So Curt Schilling spent his evening arguing against the theory of evolution

166 Comments

We’ve read all of the stories about Curt Schillng’s recovery from cancer and other attendant maladies. And they have been uplifting and encouraging. But maybe the most uplifting and encouraging evidence of Schilling’s recovery came last night when we learned that, finally, he is back to his old self, 100%.

How do we know this? Because he spent the night being bullheaded and annoying on the Internet.

You see, Schilling spent a great deal of time on Twitter last night arguing against the Theory of Evolution. Deadspin summarizes it here, but you can go to Twitter and see it in real time too. It’s quite a thing.

The main thrust of his argument were the old chestnuts about their being gaps in the fossil record and no real time evidence of evolution that we, as lay persons, have witnessed. No fossil of, say, a fish with legs like that “Darwin” sticker people put on the back of their Subarus. And no ape born in, like, the 1970s, which spontaneously turned into a human in 1986 or whatever. I didn’t see the entirety of his interactions with his followers, but I do hope at least one of them sent him a link explaining why that is pure, uncut and unadulterated hooey.

It used to always irk me when someone carried on like this. And yes, part of me is still a tad troubled by the fact that a guy who is paid to be an analyst has demonstrated a tendency to espouse his gut-held beliefs rather than actually deal with the evidence available that better-explains a phenomenon. I presume next year Schilling will be in the booth for Sunday Night Baseball and I wouldn’t bet even a nickel on him not arguing in favor of some unprovable folk wisdom about hitting or pitching rather than actually breaking down what happened objectively.

But for the most part I just smile at this sort of thing. The beauty of science, it has been said, is that it does not require that one believe in it to be true. Not even Curt Schilling, who is free to believe what he wants to believe, even if it’s wrong on just about every possible level. And even if that which he disbelieves played a crucial role in his ability to be here today disbelieving it.

Because if he’s doing that, man, we KNOW the old Curt Schilling is back. And however annoying that may be in the moment, I sleep better at night knowing that he is out there, somewhere, driving people absolutely nuts.

Red Sox employees “livid” over team pay cut plan

Getty Images
10 Comments

Even Drellich of The Athletic reports that the Boston Red Sox are cutting the pay of team employees. Those cuts, which began to be communicated last night, apply to all employees making $50,000 or more. They are tiered cuts, with people making $50-99,000 seeing salary cut by 20%, those making $100k-$499,000 seeing $25% cuts and those making $500,000 or more getting 30% cuts.

Drellich reported that a Red Sox employee told him that “people are livid” over the fact that those making $100K are being treated the same way as those making $500K. And, yes, that does seem to be a pretty wide spread for similar pay cuts. One would think that a team with as many analytically-oriented people on staff could perhaps break things down a bit more granularly.

Notable in all of this that the same folks who own the Red Sox — Fenway Sports Group — own Liverpool FC of the English Premier League, and that just last month Liverpool’s pay cut/employee furlough policies proved so unpopular that they led to a backlash and a subsequent reversal by the club. That came after intense criticism from Liverpool fan groups and local politicians. Sox owner John Henry must be confident that no such backlash will happen in Boston.

As we noted yesterday, The Kansas City Royals, who are not as financially successful as the Boston Red Sox, have not furloughed employees or cut pay as a result of baseball’s shutdown in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. Perhaps someone in Boston could call the Royals and ask them how they managed that.