3 ms·
I don't think Myers is always right. Surely, it always seems that his assessments are correct, until you look at the right angle.
by bioinformatics 16y ago
I don't think Myers is always right. Surely, it always seems that his assessments are correct, until you look at the right angle.
- kragen 16y agoNot always, but usually. In part this is because he's usually writing about subjects (like evolution) that he knows a lot more about than his interlocutors (like creationists). In this case, the situation is reversed: he's writing about subjects (artificial intelligence, information theory, and self-reproducing systems in general) that he knows very little about, and that Kurzweil knows a great deal about. It's unfortunate that he didn't bother to find out what Kurzweil was actually claiming, instead relying on some dumb-ass "science journalist", before launching his little jeremiad. You'd think Myers, of all people, would know better than to trust science journalists.
- bioinformatics 16y agoI agree with you. I can only add that PZ Myers, unfortunately, for Science and scientific blogging has become a buffoon, and some of his posts are just as detrimental to the scientific community than most of his opposition. It's not difficult to know more evolution than creationists, as most of evolutionary theory is just logic and facts, something lacking in most creationist reasoning. This is not the first time that he uses his mob-leadership to attack someone, and it won't be the last. He is not a scientist anymore, he's just a blogger, that for better or worse has cult followers.