Maybe the Discovery Institute will Finally Find BigFoot…

| 73 Comments | 1 TrackBack

It seems the Discovery Institute’s newest Senior Fellow is radio talk show host Michael Medved.

Here is the Nov. 15th U.D. announcement:

William Dembski Wrote:

Michael Medved, nationally syndicated talk radio host and bestselling author, has joined the Discovery Institute in the role of senior fellow. The position cements a longstanding friendship and recognizes a commonality of values and projects across a spectrum of issues.

Why is this FANTASTIC news for the cryptozoological community?

It’s because Medved is Big on Big Foot.

Skeptical? Good! There are data to listen to on this page; look for show# 232, Monday February 19, 2007, “Big Foot With Michael Medved,” “Medved talks about recent news reports that there is a Big Foot.”

Don’t have highspeed? Read this:

Dan Sytman, Michael’s producer and partner on the radio show, once saw Bigfoot at the edge of a summer camp in the woods. Even before meeting Dan, Michael was a passionate believer in Sasquatch.

If you listen to the whole radio segment, be advised that the “severed foot of a Sasquatch found in Spotsylvania County, VA” that was discussed at length turned out to be simply the skinned Hind Paw of a Bear the next day.

Sir Nick of the Matzke Clan actually had to endure listening to Medved trot out the usual creationist canards on his show, back in December 2004, but assures us that

…it was great fun, although during the show I felt a bit like a hobbit in the Mines of Moria scenes from the movie the Fellowship of the Ring: Look out, Medved’s first move is flagrant baiting! [octopus monster] Uh-oh, here comes the bacterial flagellum [big goblin], and on its heels the Second Law of Thermodynamics! [little goblin]. Then, the Discovery Institute list of 300 [“They have a Cave Troll.”]

The Amused Muse has more.

Is this just an attempt to distract the public from the whuppin’ the DI got on NOVA?

Perhaps, but I don’t really think so. They are devious enough, but not that clever.

1 TrackBack

It's a measure of the DI's intellectual bankruptcy that they are pleased to have recruited Michael Medved to their cause. He's wingnut who loves Sasquatch; I don't even care for his movie reviews, which seem to consist of nothing but... Read More

73 Comments

So not only do we have HIV deniers represented over there (e.g., Philip Johson and Johnny Wells), we have a bonafide crypozoological woo-woo? With enemies like these, who needs friends?

I think it’s because they are shifting their attack strategy away from the science to the sociology. On the Uncommon Descent discussion threads there are those who are pushing to get some research out but the Musgrave and Behe point-counter point has damaged Behe’s reputation with some of the supporters.

And who wouldn’t want to work with the man who co-wrote The Golden Turkey Awards.

Medved also used to work for PBS when he was one of the hosts of Sneak Previews.

Wow! What’s next - taking on experts in spoon bending and divination????

Hehe! He said “commonality of values”… hehe!

“[P]rojects across a spectrum of issues”, is that an admission of An Even Bigger Tent, Now Big Enough For Any Old Woo?

woo-woo

A fitting description of adoption of both cryptozoology and thermodynamic woo.

Dave,

I already have several comments on other threads about that, but this is not an “I beat you to it.” Rather it’s a big thanks for providing the links and the detail.

Anyway, if I may repeat, this is a golden opportunity to get other DI fellows to expand on their views - or at least show how they evade the hard questions. I.e., do we (H. sapiens) share common ancestors with BF? If so, did we or BF evolve? Both? Neither? Any design actuation events in the process?

Plus this gives me another opportunity to continue my digs at fellow ID critics. When someone accuses “don’t ask, don’t tell” IDers of being “creationists” or YECs, I’ll just add “so, do you think that they are cryptozoolgists too? Probably they’re not, but it will be fun to see if Behe is consistent, by admitting (as he does for common descent) that are other scientists who disagree with mainstream science and “know the relevant science” better than he does.

If a man can believe in a reclusive hairy guy unknown to science and a mysteriously silent god who kills himself to appease himself so he doesn’t have to burn people for being as imperfect as he made them, why is it so difficult for him to accept a theory backed with overwhelming empirical evidence?

