…and this is a 
The Discovery Institute is up to their usual shenanigans — they're pushing another propaganda movie (say, whatever happened to their research program?), Darwin's Dilemma. It's complete nonsense.
This documentary will examine what many consider to be the most powerful refutation of Darwinian evolution--the Cambrian fossil record. Charles Darwin realized that the fossil evidence did not support his theory of gradual, step-by-step evolutionary development. He hoped that future generations of scientists would make the discoveries necessary to validate his ideas. Today, after more than 150 years of exploration fossil evidence of slow, incremental biological change has yet to be excavated. Instead, we find a picture of the rapid appearance of fully developed, complex organisms during the outset of the Cambrian geological era. Organisms that embody almost all of the major animal body plans that exist today. This remarkable explosion of life is best explained by the existence of a transcendent intelligence.
Wait, what? They're planning to overstate the rapidity of the Cambrian, ignore the vast amounts of morphological change that has occurred in the half a billion years since, and do the usual stunt of waving away scientific explanations so they can claim creationism wins by default. An utterly worthless bit of hokum.
The real shame, though, is that they've landed a respectable venue for the premiere: The Sam Noble Museum of Natural History in Oklahoma. Well, it was respectable. This will put a little spot of schmutz on their glossy reputation, I fear. And they're planning to turn it into a real kookfest, with both Jonathan Wells (whose book, Icons of Evolution, revealed that he was an ignorant maroon on the subject of the Cambrian) and Stephen Meyer, the philosopher-creationist with his own book on molecular biology (hah!) to peddle, there to lecture at the opening. I guess any clown can rent the integrity of the U of Oklahoma for a day.
So, where are the University of Oklahoma biology professors? Where is the staff of the museum? Where are the rational people of the state of Oklahoma? They should all be rising up in disgust to mock this ridiculous affair. At least they've got ERV to stick up for them.
I wonder if the Oklahoma legislature will try to censure the university for allowing religion on campus, as they did against Richard Dawkins?
In the department of NO-FRICKIN'-BIG-SURPRISE, the movie has two big name scientists in it, Simon Conway Morris and James Valentine…and their interviews were obtained under false pretenses. Of course. I wonder if there isn't some universal law behind this, that every creationist movie is obligated to lie to some scientist somewhere to get their words on tape?
Politics
Comments
Posted by: Sven DiMIlo | September 15, 2009 6:37 PM
Hmmm, one of the current curators was on my doctoral committee back in the day.
At some point Vic Hutchison will show up and explain what's going on.
Posted by: 386sx | September 15, 2009 6:38 PM
Linda Coldwell left a comment on the Thoughts in a Haystack blog.
http://dododreams.blogspot.com/2009/09/w-t-f.html
"You are correct that the Sam Noble Museum is not endorsing this film or this school of thought. As an equal opportunity institution, and part of the University of Oklahoma, the museum rents its facilities out to any organization able and willing to pay for the space.
"A tour of our terrific Paleozoic exhibits will provide lots of fascinating, factual information on the current scientific understanding and interpretation of the Cambrian Explosion."
Posted by: Glen Davidson
|
September 15, 2009 6:41 PM
So is it true that the Cambrian "explosion" involves organisms not related to each other as evolutionary theory would predict that they would be? They don't map out taxonomically into "nested hierarchies"?
Oh, that's right, they are related, and they are in the predicted nested hierarchies. So let's see, how is that a problem for evolution?
Ooh, it was especially fast, almost certainly due in part to dramatically increased oxygen levels. You know how it is, evolutionary theory predicts little or no change in drastically changed circumstances?
No?
Oh well, it must be propagandistic lies again. Come to think of it, that's the constant in the DI's output.
Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p
Posted by: Yubal
|
September 15, 2009 6:44 PM
If they would offer it for free I'd get me a copy
I Luv' Anomalocaris !!
Posted by: jimmiraybob | September 15, 2009 6:44 PM
...of the Cambrian geological era.
Period. The Cambrian period.
Posted by: thad | September 15, 2009 6:47 PM
I talked with the director of the museum yesterday, and asked him if they had switched sides.
