Maloney: Responding to every ounce of criticism he has ever received

Remember how I said it’s a terrible idea to respond to criticism too much? And how I said that based on, who else, Christopher Maloney? He didn’t get the memo.

The Novella Debates
Home | The first accusation and the response. | Second: Maloney apologies, Novella does not . | Third: The Challenge | Fourth: Alternative Treatments for Ear Infections | Fifth: Hypertension, No Proof of Placebo Effect. | Novella lets Enzo debate for him. | Maloney Claims Victory, Novella Denies. | Maloney Refutes “Busy,” Novella Calls Him a Crank | Maloney Argues That Novella Is Wasting Time | Enzo Defends Novella | Maloney Apologies, Answers Enzo | Novella Patronizes Maloney, Defends Quackbusting | Novella Taken to Task For Poor Reporting. | A Debate About What Constitutes Evidence | The Evidence Debate: Novella Disappears. | Novella Attacks Maloney Somewhere Else | Maloney Responds, Novella Claims Busy | Novella Discusses Libel | Maloney Provides Evidence, Readers Attack | Novella Takes the Second Challenge | An Alternative Treatment for ALS: Bacterial | Novella Ignores Evidence, Denies Validity | A Secondary Treatment for ALS: Supplementation | A Novella Reader Attacks | Maloney Responds With A Plea for Novella To Engage In Furthering Research | Maloney Declares Victory

Not sure what the hell all that is? It’s a series of links – 27 by my count – which Maloney has made about the ‘debate’ he had with Steven Novella. Despite the significant effort put forth in creating a site, dividing the topics, creating the links and summarizing all the posts, Maloney was unable to simply link to the original post.

This is fun. The guy takes criticism so poorly that he just can’t stop himself from responding to every little bit of it. Give it up. No one is going to suddenly take a look and say, “Oh, whoops. I guess we – and medical science – were wrong. Sorry.”

At least he has removed the link to ‘The Dirty Dozen’, effectively validating the previously leveled criticism for being so petty and arbitrary. It’s just too bad he only deleted it from one place – it still exists elsewhere.

Gays – more dangerous than King George III

Colonial America was known in part for the horrid treatment of the colonists by the British Empire. Quartering, taxation without representation, all those good buzz words and phrases, you know. But was it really that bad? I mean, really? Maybe. But it certainly wasn’t as bad as what will be the death blow to society – gay marriage.

Our society is currently faced with a threat a thousand times more dangerous than the tyranny imposed by King George III.

I say “a thousand times more dangerous,” but there is really no adequate measure for comparing a mild tyranny to the destruction of society itself. Same-sex marriage will do precisely that. By changing the definition of marriage, judicial activists and out-of-control legislators will destroy the institution of the family, an institution that is both the origin and bedrock of civil society. Same-sex marriage will be a death blow to a society that is already profoundly disordered.

Really? I thought the end of the last ice age was the bedrock of society that allowed humans to go from being nomadic to agrarian, spurring the development of written language, the idea of the village or town, and helping to form deep cultures, mores, memes, organized religion (unfortunately), and basically everything that crosses one’s mind when considering the very idea of society. Maybe I’m just crazy.

Of course, this quote comes from Michael Heath, ousted leader of the Maine Family Policy Council, formerly known as the Maine Christian Civic League. He isn’t a terribly smart man, awash in religious ideology and consequent sexual immaturity.

His editorial of paranoia, hate, bigotry, and (again) sexual immaturity comes on the same day Bob Emrich, the National Organization for Marriage, and other bigots held a rally in Augusta, spewing their inability to form coherent opinions that have any rational basis. He runs through the same tried old, long-dismissed as legitimate arguments common to Christian bigots. About the only novel idea he has is to an analogy to colonial America and its end days.

The idea that elected representatives or members of the judiciary can impose same-sex marriage against the will of the people is itself tyrannical. By referencing the American Revolution and the Sons of Liberty, I am not suggesting that the answer is a recourse to arms.

The answer is to vote out every member of the Maine Legislature who voted for same-sex marriage, and to vote against Libby Mitchell in her run for governor because I believe she plays a key role in the push for same-sex marriage.

The only major candidate who hates gay people and thinks consensual sex is just so ICKY! is Paul LePage. He’s a terrible choice if only for the fact that he’s a creationist. But then there’s this other ugly fact of which Heath has decided to remind us. LePage is a major bigot as well. (Of course, there’s also the fact that under his time as mayor, Waterville homeowners have actually ended up paying more in taxes, contrary to his claims.)

