Project Steve's 1000th member announced at IgNobel Awards

Amidst sword-swallowers, exploding barbecues and atomic opera, Eugenie C. Scott of the National Center for Science Education and Steve Mirsky of Scientific American present the coveted Thumbless Panda Award to Professor Steve Darwin at the Improbable Research. Sandwiched between acts of Atom and Eve, and opera about an oxygen atom who falls for a beautiful chemist, Scott and Mirsky discuss the importance of being Steve, and honor Darwin for being the 1000th member of NCSE's Project Steve.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• evolution
• creationism
• Darwin
• Steve
• science
• religion
• humor
• improbable research
• eugenie scott
• eugenie c. scott
• AAAS
• ncse
• panda

[intelligentfalling]

I <3 Eugenie. She's adorables :-p

[BathTubNZ]

20 fold? You mean 3 fold. They've managed to scrounge up 300+ science types to agree that the evidence needs to be studies Remeber it's not a creationism is true petition. While project steve is up to 1099 Steves with Phds who support evolution. You need to watch "List of Scientists Rejecting Evolution- Do they really?" by DonExodus

[heloizyjhenifer]

Three thousand years looking for evidence without finding any...

Carry on, chances are something will come up while creationists sit it out spending time not looking for it.

[heloizyjhenifer]

yep, but benthemiester thinks it would be good material for quote-mining.

[heloizyjhenifer]

Haha yes that's right, there's also the mechanical engineers and dentists who dissent evolution.

It's not about numbers it's about ridicule, get it?

[BathTubNZ]

alright, I looked, so its 7 fold, certainly closer to my guess of 3 fold than your 20 fold.

[benthemiester]

threefold? take a look for yourself.

[benthemiester]

Yes, I spent a few days at Dons den debating the flaws with the c grade quality of the video. I don't mean that in a self serving way. I would say the same about any bullshit regardless of sides. U have to distinguish the difference between what is being inferred or implied, and what is actually quantitative. Don offers a false narrative. This list was never claimed or intended as proof of anything, other than to send a message that it wasnt just bible thumpers anymore.

[benthemiester]

As I stated before the list was never intended to prove anything. Traditional science doesn't function like that, on this we can agree. However history has shown us many times that theories that were once scorned as unscientific, have become some of our most fundamental principles and laws. Another concept that I believe is unscientific, is marginalizing people who disagree with you and claiming to arbitrarily decide what is or isn't good science. Even if its done with a wink and a nudge.

[TheGreatSimonski]

"It was silly to come up with a lists of thousands and thousands of scientists who accept evolution, because we know that"

... "You don't decide whether a scientific idea is right or wrong by how many scientists have signed a list, you accept it by how well it describes nature"

Project Steve was a joke, a parody, not a valid argument, let alone a pissing contest, and that's explained before the list is even discussed.

[benthemiester]

Great answer, We all know how lighthearted they are at the Academy concerning this subject. How adorable and Witty.