I have never understood creationism... it is so out of touch with reality and so disconnected from any logic that it defies any explanation. Yes, it might have been somehow compelling 500 years ago, when scientific evidence for pretty much anything around us was scarce, but by the last century, there were no reasons to stick with it. One has to have some really strong cognitive dissonance going in order to remain in the pure creationism camp (the earth being 6000 years old, geological strata deposited by a great flood, etc). Even the newer incarnation of creationism, Intelligent Design (ID), does not pass logical and scientific analysis, because it bases itself on faulty understanding of physics and biology.
To illustrate my point I give you the latest Science vs. Nonsense Debate:
What's even more interesting than the debate itself, was an "experiment" done right before it took place, when a reporter asked a bunch of people coming to see the debate to write questions for Bill Nye. Here is the result:
22 Messages From Creationists To People Who Believe In Evolution
Some of those questions are pure gold... and for most of the people who have even the basic understanding of science, they are either nonsensical, or very easy to answer, but there are two sources that are worth reading:
Phil Plait's Bad Astronomy Blog: Answers for Creationists
and
Steven Novella's NeuroLogica: Questions from the Nye-Ham Debate
Bits and pieces about the world of technology, science, politics, rationality, secularism and reason
Showing posts with label intelligent design. Show all posts
Showing posts with label intelligent design. Show all posts
Friday, February 7, 2014
Friday, August 16, 2013
Is Science an Enemy of Humanity?
There is an interesting debate going on, on the virtual pages of the New York Times. It's a rather standard creationism vs. science/evolution exchange of ideas, started by an article "Why I'm a Creationist", written by Virginia Heffernan, that attracted some well-deserved criticism, and was answered by Steven Pinker in an article titled "Science Is Not Your Enemy". I have to confess that I find myself much more attached the Pinker's side (obviously):
There is also a typical "science requires faith too" gibberish:
It's good to see that there are some, who understand it:
In other words, the worldview that guides the moral and spiritual values of an educated person today is the worldview given to us by science. Though the scientific facts do not by themselves dictate values, they certainly hem in the possibilities. By stripping ecclesiastical authority of its credibility on factual matters, they cast doubt on its claims to certitude in matters of morality. The scientific refutation of the theory of vengeful gods and occult forces undermines practices such as human sacrifice, witch hunts, faith healing, trial by ordeal, and the persecution of heretics. The facts of science, by exposing the absence of purpose in the laws governing the universe, force us to take responsibility for the welfare of ourselves, our species, and our planet. For the same reason, they undercut any moral or political system based on mystical forces, quests, destinies, dialectics, struggles, or messianic ages. And in combination with a few unexceptionable convictions— that all of us value our own welfare and that we are social beings who impinge on each other and can negotiate codes of conduct—the scientific facts militate toward a defensible morality, namely adhering to principles that maximize the flourishing of humans and other sentient beings. This humanism, which is inextricable from a scientific understanding of the world, is becoming the de facto morality of modern democracies, international organizations, and liberalizing religions, and its unfulfilled promises define the moral imperatives we face today.than to any of his opponents, especially, the religious and the politically motivated ones. Like the one from Ross Douthat:
Because we know the universe has no purpose, we must imbue it with the purposes of a (non-species-ist) liberal cosmopolitanism! Because of science, we know that modern civilization has no dialectic or destiny … so we must pursue its “unfulfilled promises” and accept its “moral imperatives” instead!Ouch... do I smell "ad-hominem" attack? Call Pinker some names, and disregard his stance that only rational analysis and scientific thinking has been proven to better the human race for ages.
There is also a typical "science requires faith too" gibberish:
But this belief in science collapses on itself: there is no scientific evidence to prove that science is the only reliable way to discover truth. Once we take unproven hypotheses and dogmatize them, we have moved beyond scientific evidence into philosophical reflection on truth and the scientific method. Naturalist or not, when it comes to the world’s origins, we are all in the realm of faith.Nope... there is no faith in science. Not in the way you would want to. It's just about simple rational thinking and understanding that, only via this avenue, we can learn anything useful about the world that surrounds us.
It's good to see that there are some, who understand it:
We need not, however, enter into simplistic debates that lead to endless conflict. Rather, we can bring science and the humanities together to explore a new synergy of scientific fact and human values. Recognizing that we are now understanding these evolutionary processes through science and appreciating them through art, poetry, literature, music and spirituality gives us an opportunity to discover our own role in this unfolding story.Science does not invalidate humanism, poetry, art, and countless other "soul-based" activities. It enhances them and makes them work pursuing, especially when we realize we have very little time to do it.
