. It’s a terrible burden to be so loved.
Hat tip to BCS.
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
|
|
The original BA site (with the Moon Hoax debunking, movie reviews, and all that) can be found here.
 | ||
 | Bad Astronomy was chosen as one of Time.com's Best Blogs of 2009. |
 |
DISCOVERmagazine.com: Latest Articles on Space DISCOVER Blogs: The Loom
Copyright © 2012, Kalmbach Publishing Co.
Privacy - Terms - Reader Services - Subscribe Today - Advertise - About Us
May 14th, 2008 at 8:40 am
I could pretend to hate you if it makes you feel better.
The Earth is flat, and the sun revolves around it! The moon landing and all of astronomy is a lie because the moon and the stars are just painted onto a black background a few hundred miles up just like is says in the bible! And it’s been that way for the last 6,000 years since jesus first rode a dinosaur which were then hidden to test our faith.
You sir are going to hell. Because my loving god knows that the only sensible punishment for a finite amount of sin is infinite pain and torture.
Unfortunately I don’t have quite the clout that the ICR does, although despite never taking so much as a single college level science class (which needs to be rectified), I’d be willing to pit my scientific knowledge against theirs. Mostly thanks to guys like you dawkins, pz, and of course Sagan.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:43 am
Sorry Phil, but you are just too darn loveable.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:48 am
Oh, man, you’re asking for a troll-fest on this one!
I thought all the ones who hate you were the ones who say “Waaaa, I’m not posting here anymore! GOODBYE!” then don’t come back?
May 14th, 2008 at 8:51 am
I can go and stir up some trouble on Pharyngula. That will bring out some hate from the squid-lovers.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:52 am
Don’t take it to bad, I was surprised to see Penn Jillette and Michael Shermer weren’t on there either.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:52 am
Well, to be fair, the antivaxxers don’t seem to like me much. But then, they’re wrong about a lot of stuff.
May 14th, 2008 at 8:55 am
Darth Robo:
No, they’re the ones that say “Waaaa, I’m not posting here anymore! GOODBYE!” and come back next week to say the same thing.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:00 am
Aww… poor Phil. Maybe Richard Hoagland has an enemies list?
May 14th, 2008 at 9:01 am
ICR? Sounds like a new kind of coffee pot,,,
I’ve heard it said, “You have to be a little bit crazy,,,,to believe,,,”
,,,presumably believing without evidence,,,
Dawkins, PZ, et al, are aggressive in their confrontations with religion, literally calling a boob a boob. You, on the other hand, occasionally allow the religious their emotional life raft, assuming it is possible for an otherwise intelligent being to hold contradictory viewpoints and yet remain functional in a non-sentient universe.
Perhaps the ICR hopes your courtesy can somehow be used against you and you’ll be sucked into religiosity.
After all, you’re just a glorified As-tro-logger( as in, they think astrologer is the same as someone who logs about astro stuff,,,).
Keep on trucking, Phil. I’m pulling for you to make it to their hit list,,,
Peace,
Gary 7
May 14th, 2008 at 9:03 am
If there is any sure fire clue that you’ve crossed the border into crazy town, it’s having an “enemies list.” People who make “enemies lists” more or less all fall into one or more of three categories -
a) totalitarian governments
b) people who live in “compounds” and stockpile weapons
c) people who believe that they are receiving telepathic transmissions from Neptune instructing them to assault government officials with a weed-wacker
May 14th, 2008 at 9:04 am
This is so exciting. I would be honored to be on a fundie enemies list.
Pseudoscience can be fun.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:06 am
This is what you get for not allowing people to swear on your blog. I knew you would regret it some day.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:08 am
Once again the creationists spend a great deal of time attacking
the personal traits of those who support evolution – with special
emphasis on their preference not to believe in the Christian God -
while not offering any real evidence for their “theory”.
Mr. Bad Astronomer, I think the main reason they didn’t list you
is because you are not a visible/vocal enough atheist and not due
to your pro-evolution/anti-creationist views alone.
