Learn From It

More sour grapes, anyone?

You tell me, hoody.

You have the answers to everything.

Um, redefine science? That's *funny*. They've certainly redefined stupid and ignorant.

you are on a rampage, hon! *mwah*

Yeah, my best friend works with some schools in Kansas, so of course when I hear about their school boards "rewriting the science standards" every year to incorporate "intelligent design" and de-emphasize evolution is mortifying. It comforts me a little to know at least four people voted against this and that there's still one good democrat (with a BA in Religion!) working with their public schools who thinks they've lost their marbles.

Well let's see if he has an answer for this.

Hoody,

Why, since you seem to loathe the SF sex freaks, the PC sheep, the drugged out leftovers from that failed decade, and anyone else who isn't a puritanical wing nut with a shame based sexual identity, why then, do you read all their blogs?

Really, not a difficult or layered question. I've seen your blog a few times, as I like to see who makes truly ignorant remarks. But I have to tell you, I see your name in the comments section on the "who's who of flaming sodomite blog central". Those that are in the know, or in the inner circles of the gay agenda could tell you why you may be spending a substantial amount of time on these sites.

Can you tell us why without the answer being tucked in another "left attack". Not holding my breath for a response.

Hoody likes to tell me that same-sex sex is about nothing but gratification. that it is NEVER about ANYTHING but pleasure.

Now, hoody is many things (ok, he's one giant thing), but I can't imagine him being so definitive about anything without at least personal experience with it (not that anecdotes are evidence).

So far, he has yet to clue me in on the kinds of homosexual sex he's had.

Actually, tomorrow if someone could clearly demonstrate that genetic alterations were impossible, that they only resulted in the death of the organism, then I, as a scientist, would toss out the Theory of Evolution. That would at least be an hypothesis to test. We've certainly tossed out enough other theories after they failed their test. Newtons' law of gravity is a handy approximation, but nobody believes that's how gravity actually works anymore. Same goes for Bohr's atomic model.

Will you also try and tell me that science teachers need to teach that the foundations of the earth are unmoveable, as cited by your scriptures. I can clearly demonstrate the earth has no "foundation", unless all the satellites missed photographing the giant turtle and 4 elephants, or the government is enacting a giant turtle coverup.

Which one do you believe? Huh? Or now do I come to you to distinguish when GOD's word is true or not?

Damnit, I'm giving pig singing lessons and I should stop. I've been told by GOD not to cast pearls before swine.

Oddly, science is about seeking and finding truth. How very biblical!

Maybe we should just call it the Doctrine of Intelligent Design, since it's clearly not a theory that can be proved or disproved.

Hrm, sorry, I guess I wasn't clear enough.

I have no problem with the theory of evolution. I have no disproof for it, nor do I think I need to find one. There are gaps in the fossil record, but there are also bits where it does look like one animal evolved from a previous one. Hypothesis: Animals evolved from a previous ones. Cool.

I also have no problem with ID theory. There are things that don't look as though they could've evolved like regular, and also seem like they were designed. Hypothesis: They were designed. Great.

As I tried to say before, both evolution and ID make enough sense for me, and both work as ideas. But neither is complete and remain good incomplete guesses.

My other problem with each theory is that the people who back them can't seem to come to grip with the opponent. Such as your apparent inability to even consider a theory that would point to something that would vaguely resemble God.

As for us doing "dumb" and doing "evil" all on our own, well, is god that crappy at predicting things?

No, I think God is still doing an excellent job at knowing what is going to happen in the future, as He always has been. He lets us be dumb and evil, because it's that ability that also give us the ability to be truly good.

If God had created us with only the ability to love him, than we would in fact be incapable of really loving him.

If, when you first met Sam, you pulled out a gun and told him that he loved you, or else, and he complied, and you then continued to have the relationship you have now, but under the threat of death, is that real love?

Of course not. It's absurd. We need to ability to not love to really show much we *do* love. Because then it is our choice to love, not our programming.

Are you saying there are things we humans have created that god did not?

Sure! Lightbulbs, pants, the city of Chicago, The Beatles, space shuttles, CD-ROMs, and beer, just to name a few things. Hmmm...I should go see a psychiatrist to see why those things were the first to pop into my mind.

But in regard to evil, God didn't exactly create it, in the same sense that we would think of God creating the universe or people. The lack of God creates evil.

Will you also try and tell me that science teachers need to teach that the foundations of the earth are unmoveable, as cited by your scriptures.

Of course not. Another thing that nobody seems to remember these days is the Catholic position on the Bible. Does this passage make sense in terms of science? Not at all. You're perfectly right, there are no foundations that keep the Earth from falling off into space. And of course, scientifically speaking, saying the Earth can never be moved moves from a weird idea to dead wrong at a speed of thousands of miles an hour.

But the writers of the Bible aren't concerned with science. So whenever we find something that that seems scientifically impossible (7 day creation story, anybody?), it very well could be. But taking the Bible literally is only one option out of four. There are always other meanings, or what we call "senses" of scripture.

And besides that, the Psalms are always a bad place to even consider taking thing literally. Those are basically love poetry to God. I personally would never take love poetry literally, because it relies solidly on metaphor and exageration. So God might not have actually set the Earth on physical unmovable foundations, but that's not the point. What matters is that their saying He's big and powerful.

Oddly, science is about seeking and finding truth. How very biblical!

Well, I don't see what is so odd about science seeking and finding truth, but it is indeed biblical, and very interesting and noble endeavour.

As I tried to say before, both evolution and ID make enough sense for me, and both work as ideas. But neither is complete and remain good incomplete guesses.

This is the slippery slope, Masked Avenger. You say that evolution is not a complete theory? what is "complete"? If you have a judgment to pass on the workability of evolution, then BACK IT UP. That's what science is about. ID is about nothing except assertion.

Get it right: evolution and ID are NOT just two ideas that deserve equal treatment. ID is not a theory. It is not science. it's religion and it's politics. and it's duplicitous of christians to say they're even in the same league.

Sort of like the slavish devotion of the left to the unproved Doctrine of Evolution.

"Hey, we don't really know if this happens, or how it would, but...it sounds better than having religion! Therefore, it must be true!"

Not to say that I think ID is somehow more substantial that that. Both are just theories, and both are doing the best they can to prove what they want to prove. But both also have a lot that still needs explained.

I mean, who the fuck would design such unutterably, stultifyingly idiotic morons?

And as for that, God didn't design us to be dumb or evil. We managed that all on our own.

No good scientist I know is slavishly devoted to anything other than demonstrability and reproduceability, Masked Avenger.

How big a mountain of objective, observable evidence do you require, coupled with a long, long track record of predictive power, before you'll accept a theory as valid?

And how about bringing out the mountains of evidence AGAINST evolution as a theory? You got any? No?

ID is NOT a theory. It's an assertion. It predicts nothing. It has no evidence in support of it. It's nothing. Nothing but a political maneuver to get state-supported theism in place.

As for us doing "dumb" and doing "evil" all on our own, well, is god that crappy at predicting things? Are you saying there are things we humans have created that god did not?