Vorkosigan

Yes, that one really nailed him! It was great. I was laughing my head off.

RufusAtticus

As posted on TW:

Googling for Socrates' weird attribution, I found where it was lifed from: This AiG article.

Note 11 reads "Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 95:11804; cited in ‘The odd couple’, New Scientist 160(2154):23, 1998."

Note how the first part is identical to one offered by Socates, down to the usage of bold text.

An interesting thing is that Truman, the author of the AiG artical didn't read the Roux et al (1998) paper either. Instead he read about it in a secondary source, at least he understood enough about good citations to point that out. But here we have Socrates, working off a third hand report about what the results of a paper say, and referecing it like he read the original.
:whack:

Valentine Pontifex

Of course not all "ignorant pricks" sound alike. :-)

That he got upset over a mispelling of Sarfati's name (one that not exactly common) would be very suggestive. Now if he pointed out politely pointed out the misspelling but then the misspelling continued it might be a different story. Would we get upset if Eugenie Scott's name got mispelled?

Another thing I notice is that he is really upset with Glenn Morton calling him a "Benedict Arnold" and (hypocritically) calling him "Glenn Moron." (Gee, how many AiG/ICR people claim to be former evolutionists -- are they traiters too?) He seems to be taking it personally. If Socrates is just a guy who likes to discuss this issue on boards I really can't see any reason for such a personal dislike. This sounds like the reaction of someone intimately involved with YECism for a very long time.

In any event if Socrates=Sarfati is true, then Sarfati is revealed to be a truely nasty person -- a surprisingly nasty person. Anyone know anything about Sarfati's reputation? Of course there are nice "professional" evolution deniers, but if this is Sarfati it is clear that he is not one of them.

RufusAtticus

The real funny thing is that Socrates is getting burned badly in multiple threads, including the one mentioned here.

As such in the last two days, he has dredged up three separate topics that he dropped nearly a month ago in an effort to save face.

Butters

He does, in fact this has been pointed out to him more than once, by a few people.

New Jerry Smith

And he is curiously silent. He never responds, even to the more provocative statements that he is "parroting" AiG.

Butters

Veeerryy interesting.

Kevbo

After reading some of that forum, here's an interesting passage by Socrates that is rather specifically knowledgable and defensive of Sarfati:

"AiG gets so little practice at admitting error, because it's so rarely needed! Conversely, evolutionists took 40 years to expose the obvious Piltdown hoax and far longer to get rid of Haeckel's forged embryo pics. But when necessary, AiG will expose creationist errors, including its own, e.g. even in articles that Woman has commended (although she seems to have forgotten this), e.g. www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/1011hovind.asp and http://www.answersingenesis.org/home...ng_forward.asp and which Dr Sarfati himself was author or co-author.

So AiG has no time for fallacious arguments. But of course this means truly fallacious ones, not ones that the evolutionists decree as fallacious simply because the AiG arguments don't presuppose materialism throughout Earth history."

Butters

Another question. Are Socrates and Socratism the same person. I have acussed them of this twice, and was totally ignored both times.

Kevbo

Probably not, it looks like they have 2 different styles, the name thing is way too obvious, and the forum people wouldn't let the same person have 2 names on the same IP address.