To any and all creationists out there – start backing up your claims
with some kind of real evidence, not the tired old “life is too complex
not to have been made by somebody” schtick. Until then you will
not be taken seriously and your true motives will always be questioned,
even and including those of faith who also accept evolution.
And stop doctoring the evidence while you are at it – this just
ruins your credibility with all thinking people even more, if that is
even possible at this point:
http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2008/05/flagella-real-a.html
If there is a creator to the Universe, but it turns out not to be
the God the creationists expect it to be, will they change their
minds or just keep looking for the “real” creator?
May 14th, 2008 at 9:18 am
You sir are going to hell. Because my loving god knows that the only sensible punishment for a finite amount of sin is infinite pain and torture.
Man, that should be on a T-shirt.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:21 am
Phil,
I only mostly like you, does that count for anything?
:p
May 14th, 2008 at 9:26 am
The irony is baffling. The creationists and ID supporters claim the most ludicrous things and all these so called “heathens” on their hate list who know nothing about nothing have PhD’s in their respective fields. Sometimes people are so ignorant of the truth, due to what seems to be some form of brainwashing, it really makes me sick.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:31 am
It’s OK BA, I’m sure you have a special place in their hearts.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:47 am
Didn’t come off as an “enemies list” to me per se, but yet again I am not so much into that whole “us versus them’ mentality.
I think you did not make it because your expertise is in a field not tied to biological evolution such as the three gentlemen listed.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:48 am
If it makes you feel better, Phil, all you need to do is re-read some of your own threads to find several of people who seem to hate you, yet post to your blog nearly every day. (Rememberring Mike J fondly).
Maybe it’s a love / hate thing… but that still counts for something.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:53 am
Well, the three they mention, Dawkins, Scott and good ol’ PZ have one thing in common – Biology. So, if you want to get on their list, I guess you have to change your field of expertise.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:02 am
Hi from Brazil. You owe me a new keyboard, because you provided the link to that ICR´s website without warning about the idiocy on it.
I clicked the link and then went into “evidence”. I banged my head over my keyboard, because of the plain annoyance of so much dumbness and idiocy on a single site Thus, my keyboard stoped working. I am typeing this from my office computer.
Next time, use bold letters to warn readers about links to sites which contain enourmous quantities of stupidity.
Rogério Penna
May 14th, 2008 at 10:08 am
See, here’s the thing, Phil. No where on that page does the term “enemies” even come into play. In fact, it just seeks to identify the major players on the other team. This is no enemies list by ANY definition, except the one in your mind.
All you are doing is demonizing that which you can’t defeat in typical fashion.
Someone in church must’ve really done you wrong, bud.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:09 am
I feel your pain, BA. The most I’ve ever gotten from a creationist was when Denyse O’Leary called me an “ill-tempered illiterate”; I cherish the moniker, but it’s not exactly a whiny screed from Behe or a flatulent Flash animation from Dembski.
Maybe we both need to get, ahem, expelled from a movie screening. . . .
May 14th, 2008 at 10:12 am
BMcP:
I’ll forgive you, since she’s by far the least publically visible of the three these days, but it’s two men and a woman.
- Andrew,
<3′s Genie Scott
May 14th, 2008 at 10:20 am
Doctor Plait:
Bad Albert nailed it. If you want to become their enemy, use bad language. Of course, you should one-up PZ and replace frakkin-this-frakkin-that with a plethora of obscenity based on taking the name of their Lord in vain.
That or openly declare yourself as an Alvian (“Alvis was a murderer!” “Alvis was the holiest man ever to slap iron! He killed for your sins!”).
Then again, I’m pretty sure you’ve called people “fools” in unrighteous (in Christian terms) anger; that’s got you hellbound enough. Don’t these people read their Matthew?
Gary Ansorge:
> Dawkins, PZ, et al, are aggressive in their confrontations with religion, literally calling a boob a boob. You, on the other hand, occasionally allow the religious their emotional life raft, assuming it is possible for an otherwise intelligent being to hold contradictory viewpoints and yet remain functional in a non-sentient universe.
