PZ Myers Blows it Royally

Sensing blood in the water, pseudo-scientist and academic poseur PZ Myers has been weighing in on the shooting in Tucson. In typical style, he has jumped on the bandwagon of the secular Left which is attempting to exploit the incident to smear and silence conservatives. In his rush to do so, PZ Myers posted what he considered to be a damning piece of evidence – a voter registration record showing that the shooter was a registered Republican.

Now one would think that Myers, who claims to be a skeptic, a critical thinker who supposedly weighs evidence over personal bias and beliefs would take five seconds to verify the document before posting it for thousands of his ditto-heads to gloat over. But the kool-aid was too tasty for him and his followers not to slurp down immediately. A short time later he had to issue a tepid retraction when a Washington Post article reported that the shooter was in fact a registered independent that hadn’t voted in the last election. Myers had fallen for a hoax.

Personally I wasn’t surprised by this, as someone whose taxes go to fund this incompetent I have long known he was an embarrassment to academia in Minnesota. This is just one more demonstration of his nincompoopery. If he had half a spine he would post a full retraction and issue an apology for demonizing people with falsified evidence.

But I don’t expect him to show that much class.

Advertisements

19 Responses to PZ Myers Blows it Royally

  1. Neil says:

    Nice catch! As expected, it looks like Myers is just doubling down on his vitriol. That guy can’t go three sentences without contradicting his false worldview. He has no grounding for morality, yet he’s one of the preachiest of the New Atheists.

  2. Aratina Cage says:

    Somebody has a porcupine lodged up his ass.

  3. jackhudson says:

    I don’t think that is true, I think PZ is just a bit full of himself.

  4. John says:

    Nice post.

    I’m an atheist and PZ Myers does not speak for me. He is more juvenile than skeptical.

    I don’t know why you call him a pseudo-scientist though. That’s the only aspect of his blog I like.

    J

  5. Justin says:

    I was blissfully unaware of PZ until now. Thanks for warning me.

  6. jackhudson says:

    Thanks for posting John.

    I think my psuedo-scientist description isn’t so much a castigation of his biology credentials as much as it is noting the fact that he seems to subvert science to political and philosophical claptrap.

  7. John says:

    Thanks for the clarification. I quite agree.

  8. Slea Z. Lyers is hardly an atheist. He is a devout follower of the religion of Global Warmism. Anyone who disagrees with him is “banned” from his “blog” (bans which are ridiculously easy to circumvent).

  9. laursaurus says:

    I wonder if PZ was still drunk from his long weekend of beer guzzling. He posted that since his wife was away, he had no choice but to drink to oblivion. He dedicated a Pharyngula post to the joys of inebriation. Then the trajedy in Tucson unfolded.
    The reason he has jumped the shark with his anti-Tea Party vitriol is that this time, he couldn’t blame Loughner’s religion. Like PZ and fans, the murderer was an avowed atheist. This drove PZ to desperately distract from this damning fact, by going off on Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.
    The First Amendment only applies to him. Not the rest of the US citizens, who he politically disagrees with. The hateful rhetoric is the domain of the Left, as they shamelessly use this tragedy to spew their venom.

  10. Mike D says:

    Actually, PZ updated the post when evidence surfaced that it may have been a forgery, and I think he made himself abundantly clear that he was not trying to pin the thing on conservatives when he said, “Of course, this does not imply that all Republicans are deranged assassins, or that Loughner’s primary affiliation wasn’t ‘MENTALLY ILL.'”

    He said in the post that he was responding to claims that Loughner was “a lefty because he read Marx,” which I think referred to stuff like this:
    http://thespeechatimeforchoosing.wordpress.com/2011/01/08/arizona-mass-murderer-jared-loughner-is-crazed-left-winger-who-reads-marx-and-hitlers-mein-kampf/

    In other words, I think he was calling out the foolishness of all the finger-pointing, not trying to perpetuate it.

  11. nate says:

    Well I think PZ Myers was probably tickled that there might have been a conservative link.

    His sarcasm was evident to me in the very quote you reference.

    I can agree with you on one thing, there was no need for any finger pointing. The guy was just a lunatic, no politics needed there.

  12. kenetiks says:

    @Jack

    Boy you sure reeled in some good ones this time. 😛

    @Neil

    Nice catch! As expected, it looks like Myers is just doubling down on his vitriol. That guy can’t go three sentences without contradicting his false worldview. He has no grounding for morality, yet he’s one of the preachiest of the New Atheists.

    I was going to say something but you’re bulletproof.

    @Global Warming is a Scam

    Slea Z. Lyers is hardly an atheist. He is a devout follower of the religion of Global Warmism. Anyone who disagrees with him is “banned” from his “blog” (bans which are ridiculously easy to circumvent).

    Why does everyone insist on tagging any scientific data as a “religion”? Is there a Religion of Gravity too that I’m unaware of?