Those who dispute that the homosexual rights movement causes social instability ought to recall that Gay Pride Month, held every June, commemorates the Stonewall Riots in Greenwich Village in 1969. These riots marked the start of the homosexual rights movement. At its very inception, the movement acted to destabilize society.

Sort of like how all those race riots of 1964 (or any year) showed just how much social instability blacks cause, right?

Heath clearly believes the homosexual can be summed up with a broad brush; individuality, rights, principles, liberties, happiness, and all that other downright silliness be damned, right?

Certain members of the pro-family movement today will bring to Maine’s State House a tour that will proclaim the virtues of marriage in soft, compassionate tones. They are free to do so, but let them also speak truthfully about the appalling evils of same-sex marriage and the homosexual rights movement.

Perhaps they believe a softer, gentler tone will earn the approval of their fellow churchmen and society at large. Maybe so, but their offer of compassion will be a false one, since true compassion follows repentance and should never be construed as justifying an evil act.

I’m torn. Heath was dismissed from his former position because of his strong tone. It’s probably the only thing I can appreciate from this sexually immature man. I actually have to side with him in his chiding of other bigoted leaders who are being kind for purely political reasons. At least Heath is honest in his hatred of things he thinks are icky.

But his tone says nothing of his actual substance. His words mean just the same as what a more politically viable figure might say. He’s an ignorant buffoon who has done nothing in his life to earn respect. He hates gay people because of a book that was written by the few literate pig farmers in town thousands of years ago. The only worthwhile contribution he has to make to society is as an example of what havoc religion can bring upon a society. Because of bigots like Heath, gay couples are unable to get insurance, visit each other in the hospital with any reasonable ease, or even make funeral arrangements when the time comes. I don’t think he has any idea of the utter pain he is inflicting upon so many good people.

Michael Heath is the most immoral man not in a prison in Maine.

The dishonesty of the LePage campaign

Paul LePage has been running a pretty shoddy campaign so far. Take his Facebook fan page, for instance. It has this disclaimer.

Paul LePage, Maine’s Next Governor is a fan page.

It was created by volunteer supporters of Paul LePage’s candidacy for Governor of Maine. For that reason, we cannot get into answering policy questions that get posted here.

Therefore, our rule on this page is to NOT respond to policy questions, but rather refer people to Paul LePage’s contact form on his official campaign website.

We do encourage discussion and debate by other fans, but ask that you refrain from vulgarity or other language that could be deemed offensive or demeaning to others. The page admins reserve the right to delete such posts, or posts that are unrelated to the content of this page (SPAM).

Thank you for your understanding on this issue.

Fans of Paul LePage, Maine’s Next Governor

As I’ve documented already, I’ve asked on creationist Paul LePage’s page why he wants to teach creationism in public schools. I originally blame him or his people for deleting my question and preventing me from posting any further. But according to this, these are just some random schmucks running a fan page, right? Oh, hang on.

Want to be a part of the success? Come join our team and help spread the message!

Simply drop us a line at any of the methods below:

* Paul’s campaign Twitter Page.
* Paul’s campaign Facebook Page.
* Call us at (207) 877-7616
* Email paul@lepage2010.com
* US Mail:
Committee To Elect Paul Lepage, Governor
c/o Rick Swanson Treasurer
P.O. Box 1788
Waterville, ME 04903

Guess where that link to “Paul’s campaign Facebook Page” links. Can you guess? That’s right – directly to the page that claims to have no affiliation with the actual campaign. (Here’s a screen shot in case they edit and deny all this.)

This is all just a big excuse to not be held responsible for anything. The LePage campaign wants to run an unofficial fan page so he doesn’t have to actually answer anything. Fortunately, my calls for people to continue asking LePage why he supports creationism has spilled over to Eliot Culter’s page.

Regina Karapetyan: So Mr. Cutler, I was going to vote for Paul LePage… But, I asked a simple question on his facebook page about his beliefs on whether creationism should be taught in public schools… well my post was deleted and I was removed from the fan page. I don’t believe that my question was rude or disrespectful in any way, I simply would have liked to know his view on the subject if the man is to be voted into office. I think the question should have been answered and left on the page but instead was deleted. So Eliot Cutler, what is your view of creationism being taught in public schools?

Regina happened to miss my question to Cutler earlier where he responded that he does not support teaching garbage to children. But something did come from this because an administrator from LePage’s officially unofficial fan page was lurking.