Intelligent people hold contradictory (or, at the very least, irrational) viewpoints all the time and easily remain functional in a non-sentient universe. It’s wrong to kill people, generally, but sometimes people need to die for the greater good. All people are equal under the law, and freedom is an unalienable right, but some people who have done naughty things need their right to freedom alienated. The trick is that really intelligent people can recognize when they’re holding contradictory or irrational viewpoints and explain why.
“I think freedom is an unalienable right because it’s a good ideal to aspire to and I wouldn’t like mine taken away. I think it’s not wrong to abrogate that right in the case of, say, murderers because the greater society needs to be protected.”
or
“I believe in a God because it makes me feel more comfortable about my place in the universe, with full understanding that there’s no scientific support for such a claim and that the universe appears to be able to function from a solely naturalistic/materialistic viewpoint.”
May 14th, 2008 at 10:21 am
P.Z. made it.
You need to learn to love your inner cephalopod.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:27 am
Is that picture of Pat Robertson, on the ICR main page supposed to impress people?!
May 14th, 2008 at 10:29 am
Well, over here in Denver we don’t like him because he doesn’t belong to our astronomy club.
That, and he didn’t like Armageddon, which is the bestest film ever.*
* If, in a hypothetical alternative universe where the only two films ever made were “Armageddon” and “Armageddon – Director’s Cut”.
- JR
May 14th, 2008 at 10:30 am
I checked out the link, too. They are referred to as Evolution’s Evangelists (a title that should make them proud); i couldn’t find anything about enemies. Oh for sure–it is loaded with inaccuracies and fallacies, but I pretty much expected that from the ICR.
I did not, however, see the immature kinds of personal attacks that so frequently are vomited forth by Pharyngula, for example. Maybe they are elsewhere on the site, I don’t know.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:32 am
Matt: You started off pretty well, but then you had to say this:
“All you are doing is demonizing that which you can’t defeat in typical fashion.”
You should seriously consider ending your posts a couple of paragraphs earlier.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:38 am
You are just too polite. As I said before, just wait until YEC find an “Intelligent Design” alternative for physics and astronomy and you’ll see how virulent they will be against your blog. Just imagine how fun it would be to refute “variable light speed” justifying a 6k year old universe…
May 14th, 2008 at 10:40 am
And in reading the list…
> “It is no wonder that Dawkins has elsewhere concluded that “life has no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind pitiless indifference.”9 If this is what evolution offers, can there be any other result but despair?”
Sigh. Why is it that creationists have no imagination? Nietzsche was right at least in this regard: in relying on someone to tell one what is right and good and beautiful rather than being able to figure it out for oneself, one is really, really held back.
May 14th, 2008 at 10:51 am
I can get my Colorado friends to follow you around menacingly. Would that help?
May 14th, 2008 at 10:54 am
Well, we fans can compensate with more love!
We love you, Phil!
Group hug!
{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{Phil}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}
May 14th, 2008 at 10:58 am
PZ, Richard, Genie and the others are simply drawing fire while the rest of us sneak under the fence.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:03 am
For the people challenging the term ‘enemy list’, please explain to me what you would call it when one group of people makes a list of different people from another group with opposing views and makes false accusations and other propagandist (propaganda, you know, generally what people do to trivialize those they consider enemies) comments about them?
The term is appropriate.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:07 am
DiscoToot Centurions: “We have an enemies list with Dawkins, PZ, Eugenie on it, but are looking for Evolutionist Spartacus, who also dares question us and refuses to obey.”
Phil:
“I’m Spartacus.”
You:
“I’m Spartacus.”
Me:
“I’m Spartacus.”
Other folks here:
“I’m Spartacus.”
“I’m Spartacus.”
“I’m Spartacus.”
“I’m Spartacus.”
“I’m Spartacus.”
“I’m Spartacus.”
May 14th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Andrew:
D’oh! Your right, Eugene Scott is a woman, how could I forget after that funky rap video with “The Machine” and rappin’ Dawkins.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:22 am
Ahh, yes… Matt Garrett and David D… our resident defenders of dumbosity. Keep up the good work, lads.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:28 am
Hey, they at least got something right in one of their paragraphs:
“The Internet has opened new avenues for research and for offering data of all kinds…as well as misinformation of all kinds. As was indicated in the October 2007 Acts & Facts, web surfers must be wary of “half-truths and hidden assumptions” on the sites that they visit.”
