Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,423 Year: 3,680/9,624 Month: 551/974 Week: 164/276 Day: 4/34 Hour: 0/1


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Intelligent Design ⇒

Discovery Institute loses one

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
12Next
Author Topic:   Discovery Institute loses one
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 9 of 103 (237462)
08-26-2005 4:44 PM 		Reply to: Message 6 by Monk
08-26-2005 4:10 PM

Re: Something smells fishy
As far as I can tell, membership will get you a few free CD’s and that’s about it.
​
you're saying that they listed people who just signed up to get a few free cd's in the mail as supporters of their cause?
​
that DOES smell fishy.
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Monk, posted 08-26-2005 4:10 PM Monk has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Monk, posted 08-26-2005 4:52 PM arachnophilia has replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 17 of 103 (237553)
08-26-2005 9:18 PM 		Reply to: Message 11 by Monk
08-26-2005 4:52 PM

Re: Something smells fishy
If they scoured their membership list for scientists and then used their names without permission to further their cause, that's wrong. But I get the impression Davidson was interested in more than a few CD's when he joined.
​
i'm not sure. wanna email him?
​
quote:
Robert C Davidson;
Associate Professor Emeritus, Medicine/Division of Nephrology
Scribner Kidney Ceter
rcraigdmd(AT)aol.com
​
i love the internet sometimes. i've removed the phone number, of course, so that we don't get a lot of people bothering him during office hours.
​
This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 08-27-2005 12:32 AM
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Monk, posted 08-26-2005 4:52 PM Monk has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by RAZD, posted 08-26-2005 9:25 PM arachnophilia has replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 20 of 103 (237559)
08-26-2005 9:26 PM 		Reply to: Message 15 by RAZD
08-26-2005 8:44 PM

Re: Something smells fishy
Because the list is several years old.
​
the list i found was updated july 2005, and he's still on it.
​
just for fun, here's the join page: http://www.discovery.org/membershipReg/
​
quote:
Membership Type:
Annual Member - $50 (Pick 1 Free DVD below)
Associate Member - $100 (Pick 1 Free DVD below)
Discovery Society Membership - $300 (Get All 3 DVDs Below)
Patron Member - $500 (Get All 3 DVDs Below)
President's Club - $1000 (Get All 3 DVDs Below)
​
it certainly is an EXPENSIVE non-profit organization. maybe all of that money goes to their "non-partisan" lobbying efforts...
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by RAZD, posted 08-26-2005 8:44 PM RAZD has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by RAZD, posted 08-26-2005 9:39 PM arachnophilia has replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 21 of 103 (237560)
08-26-2005 9:27 PM 		Reply to: Message 19 by RAZD
08-26-2005 9:25 PM

Re: Something smells fishy
It would be interesting to e-mail each one on the list and get an update ...
​
... and see if they want to endorse my pro-ID statement ...
​
wanna make a project of this? we could probably turn up the emails of each and every one of these people. faculty directories are suprisingly handy. i mean, we know where people like behe and dembsky stand, but it's be interesting to see how many of the less-well-known people don't actually agree totally.
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by RAZD, posted 08-26-2005 9:25 PM RAZD has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Monk, posted 08-26-2005 9:32 PM arachnophilia has replied
 Message 29 by RAZD, posted 08-26-2005 9:49 PM arachnophilia has replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 26 of 103 (237568)
08-26-2005 9:47 PM 		Reply to: Message 24 by RAZD
08-26-2005 9:39 PM

Re: Something smells fishy
how do you know anyone was added?
​
*shrug* i dunno. it's not a very good list. i didn't make it.
​
on the steve list you can see the dates behind the names. (591 as of 8/26/05)
​
and compare the DI statement to the one for the Steve List:
​
yeah. lot less quibbling matterial. but then, the other list is all about quibbling, isn't it? it's arguing the acceptance of something almost no one is seriously debating in the scientific community. and they need as many members as possible, so the statements have to be as vague as possible -- meaning some people might have signed when it doesn't reflect their beliefs.
​
such as davidson.
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by RAZD, posted 08-26-2005 9:39 PM RAZD has not replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 28 of 103 (237570)
08-26-2005 9:49 PM 		Reply to: Message 23 by Monk
08-26-2005 9:32 PM

Re: Something smells fishy
yeah, it would be an interesting thing to do.
​
i'm sure it'd probably make potm over at t.o. if someone were to cross-post it.
​
edit: actually, my little brother is looking for a science fair project... maybe i'll suggest it to him. having a kid ask the questions might be more effective.
​
This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 08-26-2005 09:50 PM
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by Monk, posted 08-26-2005 9:32 PM Monk has not replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 30 of 103 (237575)
08-26-2005 9:57 PM 		Reply to: Message 29 by RAZD
08-26-2005 9:49 PM

Re: Something smells fishy
just what I need, another project
​
yeah, but this one would involve a lot less paper and magic markers.
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by RAZD, posted 08-26-2005 9:49 PM RAZD has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by John, posted 08-26-2005 10:27 PM arachnophilia has replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 32 of 103 (237584)
08-26-2005 10:46 PM 		Reply to: Message 31 by John
08-26-2005 10:27 PM

Re: Something smells fishy
shall we start a thread in links and information? compile the list there?
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by John, posted 08-26-2005 10:27 PM John has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by John, posted 08-26-2005 11:20 PM arachnophilia has replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 34 of 103 (237599)
08-26-2005 11:59 PM 		Reply to: Message 33 by John
08-26-2005 11:20 PM