Aaron Prill: Regina that is not true. I am co-admin of Paul LePage’s facebook page and we don’t delete questions, and we definitely don’t remove people from the pag (it’s not even possible on pages). Paul LePage’s vision is a fiscal one for Maine to save our state from generational debt. He will bring fiscal responsibility and welfare reform to a state that needs both. Social issues like the one you mention are not even on the radar.

Lies, lies, and lies. After receiving a thorough shellacking, Aaron Prill eventually apologized.

Regina- let me first apologize for saying you weren’t being truthful. You are right on the ability to Remove people. I didn’t notice the “X” next to people’s names that does allow them to be removed. I am in fact the creator of that page. I said co-admin just so it was clear I wasn’t the only admin. I am following up with the other co-admins now to find out what happened in your case.

Our rule on that page is to NOT respond to policy questions, but rather refer people to Paul LePage’s contact page on his website. This is because that page is a fan supported page created by a supporter (me) back in February, it is not run directly by the campaign… nor is it a place to discuss policy questions.

So, in short, what the admin should have done is explain the above policy to you and refer you to the campaign website. If we got into debates on every issue, then that wouldn’t be a “fan” page now would it? Other fans are allowed to respond to people when they ask questions like yours, but the admins typically don’t.

Again- I’m sorry you (or anyone) was removed, and you are welcome back anytime…

I’ve since sent a private message to Aaron telling him that I was also banned from the page. I really hope he does fix the LePage campaign’s unofficial officially unofficial official error because someone has been answering policy questions over there ever since one of my reader’s asked why LePage supports teaching creationism.

He just thinks knowledge is a good thing, the more knowledge you have, the better off you are. And he has alread said that school curriculum should be decided on the local level, local school boards should be deciding what they want taught in their schools.

Why, Michael, you say, that is but one random fan! Yes, yes, it is. Well, sort of. It’s hard to say she’s random when her name is Lauren LePage. I’ve been unable to confirm any details, but it appears this is Paul LePage’s daughter. And lo, she is answering policy questions without being deleted. Hell, my question was deleted within 4 hours. And that wasn’t even a violation of the officially unofficial official unofficially official fan page policy.

Oh. And Eliot Cutler responds on his fan page routinely. It isn’t a violation to state a candidate’s policy positions – especially when that candidate lists the fan page as his own.

Thanks to Dave for much of the information here.

Alone on the Appalachian Trail

PZ has his Sunday Sacrilege post up today. It’s all about this idea of God as a father figure that brings us closer to the Universe, that makes us feel important.

Beyond just the family and tribe, though, this vision has been extended to the entire universe. There is a great Patriarch in the Sky, who is our leader and guide, responsible for making the grand strategic decisions about where our tribe will go, and is also watchfully making sure the unity of the tribe is not disrupted by wayward ideas from nonconformists. He has a central concern that we all share, that our people should thrive, and even if he is stern at times, it is because he cares so much that we succeed. And of course, he knows each one of us personally, just as the leader of tribe or clan in our pastoral days would have, and he can give us an approving stroke or a damning angry smiting, depending on whether we help or hinder the work of getting the flocks to the summer pasturage.

But scientists and atheists (I would be more specific and say anti-theists) shatter that faux relationship.

It (said shattering) makes that whole business of breaking the news about Santa Claus look like small potatoes. Reality is harsh, man.

But it is reality. We’ve done the paternity tests, we’ve traced back the genealogy, we’re doing all kinds of in-depth testing of the human species. We are apes and the descendants of apes, who were the descendants of rat-like primates, who were children of reptiles, who were the spawn of amphibians, who were the terrestrial progeny of fish, who came from worms, who were assembled from single-celled microorganisms, who were the products of chemistry. Your daddy was a film of chemical slime on a Hadean rock, and he didn’t care about you — he was only obeying the laws of thermodynamics.

This is true and only certain stances will deny it: the anti-science stance, the ignorance stance, the religion stance. And those often all go come as a single package deal.

But there’s good news – and it’s from someone that actually exists.

But here’s the wonderful revelation. If you’re a well-adjusted person, once you’ve discarded the unhealthy fictitious relationship with a phantasm, you can look around and notice all those other people who are likewise alone, and you’ll realize that we’re all alone together. And that means you aren’t alone at all — you’re among friends. That’s the next step in human progress, is getting away from the notion of minions living under a trail boss, and onwards to working as a cooperative community, with no gods and no masters, only autonomous agents free to think and act.

