The Anti-Science Party

[Peikko 1,575]

I don't think it's useful or helpful to brand the republican party as anti science. Obviously all parties attract a share of people with views that are shall we say controversial. That there are republicans that believe that evolution is some kind of librul conspiracy against the god fearing is one thing but to suggest that means that everyone in the republican party rejects science is unnecessarily inflammatory, the kind of rhetoric that is genuinely damaging and divisive (as apposed to this idiotic notion that one can no longer use the expression, 'give them enough rope and they will hang themselves' in political discourse).

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I don't think it's useful or helpful to brand the republican party as anti science. Obviously all parties attract a share of people with views that are shall we say controversial. That there are republicans that believe that evolution is some kind of librul conspiracy against the god fearing is one thing but to suggest that means that everyone in the republican party rejects science is unnecessarily inflammatory, the kind of rhetoric that is genuinely damaging and divisive (as apposed to this idiotic notion that one can no longer use the expression, 'give them enough rope and they will hang themselves' in political discourse).

The GOP has been taken over by politicians who have a general distrust in science, which is rooted in their religious fundamentalism. There's a list somewhere that shows how many Republicans in Congress don't believe in Evolution, let alone believe that Global Warming is anything but a communist conspiracy to take away their gas guzzlers.

Edited January 30, 2011 by 8TBVBN

[Peikko 1,575]

The GOP has been taken over by politicians who have a general distrust in science, which is rooted in their religious fundamentalism. There's a list somewhere that shows how many Republicans in Congress don't believe in Evolution, let alone believe that Global Warming is anything but a communist conspiracy to take away their gas guzzlers.

Taken over? Seriously Steven, give over. There are fundamentalists in the party, for sure but that's not what drives the internal debates and such suggestions are decisive and unnecessary.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

The GOP has been taken over by politicians who have a general distrust in science, which is rooted in their religious fundamentalism. There's a list somewhere that shows how many Republicans in Congress don't believe in Evolution, let alone believe that Global Warming is anything but a communist conspiracy to take away their gas guzzlers.

And you think conservatives are narrow minded. How can we take anything you say seriously with an attitude like that? Tell you what, I will accept that all reps are religious nuts that want to establish a religious state if you agree that all progressives are communists that want to install themselves as dictators. Deal?

[JohnSmith2007 353]

I know, I heard this argument that God just exists, he always has. It cannot easily be disproved but I cannot see any logic or evidence in favor either. On the contrary, it seems totally ILLOGICAL. But if it brings you comfort that you need believing we have some sort of supernatural 'daddy' up there to take care of us then you should ignore my heathen statements! But PLEASE, don't advocate for or try to impose laws on the rest of us that are based on your god-mythology!

Wow, just wow. What brought on that? Could you be any more condescending? What happened to the enlightened tolerance for others? You don't see me putting down your belief system.

[mawilson 2,133]

Wow, just wow. What brought on that? Could you be any more condescending? What happened to the enlightened tolerance for others? You don't see me putting down your belief system.

Atheists don't have a "belief system". And before you lay that old

chestnut on me about atheism being a belief system - no, not believing

in something without evidence is NOT the same as believing something

without evidence. The former is rational, the latter is not.

[JohnSmith2007 353]

Atheists don't have a "belief system". And before you lay that old

chestnut on me about atheism being a belief system - no, not believing

in something without evidence is NOT the same as believing something

without evidence. The former is rational, the latter is not.

Why the anger and antagonism? What happened to live and let live? I thought one of the arguments for a lack of a belief of a Higher Being was it was an "evolved" and "civilized" way of living. Lack of tolerance is an uncivilized way of thinking.

[Amby 490]

Not when the world is populated by dumb fuсks.

could religious fanatics be part of the reason US students are waaay behind in science?

I know, I heard this argument that God just exists, he always has. It cannot easily be disproved but I cannot see any logic or evidence in favor either. On the contrary, it seems totally ILLOGICAL. But if it brings you comfort that you need believing we have some sort of supernatural 'daddy' up there to take care of us then you should ignore my heathen statements! But PLEASE, don't advocate for or try to impose laws on the rest of us that are based on your god-mythology!

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

could religious fanatics be part of the reason US students are waaay behind in science?

More likely unqualified math and science teachers, and lazy parents. You know: Hippies.

[Amby 490]

More likely unqualified math and science teachers, and lazy parents. You know: Hippies.

hippies like science because it makes really good drugs with a nice high...right?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

hippies like science because it makes really good drugs with a nice high...right?

Right. That is why they only study Organic Chemistry and go to work for Big Pharma.

[SuperDuper! 230]

That's true. If I were a Christian I would simply say "God created evolution" Why not? What could more of an "intelligent design" than to allow your creation to morph itself to meet the changing needs.

Gary, I don't agree with you often, but this is one time you are spot on. +1

Who is to say that God did not choose to create life thru an evolutionary process?

It doesnt have to be one or the other, black or white.

[mawilson 2,133]

Who is to say that God did not choose to create life thru an evolutionary process?

Who's to say that God isn't a giant fluffy hamster named Steve floating in outer space?

But why say it?

[faust-yusov 103]

That is the short description of God. He wasn't created, He created everything including evolution. It isn't an infinite regress unless you insist that God had a creator.

But do you not find that a rather humbling state of being for the almighty? The last refuge of our regress, reduced essentially to some capitalised pronoun symbolic of the intellectual plateau to which we must all doff our caps and surrender credulity?

At best, it's something of a logical mis-step to characterize the boundaries of our cerebral impotence as "God", only to then confidently assert that there exists nothing greater. If we are permitted to postulate a creator of such superlative faculty, why do we stop short of pondering the next rung on the ladder? Again we have made no progress, and the regress remains a rather damning critique.

As a side note, I often find the position you profess above a rather sinister and disingenuous resolve. Were it truly sincere, persecuted pantheists of the past (such as Giordano Bruno) would have by now been venerated as prophets or saints.

Edited January 30, 2011 by faust-yusov

[Amby 490]

Right. That is why they only study Organic Chemistry and go to work for Big Pharma.

are you talking about yourself? I remember you talking about organic chemistry in another thread a few days ago.