March 4 in Texas is more than just the primary, it’s also the state school board election. Two of the seats up for grabs on the state school board belong to pro-evolution people, but they are both being challenged by creationists (one of whom — Barney Maddox - is, to be delicate, especially icky). Greg Laden has the details.
Live in Texas? Make your voice heard! Talk to your neighbors, talk to your friends, talk to teachers, and above all else, go out and vote.
If you went to BadAstronomy.com and found yourself here, never fear: the BA Blog has moved to its new home at Discover Blogs. The original BA site (with the Moon Hoax debunking and all that) is still online, too.
Phil Plait, the creator of Bad Astronomy, is an astronomer, lecturer, and author. After ten years working on Hubble Space Telescope and six more working on astronomy education, he struck out on his own as a writer. He has written two books, dozens of magazine articles, and 12 bazillion blog articles. He is a skeptic, and fights misuses of science as well as praising the wonder of real science.
 |
"Reading this book is like getting punched in the face by Carl Sagan. Frightening, but oddly exhilarating."
-- Daniel H. Wilson, author of How to Survive a Robot Uprising
DISCOVERmagazine.com: Latest Articles on Space DISCOVER Blogs: The Loom
February 29th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Can someone suggest a page we can make a Digg or Reddit bomb out of? (This one’s too short.) The Greg Laden page isn’t linked to, but I’ll look for it.
Also, am I right in thinking that it’s only voters in district 2 who are going to be voting on this issue?
My suggestion for a rallying cry: ‘Let science teachers teach science!’. Even Texans can get behind that one.
February 29th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
Link to GL’s page:
http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2008/02/we_aint_outta_texas_yet_creati.php
February 29th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
no kidding… it seems “pro-evolutionists” are having quite a good time in Romania.
Today, was a really sad day for me, I watched the evening news.. for the first time in a few month… and they were talking about the “theory” of evolution (and if it’s ok to allow it in schools…WTF!?!)… and some priest guy was talking about ID. If in the “greatest country on Earth” it is the norm… why not in Romania.
Next story about the healing and “energetic” properties of some rocks.
Next story about a pilgrimage to some cave-church where people witness miracles.
And finally… the orthodox church, and all other faiths united… pressured the government not to ban religious symbols in schools.
thanks a lot USA for the wonderful gift of Central European Media Enterprises (CME)
February 29th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Go texas. Show us you’re not rednecks.
February 29th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
No school board elections in my district.
February 29th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
Creation is impossible. The fundamentals of the universe prohibit such a thing. Here is why.
A living entity with absolute power over an infinite universe is impossible. There is immediately an infinite number of rock hard laws that such an entity must obey and that would render him completely crippled. 1+1=2 for instance. A simple rule which is a law, no matter what. It’s not made up, it’s logic. There are many laws in maths that simply are as they are because something else is impossible. And everything everywhere must obey those laws. Physics, chemistry, biology, faith based religions even.
Another thing, forget the maths. This entity must first of all live in a universe that is complex enough for itself to sustain it. This entity could not have made this own universe out of nothing since then he himself was nothing, never and nowhere. Claiming that he already existed for an eternity in an eternal universe does not do the trick.
Intelligent design is possible yes. Theoretically. That is, if earth were a cosmic zoo or laboratory. And than only if it was made by alien intelligence and not illogical pseudo magic by an impossible invisible wizard who lived for an eternity of never in nothing. But Earth isn’t an artificial zoo or lab. Not a single thing points into that direction. On the contrary. So no, we’re probably not the byproduct of some sophisticated artificial nanotech stuff with a bit of quantum mechanics juice, busy engineering genes en memes in real time.
Science brought us to tremendous insights on how the universe works and gives us control. Now the religious know-alls are claiming it was actually their supernatural power who did these very things? Come on. Before we know it we’ll hear that this creator actually was an MCSE engineer upgrading a web3.0 server as internet was allegedly invented by this dude some 2000 years ago. It wouldn’t be something new. In medieval times the creator was a powerful landlord. In earlier times it was a warmonger who committed solar eclipses and genocide.
I do not understand what is so complicated. Creationism and intelligent design are not even theories. They do not belong in science class. Period. No matter your personal believes. You may believe that 1+1=3. Good. Have faith in it and good luck with you tax papers. But please: do not teach such crap.
