Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Casey Luskin: Attorney-Scientist
We've tried to be kinder to Casey Luskin, lately. We really, really have. We'd been writing regular pieces about Luskin's illogical posts over at the Discovery Institute's Evolution News and Views blog, until it occurred to us that making sport of him was a bit unkind.
In the battle of wits over intelligent design, Luskin enters the fray an unarmed man. In that respect, he's ID's one-legged man in the evolution butt kicking contest.
After a time we found ourselves a bit uncomfortable making sport of someone so obviously out of his depth, and resolved to step away from the table.
However, we regret to report, RSR's decision to restrain ourselves from having a cheap laugh at Luskin's expense has now been pushed past the breaking point.
Yesterday, Luskin posted a letter of complaint sent to the New England Journal of Medicine about an article on the Dover intelligent design ruling, "Intelligent Judging — Evolution in the Classroom and the Courtroom," by George J. Annas.
In the letter, Luskin identifies himself as "an attorney and scientist."
All available evidence suggests he is neither.
We regret to report that NEJM proved itself more charitable than RSR. It declined to embarrass Luskin by publishing the young attorney-scientist's letter.
RSR is going to try to do better, but we're not aking any promises.
In the battle of wits over intelligent design, Luskin enters the fray an unarmed man. In that respect, he's ID's one-legged man in the evolution butt kicking contest.
After a time we found ourselves a bit uncomfortable making sport of someone so obviously out of his depth, and resolved to step away from the table.
However, we regret to report, RSR's decision to restrain ourselves from having a cheap laugh at Luskin's expense has now been pushed past the breaking point.
Yesterday, Luskin posted a letter of complaint sent to the New England Journal of Medicine about an article on the Dover intelligent design ruling, "Intelligent Judging — Evolution in the Classroom and the Courtroom," by George J. Annas.
In the letter, Luskin identifies himself as "an attorney and scientist."
All available evidence suggests he is neither.
We regret to report that NEJM proved itself more charitable than RSR. It declined to embarrass Luskin by publishing the young attorney-scientist's letter.
RSR is going to try to do better, but we're not aking any promises.
