January 20th, 2006

Hello Discovery Institute? This Is The Pope Calling. Shut the F### Up!

It seems that not all religious conservatives have their heads up their rear end when it comes to science. The Pope himself just reaffirmed that the Catholic Church supports Evolutionary Theory. In fact it doesn’t think Intelligent Design constitutes real science (gee you think?).

From The Globe and Mail

The Roman Catholic Church has restated its support for evolution with an article praising a U.S. court decision that rejects the “intelligent-design” theory as non-scientific.

The Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano said yesterday

that teaching intelligent design, which argues that life is so complex that it needed a supernatural creator, alongside Darwin’s theory of evolution would only cause confusion.

The ID movement sometimes presents Catholicism, the world’s largest Christian denomination, as an ally in its campaign. While the church is socially conservative, it has a long theological tradition that rejects fundamentalist creationism. Reuters

Take that IDiots.

Posted in Science



12 Comment(s)

Leave a response »

  1. Anonymous Says :

    Intelligent Design is Pseudoscience

    Pseudoscience is fake science that has no tests for its validity.  I said this on 20 of January 2006.  Within a few months, you will hear the conservatives spinners calling evolution Pseudoscience. The conservatives can’t come up with their own words, they will copy mine.  I foresee them using this word Pseudoscience when it comes to evolution.


             
    Comment unrated
  2. steve Says :

    Intelligent Design not a science it’s a philosophy and casts no doubt on the Theory of Evolution.  The theory of evolution is just that:  A theory.  There is a theory that OJ killed Ron Goldman and Nicole Simpson by lopping their domes off with a Stiletto, some gloves and some Bruno Amali shoes.  Yet there is doubt in the theory because some racist cop had to “prove” the theory by tampering with blood and tossing gloves over OJ’s fence.  I have been to that house.  That is a tall freaking fence!

    If Evolution were not taught as a fact but as a science in the true sense of a science then fine.  Scientists will always try to keep proving the theory correct.  But still, until it is fact that this is the exact way it happens, it is still a theory.  Just like the Theory of Gravity.  We all know gravity exists but can you prove it?  Scientists are still estimating the amount of molten iron within our planet to determine how our gravity works.  Isaac Newton came up with the concept 300 some odd years ago.  Gravity is still trying to be proven.

    There was another group that tried to end some religious beliefs back in the late 1930’s and early 1940’s…  So why not keep an open mind and let people preach there alternative theory before ya dismiss it all as a lie.

     


             
    Comment unrated
  3. Cranky Liberal Says :

    NO Steve, Evoution isn’t a theory, it is a Theory. Like the Theory of Gravity as you point out. That is NOT the same as theory that OJ killed 
    Nicole. You are mixing a lay persons defintion with a specific scientific term. Evoltuon is taught as a Scientific Theory because it is the best explanation to support all the evidence that exists to explain the origins of life. No counter theory disputes this data. 

     ID doesn’t cast a doubt on the Theory of Evolution not because they can coexist - ID states Darwinian Evolution didn’t happen - but because ID has no scientific underpinnings and can;t be taken seriously.

    Please people, do not confuse theory and Theory. They are not the same.

     


             
    Comment unrated
  4. icoman Says :

    One of the best explanations for the difference between Science and Religion that I’ve read recently uses the term “mystery”.  Science sees a mystery and works hard to solve it.  Religion sees a mystery and wants to keep it a mystery while saying that it is further proof that there is a God.


             
    Comment unrated
  5. Anonymous Says :

    Steve, you said you been to house where OJ allegedly killed his wife, and Ron?  Why would you visit a home where a murder was committed? Where you planning on purchaseing that home? Then at a later date sell the famous home for a huge profit.  I have heard of individuals purchasing the home of a famous star, and selling them. However, I never heard of someone buying a home were a high profile murder was committed and selling it.  I am just curious.     


             
    Comment unrated
  6. steve Says :

    Cranky: 

    You are too funny!  Under the title on my blog, “We have Conservative Nutjobs in California Afterall” there is a definition of the word “theory” straight from Webster’s Online Dictionary.  You should read the “definition” again.  Then tell me the exact difference between the Theory of Evolution and the Theory of OJ, the Knife Wielding Murderer.  Both have a set of “FACTS” that if assembled together “PROVE” a plausible outcome.  Can you “prove” my “theory” wrong?

     You and I have argued similiarly on something like this before.  You said one time that a pile of boards, some nails and cement don’t necessarily make a house while comparing that rationale to a human embryo being a “human life”.  Then I said something to the tune of the embryo becomes a human life and the pile of building supplies still need “Intelligent Design”. Remember that?  I can’t find that old info since the blog changed.

     Liberals like you amaze me!  You preach tolerance for the poor, the sick, women, minorities, and religion but can’t stand it when that religion is Christianity.  Celine Dion should be your role model:  “Let them touch those things!“  Instead you all wanna ban an idea because you cannot see the truth behind something like ID.  And that’s bad.  Seriously, just wrong…  You wonder why your candidates lose elections.  Maybe it’s tolerance…

    Without you, there’d be no articles like this to laugh at. 

     


             
    Comment unrated
  7. steve Says :

    Anonymous:

     I was in LA trying to start a music career.  There is a video clip of OJ going to his limo during his civil trial in Santa Monica and I am standing right there waving at OJ.  A girl I know saw me on TV and drove down to LA that evening.  We looked up the address to his house and did a drive-by gawking like most people down there did.  There were always 20 or so camera men outside his house.  We went around the side of the house to take a peak.  The walls around the entire property were like 8 feet tall.  Thank God, the girl was like 6 feet tall so we each could climb up and take a look.  We saw nothing.  The house was tore down.  One of the TLC chicks lived next door and her house was burned down by Andre Rison.