February 29th, 2008 at 7:43 pm
Sorry Michelle, but look in any atlas and stamped over Texas will be the dire warning “Here be Rednecks!”. Alas, I live amongst them and know from whence I speak.
March 1st, 2008 at 12:48 am
Haven’t we advanced as a species? Haven’t we gotten past all this BS?
I am sick and tired of reading about this in the news. We need to crush the opposition once and for all. I saw P & T BS episode on the GA school board and the end really upset me. All these Deep south states and RED meat America are pushing this legislation through while people sleep. Its really appalling.
March 1st, 2008 at 2:07 am
@Thanks:
Simple question: Just when did it occur to you that a finite being would be comprehendible to your finite mind?
You make the mistake of thinking that all we know today is all that there is. Now you’ve made yourself god.
March 1st, 2008 at 2:09 am
Correction to above. It should have read:
Simple Question: Just when did it occur to you that an infinite being would be comprehendible to your finite mind?
March 1st, 2008 at 2:28 am
@Brent:
Simple question: just when did it occur to you that semantic games make a good argument for anything?
There is no god, deal with it.
March 1st, 2008 at 5:24 am
Thanks posts:
[[This entity must first of all live in a universe that is complex enough for itself to sustain it.]]
You’re assuming a priori that God is a creature existing in a preexisting universe. By definition, that’s not the Christian God, who is the source of the universe (and any other universes that may exist). The difference between a creator and a creature is crucial.
[[ This entity could not have made this own universe out of nothing since then he himself was nothing, never and nowhere.]]
See above.
[[ Claiming that he already existed for an eternity in an eternal universe does not do the trick.]]
True. He exists eternally, but not in a universe that contains him. Again, you’re seeing the universe (or the “original universe”) as a kind of container holding God in it. That’s a fundamentally misguided view of the whole subject.
March 1st, 2008 at 5:26 am
Frank Oswalt writes:
[[There is no god, deal with it.]]
Good argument there, Frank. I’m sure it convinced a lot of people.
March 1st, 2008 at 7:19 am
@ Barton Paul Levenson,
To say that an entity of any sort lives “outside the universe”, is to go well beyond any ability to prove, disprove it. That is convenient. It seems that you are arguing for a being that has no mass or energy. Without mass or energy, it simply does not exist. Without mass or energy, it would not have a brain. We have absolutely no evidence that any kind of thought exists without the hardware to do so. I do understand the human ability to imagine things outside our ability to test, gain evidence, or reason. I just believe that to do so is a leisurely activity at best, a dangerous one if taken to an extreme. There is nothing wrong with using the imagination, just be fully aware that imagination is what you are using. It may be amusing to do so, but you will never gain by it.
March 1st, 2008 at 8:29 am
@# Brenton 01 Mar 2008 at 2:07 am
Propositional logic. Simple discrete mathematics.
A hypothetical infinite intelligent and powerful life form must obey the laws of logic, which are universal and are as they are because it would be illogic otherwise. 1+1=2, a circle always has a certain set of properties, you name it. No matter what. Infinite amount of laws (would) apply to/in any universe, including irrational, empty, and even imaginary ones like a purely illogical universe, which would not be logical to begin with, just like a universe with a negative number of dimensions.
Now, since this being, living in whatever kind of universe, must obey laws and rules which it could not have set by itself would therefor be finite in fundamental ways. No matter what. Otherwise it would be illogic, which would mean it could not be intelligent by lack of logic. So this hypothetical being must be finite, highly depended and is everything but powerful. Or it is illogical and would lack fundamental properties because it would be in contradiction with itself immediately. Nothing could be done about it, except by defying logic and therefor itself.
Besides that, it could not have created the universe it was living in by itself to start with. It had to be in existence at least one step before its existence was possible. Whatever small step this was. It could not have created itself out of nothing, nowhere and never because it simply did not exist. Otherwise it would also be illogic, which would induct the same fundamental problems as I mentioned earlier. No matter what.
I don’t see how proving the absence of logic regarding an infinitive overly powerful eternal life form, as proposed by some flavors of some religions _please keep that in mind_, inducts the creation of another god. That we have fundamental laws of nature and logic is nothing new or something that has been made up. We only discover and deduct. We are more than once amazed by the results maybe, but nothing implies that there must be something divine or that faith in something is necessary to make something happening. It’s not.