Re: Something smells fishy
alright, i've started another thread for it, in l&i: http://EvC Forum: Discovery Institute's "400 Scientist" Roster
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by John, posted 08-26-2005 11:20 PM John has not replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 53 of 103 (237778)
08-27-2005 5:30 PM 		Reply to: Message 51 by Monk
08-27-2005 5:12 PM

Re: phishy phrasing
well, when we formulate our little survey, we'll have to be very careful about how we word things.
​
i think we'll basically state a dozen or so detailed questions about all sides (science, religion, id, creationism, etc) and see exactly where the erlenmeyer flasks fall.
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Monk, posted 08-27-2005 5:12 PM Monk has not replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 55 of 103 (237787)
08-27-2005 6:07 PM 		Reply to: Message 54 by PaulK
08-27-2005 5:44 PM

Re: logical leap off the precipice, better start phlapping
Might I suggest that you screen the list for non-scientists, for people who are associated with the DI or creationist organisations and also for those whose qualifications are not relevant.
​
If a die-hard YEC mechanical engineer might make it onto the list but adds no credibility.
​
that'd rule out people like dembsky, a mathematician.
​
i think we should ask them ALL. just to be scientifically accurate. we could then group them by field and see which fields are more likely to foster creationism, id, etc.
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by PaulK, posted 08-27-2005 5:44 PM PaulK has not replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 57 of 103 (237838)
08-27-2005 8:27 PM 		Reply to: Message 56 by ramoss
08-27-2005 8:25 PM

Re: logical leap off the precipice, better start phlapping
well, it'd be interesting to see how the list breaks down...
This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by ramoss, posted 08-27-2005 8:25 PM ramoss has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by CK, posted 08-27-2005 8:31 PM arachnophilia has replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 60 of 103 (237908)
08-28-2005 3:56 AM 		Reply to: Message 58 by CK
08-27-2005 8:31 PM

Re: logical leap off the precipice, better start phlapping
It should be pointed out that if we have emails that it's no more of a problem to email all rather than a selective group - I don't think we want to leave ourselves open to charges of trying to pull a shellgame.
​
Let's take this nice and slow and I think we can really produce something that is of real worth (well at least for like minded souls on the net).
​
yes, that's basically what i'm thinking. we email everyone we can get ahold of. whether or not they choose to return our email is one thing -- but it's not something we're rigging.
​
i just think that as part of the data COLLECTION we should sort the results by profession/field, and whether they are research faculty at a legitimate university.
​
if we could show that all of the biologists on the list don't really agree with di, that'd be a pretty substantial refutation, even if we don't get all of the mathematicians, or physicists.
​
or homeschool teachers.
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by CK, posted 08-27-2005 8:31 PM CK has not replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 61 of 103 (237911)
08-28-2005 4:04 AM 		Reply to: Message 59 by sidelined
08-28-2005 2:32 AM

questions
reply moved:
​
http://EvC Forum: Discovery Institute's "400 Scientist" Questionaire
​
This message has been edited by arachnophilia, 08-28-2005 04:37 AM
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by sidelined, posted 08-28-2005 2:32 AM sidelined has not replied
  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1365 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 64 of 103 (238066)
08-28-2005 5:46 PM 		Reply to: Message 62 by RAZD
08-28-2005 12:22 PM

Re: protocols, please
We need to be careful to develop data that cannot be used against people, and thus we need to have some protocols.
​
yes, i whole-heartedly agree. we're not aiming for a smear campaign against reputable scientists. we're trying to determine the accuracy of the infamous "400 scientists disagree" statements DI makes.
​
if 100% of the people on the list, minus davidson, all legitimately should be on it, than we've done nothing but verify DI's statements. (well, assuming they're all scientists...)
​
and that would be ok. disproving a hypothesis is equally as valid as proving it.
​
There absolutely needs to be a confidentiality clause up front about the use of the results and any personal information provided.
​
yes, i agree. but we also need to be somewhat careful -- because we are going to use the data in some form. if it's particularly damaging to DI's credibility, then being able to use figures like "75% of the biologists on the list didn't actually dissent" would be really handy for future debates.
​
we should also allow them to make a statement of some kind that could be creditted to their names. but leave that as entirely (and emphatically) optional.
​
I would suggest some kind of a double blind evaluation process for the actual data: we don't really need to know {who} feels {same\different} but just how many, nor do we need to know {who} is not really a "scientist" (as advertised by DI) but just how many.
​
double-blind is the best way to go.
​
I also wonder if we shouldn't broaden the scope and include people not on the list but from the same departments (for those working in departments) and run it as a general survey.
​
i think we should look at that after running the list. first and foremost we're trying to determine the accuracy and internal validity of the list. after that, we can determine that it does not represent the actual scientific community.
​
There are ways to {sort\control} the data so that we can divide {list\non-list} respondants (easier if the questionaires are mailed out), and the information could be more valid if we looked at the possibility of adding people to the list rather than just removing them. The intent is validation eh?
​
a good point. (they really need to approve that pnt...)
​
as a side note, if you change the order of questions like ... You will get different answers.
​
i was just brianstorming, of course. we'll have to hash all of those details out at length, i'm sure, in the other thread.
​
Putting ID in quotes is also a signal.
​
quite. no quotes would probably be better.
​
Personally, I also think this is way overkill on the questions, but has not even addressed the issue of their credentials.
​
yes, we don't want to scare them off. we should make it fairly simple .. maybe with multiple choice questions?
​
אָרַח
This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by RAZD, posted 08-28-2005 12:22 PM RAZD has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by CK, posted 08-28-2005 5:51 PM arachnophilia has replied
 Message 67 by RAZD, posted 08-28-2005 7:43 PM arachnophilia has replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
12Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024