Of course they may not have meant that to mean their own website.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Phil, The quote attributed to Dawkins (but which I haven’t yet verified) on the ICR site seems like a perfect raison detre for many of your anti-science posts:
“The enlightenment is under threat. So is reason. So is truth. So is science, especially in the schools of America. I am one of those scientists who feels that it is no longer enough just to get on and do science. We have to devote a significant proportion of our time and resources to defending it from deliberate attack from organized ignorance. We even have to go out on the attack ourselves, for the sake of reason and sanity. But it must be a positive attack, for science and reason have so much to give.”
Is it just me, or is the overall effect of the ICR site exactly the opposite of what they intended?
May 14th, 2008 at 11:42 am
“….raison detre for many of your anti-science posts:”
Oops, of course, I meant to say, posts attacking anti-science.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:49 am
I think the neo- prefix is so overused today. Its like the -nick and -ista suffix. For example: “Neo-creationista need to learn to fear Phil Plait”.
May 14th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
It’s simple. You and your astro buddies aren’t as immediate a threat to the survival of their fantasy. Every kid in the public school system is going to be exposed to the fundamentals of biology (and thus potentially evolution) at least once before they graduate. Far fewer are going to have anything but the most cursory exposure to astronomy or physics before university.
They hate you. It’s just that you and your field aren’t the current priority.
May 14th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
I think “enemies list” may be a bit reactionary as the linked article seems to be an attempt to make the ID cause seem righteous to those who believe in the ill-defined philosophy. Of course, as an outsider looking in, the quoted individuals seem to be bring up good points. They may be passionate about it, but they do a better job pointing out the relation of ID to religion than the ICR does avoiding the subject almost entirely.
Having said that, many of the choice quotes seem to be used specifically to gain a reaction from those of particularly strong faith. Not exactly subtle manipulation nor does it increase their chances of martyrdom.
Science has made it quite clear why ID is, to be blunt, looked down upon, and though I don’t believe smug attempts at witless satire help the whole concept of “us versus them,” I can totally understand why scientists are becoming increasingly volatile and open about the subject when ID continues to fight without a definitive cause, taking the role of an opressed victim.
I’m sorry, I’m just rambling now. I’ll just quietly exit this way… *sneaks out of the room*
May 14th, 2008 at 12:52 pm
CE–
How am I defending dumbosity?
Just askin . . .
May 14th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Cripes, what’s a guy gotta do to be on a creationist hit list?
More swearing on your blog!
Well, it would make me feel better anyway. It’s hard to bite my tongue at times.
May 14th, 2008 at 1:36 pm
You could try changing the title of your next book. Instead of “Death From the Skies,” you could call it, “Creationism Sucks.”
That would, of course, be cheating.
May 14th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
If it helps, Phil, it’s not very hard to become an “enemy” of the religious…
Once while on break at work I stepped outside to have a cigarette, and a street preacher began yelling at me, shouting that I would burn in hell because my body is a gift from god and I was affronting it…
I wonder if that make potato chips sinful…?
With Christians, Muslims, and Scientologists lately it seems that “freedom of religion” actually means “freedom to harass and condemn”
May 14th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
“freedom to harass and condemn”
And pointing out that harassment is suppression and hateful bigotry.
May 14th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Will and NBWAW–
We are all free (fortunately or unfortunately) to harass and condemn each other, no matter how abhorrent that idea may strike you. I’m not talking about “stalking” harassment, or other harassment (like sexual, etc.). And yes, we are free to be bigots–our country, and esp. perhaps its churches, are full of them.
A street preacher yelling at you is unpleasant, but I doubt that constitutes suppression.
Harassment is not necessarily suppression and bigotry. Harassment is harassment.
May 14th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
no matter how abhorrent that idea may strike you
I’m not one of those who complains about personal attacks detracting from the discussion, so I dunno why you’d think that.
As for the rest, I think you read my post backward. I was just talking about the dominant religious culture’s frequent whining about being suppressed simply for not being allowed to dictate policy without criticism.
May 14th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Once while on break at work I stepped outside to have a cigarette, and a street preacher began yelling at me, shouting that I would burn in hell because my body is a gift from god and I was affronting it…
That almost makes me want to take up smoking just out of spite. Almost. But I kind of like to breathe more, so…
May 14th, 2008 at 3:38 pm
Unclothed Lupine with accessory–
My bad. I see what you mean. Religions whine loudly–no doubt.
Mea culpa.
May 14th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
Maybe to get on the anti-creationist list all you have to do is ask? I just sent the ICR this email:
“Dear sirs,
I’ve just seen your excellent article number 3860 where you list some brilliant advocates of evolution, like Richard Dawkins, Eugenie Scott and P Z Myers. I wonder, would you please be kind enough to add my name to the list? I have a CSE and 25 credits in astronomy, so I am scientifically qualified and I am totally opposed to creationism, intelligent design and religion, even more radically than Dawkins or Myers. Both Dawkins and Myers have also made use of a video diatribe against religion I posted on youtube under the name ‘alien8ted’ called ‘Religion – Marcus Brigstocke’. I would be very proud indeed to have my name up there with the other greats who oppose every you stand for. My real name is Gary Mcleod and I live in England.
Thank you.”
I’ll let you know if they let me appear!
May 14th, 2008 at 7:26 pm
@ Matt Garrett
BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA (gasp) HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!
Now, if, like me you frequent a number of forums and frequently engage in the verbal slaughtering and mocking of numerous fundies, you’re BOUND to be on someone’s enemy list.
How about it, Matt? Wanna start one and add a few names from here onto your list? I know you’re tempted! C’mon!
May 14th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
According to the ICR website, guys like you, Meyers, and Dawkins need an accurate mirror in which to judge yourselves. Their source on that (not kidding)? The Book of James 1:23-24.
I don’t know about anyone else, but if I were to cite the Bible at school in a research paper… well, it would go over worse than citing Wikipedia.
May 14th, 2008 at 9:51 pm
I still think you should change your blog name to ‘BAD-ASS ASTRONOMY’
haha
May 14th, 2008 at 10:33 pm
As I read the whole article, my position as an atheist, scientist and evolutionist was reinforced. Only ignorant people who would not understand the terminology used would see it as an affirmation on their creationist beliefs.
May 14th, 2008 at 11:00 pm
Don’t worry Phil, your turn will probably come. Just wait until they have finished off biology classes, then they will start on the other sciences in earnest. Until then, trying to squash us Darwinists and evilution to prevent the next holocaust is much more important for now. After all, didn’t you see Ben Stein’s film warning us of the dangers of Darwinism and science?
May 15th, 2008 at 12:17 am
Go back and actually READ the article you linked to – no “enemies” are proclaimed, only the three “evangelists of evolution” who preach their faith with fervor. No one dissed any of them, just quoted from their own writings and interviews, where THEY did a bit of dissing and name-calling of people. I suppose that IS easier than actually examining the claims of ICR, AIG, and other organizations.
May 15th, 2008 at 1:17 am
jim, actually examining the claims of the ICR, AIG and the like is extremely simple, just very boring. As it amounts to throwing the same old repackaged garbage at us, which we constantly refute with actual peer reviewed evidence. Unfortunately, the evidence is invariably ignored by the various creobots who pop up to spout the same old, same old at us again and again and again and again an………………………………………………..d again.
When they actually have some genuinely peer reviewed evidence, or even if they ever actually put forward a falsifiable hypotheses, come and talk to us. Until then, give the BS from AIG and their ilk a rest, we are tired of it.
May 15th, 2008 at 1:56 am
This:
“No one dissed any of them, just quoted from their own writings and interviews, where THEY did a bit of dissing and name-calling of people.”