I do respect opinions, I do recognize great things some people have done and I am aware of inspiration and comfort that religion has brought to quite some people over the years. However, this is no excuse to demand that illogical c.q. equally derived things should be taught in public education. We have to be very careful. Trying to live a honest good life in a ’spirit’ while respecting your culture and values of your personal faith in ’something’ is one thing. Different opinions and views enrich the world. Ancient wisdom may provide colorful answers to difficult personal questions and may bring tremendous relief for some. I’ve been there myself, long ago. However, trying to discard logic, evidence, insight, technological skills and centuries of worldwide experience, while waiting for one of these ’spirits’ to suddenly appear as a magic man, just because something like that was allegedly written in a primitive utterly violent society thousands of years ago, amongst many other similar but completely different stories, is dangerous. Things are taken way too far out of context and things are taken way too seriously.
For ages humanity has been living in a dark, frightening world full of violence, illness and things that could not be understood, seen, measured or recognized. Right now we are at a point that we do understand a lot of things and we have an idea of the big picture, although the journey will probably never end. Despite the fact we still have wars and crimes going on we do understand each other much better than even a couple of centuries ago. Our understanding of ourselves and the universe brought us insight and technology that cures diseases, shelters people, provides healthy food, let us communicate worldwide to exchange ideas, let us travel far abroad, etc. It is undesirable to turn back the clock just out of blind faith that some ancient imaginary friend will do the very same tricks. Pick any, none of them won’t. According to many scriptures and stories none of them, nor their messengers, did even do the tiniest thing in that direction. Not even a clue. On the contrary, quite some ’scientific’ claims in these books have been debunked. Including the ‘fact’ that earth is flat, the sun evolves around the earth, that there are a few thousand stars, even that our universe is linear.
Religion is a personal private matter of the heart and should stay there. Intrinsic values of religion may be beneficial for some people in many ways and may enrich personal lives, but claims in science and public life should be avoided. It costs a lot of time and energy that could have been used in more constructive ways. Religious faith loses from science because it can never produces a solid answer, other than to have faith and accept illogical things that cannot be proven, except when you it, or it can never be proven because it is meant that way, just have faith.
Even then: if religion, any, could produce a single solid universal answer to a universal question we probably wouldn’t be living in a world full of fundamental differences, after many centuries. Religions wouldn’t be scattered in patches throughout the world stitched to geographical patterns, man made borders, ethnic groups and (sub)cultures. Religions would not have changed dramatically within lifetimes even because it wouldn’t have been necessary. Religions would agree with each other in the vast majority of things. But they don’t. Even within a single religious community there may be tremendous differences in opinions.
Bottom line. While a magical eternal infinite life form as in the ancient sense would contradict itself, this does not mean there is no ’spirit’, enlightenment or wisdom, or that religions don’t have any value or whatsoever for its followers, or even has positive things to society as a whole. But we really should keep things separated. Pseudoscience and religious believes do not belong in science class. Science is not a religion. Not believing in supernatural things is not a kind of faith, nor does it mean ‘having faith in something else’. Neither does it mean ‘lack of faith in something supernatural’. Trust is something else. And although I personally trust on logic, science and myself in my daily life I am also very skeptical. That would be impossible if trust and faith were the same.
March 1st, 2008 at 8:46 am
@Barton Paul Levinson:
Unlike you, I’m not out to convince anyone. You want to play mind games, with yourself, that’s fine by me.
March 1st, 2008 at 9:21 am
Wow. These discussions are so blindingly boring. You people enjoy this?
March 1st, 2008 at 9:53 am
@dziban:
No, we hate every minute of it. But somebody’s gotta do it, you know.
March 1st, 2008 at 5:28 pm
So this is the second post linking Texas to creationism due to the upcoming primary election this Tuesday. From what I have been able to see from the following web site:
http://www.tea.state.tx.us/sboe/districts.html
Maddox is running in district 11 which is in the Dallas/Fort Worth area (actually it looks closer to Fort Worth since Dallas seems to be district 13). The other creationist (I forget the name) is running in district 2 which is the Corpus Christi area. So unless you either live close to Fort Worth or in the South Texas Corpus Christi area you will not be able to vote on these folks.
