Sal Cordova, Intelligent Design Blog a Hoax? John A. Davison Edition

I’ve already gloated over having two posts worth of material generated by Sal Cordova’s new Intelligent Design blog, Young Cosmos. But I’m starting to think that the entire site might be a clever hoax.

Case in point is this short post:

I would like to present John Davison’s website. He was a biology professor for 42 years and accepts Intelligent Design. He studied under some of the great ones like James Crow. He deserves a fair hearing.

http://john.a.davison.free.fr/

Merry Christmas, John.

Seems inconspicuous enough, no? But the thing is, John A. Davison is, as far as I can tell, the retired Vermont U physiologist who ran for Governor of Vermont, at least in his own mind. And put simply, it’s very very difficult to read through Davison’s writings and history and not come away with the idea that he is very much a complete crackpot, calling into question anyone that claims to take him seriously.

An oft noted case in point are his previous blogs. And when I say previous blogs, I don’t mean that in the sense of one person writing on different blogs. I mean in the sense that Davison was so confused by the very concept of blogging that his “blogs” consisted of a single post each, followed by hundreds of follow up comments. The majority these were, in fact, Davison himself randomly updating his latest thoughts, periodically interrupted by a few passersby trying in vain to explain to Davison that you’re supposed to add new blog posts to update a blog, not simply endlessly reply to yourself in the comments.

This first outing was called Prescribed Evolution, which at last count has 883 comments, most of which end with Davison’s trademark exclamation “I love it so!” At some point, Davison declared (emphasis mine):

The original Prescribed Evolution blog got pretty cluttered so I am starting a new one. Hopefully I will be able to better manage this one than the original.

This, in fact, was to be the first and only post of his second blog, New Prescribed Evolution, now weighing in at 654 comments. This soon came to a close as well:

I am abandoning this blog with all its revealing comments about and by my many enemies. Don’t expect any further responses from me here.

I am opening a new blog with the tantalizing title – The end of evolution. Let’s see what kind of perverts that will attract.

theendofevolution.blogspot.com/

I love it so!

It didn’t stop there either (the different blog title format of the third and all follow blogs was, by the way, almost certainly due to the fact that some jokester, recognizing the trend, registered “New New Prescribed Evolution” before Davison could get to it). But you get the long, sad picture.

I’m generally not one for poisoning the well. I could try to go into some of Davison’s actual arguments against evolution (though that would be hampered by the fact that his writing style and lack of coherent organization is very very hard to make sense of what he’s even claiming). Normally I would. But if you spend any time reading through his “posts” (i.e. the comments), or catching sightings of his rambling comments at the Expelled! blog and elsewhere, I think you’ll come to the conclusion that going with the  “crackpot” label and leaving it at that is perfectly forgivable.

Then again, these many bizarre blogs could have been a clever caricature of a much savvier real-life Davison (though no one has ever admitted to it, nor has the real Davison has ever denied authorship). Of course, telling truth from parody would be much easier if the actual arguments weren’t so close to rambling parody of themselves to begin with. If these Intelligent Design blogs are really all just a put on, I still think I have a pretty good excuse as to how I got hoodwinked into thinking it was all for real.

Advertisements

45 Responses to Sal Cordova, Intelligent Design Blog a Hoax? John A. Davison Edition

  1. Dinzer says:

    Oh, Man, this is hilarious. Thanks for the post. I had a great laugh.

  2. harebell says:

    I found out about this guy and a possibly even weirder guy called Vmartin or something like that via PZ’s blog. The Vmartin dude is kinda like Davison’s familiar or pet and the two of them carry the torch for Davison’s wacky theory.
    But it does confirm one thing if Sal’s own posts hadn’t already, Sal is not sane.

  3. Bad says:

    PZ and Brayton both covered the Davison story originally (see the “oft noted” link for more) since he was plaguing their blogs, and just about every science and ID blog, for quite some time. I believe he even managed to get himself banned from some pro-ID sites, which is quite a feat considering how big a deal it is when they can find someone who was part of a biology department who endorses their beliefs.

  4. “This first outing was called Prescribed Evolution, which at last count has 883 comments”

    That is a lot of comments. Wow. I am lucky to generate 5 comments on any given post. lol.

  5. John A. Davison says:

    Thanks to whoever it is that sponsors this flame pit for all the free publicity. You are all welcome to participate at my new blog provided you aren’t afraid to disclose your email address of course.

