I just learned that an anti-evolutionist twit has just started a blog with Blogger, with the url of (wait for it) http://skeptico.blogspot.com/ Go on – click the link and see. He’s even leaving creationist comments on other blogs as Skeptico.
What a lame-ass – can’t even use his own blog name. What does he hope to achieve? To confuse people into thinking I favor intelligent design? To generate extra traffic to his lame site? Clearly, he doesn’t think that rational argument and evidence will be enough to convince people that ID is valid.
If you ever needed evidence the intelligent design argument was in trouble – you have it here. (Not that we really needed any more evidence.)
(Checkout The Real Skeptico.)
Hat tip to Bronze Dog for originally spotting the imitator.
I think from now on, we should refer to him as "lame ass" (or "donkey" for places with strict COCs) with a link to this Skeptico entry, to prevent his confusion.
This goes along the lines of Generation Abandon buying oracknows.com to try and make it look like Orac over at Respectful Insolence endorses their nonsense, even though he doesn't.
Posted by: Bronze Dog | May 22, 2006 at 04:52 PM
Showing my support: Accept No Substitutes: Donkey is NOT a Valid Replacement for Skeptico.
Posted by: Bronze Dog | May 22, 2006 at 06:10 PM
Just a hint. Append a rel="nofollow" attribute to the html link to the donkey's web site. This way, the search engines won't count the link when calculating page rank.
Posted by: Rafael | May 22, 2006 at 07:18 PM
I'm doing a little Google cherry-bombing linking the text "lame donkey" to him. At least, that's how I think it works.
Posted by: BronzeDog | May 22, 2006 at 07:23 PM
Rafael:
Thanks. Done it - I think.
Posted by: Skeptico | May 22, 2006 at 08:09 PM
Wait this isn't the anti-evoltuoin site?
HEATHENS.
YOU'VE FOOLED ME THIS TIME!
Posted by: bigdumbchimp | May 22, 2006 at 09:05 PM
Could it be possible the chap just accidentally used the same name as OurBelovedSkeptico? I know our one is relatively well known in the online skeptical community, but it's at least possible the ID proponent just didn't know about our wee man of reason, unless anyone has evidence to the contrary.
Posted by: The Rev. Schmitt. | May 23, 2006 at 06:00 AM
I contemplated the possibility, but I doubt it. Mostly a gut feeling.
Plus a IDiot impersonating a skeptic to push his Time Cube Guy-esque "arguments" would not be a very extraordinary explanation.
Posted by: BronzeDog | May 23, 2006 at 06:29 AM
Based on past experience, I'd say it's just an accidental use of the same name for two reasons:
1) Something similar happened in the right-leaning blogosphere with Moxie.nu and a another blogger who started a site called MoxiePop. It became a cavalcade of retardation, to the point that (so it seemed) one of Moxie.nu's fans got MoxiePop fired from her job.
2) I'd never been to nor heard of this site until Pharyngula linked over, and I'm a pretty avid blogger/blog-reader.
Remember, even the ID crowd considers itself to be rational and skeptical, no matter how misguided such thoughts may be.
Posted by: andy | May 23, 2006 at 06:47 AM
Would there be any grounds for asking Blogger to drop his account? They might consider it a case of intellectual property infringement. Making him change his handle at least a little might prevent some confusion.
Posted by: Lord Runolfr | May 23, 2006 at 09:56 AM
Breach of Copyright?
Fraud?
Lying - if he is a cretinist and/or an IDiot he is certainly a fool, and probably a liar.
Posted by: G. Tingey | May 23, 2006 at 11:08 AM
Is he leaving comments as Skeptico in comment sections you've been known to frequent, or have linked to you, etc.? Because that would be a "smoking gun", wouldn't it?
Posted by: dorkafork | May 23, 2006 at 12:01 PM
I know he's been by the Uncredible Hallq's place, which has a link on the left.
Posted by: Bronze Dog | May 23, 2006 at 12:56 PM
Wait. Someone thinks it's possible a person creating a blog to support Intelligent Design and criticise evolutionsry theory might randomly come up with the name "Skeptico?" Sorry, I ain't buying it.
Posted by: Paul | May 23, 2006 at 04:10 PM