PZ wasn’t making any reference to hiking trails, much less the Appalachian Trail (AT), but just the word “trail” in the context of being alone triggered a whole slew of thoughts for me.

I was fortunate enough to hike the 100 Mile Wilderness last summer and I quickly came to discover an entirely new culture out on the trail. My poor knees only suffered for 8-9 days (while being partially supported by an infected ankle wound), but it was the toughest physical thing I’ve ever done in my life. Let me start with a description of the trail.

The 100 Mile Wilderness is considered the toughest part of the entire 2,174 mile AT. It runs from Abol Bridge just outside Baxter State Park (where the Northern Terminus of the trail is located on Katahdin) to the hiking town of Monson, all within Maine. It’s recommended that hikers bring 10 days worth of food as well as the rest of their supplies. This makes for a pretty heavy load, even for thru-hikers (those doing the whole trail from Springer Mountain in Georgia to Katahdin, or vice versa). My own pack came in around 45lbs.

I started and finished with two friends. I’m not sure if I could have done it alone. We started at Abol (where some kind gentleman smashed my window and stole my CD’s – because CD’s were worth so much in 2009) and ended at Monson. The rationale for going north-to-south was that the northern end is less mountainous than the southern end and it would an easier start since our packs would be heaviest in the beginning. It didn’t really matter. It was still horribly difficult, horribly painful.

While I was with friends, I only recall my own world on a lot the trail. There’s a lot of silent suffering. And that’s part of the pull of the AT, I think, part of its charm. But at the end of the day, no one is really alone. Hikers will gather at campsites, most of them with lean-to’s. And that’s where the culture of the hiker is solidified.

Everyone out on the trail understands through what everyone else is going. Everyone knows that particularly sharp joint pain. Everyone knows how distant a shower feels, how far away the idea of clean clothes really is. It’s its own culture.

I specifically recall one arduous, torturous day. It was already raining before we even woke up. We had forded rivers with our regular hiking boots on because it would be too painful to try and take them off to put on sandals. And really, we didn’t think we could get any more wet. We were wrong, but it was too late when we found that out. But we trudged on, probably near 15 miles. There was a lot of yelling and screaming, too. It wasn’t ever directed at each other – you need each other – but it was there. It was boiled pain and frustration come to the surface. But it had to end. We saw the sign – “150 feet to lean-to”. Such relief. Until, after spending all my time since walking in that river trying to keep my feet dry, I managed to slip into the swampy, flooded waters at the bottom of a hill. It just sort of just right, though. Now I was angry, frustrated, and in a way, alone.

My world was one of huge discomfort at that moment and it wasn’t anyone else’s. That is, until we climbed that final 150 feet. The lean-to was nearly filled. Five hikers had seemingly used every hanging nail available (so mice don’t get into everything). All their gear was spread out, just as they were, already in bed long before the sun had set. They didn’t look like they wanted to move. Sure, we had our tents, but no one wants to set those up at the end of a day like this, and in the rain. And then that one special thought, maybe the most important one on the trail, crossed all of their minds: There’s always room for one more.

It was only a six person lean-to, but we managed to squeeze in six men. And that’s the culture of the AT in a nutshell. Those 5 hikers saw the look on our faces when we came upon a filled lean-to at the end of the day. They knew our pain. They weren’t about to cast us aside. We weren’t alone.

I think a good life experience for everyone capable is to hike either the AT or some other significant trail system. It’s entirely different from the coldness one might find in Time’s Square, or even Portland, Maine. Of course, it isn’t free from that coldness – families will do simple overnight hikes, taking entire lean-to’s from the thru-hikers, offering them no relief in their 5-7 month journey. (I don’t know how the thru-hikers do it.) But for among those who are on the trail for any length of time, there’s a joining warmth.

The Appalachian Trail is an isolating beast, but those who discover it are ever alone.

Kevin Scott responds

I’ve received direct responses from three candidates for governor for Maine regarding my question about their position on teaching creationist garbage. Eliot Cutler and Shawn Moody do not want it taught. Now Kevin Scott weighs in.

Hello Michael, creationism as science is not acceptable for teaching in public schools for a number of reasons – certainly not as an element of the curriculum. K-12 should teach tolerance and world cultural views but a “religious” doctrine of any kind is not acceptable in our K-12 public school system.

I firmly believe religious and moral values are derived from family, not public school. In my view schools are for academic pursuits and the home & church is for social value development.

We need to elect a Governor who will work to make society, jobs, policies, etc… that will empower families and add value to individual efforts to raise and grow a family.