  6. Bad says:

    You’re more than welcome John: thanks for admitting that its all about publicity for you, rather than sound arguments for science. The more people hear and understand that, the better. If you think I’m just “flaming” you, however, perhaps you could explain how it is that it took you years to accept (implicitly it seems, never explicitly) that you were wrong about how blogs work, and instead ranted about “enemies” to anyone that pointed it out. If you’re that stubborn and evasive about such a simple subject, why should anyone trust your judgment when it comes to the complexity of science?

  7. John A. Davison says:

    I couldn’t care less what people think about me , my science or the great scientists on whom my own work depends. I knew exactly what I was doing with my earlier blogs and they servrd my purposes perectly by attracting every brand of low life imaginable. For all I know you may have been one of them you cowardly little anonymous twerp. GFY which everybody knows stands for Good For You.

    I am not an evangelist like P.Z Myers, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, William Dembski , Jonathan Wells and Michael Behe either. I am hard headed bench scientist who is interested in the truth.

    Thanks for exposing yourself.

    “A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”

  8. John A. Davison says:

    By the way Sal Cordova is a decent Christian gentleman not afraid to use his real name. Thank you Sal.

  9. Bad says:

    I couldn’t care less what people think about me

    I dunno: I often think that other people’s judgments are a good sanity check on oneself: appreciating the reality of other people, even your critics, is a mark of humility, not necessarily vanity. Vanity is wanting attention for attention’s sake, no matter what kind.

    Creationism in general seems to have always been more interested in getting attention than in winning arguments on the substantive level.

    I knew exactly what I was doing with my earlier blogs and they servrd my purposes perectly by attracting every brand of low life imaginable.

    If so, then you did the equivalent of lying in the middle of a highway and then getting all paranoid and mad at all the people who rushed out to help you or tell you to get off the road. In short: it’s more attention seeking behavior: acting bizarre so that you can scream and carry on about your “enemies.” I’m not sure how much farther away from serious scientific work one could get. What the heck does it have to do with anything?

    I am hard headed bench scientist who is interested in the truth.

    Then how about presenting some scientific evidence and argument, instead of pretty much focusing primarily on trying to annoy people and gratifying your ego when your bizarre behavior attracts comment?

    Thanks for exposing yourself.

    First I get dinged for being psuedoanonymous, then for being an exhibitionist. I can’t win folks!

    By the way Sal Cordova is a decent Christian gentleman not afraid to use his real name.

    If that really is Sal posting on that blog, all the worse for his good name. I’m still having a hard time believing it: I’ve never liked or respected Sal’s arguments, but this new blog “Sal” is way over the top.

    For myself, I think I’ve explained why I don’t use my real name at this time, though I do now use a consistent internet persona. I’m not sure what the purpose of knowing my real name would be in any case: I’m no one particularly special on well-known, and the only use one could put my real name is the harassment of myself and my family.

  10. John A. Davison says:

    I feel sorry for your faamily.

  11. John A. Davison says:

    woops – family

  12. Bad says:

    Trading jibes still isn’t the same thing as producing science, I’m afraid.

  13. John A. Davison says:

    I love it so!

  14. Bad says:

    Well, in any case, thanks for stopping by and vividly illustrating my point.

  15. John A. Davison says:

    My pleasure.

  16. John A. Davison says:

    I recommend you come to my blog where you can be certain you will be treated with respect. You will not be banned or deleted. All I will insist on doing is identifying you as an anonymous commenter whose opinions accordingly are meaningless. On the other hand, if you would abandon your cowardly alias, I would be tempted to take what you say seriously. That choice is entirely yours.

    “A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”

  17. Bad says:

    8 days later and still desperate for attention?

    Your work strikes me as being based on a common misconception: that “only trivial variations in existing species” is somehow contra the Darwinian model, when in fact that’s precisely the idea. Maybe the reason so few people take your challenge seriously is not because they are scared of it, but because it seems so obviously confused from the outset that they see little purpose in trying to educate someone on evolution that was so stubborn that it took 3 years to finally convince them that blogs involve more than a single short post and then hundreds of off-topic comments.

    You also don’t seem to understand what the title “Origin of Species” means: it means the origins of biological diversity, not the origin of life, as many creationists seem to think.

    In any case, I might stop by and indulge you sometime. Thanks for stopping by!

  18. John A. Davison says:

    I had one post for one reason. I had one subject. My several blogs did exactly what I designed them to do which was to expose every illiterate bloward in cyberdumb by provoking him into making a perfect ass of himself by exposing his stupid “prescribed” bigotry on the wonderful world wide web. You were probably one of them!

    “What happens on the internet stays on the internet.”

    If you want lots of threads, vist Pharyngula. Myers has put out as many as twelve in a 24 hour period and nothing he has ever presented ever had anything to do with the only matter that has ever been in question – the mechanism of a long ago terminated organic evolution.

