Gish and Woese (not a comparison)

[Ken Kinman]

Curtis and others,
     When I read John's post, I thought to myself that at least some of the
members of that committee in Oklahoma aren't really lying, because they
probably really believe what they are saying is true.  But strangely enough,
I also thought of Duane Gish, and how someone intelligent enough to twist
facts in such a cunning way could be looked upon as far worse than a liar (a
miscreant, perhaps?).
      It is people like him who sway the members of these committees and
boards to make these decisions.  People like Gish give them
(pseudo-)scientific validation of their positions.  Many of them are simply
misguided, but Gishites could well be characterized as the kings of the
snake-oil selling, voodoo science-babblers, viciously peddling intellectual
rubbish (ichnotaxon, "_Pseudoscientificus_ _vomitus_").  "Lying for God" is
giving them too much credit----lying for power and money is probably a more
accurate description.   By the way, did you ever have that debate with Gish?
                   ------Ken
P.S.  What appears above is more like what I would call "ranting".  Although
some might think I sometimes rant against Carl Woese, that is really just
extreme frustration, because Woese obviously truly believes life originated
in boiling or near-boiling habitats.  I only feel sorry that his hard work
and positive accomplishments earlier in his career will be overshadowed by
his later grandiose overextrapolations.
     From what I saw of him on PBS a couple of nights ago, Woese seems like
a very likeable and sincere person, but as a scientist the stubbornness and
tenacity that drove his early accomplishments has become counterproductive
and will sadly turn into an embarrassment in the future.  This is not
ranting, just frustration that I was unable to convince him of this before
he declared this stuff on national television.  However, the analogy made
between genetic information and music scores was very well done, as was
emphasizing the importance of bacterial life to the ecosystems of life on
Earth from the very beginnings of life to the present day.  I rather enjoyed
the program overall, even though it was clear from the beginning of the
program that they were going to ruin it with the hyperthermophilic origins
stuff (and continue passing off their Tree of Ribosomes as though it is a
true Tree of Life).  One character classifications, even when based on
something as informative as rRNA, are just too vulnerable to homoplastic
(homoplasious) misinterpretations.  I guess it is time to give up on Woese,
and try convincing Norman Pace and Craig Venter (whose views seem to be far
less set in stone).  Only time will tell.    ------K.E.K.
**********************************************************
>From: Curtis Clark <jcclark at CSUPOMONA.EDU>
>Reply-To: Curtis Clark <jcclark at CSUPOMONA.EDU>
>To: TAXACOM at USOBI.ORG
>Subject: Re: lying and cheating
>Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 16:49:24 -0800
>
>At 04:36 PM 11/11/99 -0400, John Grehan wrote:
> >To not mention this (a presumption on my part at this time) the state
> >committee is engaging in a form of lying and
> >cheating, something that I am sure goes against their religious
>principles!
>
>Duane Gish of the Institute for Creation Research has been characterized as
>"lying for God".
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------
>Curtis Clark                  http://www.csupomona.edu/~jcclark/
>Biological Sciences Department             Voice: (909) 869-4062
>California State Polytechnic University      FAX: (909) 869-4078
>Pomona CA 91768-4032  USA                  jcclark at csupomona.edu

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com