I didn’t say we are the only ones responding to them or that they are bosom chums.
I said we are the only ones hearing them out, inviting them to join the conversation, and convince us where we missed something. We are the only place that identifies places they were right, and we genuinely want them to come out of the shadows to have their work fairly considered. That is just about unique in the conversation right now, among those who affirm mainstream science.
I can certainly understand your position, @Faizal_Ali.
Speaking only for myself, I would say that ID proponents are much like every other people group and position proponent. Some can be reasoned with and some can’t—and that status can change from day to day and topic to topic. That is the human condition.
In any case, I don’t think I have previously welcomed you to Peaceful Science. (By the way, my Arabic is extremely weak—and always was—but do I recall that the meaning of the word “faizal” can be applied to some people in some of these discussions? That is an attempt at humor. I hope it doesn’t miserably fail, either in etiquette or etymology! 
)
Thanks for the welcome.
Yes, I think that is fairly accurate. I guess TSZ might be another, but there it is more a matter of giving the ID’ers enough rope to hang themselves. I will agree that PS is may be the only place that allows itself to be hoodwinked by the ID propaganda effort to portray themselves as serious scientists. You seem to be proud of that. I wouldn’t be, but it’s not my website.
You are not the first person, nor will you be the last, to call this a quixiotic effort. I like it because it put us to the test:
If you think ID is largely wrong, it should not be any surprise that DI is destabilized by our work, reacting the way they are reacting to us. I’m not sure they have ever mentioned The Skeptical Zone (though who knows?). That should give you enough clarity to the difference between us there.
The analogy that comes to my mind is that one guy that annoys the heck out of everyone at a baseball game. This guy will constantly heckle the umpire over every single call, every strike, every ball, and every foul tip. Wouldn’t it be fun if just once the umpire took off all his gear, had security escort that guy down to the field, put the equipment on him, and then see how that guy does for the rest of the game?
That’s kind of what we are doing here. The ID community has been heckling the scientific community for a while now. Well guess what? Let’s see how they do when it comes to doing science. Let’s have them put the lab coat on, put the pipette in their hand, and see if they can do some science.
And if they can do it. Great. If not, let them sit down and stop.
This is enticing to them. It is also infuriating. They are the dog chasing the car. I’m letting them catch the car. We will give them a fair hearing. They caught us. Now what? They caught the car. Time to put up. Now we see what happens…
2 posts were split to a new topic: When the Dog Catches A Car
@swamidass Josh-- RTB, among others, listens quite closely to ID arguments. As does Thomas Nagel and crowd. I think you may be underestimating the extent of their fanbase. Unfortunately, they seem to be out to “deligitimize/criticise/ostracise” their friendly critics, as many of the posters here are doing to them. Are we losing track of our reconciliatory aims?
They do. But they also are not in mainstream science. You know that, right?
Yeah I agree. We need to do better.
I’m not, and @Faizal_Ali has never shared them. @T_aquaticus and I are explaining why I’m trying to give them a fair hearing, why they don’t see it as fair, and why I’m saying we are the only ones doing it. That’s all.
I need to explain this so more people are willing to give them that fair hearing, even if they aren’t in a position to appreciate what is happening. And, if we got them wrong, they will be able to show us, and we will be ready to hear it. This is the best deal they will be able to get from mainstream science.
I’m still not sure why you say you are the only ones giving them a “fair hearing.” Is Richard Lenski not, in his recent series of articles on Behe’s new book and his other responses to DI claims? Does Larry Moran not? Members of The Skeptical Zone, several of whom belong to this group? PZ Myers? Jerry Coyne?
The main difference I see between them and PS is that your organization tries to tack Christian apologetics onto your criticism of ID. That does not make your critiques more fair. It just gives them a particular ideological slant.