(the gloating title of the di's press release made it seem so.)
He said he hoped that the creationists could possibly learn something when passing through the place!
I kid you not.
A disgrace.
Posted by: psweet | September 15, 2009 6:48 PM
Has anyone else noted that the blurb for the movie seems to assume that the geological timescale actually means something? If the YEC crowd is correct, this "explosion" isn't an explosion at all -- the fossils were all laid down in the same flood that killed the dinosaurs.
I realize that the ID movement 'claims' that it isn't simply warmed-over creationism. Still, I can't help but wonder how this sort of thing is received elsewhere in the movement?
Posted by: 386sx | September 15, 2009 6:51 PM
The film, shot on location at fossil digs in China and Canada, traces Darwin's own study of the fossil record and recreates the prehistoric world of the Cambrian era with state-of-the-art computer animation.
Yeah, 20th century state-of-the-art computer animation!
Posted by: Smoggy Batzrubble OM4Jesus | September 15, 2009 6:51 PM
Praise Jesus for the Sam Noble Museum's brave and democratic stance as "an equal opportunity institution [which] rents its facilities out to any organization able and willing to pay for the space."
My friend Floyd Rubber is organizing an international conference on the "Joys of Sodomy for Christian Abstinence Pledges". As his conference has vastly more credibility and real-world application than the "Darwin's Dilemma" circus, he'll be contacting the Sam Noble Museum at once to book conference rooms, exhibition space and fifty double-beds.
I wonder if the museum has any terrific exhibits his students can tour after? Something on Ancient Greek sexual practices perhaps?
Sam Noble must be very proud.
Smoggy Batzrubble
Missionary to the atheists
Posted by: truebutnotuseful | September 15, 2009 6:53 PM
Fixed that for you, Discovery Institute.
Posted by: eddie | September 15, 2009 6:53 PM
"...any organisation able and willing to pay for the space."
Any of the porn enthusiasts among us care to challenge this?
Posted by: beccastareyes
|
September 15, 2009 7:07 PM
Every time I see Stephen Meyer's name I read it as Stephenie Meyer, she of the writing vampire romance for teen girls. Despite the fact that her books are Not My Thing at All, I somehow think that I'd rather see Mrs. Meyer speak than Mr. Meyer, and that I'd get more out of it. (Of course, I'd rather see Dr. Myers speak than either of them.)
Posted by: Nicolas Keller | September 15, 2009 7:08 PM
#11:
an exhibition of naked lesbians masturbating with bibles?
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | September 15, 2009 7:12 PM
Oklahoma would explode. Even Norman. They'd hear the explosion all the way to Ponca City.
Posted by: Nicolas Keller | September 15, 2009 7:15 PM
@#14
""an exhibition of naked lesbians masturbating with bibles?"
Oklahoma would explode. Even Norman. They'd hear the explosion all the way to Ponca City."
double entendre? ;D
Posted by: Thomas Winwood | September 15, 2009 7:22 PM
A while back I used an obviously fake name (at least, obvious to anyone with a smattering of education) to sign up for the mailing list of "Truth in Science". (I figure I have something of a duty as an atheist in the UK to try and keep tabs on these groups in case they become seriously politically active. It's bad enough one of the funders of the academy system, Peter Vardy, is a creationist.)Thus far they've sent me a DVD (which I may decide to tear apart in a video on YouTube, depending on how amusing it is) and a review copy of a textbook which uses this exact claim to argue against common descent, complete with an outright falsehood that we do not see common descent in the Cambrian fossils.
As such, it's not so much "planning to do" as it is "doing already".
Posted by: Gilby | September 15, 2009 7:23 PM
I've been through the museum's exhibits--they are among the best I've seen in terms of natural history. Very clear, great explanations.
I've also been through the exhibits while behind a group with a creationist loon. As the kids looked at the exhibits, she said that all of this was wrong and the bible was right, and that there was no evidence for evolution.
So, no, I don't expect that the creationists would learn something while passing through the place.
Posted by: BMM | September 15, 2009 7:24 PM
There is only one solution to this problem: to root against the Oklahoma football team even more earnestly than before.