Rob Ryan:

If a man can believe in a reclusive hairy guy unknown to science and a mysteriously silent god who kills himself to appease himself so he doesn’t have to burn people for being as imperfect as he made them, why is it so difficult for him to accept a theory backed with overwhelming empirical evidence?

It’s a conspiracy, Rob.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, my cannoli wants a word with me whilst I go get my tinfoil hat.

Rob Ryan,

Michael Medved is Jewish and thus apparently does not believe that there’s a “mysteriously silent god who kills himself to appease himself so he doesn’t have to burn people for being as imperfect as he made them.” But it can’t hurt to ask DI personnel to debate each other on whether ID “theory” predicts that.

“Michael Medved is Jewish…”

Thank you for pointing out my error, Frank J. I apologize to Mr. Medved for my assumption. I should have looked before I leapt. I forgot that ID, and hence DI, appeals to theists of all brands.

Am I safe in assuming that Medved believes in a being that sends out angry bears to devour insolent youths?

“But it can’t hurt to ask DI personnel to debate each other on whether ID “theory” predicts that.”

But…that would be unscientific. They are only talking about an “intelligent agent”. I’m sure, when pressed by sympathetic inquirers, they can recommend reading material for those interested in learning more about the nature of this “intelligent agent”. Still, it wouldn’t hurt to ask, as you say. Some of those guys might bite.

Sounds like the DI is bored with the DI. Intelligent Design predates Darwin and is about 200 years old. In that time it has just gone in circles. Good Cthulhu, 200 years of circles.

Really, it is time for them to branch out into more interesting subjects. They have to have alien abductions and UFOs. ESP is always in fashion. Angels and demons are popular with some theists. Then, the Loch Ness monster.

I suppose they will avoid astrology, lepruchuans, and witchcraft as being pagan.

Wow. Just… wow. This is so perfect.

As someone whose #1 leisure-time preoccupation is probably cinema, I’ve viewed Medved as a bit of an archnemesis since my high school years, when his bestseller Hollywood vs. America came out. This mendacious little book has since been a bit of an ur-text for right-wing demonizing of “Hollyweird,” and that’s been his biggest schtick ever since, although he’s been expanding into more general conservative demagoguery for some years without ever quite achieving the critical mass (if you’ll pardon the expression) of, say, a Rush Limbaugh.

To add even more icing to the cake, I was also a Bigfoot/Nessie/UFO buff in my schoolboy days.

To find out in the space of less than a minute that Medved’s officially added ID and cryptozoology to his portfolio feels… I don’t know, epiphanic in some way that’s hard to explain or describe. It feels sort of similar to when you find out two old friends from separate periods of your life coincidentally know each other. Aw, Mikey, Mikey, c’mere and give me a hug, you big dumb lug!

What are the scientific credentials of Michael Medved? Does he have a Ph.D. (or any degree) in biology? Is he motivated by his scientific research or his religious faith? These are the only questions that really matter.

How do you recruit anyone with half a brain when your organization has been caught red handed running a dishonest creationist scam on the public. Not only that, but the Discovery Institute is currently running the bait and switch on any creationist rube that supported them about the teach intelligent design scam. One look at the replacement scam that they are handing out to the rubes instead of ID will tell any thinking human being that they were running a dishonest scam. If ID can’t even be mentioned in the replacement scam and the same guys that ran the ID scam are running the replacement, what is there to conclude?

Who would sign up with such a group? Do these guys just accept dishonesty as a matter of doing business? Are they in denial? What is their explanation for what the Discovery Institute is currently doing?

You have long time fellows like Berlinski who claims to have never bought into the ID scam, but he never quit, and never came out against the dishonest scam. Berlinski never even blinked when they started running the bait and switch scam. None of the Discovery Institute fellows did. The exception may be Nelson who in an action of conscience admitted that there never had been a scientific theory of intelligent design when the bait and switch was run for the first time in Ohio in 2002. It didn’t stop Nelson from playing along with the replacement scam or being a coauthor of the new scam book. What do these guys think that they are doing? What is so important that they have to prostitute whatever principles that they may have?

