I will have to reiterate the rule about comments on my previous post about John Derbyshire's review of "Expelled" in National Review: You cannot have read the post if you want to comment. Your comments must be based on second hand information and hearsay--just like Derbyshire's review of "Expelled". I had to reject a post today that wanted me to know how "batsh*t crazy" I was.
This may very well be true, but the anonymous author admitted that he had, in fact, read the post. So into the ether it went.
Only one comment has met my challenge, betraying a clear indication that the author had not read the post. I'm disappointed by the lack of creativity on the part of all the ID critics who frequent this blog. Surely you can match Derbyshire's inventiveness in being able to write a confident sounding opinion of something you did not actually read or see.
I have not, however, given up hope...