    “A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”
    John A. Davison

    Whatever you do, don’t abandon your cowardly alias. You better use a valid email address too because I check on every one of them and remind my users who the phonies are. Got that? Write that down.

    Adios

  19. John A. Davison says:

    Bad

    The purpose in using a real name is so that you can leave some semblance of a legacy once you are dead. Anonymous blowhards leave no legacy and accordingly might as well never have existed. For all practical purposes they do not exist. Of course if you have nothing to offer I guess there is not much to be gained by letting others know who you are. How does that grab you? I hope it gives you gas!

    I love it so!

  20. Bad says:

    You do go on and on don’t you? But somehow, you never get to anything substantive.

    I’ve already explained in detail my reasons for using a pseudonym, reasons which you haven’t addressed, making your taunting on this score fairly irrelevant to me.

    None of this is either here nor there when it comes to the scientific debate. Perhaps if you had more to offer on that score, you wouldn’t have to spend so much time yammering about conspiracies and repeating your catchphrases over and over and over.

  21. […] Creationist Sal Cordova, or at least someone claiming to be him (cheered on by someone at least claiming to be John A. Davidson), is finally back to regular blogging over at Young Cosmos. Which means free bad ideas for bloggers […]

  22. John A. Davison says:

    I have several papers published in refereed journals. Where may I find the publications of the cowardly anonyous bloward who hides his identity as BAD?

    I’ll bet he has none because of he did he would use the name under which he published them. KMA and GFY.

  23. Bad says:

    I have several papers published in refereed journals. Where may I find the publications of the cowardly anonyous bloward who hides his identity as BAD?

    I’m not scientist and never claimed to be: I don’t publish papers. And calling me names isn’t the same thing as presenting an argument. Again, I’ve already explained my reasons for my current use of a pseudonym (hardly an uncommon practice on the internet), and unless you care to actually address them, your taunting isn’t getting you anywhere.

    I am, however, enough of a student of science to know that getting published in, for instance, Rivista, a journal so irrelevant to the field that most universities don’t even subscribe to it, is not exactly big bragging rights on which to claim special authority. Again, if you have serious arguments, you’re welcome to air them here. “Loving it so” and repeating your claims without any coherent argument or evidence isn’t the same as doing that, however.

  24. John A. Davison says:

    Bad

    You didn’t have to tell me that you were not a scientist. Scientists publish their work under their real names.

    Incidentally, and I am sure this will please you, Rivista has also now refused to publish any of my work. It seems I am not creationist enough to please Giuseppe Sermonti or whoever it is that I have offended. I long ago rejected both sides of this idiotic debate, a debate initiated by the ID crowd led by William Dembski.

    I love ot so!

    “A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable.”

  25. Bad says:

    “Again, if you have serious arguments, you’re welcome to air them here. “Loving it so” and repeating your claims without any coherent argument or evidence isn’t the same as doing that, however.”

  26. I am watching this “debate” with slack-jawed fascination. Bad, my friend, you either have a LOT more patience than I do, or you’re simply addicted to arguing with people. ;>)

    I’m still wondering a little if this is the real John A. Davison, or if someone is just pulling your leg.

    -smith

  27. Sean Doherty says:

    He is real, and he seems to be suffering from some form of mental illness. The reason he gets banned is because he never gets to the point, he just trolls.

    Martyr complex?

  28. John A. Davison says:

    And who is Sean Doherty? Where are his publications ? What is his legacy? I never heard of him and I certainly have no idea who some anomymous twerp like Bad or muderofravens might be. The internet is caawling with such cowardly anonymous blowhards. They contribute absolutely nothing to society or to the search for the truth. They only practice intellectual masturbation to their precious little heart’s content.

    I love it so!

  29. Bad says:

    They contribute absolutely nothing to society or to the search for the truth.

    Ah, but they do. Named or nameless, they contribute actual substantive arguments. You, on the other hand, seem unable to write about anything beyond merely whining.

  30. I never heard of him and I certainly have no idea who some anomymous twerp like Bad or muderofravens might be. The internet is caawling with such cowardly anonymous blowhards.

    Anonymous? Moi? Oh, hardly. First of all, there’s a link to my blog on every one of my comments, which, I would add, is more than you provide. If you actually bothered to visit my blog, you would find my name on every post, as well a picture of my ugly mug. No, I’m not going to publish my address, because I don’t want strangers showing up at my door. But I would hardly describe myself as anonymous.

    But more to the point, you seem to seem to be incapable of mustering anything more than ad hominem arguments here. You’re bent out of shape because the author of this blog wishes to remain anonymous. OK, we get that. But what you fail to get beyond is that the anonymity of the author, while in some ways regrettable, has no bearing on the soundness or validity of his arguments…or mine, for that matter.