Why would someone consider joining a group like the Discovery Institute after Dover? Why would someone like Casey Luskin join after he knew that the bait and switch was being run? Luskin participated in the Colloquy discussion on teaching ID just before the Discovery Instititue ran the bait and switch on Ohio. He didn’t let on then that the switch was in, so why accept it after the fact? What kind of person would support ID, and then join the scam outfit that obviously lied to him about ID?

It could be educational to look over what the ID supporters thought about ID before they knew that the switch was being run. This started at the end of the year and went into 2002.

http://chronicle.com/colloquy/2001/[…]n/design.htm

One of the reasons for having the Colloquy discussion was the Ohio State School board action on trying to teach intelligent design. One thing was clear, none of the ID supporters knew what would be taught. They just believed that there was something to teach, and they were all wrong.

Others could probably put up quotes from Dembski et al on teaching intelligent design, but what is the scam today? What did the Ohio State board get to teach instead of intelligent design?

http://www.ohioscience.org/L10-H23_[…]is_March.pdf

Why can’t the new scam mention that ID ever existed? Why isn’t ID one of the controversies that can be taught? Why are the same perps that ran the ID scam running the replacement scam? Who would join them in the effort?

Who would sign up with such a group?

Naive people. Anyone who believes the earth is 6,000 years old and dinosaurs went extinct a few thousand years ago.

Do these guys just accept dishonesty as a matter of doing business?

Yes, of course. When you are pushing lies, piling up more and more lies to support the original lies is the only way to go.

Are they in denial? What is their explanation for what the Discovery Institute is currently doing?

At this time, most likely they are looking busy to keep their pay checks coming. We all have to eat. What else would some of the DI people do if they weren’t trying to sell nonsense and bafflegab to the public?

Frank J said:

Dave, I already have several comments on other threads about that, but this is not an “I beat you to it.” Rather it’s a big thanks for providing the links and the detail.

Thanks, Frank! I knew I’d seen it mentioned somewhere, but the PT Search function only brought up Nick’s interview on the Medved show in ‘04. So consider this a delayed hat tip.

I hope folks take the time to listen to the Medved Bigfoot show. It’s a hoot.

Global warming denial, HIV/AIDS denial, evolution denial - the Big tent just keeps on getting bigger and bigger. And now, there’s even room for Sasquatch.

If any callers get through to the Medved show, be sure to ask when the last common ancestor of humans and sasquatch existed. Squirm-o-matic!

Cheers, Dave

Hey we believed the scientists when they said Ceolocanths were extinct, I say we believe them now on bigfoot(s).

Man I hope their not wrong.… again.…

When a scientists tells you something is extinct, you darn well better believe it. They go by hard evidence, not speculation, they test and test their theories. Their not just pulling it outta dere’ ass like those ID’rs .

The thought to be extinct by scientists celocanthys were discovered after having been reported being dead for 80 Million years. —————————————————— ‘Extinct’ woodpecker found alive:The ivory-billed woodpecker, a spectacular bird long thought to be extinct by scientists has been found alive in North America, Science magazine reports. ——————————————————— They Thought It Went Extinct 11 Million Years Ago - A mammal is “back from the dead” By: Vlad Tarko, Senior Editor, Sci-Tech News

They found the animal for sale in market in Laos!

But now a group of scientists have realized that the new mammal in fact belongs to a species thought to have been extinct for 11 million years. This is an amazing discovery since most similar examples of “back from the dead” mammals only go back around 10,000 years. “It’s the first time in the study of mammals that scientists have found a living fossil of a group that’s thought to be extinct for roughly 11 million years. That’s quite a gap. ———————————————————— Once Thought Extinct, Siamese Crocodile Is Photographed In Thailand ScienceDaily (Apr. 24, 2001) — NEW YORK – A team of conservationists led by the New York-based Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) have re-discovered the Siamese crocodile in Thailand ————————————————————- BEIJING (AP): A tiger species thought by scientists to be extinct in the wild for more than two decades has been photographed by a farmer in northwest China. ————————————————— BEIJING — A rare white dolphin native to China’s Yangtze River that scientists declared extinct last year has been spotted swimming in the wild, state media said Wednesday.

