This is probably more than anybody would ever want to know about Don McLeroy here at DU. But I assure you that Dr. Novella is really great in these exchanges, both verbally and via his Blog. This is how one does this.
Here: http://www.theskepticsguide.org/podcast/sgu/408
It's an interesting interview.
Then, Steve Novella (the SGU host) continued the conversation in his Neurologica Blog.
Here: http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/an-interview-with-don-mcleroy-part-i/
On the SGU this week we did an interview with Don McLeroy, the former chairman of the Texas School Board of Education, famous for his (successful) attempts to insert wording into the science textbook standards that would open the door for creationist arguments.
The interview was very enlightening. In my opinion it was an excellent example of the power of motivated reasoning – if we have a conclusion in mind, people are very good at finding a mental path to get there.
We rarely do confrontational interviews on the SGU, but the few we have done I am generally happy with. The risk is that the tone of the interview will go sour. I have only done such interviews when I feel that the person being interviewed will be able to stay calm and professional even as we dismantle their position. Another risk is that the interviewee, who likely is a passionate and eloquent defender of their fringe position, will make it difficult to get a word in edgewise, resulting in a Gish Gallop.
Don McLeroy, I have to say, was an exemplary guest. He stayed polite throughout, and did not bristle even when directly confronted on his position. He also did something I find extremely rare in such interviews – occasionally acknowledging a point on the other side or a weakness in his own position. He also had clearly made a genuine effort to read pro-evolution material and criticisms of his position.
... Much more at link (above)
Part II:
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/an-interview-with-don-mcleroy-part-ii/
In part I of my analysis of a recent interview with Don McLeroy on the SGU I discussed his assertion that those of faith are more free to accept or reject the evidence for evolution, while strict materialists can only accept it as it is the only materialist option. I mentioned in that post that I would invite Don to respond – I did and he did.
In this post I will include Don’s response and then my further analysis of his response. I will then extend the discussion to other points that Don raised during the SGU interview.
Much more at above link
Part III:
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/an-interview-with-don-mcleroy-part-iii/
This week I am posting a discussion with Don McLeroy, a young Earth creationist and former chairman of the Texas Board of Education during the recent controversy over the science textbook standards. This is a follow up to an interview I did with him on the SGU.
Don has been traveling a bit this week, so our e-mail conversation has been slow, but we have had a few exchanges. For today’s post I want to simply reprint that exchange and then add a few thoughts, before I go onto new territory, which I will do in tomorrow’s post.
As before, much more at above link.
Part IV:
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/an-interview-with-don-mcleroy-part-iv/
This is the fourth is a series of posts analyzing the claims of Don McLeroy, former chairman of the Texas School Board of Education and young Earth creationist. I recently interviewed Don on the SGU about his successful insertion into the Texas science textbook standards language requiring books to address stasis and suddenness in the fossil record and the complexity of the cell.
In parts 2 and 3 I addressed Don’s stasis and suddenness arguments. They are classic denialist fallacies – focusing on lower order details as if they call into question higher order patterns (they don’t). In this case, Don is arguing that the fact that many (not all) species display relative morphological stability in the fossil record, with episodes of (geologically) rapid speciation events, calls into question the bigger picture of the change of species over time in an exquisitely evolutionary pattern.
The former is a reflection of the tempo of evolutionary change and an artifact of the fossil record, while the latter is home-run unequivocal evidence for common descent and evolutionary change. Don has not provided any explanation for why the pattern of change we see in the fossil record presents any problems for evolutionary theory.
In this post I will address Don’ other main point, which he feels is the greatest weakness of evolutionary theory – the complexity of the cell. His premise seems to be that, if evolution were true, then evolutionary biologists should be able to provide detailed evidence for the specific evolutionary history of many biochemical pathways and cell structures. He argues that they cannot, and therefore the evidence for evolution is weak.
Much more at above link.
The Finale:
http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/final-response-from-don-mcleroy/
...
I had hoped that Don would engage more directly with the evidence that I provided him. I’m disappointed that we could not continue to do a deep dive on the core question here – the amount of evidence for evolution. I am actually surprised he was willing to engage in this forum to this extent, and I’m glad we were able to keep our exchange civil, but in the end he just dodged the key issue.
Much more at above link
I know. Too much information. But this exchange can teach us all a lot.
= new reply since forum marked as read