He posted this post on his Facebook page as well as in a private inbox message to me. Another good answer.

I’ve also received an indirect response from that poverty-loving, equality-hating, ignorant bigot Paul LePage: he deleted my question and prevented me from asking it again on his page. Fortunately, I have a blog with nearly 150,000 hits. That isn’t me bragging, like LePage. It’s me pointing out that I might be able to encourage some of my readers to head over to LePage’s Facebook page and ask him to clarify his position. He has recently said he supports teaching creationism, but he never said why. The answer is presumably that either 1) hates science or 2) is ignorant. But he needs to give the answer. So go ask him.

I’ve also reiterated the question to Libby Mitchell. She’s a smart lady so I can just about guarantee that she rejects the teaching of creationism, but it wouldn’t hurt to try and prompt a response from her as well.

Shawn Moody responds

I’ve been asking the candidates for Maine governor their positions on the teaching of creationism in public schools. Paul LePage, Republican, deleted the question, presumably out of understandable embarrassment for his previously stated support for teaching children that people and dinosaurs walked the Earth together. Eliot Cutler expressed his support for evolution, calling it fundamental to the understanding of the world. Now Shawn Moody has responded.

Michael,
I don’t believe teaching creationism in public schools is appropriate. In the history of the World, many military conflicts centered around religious intolerance. Our Freedom of Religion is one founding principle that makes America the greatest nation in the world. I do believe in the separation of Church and State.
There is a time and a place…….. Thanks Shawn

Sort of a hodgepodge of points, but that’s pretty standard for most politicians answering this sort of question. But good. I’m still waiting on Libby Mitchell and Kevin Scott to respond, but it seems as though the only anti-science candidate so far is Paul LePage.

Richard Maurer is a quack

I was going over an old post when I realized I had spelled the name of a naturopathic quack incorrectly. I referred to Richard Maurer as Richard Mauler. Whoops.

Immediately after correcting his name, I did a quick search and found his blog. It’s a lot of the traditional malarkey from naturopaths: a lot of noise and a smidgen of Gish Gallop from non-experts who are out of their amateurish field. But this post stood out to me in particular.

In this case the study summary says it all.

“Vitamin D3 supplementation during the winter is linked to lower incidence of influenza A, particularly in specific subgroups of schoolchildren, according to the results of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial reported online in the March 10 issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition”

Sounds reasonable enough, right? Of course it does. There actually is a study which draws that link. But that’s all it does. It cites its small sample size alongside the lack of testing for most compounding factors (such as antibodies) as weaknesses in the research. Anyone who concludes that there is anything more than a link between vitamin D3 and a decreased incidence in influenza A is a quack. And you all know what’s coming. But hang out, I’ll even quote the abstract from the study.

RESULTS: Influenza A occurred in 18 of 167 (10.8%) children in the vitamin D(3) group compared with 31 of 167 (18.6%) children in the placebo group [relative risk (RR), 0.58; 95% CI: 0.34, 0.99; P = 0.04]. The reduction in influenza A was more prominent in children who had not been taking other vitamin D supplements (RR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.17, 0.79; P = 0.006) and who started nursery school after age 3 y (RR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.17, 0.78; P = 0.005). In children with a previous diagnosis of asthma, asthma attacks as a secondary outcome occurred in 2 children receiving vitamin D(3) compared with 12 children receiving placebo (RR: 0.17; 95% CI: 0.04, 0.73; P = 0.006). CONCLUSION: This study suggests that vitamin D(3) supplementation during the winter may reduce the incidence of influenza A, especially in specific subgroups of schoolchildren.

It’s an interesting result, but no competent doctor is going to make recommendations based upon it. That isn’t to say doctors don’t have other reasons for recommending vitamin D; this just isn’t one of them. But does that stop the quack brigade from marching in the streets? Nah. Check out the title of Maurer’s blog post.

Vitamin D, as suspected, prevents the flu.

Christopher Maloney tried pulling this same garbage when he claimed black elderberry can “block” H1N1. Given the drubbing Maloney got back then in December, it’s curious that Maurer would repeat the same sort of anti-medical trash just a few months later. Vitamin D does no such thing. Maurer is either lying or incompetent. I won’t argue against anyone who claims he’s both.

It’s this sort of stuff that helps to solidify the naturopath’s leadership among charlatans.