Posted by: flawedprefect | September 15, 2009 7:41 PM
So any of you pharyngulites gonna Zerg this?
Posted by: PZ Myers
|
September 15, 2009 7:47 PM
If the museum administration is hoping that "the creationists could possibly learn something when passing through the place", then I would hope that they are actively planning some informative lectures to counter the claims of the movie. This is where the biology faculty could come into play -- why not plan on having a lecture in the museum right after the movie to discuss and rebut the lies of the Discovery Institute?
Posted by: AdrianT | September 15, 2009 7:49 PM
This is ludicrous - the ID claims relating to the cambrian explosion have been adequately answered in the excellent 'Creationism's Trojan Horse' by Barbara Forrest and Paul Gross, chapter 4, especially pages 49 to 66.
Posted by: Jafafa Hots | September 15, 2009 7:51 PM
Meanwhile the Darwin movie with Jennifer Connelly can't find a distributor in the US because they're too scared.
Posted by: John Morales | September 15, 2009 7:57 PM
PZ,
Well, if this really is a commercial decision (cf. #2), that would be tantamount to biting the hand that feeds it...
Looks like they value their reputation less than you do (or perhaps, more charitably, they consider this won't harm their scientific reputation). :(
Posted by: Matheus | September 15, 2009 7:59 PM
Wait cambrian what? Now they accept that the earth is very old?
A step forward at least, even if its for the benefit of this particular argument only.
Posted by: Patricia, OM | September 15, 2009 8:01 PM
Zena Wyondotte, member of the proud warrior Wyondotte flock is available to give lectures at museums of natural history. Her riveting topics are - Which came first, the chicken or the egg? and The Easter Bunny is a big fat liar!
Call 1-800-IAMACLUCKHEAD
Posted by: Yubal
|
September 15, 2009 8:06 PM
sorry 4 empty posts tried to get this Link to #22
:/
Posted by: 386sx | September 15, 2009 8:07 PM
Wait cambrian what? Now they accept that the earth is very old?
A step forward at least, even if its for the benefit of this particular argument only.
I doubt it. They probably insinuate some young earth stuff in there. Or at least they probably use a lot of neutral terminology. You probably won't hear a lot of "millions" or "billions" in there. It is the Discovery Institute, after all...
Posted by: MikeTheInfidel | September 15, 2009 8:12 PM
Regarding the lies: Nothing new here.
"How it may be Lawful and Fitting to use Falsehood as a Medicine, and for the Benefit of those who Want to be Deceived."
The title of Chapter 32 of the 12th Book of Evangelical Preparation by Bishop Eusebius, the official propagandist for Constantine.
-- John Chrysostom, 5th century theologian and erstwhile bishop of Constantinople, in Treatise On The Priesthood, Book 1. -– Martin Luther
Posted by: DanN | September 15, 2009 8:40 PM
Alright, who is going to post the addresses that we can write letters to?
Posted by: AlexS | September 15, 2009 9:02 PM
The practice of getting interviews from high-profile authorities under false pretenses might be on its way to becoming a law of creationism (like the Salem hypothesis). The Dawkins "stumped" story, Expelled, The Voyage that Shook the World, and now this. Anyone have any good ideas for naming the phenomenon?
Posted by: DJM | September 15, 2009 9:08 PM
Can Morris or Valentine take legal action over this?
Posted by: Richard Broughton | September 15, 2009 9:16 PM
As a faculty member I can't speak for the Museum directly but it is part of the University and must go by their rules. The screening and subsequent talks are sponsored by the local intelligent design club, a recognized campus organization, so they can't officially discriminate.
However, rest assured that there will be plenty of rational people there giving them their due, just like our students ran Dembski out of town with his tail between his legs two years ago.
And this DI dog and pony show is flanked by talks by Elliott Sober, Janet Browne, and Robert Trivers, among many others.
Posted by: Dan Phelps | September 15, 2009 9:19 PM
You can leave a short message here:
http://www.snomnh.ou.edu/contact.php
Posted by: Ichthyic | September 15, 2009 9:23 PM
It really IS time for Markuze/Mabus to lose his internet privileges.
this kind of abuse has been going on for years now, and it needs to be addressed.
