Thursday, April 05, 2007


Couldn't He Have Waited a Day?

Someone by the name of Jim Hinckley has somehow gotten something called the Kingman (Arizona) Daily Miner, which is proudly billed as "Kingman's Only Daily Newspaper" (my sympathies to the people of Kingman), to publish his opinions on matters scientific, political and religious as if he actually knew anything about those subjects. It is close to being acceptance of money under false pretenses.

It seems, from the faint smell of scalded cat that emanates from his latest column, that the reaction to Mr. Hinckley's prior column about evolution was less than favorable. You can see the prior "effort" here and need no more commentary than what is provided by talk.origin's Gary Hurd in the comments section. Even Silas Stillwater, who went to the "defense" of Mr. Hinckley (and who merrily proceeded to quote mine Colin Patterson as a defense against quote mining) has to concede, clearly referring to Mr. Hinckley, "creationists make some of the worst arguments imaginable … [e]ven embarrassing."

(Gary responded to Mr. Stillwater but either Mr. Hinckley or the paper did not deign to post that response. Fortunately, you can read it here.)
Mr. Hinckley tries to take refuge in the old excuse that his intent was merely "to provide material for water cooler conversation, to spark discussion on controversial topics and, perhaps, encourage people to question, to think." The problem is the utter dearth of any of the latter activity in the column.
There is much waiving of tar brushes at evolutionary science, reason and tolerance as causes of horrors both real and fantastic. But Mr. Hinckley cries that there is no tolerance "of anything or anyone that proclaimed there were absolute truths," despite the fact that he remains at large and able to publish even more incredible pabulum right out in the open where it can scare the horses and everything.
But this is the part that I wish could have waited until tomorrow for Blog Against Theocracy to officially start:

How would a society feel if laws were based on public opinion rather than the rule of law based on truth? If the government grants laws, could not that same government rescind those rights?

Why, it would feel just like a democracy … with a Constitution that can be amended by the people and with freedom guaranteed by nothing more … and nothing less … than the common consent of all the nation's citizens.

And we'd like to keep it that way, thank you very much.


I do wish he would wait forever, or at least learn a little bit about what he is writing on about.
Well, I wrote a responce. I am probably wasting my time. The last time, the Kingman whatever would not post my responce to the fake "Stillwater" (He sent me a gloating email). They also deleted paragraphing and other grammatical conventions.

The latest is on my Blog, Stones and Bones.
Betcha it made you feel better though! ;-)
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

. . . . .


How to Support Science Education