Eliot Cutler responds

I’ve asked the three main candidates* to either state or clarify their positions on the teaching of creationism in public schools. Paul LePage acted like a spoiled little brat and deleted my question from his Facebook page. Libby Mitchell has yet to respond. Eliot Cutler, on the other hand, has responded. First, here is how I worded my question.

Mr. Cutler, I recently left a message on Libby Mitchell’s and Paul LePage’s respective Facebook pages asking them to either state or clarify their position on teaching creationism. Mitchell wants to be known as the “education governor”, so I presume she will favor teaching the basis of biology – evolution. (But I await… a response.) LePage, on the other hand, has had my question deleted and kicked me from his Facebook page. I presume he views his support for creationism as a liability.

What is your position? Thanks.

And once I write up a letter to the editor explain Paul LePage’s actions and inane, anti-science position, I hope his ignorance does become a liability. But first, here is Cutler’s response.

Hi Michael,

I support the teaching of evolution in elementary and secondary schools. Evolution is fundamental to every student’s comprehensive understanding of the world they live in and their ability to reason critically from evidence.

I have no objection to referencing creationism as an alternative view, but I do not believe it should be taught as part of the curriculum in public schools.

As a matter of principle, I do not believe that religion should make rules for government or that government should make rules for religion.

Eliot

It took me a second to digest this response. At first glance, being okay with references to creationism sounds sketchy, but then I thought back to my first biology course at university. Intelligent design and creationism were referenced before much got started. The professor basically covered his ground so that students wouldn’t be bringing silly challenges to him. He certainly welcomed a whole range of questions (and fielded them incredibly well, as he’s likely one of the smartest people I know), but he wasn’t there to undo 20 years of religious indoctrination. In that light, Cutler’s response works for me.

*Update: I’ve also asked Shawn Moody and Kevin Scott for their positions. They aren’t as high in the polling as the others, but they certainly aren’t off the radar.

LePage brags about his fans

Although he is virtually in a statistical tie with Democratic candidate for Maine governor Libby Mitchell, Republican candidate Paul LePage likes to think he’s way ahead. Or maybe he gets it and realizes that the poll numbers don’t give him that big edge, so he’s trying to find another way to brag about being ever-so-popular. Whatever the reason, this is the status update on his Facebook page.

We just hit 3,300 fans! Libby Mitchell is at 2,139, Eliot Cutler 919… Keep spreading the word- Click “Share” on the link below. Let’s keep the momentum on facebook in order to reach our GOOOOOAAALLLLLL in November! Go USA soccer!!

This is as valid as measuring what people think based upon Internet polls. There are any number of reasons any candidate may have the fans he or she does. LePage may encourage people to sign up for his Facebook page while he’s out campaigning, and Mitchell and Cutler don’t. In fact, under the picture of his obese mug he encourages people to suggest his page to friends. It’s all meaningless.

Which is why everyone should become a fan of Mitchell’s and Cutler’s respective pages. It doesn’t mean jack squat, but if it might stress LePage out to know he isn’t so far ahead in the Facebook page contest, then it’s worth it. I mean, the guy already wants to have creationism taught in Maine, so I imagine it might actually work since he puts stock in things that make no sense.

Join Libby Mitchell’s page here.

Join Eliot Cutler’s page here.

The cowardice of Paul LePage

For the past few weeks I’ve been trying to think of a good topic for a letter to the editor. Ideally I want to write about evolution, but my space is limited. Then I think maybe I could respond to some inane letter that says the U.S. is based upon Christian ideals. But nah, people prefer topical stuff, not history lessons, at least in their newspapers. But then I realize, oh yes! Paul LePage is a creationist. He’s even on video professing his desire to teach children that Jesus rode on dinosaurs.

But now it gets better. Take a look at Paul LePage’s Facebook “Like” Page’s comments. Now filter it to “Just Others” and look between the comments by Sandra Blanchette and Marc Worrell, the first of which was made at 5:15 pm June 21, the second of which was made around midnight tonight. Do you see it? Do you see what it says?

No, you don’t.

The reason is that I left a message very near to this one:

You’ve said you support the teaching of creationism.

…why?

Fairly mundane by my standards.

But it got deleted. And I have been forced from his “Like” Page.

I mean, I’m glad LePage has learned that his anti-science ignorance ought to be viewed as an embarrassment, but the fact remains that he’s on video saying he supports the teaching of something known to be false. He is against every biology professor in the state of Maine. He is against every relevant scientific organization in the country. Paul LePage is an ignorant creationist who is too cowardly to defend what he believes.

But I thank him for the topic idea for my next letter to the editor.