Tom Toles nails it yet again

| 7 Comments

From here. Almost as good as this one from December 23, 2005:

7 Comments

Makes me proud of having worked on the same college newspaper with Tom. On the other hand, I was also working with Howie Kurtz.

Excellent. Simply excellent.

GW

Isn’t this presenting the misguided “ladder of evolution” concept though?

Yes, but the rules say that’s OK in cartoons on the editorial page.

You can expect to see the diagram in the first of those cartoons snipped out of the rest of the frame and showing up in the next edition of ‘Icons of Evolution’ as another ‘fraud’ by the ‘Darwinists’.

Afterall, the rules also say that scientific theories stand or fall on their explanatory and predictive power and the extent to which they are born out in observation and experiment, and the IDers have never accepted those rules either, so why would they obey the rules of editorial cartooning?

You can expect to see the diagram in the first of those cartoons snipped out of the rest of the frame and showing up in the next edition of ‘Icons of Evolution’ as another ‘fraud’ by the ‘Darwinists’.

You must mean this one.

You can expect to see the diagram in the first of those cartoons snipped out of the rest of the frame and showing up in the next edition of ‘Icons of Evolution’ as another ‘fraud’ by the ‘Darwinists’.

You must mean this one.

I like how non-science is so not scientific:

In clear, non-technical language, Wells explains…the evidence for and against Darwinism and Intelligent Design.

In a 288 page paperback.

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Nick Matzke published on August 4, 2006 1:00 PM.

Rumors of pseudogenes’ demise greatly exaggerated, new study says was the previous entry in this blog.

Is School Choice the Answer? 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