PT Lauded by Scientific American

| 14 Comments | 1 TrackBack

Since no one else has done it, on behalf of my colleagues here I’ll immodestly draw attention to Scientific American’s selection of Panda’s Thumb for one of its 25 “Science & Technology Web Awards 2005”.

If it’s in the media and related to evolution, you’ll find it posted, dissected and debated on this lively and informative watchdog blog. Devoted to debunking all existing and nascent theories related to the anti-evolution movement, the site’s contributors comprise a passel of the world’s most vigilant and passionate biologists, geneticists, students and concerned citizens, for whom stemming the tide of creationism and its offshoots is a fulltime job. The general public can join the fray in the “After the Bar Closes” forum, where political, religious and personal evolutionary arguments are given a full dressing-down by the site’s rowdy, articulate devotees.

The Loom, where Carl Zimmer holds forth on the biological sciences with clarity and erudition, was also selected along with 23 other excellent science and technology sites in whose company we’re honored to find ourselves. Go read ‘em all!

RBH

1 TrackBack

Religion from thomasmarquart.net on October 12, 2005 5:07 PM

Religion is on some kind of renaissance nowadays isn't it? Be it islamic fundamentalists or christian ones - the topic is all over the media and has been for quite a while now. The movement in the USA even seems to be strong enough to threaten science edu Read More

14 Comments

And why in the hell didn’t they mention your blog? Just because nobody can spell your name, they shouldn’t overlook the best site of developmental biology there is (maybe you scared the horses with your Atheism? :-) )

“You” who? You mean Pzed Mayer?

RBH

Looks like Scientific American has decided to join the Darwinist conspiracy to censor evidence of the paradigm breakdown in biology.

It’s only natural that Wilkins would assume that P. Z. Meighairs is the only PT contributor with an ego big enough to put the S.A. award up as an article.

Guys, it’s Pizzy Miers. I think he’s related to the new USCC nominee.

“Rowdy” Are we “rowdy”?

:>

Such a pity that nice John Rennie fellow doesn’t post a bit more often in his blog - he coulda been a contendah…

Hello. Just wanted to ask: should the reflection on the water surface qualify as being intelligently designed? It seems to be not only complex, but specified (it has a “blueprint” in the form of the real objects).

“Rowdy” Are we “rowdy”?

WOOF! WOOF! WOOF! WOOF! WOOF! WOOF!

(shakes up beer, sprays it all over self)

Guys, it’s Pizzy Miers. I think he’s related to the new USCC nominee.

Pizzy Miers, Scooter Libby – yeah, it all starts to make sense after drinking a few of the unsprayed beers.

From Scientific American:

Devoted to debunking all existing and nascent theories related to the anti-evolution movement,…

Chez Watt?!?

There are no “existing and nascent theories related to the anti-evolution movement.” If there were, PT would defend them, not be “devoted to debunking” them. SA is just begging to be quote mined.

Andrea Bottaro Wrote:

Guys, it’s Pizzy Miers. I think he’s related to the new USCC nominee.

Husband, I think. Remember the TV show “Pizzy and Harriet?” You may all groan now. ;-)

Congratulations chaps. You certainly deserved the award.

-Schmitt.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Richard B. Hoppe published on October 3, 2005 7:18 PM.

Fitting in: Newly evolved genes adopt a variety of strategies to remain in the gene pool was the previous entry in this blog.

Protein folding – a step closer? is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.361

Site Meter