vatican astronomer blasts creationism
 

On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 19:35:20 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 5, 9:11*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 16:21:22 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 5, 5:04*pm, Vic Smith wrote:

What I find strange is that some people have boats, and others don't.

I never thought of it that way, Vic.

i suppose I haven't evolved to higher intelligence.

Woe is me....

For a small fee I would be glad to provide you with the essential
inner knowledge to free your mind and increase your intelligence.

Tom, I appreciate the offer, but I have plenty of .22 shells.

I didn't mean blow holes in your head to increase ventilation
resulting in cooling that increases your intellect.

~~ sheesh ~~

vatican astronomer blasts creationism
 

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:04:38 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

What I find strange is that some people have boats, and others don't.

Obviously boat ownership implies a higher level of development, and
the more boats the better. :-)

vatican astronomer blasts creationism
 

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:56:05 -0400, JohnRant
wrote:

The origins of man have not been proven. Until they are done so, there
is no harm in presenting what several billion (see, I fixed it)
believe, even if presented only as a belief without proof.

That's fine, just don't present it in a science class because there is
no science to it.

vatican astronomer blasts creationism
 

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 21:45:52 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 22:08:51 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:



Theodore L. "Ted" Thomas - "The Weather Man" - 1962.

You can't stump The Master. :)

Hehe. That would be counterproductive.

I figured you would produce. Thanks.

All hail me!! :)

I actually ruined a Trivia Night at one of the local bars once. One
of my friends entered me in a science fiction trivia contest and told
me at the last minute when we supposedly went out to "dinner".

25 contenders in the First Round. 10 after the Second. None after
the third - took me less than fifteen minutes to clean 'em out. :)

Only time the grand was won in the Challenge Question to boot. Want to
know what it was? No?

I'll tell you anyway.

"Kim and his family travel to Earth on the Dauntless. Which Dauntless
was she?"

Answer: The 4th. E.E. "Doc" Smith - "Children of The Lens".

You should have seen the look on the Trivia Master's face. Hell, you
should have seen the look on the Bar Manager's face. :)

Oddly, I've never been invited back for Scifi Nite.

I wonder why?

vatican astronomer blasts creationism
 

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 23:02:59 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:04:38 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

What I find strange is that some people have boats, and others don't.

Obviously boat ownership implies a higher level of development, and
the more boats the better. :-)

Damn straight. :)

vatican astronomer blasts creationism
 

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 22:28:26 -0400, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:

On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 19:59:41 -0500, wrote:

"What-if's" of theory are usually subject to Popper's Theory of
Falsification, or are a part of the logic that determines whether
theory is falsifiable. This is the tool that opponents of intelligent
Design employ to challenge Creationism or ID, Tim. And it's been used
successfully in the court room to enjoin school districts to restrict
the teaching of Intelligent Design. Since aspects of the metaphysical
are not capable of being falsifiable, then the metaphysical does not
qualify as having proper scientific foundation and Intelligent Design
consequently has no room in the classroom, according to the courts.
Popper's Falsifiability is a tidy, proven method for assessing the
soundness of theory; but, faith and science are two different,
disparate universes.

Interesting you should bring him up. I always liked Hawking's
explanation of Falsification - "No matter how many times the results
of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the
next time the result will not contradict the theory."

Which kind of dovetails with another of his more famous statements:
“The whole history of science has been the gradual realization that
events do not happen in an arbitrary manner, but that they reflect a
certain underlying order, which may or may not be divinely inspired.”

Oh this could get really deep 'ya know? :)

And how! This stuff can make your head spin. The philosophy of
science isn't necessarily an easy thing to get one's head around. I
remember reading a speech by Einstein, once, that he gave as a
commencement address at the University of Minnesota(?) in which he
insinuated that the notion of a guiding force behind physical reality
was not something that should be readily dismissed, if I recall the
gist of his speech correctly. Though, he said it with a succinct
eloquence and diplomacy that I could never hope to match. I think
Einstein was a bit of a philosopher, too, much like Hawking is a bit
of one.

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

vatican astronomer blasts creationism
 

On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 18:36:23 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

On Oct 5, 7:59*pm, wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 16:51:23 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:
snipped for the redemption of Usenet





Everything else is religion or philosophy.

I agree - global warming, peak oil, wind/solar energy. *:)

~~ now come one - you just knew that was coming :) *~~

The point was the relevance of creationism in science classes or,
indeed, in public schools. No relevance, should not be discussed except
perhaps as an example of religious superstition.

--
Birther-Deather-Tenther-Teabagger:
Idiots All

There's many things that science can't explain, Harry.

I myself haven't seen anything in the Bible that would discount dyed-
in-the-wool, rock hard, chiseled-in-stone proof of scientific
anything.

however, I don't see science being the absolute authority on the
beginning of mankind, or beyond *to before the Universes.

So, until science can present solid proof of origins of creation (big
bang theory included) I'll remain a Creationist that believes in
"Intelligent Design"

besides, *even if you leave out the Judao-christian belief system, it
really does no harm to look at another point of view in school as an
option, because I never hear evolution as being called "fact" but I
hear it called "theory" a lot. And weather answerable, or unanswerable
questions, there's too many "what if's" with theory.

"What-if's" of theory are usually subject to Popper's Theory of
Falsification, or are a part of the logic that determines whether
theory is falsifiable. *This is the tool that opponents of intelligent
Design employ to challenge Creationism or ID, Tim. *And it's been used
successfully in the court room to enjoin school districts to restrict
the teaching of Intelligent Design. *Since aspects of the metaphysical
are not capable of being falsifiable, then the metaphysical does not
qualify as having proper scientific foundation and Intelligent Design
consequently has no room in the classroom, according to the courts.
Popper's Falsifiability is a tidy, proven method for assessing the
soundness of theory; but, faith and science are two different,
disparate universes.

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
* * * * * * *-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

Yes.
"guilty until proven innocent"

?;^ )

Or at least until the black swan is discovered :). I'm not as much
puzzled now as I was in time past by the insistence of some
irreligionists and iconoclasts that science necessarily nullifies
faith (as in the practice of a personal faith), where the term
"superstition" is pejoratively applied to its application. To contend
that science "undresses" faith is akin to trying to call a trump suit
in a game of chess. It's meaningless.

But, I'll have to confess, there are some devotee's of the Christian
faith that flirt with the ludicrous, a la Ken Ham.

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

vatican astronomer blasts creationism
 

On Oct 5, 10:08*pm, Tom Francis - SWSports
wrote:
On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 23:02:59 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:
On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:04:38 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

What I find strange is that some people have boats, and others don't.

Obviously boat ownership implies a higher level of development, and
the more boats the better. * *:-)

Damn straight. *:)

hey, I've got three. am I evolving to a higher level of development?

vatican astronomer blasts creationism
 

On Oct 5, 10:52*pm, wrote:
On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 18:36:23 -0700 (PDT), Tim


But, I'll have to confess, there are some devotee's of the Christian
faith that flirt with the ludicrous, a la Ken Ham.



yep.

vatican astronomer blasts creationism
 

On Mon, 5 Oct 2009 21:08:18 -0700 (PDT), Tim
wrote:

What I find strange is that some people have boats, and others don't.

Obviously boat ownership implies a higher level of development, and
the more boats the better. * *:-)

Damn straight. *:)

hey, I've got three. am I evolving to a higher level of development?

You're getting there. :-)