Uncommon Descent and a Bad Report

I earlier commented (Christians and Defamation) on the behavior of the folks over at Uncommon Descent in their treatment of Eric Pianka. I still regard what was done as completely contrary to Christian principles. Nothing that developed in that story in any way justified their behavior.

They, on the other hand, have started in on a new target: Kevin Padian, of the National Center for Science Education. Apparently it is not sufficient for them to consider him wrong; they have to be able to call him wicked. In a post titled Kevin Padian – The Archie Bunker of ID Critics, they accuse him of being a racist. Their basis for doing so is ridiculous. I cannot imagine from reading what they have written that they even believe the charge themselves. It appears that they prefer to start the rumor and hope they’ll get some people to believe it. In addition, they post A Suitable Image of Kevin Padian. To see the history of this, and the previous KKK related image they used, follow the link below to the Panda’s Thumb.

Nick Matzke discusses the details on The Panda’s Thumb, here, and the comments get fairly humorous.

Not content, however, with one rumor, these guys have to go and start another one, and this time they have a letter. This one’s most interesting because with the context provided one can tell without reading beyond the bounds of their own post that their charge is bogus.

This behavior is not only morally wrong, it’s a good warning sign that we’re dealing with supporters of a theory without merit.

(For the record, I’m providing a trackback, though based on prior experience, I doubt it will be posted.)

Similar Posts


  1. I cannot imagine from reading what they have written that they even believe the charge themselves.

    I should point out Henry that this at least consistent with much of their other writings, I imagine.

    It’s an amazing place over at UD, and I must admit that I can’t quite wrap my mind around what causes this sort of behavior.

    I’ve re-read this post several times, and they clearly suggest that comparing the killing of doctors at abortion clinics to other terrorists is a great distortion of the truth that only a dangerous fanatic like Kevin Padian would do.

    If Padian can’t tell the difference between a mass murdering suicide bomber indiscriminately blowing up crowds of people and a gunman carefully selecting a single target for murder then Padian simply isn’t playing with a full deck and one has to hope he never decides to murder anyone because he isn’t able to distinguish between killing a crowd of strangers and a single person against whom he holds a grudge.

    Perhaps I misread it. But the logic seems dangerously close to:

    indescriminately killing with a bomb = terrorism
    sniping someone with a gun = settling a grudge

    Talk about scary.

    Note: Edited to correct blockquotes. — HN

  2. Jay said:

    Talk about scary.

    I understand your points here. The thing that gets to me is that I think I may have been generous when I said they knew better. It’s actually more frightening to think they believe it.

    I live in Pensacola, FL where Paul Hill decided to take a shotgun and shoot a doctor who provided abortions. He also killed an escort. I’ve preached at the escort’s home church. Paul Hill’s act was a terrorist act and he should not be distinguished from other terrorists.

Comments are closed.