This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Sixth Annual Templeton–Cambridge Journalism Fellowships in Science & Religion

Sixth Annual Templeton–Cambridge Journalism Fellowships in Science & Religion - Comments

Mitch Kahle's Avatar Comment 1 by Mitch Kahle

*Chris Mooney, Science Journalist and Reporter

No surprise here. Mooney is the perfect apologist for Templeton's propaganda campaign.

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 18:56:00 UTC | #444353

robotaholic's Avatar Comment 2 by robotaholic

Maybe it's just me, but it looks like Mooney is going after the money-

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:00:00 UTC | #444357

Alyson Miers's Avatar Comment 3 by Alyson Miers

So, the main criterion for selection by Templeton is to piss off the New Atheists?

Well, if nothing else, this will be a list of authors to avoid. Thanks, Templeton!

http://alysonmiers.wordpress.com/

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 20:14:00 UTC | #444373

jaytee_555's Avatar Comment 4 by jaytee_555

Oh Dear! Another batch of people willing to bear false witness for cash.

At least, we know who they are.

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 20:30:00 UTC | #444378

Stafford Gordon's Avatar Comment 5 by Stafford Gordon

"LOVE OF MONEY IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL." ; IT SAYS SO IN THE BIBLE.

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 20:35:00 UTC | #444382

Stonyground's Avatar Comment 6 by Stonyground

The sad thing is that the money could be used in an almost infinite number of better ways. Science and religion are incompatable and no matter how much money the Templeton Foundation spends on trying to prove otherwise, nothing will change that simple fact.

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:14:00 UTC | #444388

Duff's Avatar Comment 7 by Duff

It should be renamed the Tempelton Jounalism Bribe in Science and Religion.

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 21:46:00 UTC | #444396

ergaster's Avatar Comment 8 by ergaster

Chris Mooney is soiling himself.

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 22:29:00 UTC | #444405

Crazycharlie's Avatar Comment 9 by Crazycharlie

Templeton Journalism Fellowship = $$ CHAAH-CHING! $$

Sat, 27 Feb 2010 02:22:00 UTC | #444448

Patte Lanus's Avatar Comment 10 by Patte Lanus

Could someone please enlighten me? I've been reading Chris Mooney's book "Republican War on Science"--I realize it is pretty old, but the facts do not change, and so I would assume it is still relevant and eye-opening for those who find it--an indictment of both the conservative Republicans and the Religious Right. Has he changed that much in his more recent writing? Thanks for the update.

Sat, 27 Feb 2010 03:46:00 UTC | #444463

mirandaceleste's Avatar Comment 11 by mirandaceleste

MOONEY! OF COURSE!

At least now he's going to get paid for being a dishonest and weasel-y accommodationist. Good for you, Chris. Good for you.

Ugh.

Sat, 27 Feb 2010 04:40:00 UTC | #444472

ramfalls's Avatar Comment 12 by ramfalls

integrity midgets.

Sat, 27 Feb 2010 04:49:00 UTC | #444475

Ophelia Benson's Avatar Comment 13 by Ophelia Benson

Patte Lanus - yes, Mooney has changed that much; Mooney has changed so thoroughly and in such an unpleasant way that it's beyond belief. The documentation for this is by now in the billions of words - I've written a few million of them myself. (Only slight hyperbole.)

Sat, 27 Feb 2010 11:21:00 UTC | #444511

ennui's Avatar Comment 14 by ennui

Meh, I gave up on Mooney a year ago, so this was more or less expected. The Templetons can have the Colgate Twins and the Kw*kster, no big loss at this point.

I am much more concerned about David Sloan Wilson taking Templeton money for his ERS website.

Sat, 27 Feb 2010 13:42:00 UTC | #444530

Lisa Bauer's Avatar Comment 15 by Lisa Bauer

Finding this was kind of an accident -- I happened across the blog of another recipient of this "fellowship" who sometimes rips on Jerry Coyne for his view that science and religion are utterly incompatible, since he's religious himself and sees nothing wrong with accepting evolution, etc.

I'm disappointed that Mooney hasn't said anything on his blog about this, given that the receipt of Templeton money pretty much nukes your reputation in the "atheist community" (for lack of a better word). Will any outspoken atheists EVER take Mooney seriously after this? (Not that they do anyway...)