Thursday, June 13, 2013
Are "Smart" and "Republican" Mutually Exclusive Terms?
Following my fascination with cognitive dissonance and how it can obstruct one's clear view of reality and reason, I give you the real world example.
First, an article from the Tampa Bay Times, from a few years back (I remember reading it in real print):
Why scientists are seldom Republicans
First, an article from the Tampa Bay Times, from a few years back (I remember reading it in real print):
Why scientists are seldom Republicans
Have you ever wondered what the world would be like without scientists? Ask the Republican Party. It lives in such a world. Republicans have been so successful in driving out of their party anyone who endeavors in scientific inquiry that pretty soon there won't be anyone left who can distinguish a periodic table from a kitchen table.
This was a brilliant article and it's funny, how the Republicans finally noticed the same thing, after the last elections, and decided to stop being a "stupid party"... except I don't think they are actually trying at all.
Not only, the narrative from them did not change, but it seems it is getting worse. From climate change and creationism, to gun control and human rights, they are still deep in the 19th Century, and they seem to be more and more proud of it. Case in point:
Where do we go from here??? Only a complete negation of reality can follow... and it's a scary, scary vision.
Monday, November 19, 2012
Why Do We Pick Idiots To Run Our Country?
Yes, I agree it's rather harsh to say that, but after Florida's very own senator, Marco Rubio said this:
1. Crackpot.
2. Liar, who knows the real and scientific answer, but lies to all of us for political reasons.
I admit, #2 is very probable for any politician, but I also want to believe that nobody would consciously and purposefully, expose himself or herself to this kind of ridicule, so I'll stick with my initial assessment.
Let me point to an excellent Bad Astronomy blog, for an expanded explanation of why we all should start picking our government representatives a bit more carefully: they are elected to make decisions that are very complex, require critical thinking skills and can affect all of us (and sometimes even the world). Of course, this is not new and not even rare, especially from the politicians on the right (a.k.a. the Republicans). The scary part is that Rubio is considered a "rising star" in the Republican Party and we might have to endure his misguided views more than we care for.
I'm not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that's a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I'm not a scientist. I don't think I'm qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.in an interview for GQ, as an answer to the question about the age of the Earth, the only two choices are:
1. Crackpot.
2. Liar, who knows the real and scientific answer, but lies to all of us for political reasons.
I admit, #2 is very probable for any politician, but I also want to believe that nobody would consciously and purposefully, expose himself or herself to this kind of ridicule, so I'll stick with my initial assessment.
Let me point to an excellent Bad Astronomy blog, for an expanded explanation of why we all should start picking our government representatives a bit more carefully: they are elected to make decisions that are very complex, require critical thinking skills and can affect all of us (and sometimes even the world). Of course, this is not new and not even rare, especially from the politicians on the right (a.k.a. the Republicans). The scary part is that Rubio is considered a "rising star" in the Republican Party and we might have to endure his misguided views more than we care for.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Quote of the Day
I could not help myself:
By James Carville
Tagged as "funny", but I'm not so sure about that.
As I watch the Republican debates, I realize that we are on the brink of a crazy person running our nation. I sit in front of the television and shudder at the thought of one of these creationism-loving, global-warming-denying, immigration-bashing, Social-Security-cutting, clean-air-hating, mortality-fascinated, Wall-Street-protecting Republicans running my country.
By James Carville
Tagged as "funny", but I'm not so sure about that.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
Dumb Politicians
It appears that a large portion of our society here in the USA tends to prefer and vote for not-so-bright politicians. The current flock of the right wing candidates for the highest office in the land is the best example of this frightening trend.
Sarah Palin is a poster child of this group, but the rest of them are not better at all, and don't get me even started on Christine "I'm not a witch" O'Donnell.
The scary thing is that they are a legitimate candidates in this country, where, apparently stupidity rules.
It is always encouraging to see that someone is bringing up this issue openly in the media, without sugarcoating:
Sarah Palin is a poster child of this group, but the rest of them are not better at all, and don't get me even started on Christine "I'm not a witch" O'Donnell.
The scary thing is that they are a legitimate candidates in this country, where, apparently stupidity rules.
