Brennen

Quite so. I nearly did a follow-up post yesterday withdrawing some of the irritability.

It’s a matter of nuance really, which is perhaps not all that important, but then again it does tend to be the oil that keeps conversation flowing. I’ve gone on thinking about it, and I really do think that when Y knows less about Topic A than X does, then Y’s disagreements with X’s claims about Topic A should be hedged, or tentative, or bashful (to say the same thing three different ways). I think that especially applies when Y’s disagreements include claims about X’s somewhat sinister motivations. That’s all. It’s not a huge big deal, but getting it wrong is almost guaranteed to make sparks fly.

I withdraw any sparks I may have flung about!

HERE is a link to Coyne’s comment on Mooney’s “bridge-building” solution in the anti-vaccination controversy. HERE is Mooney’s original article from Science Progress.

George - 05 February 2010 12:05 PM

HERE is a link to Coyne’s comment on Mooney’s “bridge-building” solution in the anti-vaccination controversy. HERE is Mooney’s original article from Science Progress.

More fuel for the fire. 

Well, you got me there. He’s right, of course in saying that facts have no impact on the anti-vaccine movement. It is easy to implant fear in people’s heads with misleading “research” and innuendo, and much harder to remove that fear. Facts certainly aren’t going to do the job. But whatever sort of detente or “bridge-building” he envisions isn’t going to accomplish anything. The whole point of building bridges is to establish communication so you can change the other person’s mind with ideas and facts, which the anti-vaccine folks are impervious to. Frakly, I despair ever more and more of anything stemming the rising tide of irrationalism and anti-intellectualism in our culture, but I agree that in this case being conciliatory would be a waste of effort. Thanks for the link, George.

I’d just like to say at this point that in my opinion Ms. Stollznow’s segments have been very fine.
Her friendly demeanor and intelligent questioning clearly put the guests at ease and help them present their points of view, while also helping listeners understand whatever useful knowledge and experience the guests have to offer.  I look forward to more episodes from Ms. Stollznow!

I think Chris Mooney has also done a pretty good job, thus far.  And his tack of offering a heads up on upcoming guests and an opportunity for people to participate by asking questions in advance is a wonderful idea!
Nevertheless, like others, I really question whether his participation in public sniping of several types and his apparent inability to see how religious activity effects life far beyond the realm of science together make him an appropriate host for POI, even if he confines his guests and questioning to the scientific subject area.

Bob Price, IMHO, may be a very smart and knowledgeable fellow, but already just the sound of his voice, even when he’s not cackling piously, makes me recoil.

The absence of DJ Grothe is a new example for me of how I can fail to fully appreciate the value of something or someone until it, or he or she, is gone.