    -Stephen P. Smith (happy, now?)

  31. John A. Davison says:

    “The best defense is to be as offensive as possible.”
    John A. Davison

    I love it so!

    KMA and GFY

  32. John A. Davison says:

    Come visit my blog as I have visited yours. Vent your spleen as I have vented mine. You will only have to register and I promise that whatever you say will be preserved.

    john.a.davison.free.fr/

  33. “The best defense is to be as offensive as possible.”
    John A. Davison

    I love it so!

    KMA and GFY

    KMA. I assume this means “kiss my ass”. I’m sorry, “Dr. Davison”, but the idea of kissing your posterior conjures up a rather unsettling mental image. I think I’ll pass.

    GFY. I assume this means “go f**k yourself”. While it is true that I am unusually well endowed, I must inform you that having sexual intercourse with my humble self remains a (regrettable) anatomical impossibility.

    My, my, there’s nothing I admire like a logical argument, elegantly constructed, and flawlessly executed.

    Je l’aime ainsi!

    -Stephen P. Smith (fearlessly revealing his identity!)

  34. […] blog, and the creationist didn’t like that, either, so—like a hybrid of David Mabus and John A. Davison—he trawled atheist and Christian discussion boards alike across the Internet, and started a […]

  35. Wow. This blog is amazing. Its not only interesting but also enlightening. I have not come across such an interesting article for a long time. I m happy to know that good writers like you still exist. Congratulation on your amazing work.

  36. There are several factors in life that are believed to be responsible for male infertility. This could be because of low sperm count, abnormal shaped sperm, or even the size of the sperm.

  37. David B. Johnison says:

    John A Davison has nothing but bluster to counter real science. He is ready for the rubber room.

    I loathe him so!

  38. I’m a little bit puzzled. still this site does clear up some things

  39. I wish I understood more about it. I’ve been to four sites today trying to get details, almost all of the destinations I have visited I have found the information section has become a slanging match. It isn’t really really the sort of thing young women discuss, therefore i was wanting someone right here could actually help?

  40. John A. Davison says:

    Is this dog and pony show still functioning? If it is I invite you all, for under twenty bucks, to purchase my book of hitherto unpublished essays published by Lulu press – “The unpublished evolution essays of John A. Davison.” After you have thoroughly digested its contents, I hope you will write reviews of it and comment on it right here.

    Thanking you in advance,

    jadavison.wordpress.com

  41. John A. Davison says:

    Incidentally, I googled David B. Johnison and found nothing. The same with Sean Doherty. I don’t believe Johnison is David B. Johnson’s real name. Johnson is just too insecure to disclose his real identity. I don’t blame him as he has no credentials as a biologist whatsoever!

    jadavison.wordpress.com

  42. John A. Davison says:

    I recognize the names of competent scientists or other scholars qualified to comment on the great Darwnian hoax of 1859. If Google or Bing turns up nothing, I don’t bother responding.

    Pseudonymy is cowardice and has never contributed anything of value to the question of our origins. That it was ever permitted is a scandal. It is mostly a venue for sociopathic losers who were unable to accomplish anything of value in the real world. Why else would they hide their identity? Imagine, if you can, a scientific journal with pseudonymous authors.

    Got that? Write that down!

    jadavison.wordpress.com

    jadavison.wordpress.com

  43. John A. Davison says:

    Well folks. How about a response to being on the other end of contempt for a change. At least you know who I am. I have no idea who any of you are, as I can’t find anything about any of you anywhere.

    I recently posted “An Essay on Contempt” which you may read by poking the “new essays and essays in progress” button at the top of my Introductory Page. After you have digested that material, why not write a response to it right here. Whatever you do, don’t use your real names. I might be tempted to quote you. I always call attention to my adversaries as soon as I find out who they really are. That is provided they have any credentials at all as biological scientists.

    Those who denigrate a known adversary as they hide their own identity are beneath contempt. They have defined themselves as intellectual trash. This blog is no different than Pharyngula, After The Bar Closes, EvC, Panda’s Thumb and richarddawkins.net. You all practice the tactics of protectionism, groupthink and denigration. You are pathetic.

    jadavison.wordpress.com

  44. John A. Davison says:

    I goofed. The name of the essay is “An Essay on Abuse.” But Abuse is virtually a synonym for contempt anyway. Maybe I should change the name of the essay.

    jadavison.wordpress.com

  45. Sean Doherty says:

    Keep spamming away you old fraud, no one is going to buy your mindless garbage.

    Please seek medical attention for your problems.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: