But Conservapedia is going to fix that.
… apparently Conservapedia is unhappy that after Terence Tao got the Fields Medal four years ago he then endorsed Barack Obama for President, … To deal with this apparent liberal bias and affirmative action in the Fields Medal, Conservapedia is starting its own award for mathematicians
Read about the ConservaMath Medal here!
Have you read the breakthrough novel of the year? When you are done with that, try:
In Search of Sungudogo by Greg Laden, now in Kindle
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
or Paperback
*Please note:
Links to books and other items on this page and elsewhere on Greg Ladens' blog may send you to Amazon, where I am a registered affiliate. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases, which helps to fund this site.
I just can’t imagine how people plumb the depths of stupidity, then manage to drill through the bottom.
Right. Math is what we want it to be ..
I wonder if they’d be interested in taking the Compression Pest off of Mark Chu-Carroll’s hands.
Conservapedia’s “winner” will have to be a mathematician who avoids both complex numbers and proof by contradiction, two other items that the moron who runs it has decided are unclean (for lack of a better description).
Well, I can see why proof by contradiction (ie reductio ad absurdem) would be anathema there. On the other hand, it would also make MCC’s compression pest a lot happier.
As for complex numbers, well, I can see why doing without them would make the gang there happier. No quantum mechanics, no electronics, all that stuff. I’m going to be interested to see how they handle trigonometric calculus.
It’s important to know what set-theory is required for a proof. But I’ve never quite understood the philosophical importance some people place on constructivism. And by “some people,” I mean some serious people, not the folks at Conservapedia.
The Conservapedia people are for the most part endearingly dotty, but the founder Andrew Schlafly is quite extraordinary in the scope of his ambition. It was his idea to compile a list of “conservative words” by century, which on some personal conceit he and his colleagues strive mightily to ensure it retains the appearance of growing in strict geometric progression. Not content with any modern translation of the bible, he initiated the Conservative Bible Project. Encountering the E. coli Long-term Evolution Experiment, he engaged in a public dialog with its founder Richard Lenski that has brought his unique brand of illiterate venom to new audiences. He is bursting with original and unintentionally funny ideas.
Well I can’t imagine a world without mathematics. But they do have some entertaining articles/post their on Conservapedia.
by century, which on some personal conceit he and his colleagues strive mightily to ensure it retains the appearance of growing in strict geometric progression. Not content with any modern translation of the bible, he initiated the Conservative Bible Project. Encountering the E. coli Long
The dissing of complex numbers is especially amazing since, if i recall correctly, schlafly has a degree in electrical engineering.
Not directly related, but a hilarious example of the lack of introspection…
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/08/i_think_theyre_doing_this_on_p.php
I mean, do these guys (they are mostly men) not understand why others ridicule them?
Tony Sidaway @ 17: [snip]…”bursting with original and unintentionally funny ideas”…which is a cornucopia of material for Colbert and Jon Stewart 🙂
Wow, that ConservaMaths Medal is going to be mega-prestigious. I need to come up with something worthy to have a chance at it. Does anyone have Alan Sokal’s phone number?
Yes. Andrew Schlafly is the living embodiment of Poe’s Law.
What is next on their hit list, Judenphysik?
[OT]: How’s that knee? No amputations yet?
If the cure for cancer was discovered by a communist, would Schlafley refuse to use it, I wonder?
Schlafly’s sudden interest in the Fields Medal is extremely amusing. For the last few days he’s been loudly predicting the downfall of the mathematical establishment over the prize going to a woman (which in Schlafly’s mind would necessarily be undeserved, natch) but now he has to make do with a guy from Vietnam. (And apart from all the other obvious objections, the “communism!” charge makes absolutely no sense in light of his apparent affection for G. Perelman.) Tragically, although repeatedly asked, he didn’t provide examples of who he thought would have been a worthy Fields recipient.
(Anyway, I very much hope that they do award the “ConservaMath” medal, just because I’ve found the ConservaPedia talk pages irresistible train-wreck reading since I saw the “Counterexamples to Relativity” page and this has almost as much comedy potential.)
This is how a real scientist responded to Andrew Schlafly.
http://www.conservapedia.com/Conservapedia:Lenski_dialog
How delightful! Next we’ll see the Catholic church giving out childcare awards.