I do know Qanta Ahmed from her book about working as a doctor in Saudi Arabia, In the Land of Invisible Women, which I thought was pretty good, but she's a believer who writes lovingly of her hajj experience.

Sat, 27 Feb 2010 16:00:00 UTC | #444585

Lisa Bauer's Avatar Comment 16 by Lisa Bauer

Oh, and from later on in the press release, here are some of the speakers who will weigh in at the conference, featuring quite a few awfully familiar names:

Speakers at the Cambridge seminars include:

 Denis R. Alexander, Director, The Faraday Institute for Science and Religion, University of Cambridge
 John D. Barrow FRS, Professor of Mathematical Sciences and Director, Millennium Mathematics Project, University of Cambridge
 Gillian Beer DBE, Emeritus King Edward VII Professor of English Literature, University of Cambridge
 Alasdair Coles, Lecturer in Neuroimmunology, University of Cambridge
 Noah Efron, Chair, Program in Science, Technology & Society, Bar Ilan University, Israel
 Pehr Granqvist, Associate Professor and Senior Lecturer, Department of Psychology, Stockholm University
 John Gray, Emeritus School Professor of European Thought, London School of Economics
 Robin Le Poidevin, Professor of Metaphysics, University of Leeds
 Ehsan Masood, Editor, Research Fortnight
 Simon Conway Morris FRS, Professor of Evolutionary Paleobiology, University of Cambridge
 Michael Reiss, Professor of Science Education, Institute of Education, University of London
 Steven Rose, Emeritus Professor, Department of Life Sciences, The Open University, UK
 Keith Ward, Regius Professor of Divinity Emeritus, University of Oxford, and Professor of Divinity, Gresham College, UK
 Mark Williams, Professor of Clinical Psychology, University of Oxford


People like Simon Conway-Morris, Keith Ward, John Gray and Michael Reiss I expected, but Steven Rose? The leftist/Marxist foe of Dawkins? Wonder what he'll say...

Sat, 27 Feb 2010 16:05:00 UTC | #444586

NewEnglandBob's Avatar Comment 18 by NewEnglandBob

Look up each of the fellowship recipients in Wikipedia. Most are not there and those that have entries are not very impressive and are controversial.

Sat, 27 Feb 2010 18:22:00 UTC | #444622

Crazycharlie's Avatar Comment 19 by Crazycharlie

Mooney's really getting skewered by most of the comments at Discover / The Intersection blog, (mirandaceleste's link).

Sun, 28 Feb 2010 01:06:00 UTC | #444722

mirandaceleste's Avatar Comment 20 by mirandaceleste

Yeah, but he never ever responds to any of the criticism he receives, for some reason. It's ridiculous.

Sun, 28 Feb 2010 04:28:00 UTC | #444747

SaintStephen's Avatar Comment 21 by SaintStephen

Mooney is a ho.

John D. Barrow FRS, Professor of Mathematical Sciences and Director, Millennium Mathematics Project, University of Cambridge...
This guy pimps for the Templeton Foundation?

From Wikipedia:
He [Barrow] was awarded the 2006 Templeton Prize for "Progress Toward Research or Discoveries about Spiritual Realities"; Member of United Reform Church.
He just lost a fan. Where's my copy of his book Impossibility: The Limits of Science and the Science of Limits...

(*Feeds it to the neighbor's pot belly pig*)

Sun, 28 Feb 2010 08:33:00 UTC | #444763

Eyerish's Avatar Comment 22 by Eyerish

You have to hand it to the delusional and how they can 'spin doctor' their way around just about anything. I like the fact they have called them 'Fellows' to try and artifically give them some kind of credibility, particularly amongst the believers who will think that these people are eminent scientists because of the word 'Fellow'. Who do they think they are trying to fool??

Mon, 01 Mar 2010 14:15:00 UTC | #445382

Dave H's Avatar Comment 23 by Dave H

Between science and religion, the negotiation never stops because the reconciliation never works.

No doubt many of these hypocrites will use the trappings of science (i.e. using computers and the internet after being well fed) to write reports that make excuses for belief in the supernatural based on no evidence whatsoever, and then claim that both are equally true and equally valid. To qualify for a grant do you have to be blind in one eye, or just schizophrenic?

Mon, 01 Mar 2010 14:34:00 UTC | #445396