…is false. Here is the ICR taking a cheap shot:
“Although using cruder language, Myers basically offers nothing new to the debate. He may state his case more brusquely than other evolutionists, but the argument essentially remains the same–evolution is fact, evolution vs. creationism is a case of science vs. religion, science and religion are anathema to each other, therefore scientific creationism should be banished to the lunatic fringe.
“No matter where the evidence leads.”
(ICR, from that link)
As a side note, notwithstanding how accurate the “No matter where the evidence leads” assessment of PZ may or may not be, something appears severely messed up about the Institute for CREATION RESEARCH to actually put this statement on one of their web pages, and doubly messed up to even use it as an attack on someone else.
I still say this isn’t a “creationist hit list” aka enemy list. Do I get to say that as a skeptic? Because it does in fact look like it’s just an ordinary short list of a few popular major vocalists to me.
Still, call me crazy, but I really don’t see the logical relationship between this not being an enemy list and the earth being 6,000 years old. Even introducing the intermediate “lemma” that the only reason this was referred to as an enemy list was that there’s no way to prove the earth is older than 6,000 years old doesn’t do this for me, since the lemma seems to have the same issues. Can the YECers who are trying to turn a non-argument into a proof enlighten me here?
(Did I attack enough viewpoints? I swear I’m not just trolling–I honestly think everyone’s wrong!)
May 15th, 2008 at 9:04 am
Yes, that’s exactly why most atheists become atheists and why Phil became a skeptic blogging astronomer.
Good job Matt. You’re skills of deduction are as sharp as ever.
May 15th, 2008 at 9:04 am
bah
typos ftw.. your
May 16th, 2008 at 3:38 am
Phew!
That had me worried there for a sec but luckily all my telepathic transmissions telling me to assault govt officials with a weed-whacker (& the odd lawn-mower & chainsaw too) are coming from Pluto instead!
May 16th, 2008 at 3:46 am
D’oh! That wasn’t all supposed to be in bold just the posters name! Sorry.
May 16th, 2008 at 3:51 am
Aaarrrgghh! & that wasn’t supposed to all be in italics either .. Sigh. Sorry.
——– TAKE II —————————-
… But then writing a whole new book on just that anti-Kreationist topic under that name could get your name on that much-desired “enemies” listing fair & square!
Plus I’m sure you’d make it an entertaining read and it’d quite probably a therapeutic, cathartic write for you ..
There you go, Phil another book post ‘Death from the Skies!’ will be a good idea – you’ve even got the title already!
May 16th, 2008 at 4:15 am
From the ICR “enemies” site :
like other systems of belief, it [science] has its clerics (those invested as scientific authorities), its adherents (e.g., the education system and the media), its mission (to apply its “truth” to every sphere of human endeavor through research in the fields of biology, geology, cosmology, psychology, etc.)–
Hmm .. Interesting : ASTRONOMY doesn’t rate a mention there yet cosmology does.
Maybe if the Bad Astronomer called himself the Bad Cosnmologer instead he’d make their list …???
May 28th, 2008 at 10:25 am
I love this part. Why? Because this is a prime example of “moron” if there ever was one. Can you smell the fallacy? Or it is one example of intentional warping of what was quoted. If the latter is true, then I agree, this IS an enemies list despite the absence of “enemy” on the page.
March 21st, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Could you invent yourself a middle name that would make the letters of your name add up to 666 (616 would also do)? I can take it from there =D
March 21st, 2009 at 3:53 pm
[...] And, just to make sure I get on the ICR’s enemies list: [...]
March 21st, 2009 at 10:21 pm
Hey that sounds like a goal. How does (short of emailing and asking them directly and politely to be put on the list) one get onto that enemy list? I want to be on it too!
March 22nd, 2009 at 5:55 am
Well, Mr Baad Astronomer, pointing out their latest scam in awarding (or attempting to award. Yadda yadda.) science degrees is a pretty good way to get onto their hit lists. but worse than publicly citing you as their enemy, they could be really nasty and award you one of their degrees. Whether you want it or not.
Or would that actually be enough to count as libel, slander, or whatever passes for defamation in Texas?
March 23rd, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Why go to them for a degree?
Many Universities already offer degrees in religious studies