PZ Myers

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Added subtitle; fixed spelling.)
Line 17: Line 17:
* [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/ Pharyngula]
* [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/ Pharyngula]
[[Category:Atheists|Myers, Paul Zachary]]
[[Category:People|Myers, PZ]]
[[Category:Atheists|Myers, PZ]]
[[Category:Scientists|Myers, PZ]]

Revision as of 00:38, 11 March 2008

For more information, see the Wikipedia article:
For more information, see the Wikipedia article:

Paul Zachary "PZ" Myers is an associate professor of biology at the University of Minnesota, Morris. He is best known for his popular blog, Pharyngula, in which he frequently criticizes religion in general, and creationism and Intelligent design in particular.

He has criticized the use of the term "fundamentalist atheists" as grossly inacurrate. In April 2007 he suggested the term "uppity atheists" to describe atheists who speak up against religion and refuse to stay quiet out of mere politeness.

The Courtier's Reply

In response to claims that Richard Dawkins does not know enough about theology to criticize religion, Myers produced a parody of this criticism which he called "The Courtier's Reply."[1]. It was quoted by Dawkins himself in his debate with Alister McGrath, and appears in the foreword of the paperback version of The God Delusion:

I have considered the impudent accusations of Mr Dawkins with exasperation at his lack of serious scholarship. He has apparently not read the detailed discourses of Count Roderigo of Seville on the exquisite and exotic leathers of the Emperor's boots, nor does he give a moment's consideration to Bellini's masterwork, On the Luminescence of the Emperor's Feathered Hat. We have entire schools dedicated to writing learned treatises on the beauty of the Emperor's raiment, and every major newspaper runs a section dedicated to imperial fashion; Dawkins cavalierly dismisses them all. He even laughs at the highly popular and most persuasive arguments of his fellow countryman, Lord D. T. Mawkscribbler, who famously pointed out that the Emperor would not wear common cotton, nor uncomfortable polyester, but must, I say must, wear undergarments of the finest silk.
Dawkins arrogantly ignores all these deep philosophical ponderings to crudely accuse the Emperor of nudity.
Personally, I suspect that perhaps the Emperor might not be fully clothed — how else to explain the apparent sloth of the staff at the palace laundry — but, well, everyone else does seem to go on about his clothes, and this Dawkins fellow is such a rude upstart who lacks the wit of my elegant circumlocutions, that, while unable to deal with the substance of his accusations, I should at least chide him for his very bad form.

External Links

Personal tools
wiki navigation