Now, one might get the mistaken impression that creationism is a strictly Texas phenomenon but it appears to be nationwide. For example, the address of the Discovery Institute is as follows:
Seattle Headquarters:
Discovery Institute
208 Columbia Street
Seattle, WA 98104
Grunge rock ‘n roll and creationism? Now that’s a pair I didn’t think went together but apparently they do. I guess Washington state is on the brink of “doomnation” also. There do appear to be quite a few organizations up in the BA’s neck of the woods including the following:
http://www.youngearth.org
Rocky Mountain Creation Fellowship
P.O. Box 3451 Littleton, CO 80161
Phone: (303) 525-5500
Email: info@youngearth.org
According to their website their mission is as follows:
“RMCF is a group of Biblical Creationists, who have received Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior. We believe that God, through Jesus Christ, created the heavens and the earth, out of nothing (ex nihilo), in six, 24 hour literal days just as He states in Genesis. There is ample scientific evidence that not only is the Bible correct in the creation account of the universe, but is also correct in its implication that the universe is very, very young. On the order of 10,000 years or less. This is a stumbling block for many people, especially those who have been taught to believe that the evolutionary fairly tale is a “true” fact and/or that God may have used evolution to bring man into existence (theistic evolution). Neither premise is supported in Scripture. At RMCF we have faith in God’s word and that the Bible is the final authority for all our beliefs about man and the universe he lives in”
They appear to be always on the lookout for new speakers so you might want to consider setting those folks straight. Just remember to wear your bullet-proof vest during your presenation.
March 1st, 2008 at 9:48 pm
“A hypothetical infinite intelligent and powerful life form must obey the laws of logic, which are universal and are as they are because it would be illogic otherwise. 1+1=2, a circle always has a certain set of properties, you name it. No matter what. Infinite amount of laws (would) apply to/in any universe…”
Life form? Somehow I don’t think that’s what the theists have in mind. That tends to conjure up DNA, proteins, and all the rest of the paraphernalia associated with living organisms. Perhaps the ancient Greeks thought of their gods in this way but I think the idea has become passe. It would also imply that God can die which none of the major religions of the world believe in (with the possible exception of Hinduism?).
Concerning the logic which is supposedly universal, which flavor would that be?
Would that be Aristotelian logic?
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-logic
Or perhaps Boolean logic?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boolean_logic
Or perhaps Probabilistic logic?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Probabilistic_logic
Or perhaps Fuzzy logic?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuzzy_logic
Those are 4 different systems of logic invented by human beings which don’t agree with one another and don’t have the same assumptions. There is little reason to suppose than any of them is “universal” and would constrain a deity in any way.
Not getting the argument about the infinite amount of laws. I thought the purpose of science was to reduce the number of natural laws to as few as possible. That’s why physicists are still seeking the unified field theory which unites the strong nuclear, weak nuclear, electromagnetic, and gravitational forces under one law of nature. If science comes up with an infinite number of basic laws of nature then there is no possibility of understanding the universe whatsoever.
Concerning the concept of infinity and science here’s a question for the group. Can science measure a quantity (whether it be length, mass, time, electrical charge, etc., etc.) as being infinite? I say no. Science can deduce quantities as being infinite (i.e., curvature of a singularity) but never measure infinity directly for a physical object. If someone can think of a counter-example I’d love to hear about it. So an object such as God that was infinite in any regard would not be measurable by science.
March 1st, 2008 at 11:04 pm
I am a man of faith (Pagan) and I still advocate teaching science in the science class room. Creationists terrify me. I hope that the smart folks in Texas can keep these people off of your school board.
March 1st, 2008 at 11:41 pm
TM: Thanks for the info. It seems that only those in districts 2 and 11 get to vote this time around.
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:54 pm
BPL said: He exists eternally, but not in a universe that contains him.
This conjures up images of some poor old bloke knocking weakly on a window, “Hello… hello… can I come back in now… hello…”. Meanwhile his creation goes on as if he never existed.
March 6th, 2008 at 10:26 am
Thanks writes:
[[Religion is a personal private matter of the heart and should stay there.]]
That’s what they told William Wilberforce. And M.L. King, Jr.