———————————————————– A tree thought by scientists to be extinct since the dinosaurs has turned up in a remote Australian park.

___

And now, there’s even room for Sasquatch.

Yeah, you know… every species, real or imagined, can be *poof*ed.

I’m sure their religious texts mentions Bigfoot somewhere, and make sure that the feet aren’t too large. Because it must fit into a old boat, or sumthin.

Hey we believed the scientists when they said Ceolocanths were extinct, I say we believe them now on bigfoot(s).

Um, scientists don’t say Bigfoots (Bigfeet?) are extinct, they say there’s no evidence for their ever having existed.

I hope this distinction isn’t *too* difficult for you to understand?

To Mr Bill Swann from the GOD POOFING discussion.

So it looks like scientists are acting like Gods and POOFING species out of existense and then POOFING them back into existense, seemingly at will.

So it looks like scientists are acting like Gods and POOFING species out of existense and then POOFING them back into existense, seemingly at will.

Are you stupid enough to believe this, or do you think this is clever trolling?

Perhaps you haven to bothered to consider that aside from the gross mischaracterization of the scientific method in your post, but scientists have never claimed bigfoot was extinct. There is no evidence of it’s existence. You may want to consider learning about p-values and how they interact with understanding evidence as well.

Hey we believed the scientists when they said Ceolocanths were extinct, I say we believe them now on bigfoot(s).

He, Bach believes Bigfoot exists (existed). Guess it takes one lumbering ape to recognize another.

And how hard is it to spell Coelacanth, when you nail bigfeet…, bigfett…, whatever.

At least scientists are willing to correct errors when they are discovered. That’s why the science of today is more accurate and detailed that the science of 50 years ago. By contrast, the Creationists will change their arguments, but they very seldom correct their mistakes.

Poor Bach can’t spell, writes with syntax and vocabulary mistakes that would embarrass a third grader, and he thinks that we’re supposed to seriously consider the merits of his blathering? R i g h t . … .

Are IDiots like Bach the only ID supporters left?

Are there any competent ID supporters that want to try to defend the current Discovery Institute creationist ploys? Why do you think that the ID perps that lied to you about the science of ID are running a new scam that doesn’t even mention that ID ever existed. Do you believe that they didn’t lie to you about the science of ID and they are just holding back the real good stuff as a secret weapon? Does anyone really believe that the guys that ran the teach ID scam for over a decade really want to teach more about evolution?

Why do the scam artists at the Discovery Instute have to rely on weirdos like Bach to defend their actions?

Jake says: ““”Um, scientists don’t say Bigfoots (Bigfeet?) are extinct, they say there’s no evidence for their ever having existed.

I hope this distinction isn’t *too* difficult for you to understand?”””

No, its not, but since scientists haven’t studied Bigfoot to see if it exists, are they just going on FAITH? Are you aware of any comprehensive reputable scientific study of Bigfoot you can point me to?? Thanks.

““Torbjörn Larsson, OM said: ““bach said: Hey we believed the scientists when they said Ceolocanths were extinct, I say we believe them now on bigfoot(s).””

He, Bach believes Bigfoot exists (existed).”””””

You are a scientist aren’t you? Because that is not at all what I said. I clearly stated we should believe scientists when they say something is extinct, and then next week we should believe them when they say its now not extinct and the week after, when they changed their minds again, we should believe them that time too. Like Hillary believing Bill when he says he didn’t have sex with that women…

No, its not, but since scientists haven’t studied Bigfoot to see if it exists, are they just going on FAITH? Are you aware of any comprehensive reputable scientific study of Bigfoot you can point me to?? Thanks.

Do you think Bigfoot was on Noah’s ark?? Can you prove it or are you going on FAITH? Thanks.