    The amazing thing about the OJ trial to me was how far he actually lived from Nicole’s.  During the day it’d take you 20 to 30 minutes.  At night, maybe 5 minutes at the most because there was a huge amount a traffic during the day.  He totally did it.

     

     


             
    Comment unrated
  8. Cranky Liberal Says :

    Steve my well intentioned friend, I could spend hours trying to educate you on the littel difference in the word theory. In scient a Theory has a very specific meaning. Here is the best way to describe a Scientific Theory:

     

    Theory: A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.

    In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology.

    The biggest difference between a law and a theory is that a theory is much more complex and dynamic. A law governs a single action, whereas a theory explains a whole series of related phenomena.

    What does this have to do with Christianity Steve, unless you are saying that ID is really a religious issue and therefore does not belong in the schools. How come you always claim we single Christians out when most of us are Christians??? Don’t you get that fact? Even those of us who are not dont have a problem with whatever you choose to believe - it’s when you start forcing that down our throats, or claiming you know anything that God thinks. You don’t. You have no frkicking clue what god thinks, IF there is such a creature. So when places like the Discovery Institute want to force ID into highschool bilogy classes, your damn right I’m going to fight back. Maybe certain groups should learn to respect other peoples rights instead of bitching about how discriminated against you are. It’s ridiqulous and you look dumb saying it.  

     


             
    Comment unrated
  9. icoman Says :

    Steve, this is an earlier post of mine that can perhaps help you to understand religious intolerance and how it pertains to persecution and terrorism. This is Science. This is Psychology and Anthropology. Try to read it with an open mind and then maybe you’ll understand better where it all came from and why we have to fix it.


             
    Comment unrated
  10. ken grandlund Says :

    Steve- I won’ ttry to further along your understanding of the difference between Theory (big T) and theory (little t) as Cranky has done a more than adequate job.

    Personally, thoug I find intelligent design to be a load of crap, I couldn’t care less if you want to teach that along side other religious mythology. Put it into a humanities curriculum where it belongs. In science, methodology is used to take observable evidence and create an logical progression from point a to point b and so on. What observable facts does religion operate from? None. Religion operates on the principals of faith, which by definition requires only one to believe without any empirical evidence.

    For goodness sakes man, even the POPE, perhaps the most dogmatic of religious people in Christendom can see the difference. Are you saying that your own narrow views have more religious justification that the leader of the first Christian faith?

    Mathematics is another set of Theories, put into terms of mans choosing. Would you argue that one + one is also a (little t)heory too or can you accept the rationale behind mankinds conceptualization of that?

    Again, as with so many things, you seem to let blind faith for a particular dogmatic belief blind you to any kind of reasonable position.

    For the record, I could care less whether you or anyone else believes in ID or even if your assert that the Earth is really flat. Just don’t try to pass it off as fact to those of us who will see that it is fiction. You want to teach your kids that ID is the way to go? Fine. Do it at home, do it in church, do it in a religious studies class. Don’t try to push it off as acceptable science when it does not fit the mold for what passes as science.


             
    Comment unrated
  11. steve Says :

    First off, note I never selected a point of view on Evolution.  ID seems like a philosophy more than it looks like a science. I don’t see the fuss about presenting both in a classroom especially if one is a philosophy.  You can teach religious tolerance without teaching a religious side in a classroom. But hey that’s me. (Here comes your first amendment claims)

    Webster’s as far as I know does not have a captial “T” version of the word “theory”.  It’s just a word.  But then again, did ya’ll look up the word?  My statcounter says not all of you.

    Cranky you are absolutely right, a lot of liberals are Christians, probably more so in other states not named California.  But then you read Ken’s argument and that sounds like a man who’s got it out for religion.  Of course, I personally have never claimed to know what God thinks on this blog.  But dude, you’d have to admit, there are a lot of commentator’s on this blog who want to dictate to us against religion.  That’s not tolerance.  Making fun of Christianity to me is like making fun of African Americans.  It’s wrong!

    The real issue between ID and Evolution is whether or not one or the other should be taught in classrooms.  I say if it’s such a huge issue, deep rooted in so many people, teach both.  Unfortunately the bigotry on both sides with never let that be. 


             
    Comment unrated
  12. Cranky Liberal Says :

    Steve, if you want to teach ID in a philosophy class go ahead. The issue is teaching it in a SCIENCE class. 

    Would you teach cooking in an English class?

    Would you teach music in a gym class?

    Your allowed to teach Religions in public schools, as long as you do it from a secular point of view. You cant espouse a given side, or denegrate a given side. When you do that you violate MY right to freedom of religion. It’s not that we want to dictate to you no religion- it’s we want you to quit insisting that religion is shoved down our throat. Even the religious among us don’t want anyone elses brand of religion foisted on us. Do you see our point? No one cares what you believe, we care what you try and dictate.

    And note, we don;t make fun of “Christianity” we do however make fun of several supoosed Christian leaders who it seems have never actually picked up the book they are hawking. We make fun of anyone with such blind faith that they are willing to igonre reason and logic. It’s not limited to any one group - every fundamentalist group gets it - socialist, Capatlist, religious zealouts of all stripes, Bush. You know people who always KNOW they are right.

    So to sum up Steve, teach ID in any other class but a science class. As you said yourself it is not science. That’s not bigotry, its common sense. 

     


             
    Comment unrated

Leave a Reply

Note: if you are typing html tags into the comment area manually (i.e. not using the editor) please use the "toggle html source" option above.

Fact-check it!

Enter a keyword, click the button below. Search result opens in new tab / window



Fish.Travel