Can someone track down who his service provider is?
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
September 15, 2009 9:23 PM
Take your meds Mabus. You sound psychotic.
Posted by: Ron Sullivan | September 15, 2009 9:25 PM
Damn, what a pity. That's one of the best natural history museums I've ever seen. Plus, in the bit devoted to human history there's a carved quartz-crystal cicada that rocked my world aesthetically.
Intellectual guerilla action? Banners hung out the dorm windows? A mass laugh-in?
Posted by: falterer | September 15, 2009 9:28 PM
That Anomalocaris CGI looks familiar. Could be from a National Geographic documentary on the Burgess Shale?
Posted by: Richard Broughton | September 15, 2009 9:29 PM
It is no coincidence that they chose to put on their show at OU.
OK is a bible belt state with a legislature that is receptive to their message. Conversely, there is strong support for the science of evolution from university faculty, many teachers, and active groups like the Darwin 2009 committee, Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, local Interfaith Alliances, etc. So this is a battleground state unlike LA where they have already won (at least for now) and other states where they have no chance.
Posted by: Hypatia's Daughter | September 15, 2009 9:30 PM
I just watched the trailer. Looks very good. But I am wondering if the DI is screwing them selves.
The DI does not officially hold with YEC (Behe says that evolution probably occurred and took billions of years but from a primal, God created genetic "seed". Evolution merely "unfolded" this original "seed", as it cannot, of itself, create new information).
However, they keep this very quiet, in order to pander to and gain the support of the Creationist, YEC crowd.
I cannot help but think that the YEC crowd are gong to flip out when they see images of Cambrian fossils in "ancient" rock; of Cambrian creatures swimming around with nary a T-rex or Adam & Eve in sight....
I guess it depends on what is actually in the movie, but I cannot see the YEC's supporting it. Wouldn't it be nice if they went after each other and left the real scientists alone?
Posted by: Ichthyic | September 15, 2009 9:31 PM
i use many internet service providers...
care to provide a list to make it easier for us?
that's a good lad.
Posted by: isotope | September 15, 2009 9:32 PM
PZ,
This is an undeniably odd trajectory for the Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History to take, but I would not be quick to criticize the biology faculty at OU. I know the curators and faculty of the museum. I know many of the biology faculty at OU.
(The museum is excellent, if you ever get the chance to visit it).
Furthermore, I was tangentially involved with the Darwin 2009 Project at OU, which has been incredibly active in inviting notable (pro-science!) speakers to educate the general public about Darwin and evolution. You already know that they invited Richard Dawkins to campus, which resulted in the harassment of several OU faculty by the hyper-Christian state legislature for months on end.
The aforementioned people are, as far as I can tell, as staunchly anti-creationist, anti-ID and anti-pseudoscience as you are.
That is why I can think of no other word to describe this situation than 'odd.'
I trust that members of the biology faculty, geology faculty, Darwin committee, etc. will respond to this in due time.
Posted by: Aseem | September 15, 2009 9:36 PM
Let me explain. As President of CFI at OU, I was devastated when IDEA club booked Sam Noble for John West and Casey Luskin's talks this past Spring. I spoke to our faculty sponsor and another professor who is with Oklahomans for Excellence in Science education. And they explained that though they disliked the idea as much as I did, they were helpless, for Sam Noble Musuem is OU property, and must host events by any registered student organization, as long as the auditorium is legally booked and paid for. The event need not have anything to do with science - a cultural organization can host a tea party if it is willing to pay the rentals. IDEA club deliberately hosts events at the museum to make their events look 'sciency'. And they have done it again. I used to send out notifications of IDEA events to my mailing list so people could go and question the speakers and put them in a spot. But after West and Luskin's talks last Spring, and also the fact that Dembski shamelessly returned for another talk after being handed his ass by Abbie Smith (ERV) in the Fall of 2007, I have come to realize that these guys thrive on publicity. No publicity is bad publicity for them. So this time, I suggest all pro-science people stay away from these talks. Let the ID folks attend those talks alone, call the event a success and pat themselves on the back.
Oh and pzdumb at #36 and #37, you can go fuck yourself. Twice.
