John Rennie has been commenting about tomorrow's Grill the ID Guys event at Biola, arguing that the panel of interrogators looks suspiciously easygoing. Hm. Speaking for myself, I'm not looking forward to being questioned by Jim Hoffman, who probably knows more about ID (as a critic) than just about anyone on earth. And that goes for the other panelists as well.
But here's the kicker. We invited many more ID-critical scientists than accepted our invitation. Some accepted invitations, and then, under heavy lobbying from others (who were also invited, but declined), later backed out.
Here's a partial list of those who said No:
-- Mark Perakh, Cal State Fullerton
-- Andy Groves, House Ear Institute
-- Robert Camp, Skeptic Magazine
Camp, Perakh, and Inlay are all well-known, very tough ID critics. Despite sweet-talking from me, Andy Groves, whom I know personally, said No Way Jack (so to speak). Indeed, some of those Biola invited had clearly already heard about the event prior to the invitation and before any news of it had reached the public, because their replies indicated that they knew about the panel of questioners being assembled. The only reasonable inference to draw is that word had gone out behind the scenes to tell the Biola organizers, politely, but firmly, to get lost.
The whole business reminds me of junior high, and not in a good way. "Are you going to so-and-so's party?" "Are you kidding? That loser?" "Well, I'm not going either, then."
The great thing about junior high is the social rejects often ended up having more fun anyway. One of the enduring ironies of the universe, I guess.