It is always encouraging to see that someone is bringing up this issue openly in the media, without sugarcoating:
In any other party and in any other country, an individual may occasionally rise to the top in spite of being an uneducated ignoramus. In today’s Republican Party ‘in spite of’ is not the phrase we need. Ignorance and lack of education are positive qualifications, bordering on obligatory. Intellect, knowledge and linguistic mastery are mistrusted by Republican voters, who, when choosing a president, would apparently prefer someone like themselves over someone actually qualified for the job.The whole article can be found here, and I have nothing but highest respect for Richard Dawkins for calling it what it is: stupidity and willful ignorance.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Here We Go Again: Mr. Wise - Not So Wise After All
Yes, he is an embarasment to our state again:
Not so wise and an embarasment to all educators as well. Let's hope the educators of today are wiser, and let's hope this bill dies quickly and we do not have to see another Dover and all the money wasted.
"Why do we still have apes if we came from them?" Wise, a retired educator, said during the interview with the Tampa radio station. "And those are the kind of questions kids need to ask themselves. You know, 'how did we get here?' And, you know, there's more than one theory on this thing. And the theory is evolution, the other one is intelligent design."More conservative Legislature considers evolution bill
Not so wise and an embarasment to all educators as well. Let's hope the educators of today are wiser, and let's hope this bill dies quickly and we do not have to see another Dover and all the money wasted.
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
After the Debate
So, while I was unable to actually attend the debate, it seems that there was something interesting that happened there: John Tracy took a very typical right wing road, offending everyone and painting himself as the only one with any values:
John Tracy's comments at Pasco School Board candidate debate offend his rivals
There is more in the TampaBay.com Gradebook Blog:
Pasco School Board candidate Rev. John Tracy defends his debate night comments
You have to love what Mr. Tracy concluded:
We have to make sure we vote for someone much better to have any influence over our school system.
John Tracy's comments at Pasco School Board candidate debate offend his rivals
So Tracy told the audience at Thursday's candidate debate at Pasco-Hernando Community College that he was the candidate of family values and integrity. Not just one of them. The one.How funny...
There is more in the TampaBay.com Gradebook Blog:
Pasco School Board candidate Rev. John Tracy defends his debate night comments
You have to love what Mr. Tracy concluded:
This particular article misrepresents my statements and fails to accurately set the context of the debate forum. Lesson learned. Voters beware! Do not trust the press.That's right, blame the media for your own statements and try to twist the facts around, to make up your own reality. This attitude is so typical of the far right found everywhere, not only in this country.
We have to make sure we vote for someone much better to have any influence over our school system.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Pasco School Board Candidates Debate
Interestingly, there will be a live debate tonight between 12 candidates for the Pasco School Board, as reported by St. Pete Times:
Hear the Pasco School Board candidates debate
I would love to see it, or at least have a chance to read an extensive report on what all of them had to say.
More to come...
Hear the Pasco School Board candidates debate
I would love to see it, or at least have a chance to read an extensive report on what all of them had to say.
More to come...
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Roger Ebert - A Skeptic - Who Knew?
I always turned to Roger Ebert for his movie advice, not political, or skeptical views. I guess I was wrong:
He has a great point: for way too many in our society it is easy to bash ultra-religious views, but somehow we do not notice all those "progressive", new age beliefs that are equally nonsensical and can negatively influence our decisions in the same way. In the 21st century, there should be no place in politics for people without rational approach, as this influences their decisions in too many bad ways.
New Age beliefs are the Creationism of the Progressives. I move in circles where most people would find it absurd to believe that humans didn't evolve from prehistoric ancestors, yet many of these same people quite happily believe in astrology, psychics, reincarnation, the Tarot deck, the i Ching, and sooth-saying. Palmistry and phrenology have pretty much blown over.New Agers and Creationists should not be President
He has a great point: for way too many in our society it is easy to bash ultra-religious views, but somehow we do not notice all those "progressive", new age beliefs that are equally nonsensical and can negatively influence our decisions in the same way. In the 21st century, there should be no place in politics for people without rational approach, as this influences their decisions in too many bad ways.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Intelligent Design, Online Edition
This is a nice piece from Barret Brown on William Dembski, whose name I got thrown in my face in the past in some intelligent design vs. evolution debate... it's a bit funny, so I recommend it highly:
Intelligent Design, Online Edition
Intelligent Design, Online Edition
Wednesday, August 19, 2009
Creation Museum Science Fair
I saw news about this: Creation Museum Science Fair going around the blogosphere... but you really have to read the Guidelines to appreciate the stupidity of the whole thing...
The Stupid, It Burns!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)