If you expect us to take you seriously, and treat you with respect, you should treat us with respect. You are nothing but a troll, and an especially stupid one, at that. A scientific name allows a person to identify a particular organism, and you can not hope to win any arguments by simply calling it “the jellyfish,” especially since there are over 200 different genera of living jellyfish known.

Simply because that fossil jellyfish bears a strong resemblance to the modern jellyfish Periphylla does not mean that the Theory of Evolution is in crisis. If you knew anything about the Wheeler Shales formation, where the fossil came from, and if you knew anything about Periphylla, you would know that the two jellyfish can not be the same kind, as the Wheeler Shales formation was a shallow, tropical reef 500 million years ago, and Periphylla jellyfish are inhabitants of cold, deep water.

Global warming denial, HIV/AIDS denial, evolution denial - the Big tent just keeps on getting bigger and bigger. And now, there’s even room for Sasquatch.

The connection is obvious. They are all minority viewpoints that despite being dogmatically opposed by the fanatical orthodoxy have an “ever growing” number of free-thinking, open-minded professionals, and engineers, and engineers, and engineers that are challenging the status quo.

Looks like Robert O’Brien is Bach’s sockpuppet. No brains; lots of mouth.

If you see Bigfoot, here’s the official form to fill out: http://www.internationalbigfootsoci[…]sighting.php

I you see a UFO fill out this one: http://www.nwlink.com/~ufocntr/repo[…]msubmit.html

If you see Bigfoot in a UFO, contact the Discovery Institute.

Maybe Bach should go bach to composing classical music and give up on science. He can’t talk about it coherently.

waldteufel:

Looks like Robert O’Brien is Bach’s sockpuppet. No brains; lots of mouth.

I am no sockpuppet, wurmteufel. Quit while you are behind.

Les Lane:

If you see Bigfoot, here’s the official form to fill out: http://www.internationalbigfootsoci[…]sighting.php

I you see a UFO fill out this one: http://www.nwlink.com/~ufocntr/repo[…]msubmit.html

If you see Bigfoot in a UFO, contact the Discovery Institute.

LOL! I am reminded of the Futurama episode that features both aliens and Bigfoot.

Bigfoot hunters have been looking in the wrong places. What they need to do is get apartments on the lower floor of the apartment building, then wait for the sounds of a migration of bigfoots on the upper floors. :)

Henry

Medved joining the DI, eh. You know what this means: Bigfoot is The Designer!

Looks like brother Robert O’Brien is continuing to support the idiocy of Bach. No ideas, no concept of what science is, no ability to construct a meaningful thought. I suggest that Robert O’Brien sit at Bach’s knee and absorb all of his scientific knowledge. That should take about 20 milliseconds.

By the way, Robert O’Brien, “wurm” is a river in Germany. “Wald” means forest or woods. Teufel is German for “devil”. So, Wurmteufel just means “river Wurm Devil” instead of “Forest Devil”, but then you knew that, didn’t you . … …

waldteufel:

Looks like brother Robert O’Brien is continuing to support the idiocy of Bach. No ideas, no concept of what science is, no ability to construct a meaningful thought. I suggest that Robert O’Brien sit at Bach’s knee and absorb all of his scientific knowledge. That should take about 20 milliseconds.

My comments have nothing to do with the poster bach, just you.

waldteufel:

By the way, Robert O’Brien, “wurm” is a river in Germany. “Wald” means forest or woods. Teufel is German for “devil”. So, Wurmteufel just means “river Wurm Devil” instead of “Forest Devil”, but then you knew that, didn’t you . … …

I believe wurm = worm but I pretty much despise the German language, so don’t take my word for it.

Children, children, children.

Calling each other names is a little juvenile, don’t you think?

I guess it’s time to retire the thread.

For the record, besides being a clueless troll, Bach is too afraid to use his own e-mail address (which remains unpublished, BTW) when posting.

Next time, that’ll get you a one-way ticket to the Bathroom Wall.

Thanks for playing, all.

Dave

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Dave Thomas published on November 17, 2007 12:59 AM.

An Open Letter to Dr. Michael Behe (Part 7) was the previous entry in this blog.

An Evolution Prediction 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 4.381

Site Meter