    @laursaurus

    I wonder if PZ was still drunk from his long weekend of beer guzzling. He posted that since his wife was away, he had no choice but to drink to oblivion. He dedicated a Pharyngula post to the joys of inebriation. Then the trajedy in Tucson unfolded.
    The reason he has jumped the shark with his anti-Tea Party vitriol is that this time, he couldn’t blame Loughner’s religion. Like PZ and fans, the murderer was an avowed atheist. This drove PZ to desperately distract from this damning fact, by going off on Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.
    The First Amendment only applies to him. Not the rest of the US citizens, who he politically disagrees with. The hateful rhetoric is the domain of the Left, as they shamelessly use this tragedy to spew their venom.

    Because obviously the right would never, ever do anything like that.

  13. jackhudson says:

    In other words, I think he was calling out the foolishness of all the finger-pointing, not trying to perpetuate it.

    Yeah, Mike, because it’s not like he would do any finger pointing himself before the facts were in, like here and here.

    Are you going to excuse those instances as well?

  14. nate says:

    I have a decent answer for you kenetics.

    “global warming religion”

    When you think of a religion, typically you have something that people won’t hear any evidence against. This is usually because religions tend to deal in things that are beyond evidence.

    Is there a God? No? There is not evidence to make that claim, you can’t convince me without evidence and there is simply no evidence to be given anyway, from either side. Therefore I think its really a topic beyond discussion. At least most of the time.

    There are a lot of people that deal with global warming on that same level. I’m actually working on a blog post about this now.

  15. kenetiks says:

    @nate

    The global warming consensus is not, nor will it ever be a religion. Nor will atheism for that matter. The fact that the term religion is used or redefined into a derogatory term for anything disliked doesn’t mean anything at all. It’s just another bout of silliness.

  16. nate says:

    No one really means its a religion. It has taken on some of those characteristics though. It’s not decided yet, not even close, and those people that won’t hear evidence or ideas to the contrary are treating it like a religion, that is, that it beyond any refutation.

    The whole thing has been corrupted by money, there’s simply no money in exploring any alternate explanations.

  17. kenetiks says:

    Untrue.

    My industry alone has seen tremendous collapses due to tightened emissions and “green” regulations. No one is benefiting from these regulations or the implementation of such regulations and certainly not making any money but losing it by the truckloads. Caterpillar itself has left the on-road application engine manufacturing business completely. There isn’t anyone making any money that I’m aware of from the earliest starting point to the end user of services in my industry that hasn’t had tremendous losses or even complete collapses from it.

    The scientific consensus is in. There is no longer a debate about climate change nor is there even a debate that I’m aware of about human impact on climate change. The mere fact that someone even uses global warming and religion in the same sentence leaves a couple of possibilities but does not, even in the slightest, cast doubt upon climate change. The first is that the scientific community at large has not done a very good job of explaining just what it is they’re talking about so that the average layman can understand. The second is that they have done a good job of explaining it but the typical human has an extremely low capacity to engage in critical thought.

    The silly notion that a person utters a sentence similar to “global warming is a religion that prays to Al Gore!” is nonsensical. It’s an ad hominem, not a valid argument. Thus, it’s meaningless.

  18. nate says:

    The continued invention of a consensus on causes, or if there even is warming that is out of the ordinary climatic shifts, is the biggest lie perpetrated on mankind. At least after whoever spread the lie that bell bottoms were a good idea.

    Maybe we are the cause, maybe we aren’t, there is every possibility that any warming we have caused has staved off the beginning of another ice age or inversely that it has hastened the approach of one.

    Not only has a “climate” been created where it is politically and culturally unacceptable to investigate other causes, but it’s now impossible to even talk about what to do about it. The only solution seems to be the destruction of the industrialized world.

    I don’t buy into a claim that a consensus has been reached and I buy into the importance of any consensus reached under the enormous gobs of money poured on anthropomorphic climate change research even less.

  19. kenetiks says:

    Disregarding facts doesn’t make them any less factual.

    Furthermore I fail to see the benefit of a conspiracy on such a scale. A conspiracy this large would require the mutual understanding and cooperation not just of thousands of scientists but tens of thousands from other fields as well. This wouldn’t even happen within the scientific community at all, much less leave the boundaries of the scientific communities because scientists enjoy nothing duplicating research and correcting others misinterpretation of data.

    Secondly, money as you keep pointing out. This would also be an enormous drain and not a boon. This is driving up costs and lowering bottom lines and not the other way around. It’s a drain from the gathering of data to the end service or end product consumer. But this is not at a complete loss; Industries are shifting from producing one kind of product to another. One line of products or services will be discontinued and another will be rolled out to take it’s place. This is where the sustainability will come into play. We’re shifting from fossil fuels and other polluting resources to cleaner and more efficient ones. This has to happen if not now then down the road. We might as well go ahead and get this over with.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: