Thought of the day

Posted on August 14, 2009 by Michael

Whatever the motive, the consequence is that if a reputable scholar breathes so much as a hint of criticism of some detail of current Darwinian theory, the fact is eagerly seized on and blown up out of all proportion. So strong is this eagerness, it is as though there were a powerful amplifier, with a finely tuned microphone selectively listening out for anything that sounds the tiniest bit like opposition tp Darwinism. This is most unfortunate, for serious argument and criticism is a vitally important part of any science, and it would be tragic if scholars felt the need to muzzle themselves because of the microphones. Needless to say the amplifier, though powerful, is not hi-fi: there is plenty of distortion! A scientist who cautiously whispers some slight misgiving about a current nuance of Darwinism is liable to hear his distorted and barely recognizable words booming and echoing through the eagerly waiting loudspeakers.

~Richard Dawkins

This really captures a fundamental aspect of the dishonesty present in so many creationists (especially the public ones).

Filed under: Misc | Tagged: , | Leave a comment »

Ask yourself

Posted on August 12, 2009 by Michael

Ask yourself, how much respect would you offer the idea that Earth is flat? Not much, though you may not outright mock the person promoting that idea. Most likely, you’d just ignore the guy and move on. But what if it wasn’t just one person? What if you had a huge swath of the country which thought there was legitimacy to this idea? Those people vote. Those people have a voice. They can tell their senator, no, we don’t want funding for NASA because it predicates its gravity boosts for its spacecraft on the idea that Earth and all the other planets are not flat. Do you think you might have a problem with flat-Earthers then? Do you think maybe you’d stop giving them the impression that what they thought was legitimate?

This is why scientists (and atheists) are so willing to laugh, mock, and dismiss creationists.

Filed under: Creationism | Tagged: , , | 7 Comments »

Health care

Posted on August 11, 2009 by Michael

The Republicans seem to only be able to lie about Obama’s health care bill. Palin, Limbaugh, Carr, Hannity, and all the other conservative morons are out there lying, claiming that the government is going to set up a death panel. What’s more, they are under the false impression the United States has the best health care in the world. It does not. In fact, the World Health Organization ranked it 37th in 2000.

1 France
2 Italy
3 San Marino
4 Andorra
5 Malta
6 Singapore
7 Spain
8 Oman
9 Austria
10 Japan
11 Norway
12 Portugal
13 Monaco
14 Greece
15 Iceland
16 Luxembourg
17 Netherlands
18 United Kingdom
19 Ireland
20 Switzerland
21 Belgium
22 Colombia
23 Sweden
24 Cyprus
25 Germany
26 Saudi Arabia
27 United Arab Emirates
28 Israel
29 Morocco
30 Canada
31 Finland
32 Australia
33 Chile
34 Denmark
35 Dominica
36 Costa Rica
37 United States of America
38 Slovenia

I’m not sure which is more embarrassing, this or United States’ evolution ranking.

Filed under: Politics and Social | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a comment »

Giberson

Posted on August 11, 2009 by Michael

Karl Giberson and Darrel Falk have a column stating that they are scientists and they believe in both God and evolution.

We are scientists, grateful for the freedom to earn Ph.D.s and become members of the scientific community. And we are religious believers, grateful for the freedom to celebrate our religion, without censorship. Like most scientists who believe in God, we find no contradiction between the scientific understanding of the world, and the belief that God created that world.

Most of the article is just an emphasis on this basic statement. I was hoping to get a substantial post out of this when I first saw it, but I’m scavenging here.

We are trained scientists who believe in God, but we also believe that science provides reliable information about nature. We don’t view evolution as sinister and atheistic. We think it is simply God’s way of creating. Yet we can still sleep soundly at night, with Bibles on our nightstands, resting atop the latest copy of Scientific American.

It isn’t surprising that they use “and” rather than “or” between sinister and atheistic. Christians love to associate atheism with all sorts of evil things. Don’t believe it.

Our belief that God creates through evolution is a satisfying claim uniting our faith and our science. This is good news.

This is only good news for those who have long realized that religion and science are at odds, but who wish to bring the two together, ignoring all the issues raised. For instance, how can one maintain that prayer can affect the natural world, yet then ignore the scientific studies which show that, no, that is not true. Or, alternatively, claim that science cannot measure the supposed effects of prayer. Of course it can! The claim is that X occurs in the natural world. If that’s the case, it is always subject to study using the scientific method. The natural world (i.e., reality) is science’s realm. Enter your fairy tales into it and you leave the safe haven of the supernatural, mythical world.

There is nothing satisfying about a claim uniting Christianity (or any religion) and science. One makes claims about the natural world without evidence while the other is predicated on the very idea that evidence is absolutely critical in determining the truth of anything, especially counter-intuitive or improbable claims. There are only two gods which can work with science: a hands-off deity and a god which only works through natural laws. The first is pretty harmless. The claim is simply that God X set the Universe in motion. That temporarily satisfies the first cause-question, though it quickly falls apart when one asks “Well, what created God X?”. The other god, the one that works purely through natural laws, is only superfluous. This one can have theology around it and thus can be quite dangerous. However, as far as science goes, its use is as good as me saying that fairies guided every particle into place at all times. There’s no evidence for my fantastic claim, but it doesn’t technically interfere with what science says. But, of course, a god which causes virgin births, turns water into wine, and floods the entire Earth is far from being compatible with science. Very, very far.

Huh, look at that. Turns out even the short dumb things the New Creationists say can generate a lot of rebuttal.

Filed under: Creationism | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »

Thought of the day

Posted on August 11, 2009 by Michael

The American creationist movement has entirely bypassed the scientific forum and has concentrated instead on political lobbying and on taking its case to a fair-minded electorate… The reason for this strategy is overwhelmingly apparent: no scientific case can be made for the theories they advance.

~Ken Miller

Filed under: Misc | Tagged: , | Leave a comment »

The prof

Posted on August 9, 2009 by Michael

A blogger once noticed that people who don’t like PZ Myers refer to him as “Paul Zachary Myers”. Now there’s a new level of contempt. Mark Looy of Ken Ham’s staff will only call him “the prof”

…He was standing with the prof and 10-12 SSA members, and I stopped to hear what was being said—especially since the prof was being filmed at the time and that was creating some congestion.

I actually counted twelve instances of Looy using “the prof” to reference PZ. He slips up and writes “the professor” once. Perhaps his heart soften for just a moment. But at no point in Looy’s post (or Ken Ham’s surrounding post) does “PZ Myers” appear. They even refuse the often creationist-preferred “Paul Zachary Myers”. Looy, Ham, and ilk seem to have decided that the best way to express their deep, vitriolic hatred of PZ is to be as humanely impersonal as absolutely possible. Whatever. They still know shit about science.

The Prof

If some blogger can morph this with an image of PZ, that would probably garner a few hits.

Filed under: Creationism | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a comment »

Thought of the day

Posted on August 7, 2009 by Michael

I’m sure I’ve had this thought elsewhere on For the Sake of Science, but it deserves repeating.

I love when the religious call evolution or atheism or whathaveyou “religion”. They’re trying to expunge any merit from the expressed belief(s) by associating it with the emptiness of what they hold dear. Sure, they’re horribly wrong and have no clue how to define “religion”. But if they want to debase my beliefs by inherently debasing the very idea of religion, then I’m going to have a hard time objecting.

Filed under: Misc | Tagged: | 3 Comments »

Creationists hate honesty

Posted on August 3, 2009 by Michael

It’s long been known that creationists love to quote-mine. They’ve long done it Charles Darwin, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Gould, Albert Einstein, and plenty of other scientists in order to support their positions. No one is really all that surprised when they keep doing it again and again.

So it is nonchalantly* that I present yet another example. This time it’s Creation “Museum” supporter Tom Estes.

So I have been wondering; why do atheists have such animosity for Ken Ham? He is attacked so viciously, so often by atheists that I wonder if they have pure, unadulterated hatred for the man. And again I wonder, why? Before I go on, I want to share this cartoon that was drawn by Jennifer over at http://blaghag.blogspot.com.

Okay, got it? Estes is looking to support the idea that atheists simply hate Ken Ham. The hatred is so intense it’s even unadulterated. So what’s he do? He reposts a cartoon. Here’s what he featured.

PZHam1
PZHam2-1

PZHam3

To see the rest of this cartoon, visit the Blaghag.

This seems to support Estes point quite well. Clearly, the cartoon is indicating the pure desire of atheists to express their unadulterated hatred for Ken Ham. But wait!

PZHam4

PZHam5

As it turns out, the cartoon is actually showing that, yes, atheists don’t like Ham very much. He misrepresents science as much as humanly possible. That’s a bad thing. But the point is a far cry from unadulterated hatred. It’s a play off the whole Expelled debacle combined with PZ Myers’ love of squid and squid-like creatures and a mockery of Ken Ham’s silly beliefs about dinosaurs. It’s a bit of fun, and in the end it shows something decidedly less cool but clearly more welcomed – everyone being civil to each other. Estes chopped off this portion of the comic (adding a link back to the front page – not the original post – of the cited blog). He’s just another creationist. He’s willing to ignore what’s inconvenient to him in order to support his position. It’s sort of like the entire concept behind Ken Ham’s bad “museum”.

*Doesn’t it seem like “chalant” should be a word? Instead of “So it is nonchalantly that I present…” it would be way better to say “So it is without chalant that I present…”. Just sayin’.

Filed under: Creationism | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 7 Comments »

Justice

Posted on August 2, 2009 by Michael

Dale Neumann has been found guilty of second-degree reckless homicide.

Dale Neumann, 47, was convicted in the March 23, 2008, death of his daughter, Madeline, from undiagnosed diabetes. Prosecutors contended he should have rushed the girl to a hospital because she couldn’t walk, talk, eat or drink. Instead, Madeline died on the floor of the family’s rural Weston home as people surrounded her and prayed. Someone called 911 when she stopped breathing.

Prayer is an unacceptable method for real healing. I’m glad this jury has recognized that.

Filed under: News | Tagged: , | Leave a comment »

Speaking of which…

Posted on August 1, 2009 by Michael

Speaking of the tendency of believers to avoid responsibility for their actions, Dale Neumann is nearing the end of his trial with the jury currently deliberating.

“If I in a moment of crisis and in a moment of time, I went to anyone else but the Lord, it would not have been favorable to God,” Neumann said.

I wish I could find the better quotes I came across earlier today. Neumann wants to be acquitted of the charges because he really believed in his religion. No, he couldn’t have called a doctor for a relatively simple remedy to the problem. The audacity! That would be an affront to his particular, cultural god. It is merely his deeply held belief which deserves condemnation for being horribly wrong, not him. Christ.

I just hope Wisconsin juries know when they’re getting the wool pulled over their eyes. This guy is a danger to society directly as a result of the (especially) wacky religious views he and many others hold. Prayer does not heal. That is a lie, perhaps a delusion at best.

Filed under: News | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

« Previous Page — Next Page »