Posted by: falterer | September 15, 2009 9:49 PM
My bad. It was PBS, not a National Geographic, I was thinking of. It's a similarly lit and colored model of Anomalocaris, but definitely not identical rendering. Clips here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDw_Nrmb_rE
http://www.pbs.org/kcet/shapeoflife/episodes/explo_explo1.html
Posted by: raven | September 15, 2009 9:59 PM
The DI is going more and more toward YECism They just hired three people, all YECs. They've also given up claiming the Designer could be any advanced intelligence. The Designer is often referred to as jesus or Yahweh. They know there is no science in ID, it is just propaganda all the way now.
Oh gee. another death threat. Death threats are felonies. This guy uses many internet providers because he keeps getting cancelled by the ones he has.
Posted by: isotope | September 15, 2009 9:59 PM
Hey Aseem,
It's a never-ending sh*tstorm, eh?
You may be interested to learn that there are no active CFI clubs in my neck of the woods (Johns Hopkins/University of Maryland) because we don't live in a twilight zone of religious crazies.
-Former OU CFI affiliate
Posted by: pzdummy | September 15, 2009 10:03 PM
actually I am going to send this to the ENTIRE University of Morris - faculty & staff - you are going to be PUT TO DEATH PUBLICLY FOR BLASPHEMY...
you have forfeited your life
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?topic=10050&uid=73673967160
Posted by: SecularDad | September 15, 2009 10:09 PM
PZ,
You aren't being fair to the people at the museum (which is a great place, btw). They've got their hands tied on this one, and as a faculty member at a university, you should understand the position they've been placed in. They can't deny this student org. a venue any more than the student union could deny Campus Crusade for Cthulu a venue if they had the money and were in good standing with the university.
The University of Oklahoma is a relative bastion of sanity in a sea of idiocy. You should see the embarrassment we have to call our statewide newspaper. It is probably the most blatantly conservative newspaper of its circulation in the country.
The museum is great, and instead of shaming it, you should be promoting it for all of the good work it does. There is a reason this is the venue that the IDers chose. They are hoping some of its credibility might rub off on them.
Posted by: John Pieret | September 15, 2009 10:10 PM
To be fair to the SNOMNH, as part of a public university, once they open their facilities as an "open public forum" by renting them to any groups, they have only a limited ability to refuse to rent them to anyone who can come up with the fee. At my blog, Linda Coldwell, of the SNOMNH, left this comment:
I think the museum ought to, at a minimum, issue a strong statement that it does not support ID and that there is no scientific controversy. Moreover, with the biology and philosophy departments of OU, it should go beyond the exhibit walls, reach out to to the local community and put on some sort of program to dispute the distortions the DI crew will be sowing.
Posted by: Keanus
|
September 15, 2009 10:11 PM
The explanation lies in the Sam Noble being available for rent. The museum's website invites one to "Dine with the dinosaurs, mingle with a mammoth, and remember it for years to come.!" (including the exclamation point). They even suggest its being appropriate for weddings, other "private events," and lectures. I'm sure the DI has rented the auditorium to present the film and give Wells and Meyer a platform they'll never earn on their merits.
Some other observations. The policies statement of the museum requires only the approval of OU's administration, not any academic department, so the biology department probably first heard of this with PZ"s posting.
The auditorium seats just 173, so they're not likely to make much of a dent in local perceptions one way or the other. This is surely entirely for window dressing, like their colleagues who misleadingly land degrees from reputable universities.
OU biology and related faculty should find out how tickets are being distributed and try to commandeer as many as possible. If it's open seating, which I doubt, they should pack the audience with faculty and students. But even if it's closed seating, someone should organize guerilla action to make the DI look foolish.
Posted by: Benjamin Allen | September 15, 2009 10:13 PM
Aseem,
I am a Ph.D student in Bio down at UT Arlington and VP of the Freethinkers at UTA. If you wanted, we could potentially do something in conjunction with your group. If not handing their speakers their asses during the Q&A (Something I am more than willing to do), then putting on some counter-event before or after.
They may thrive on the publicity, but they can also use silence on our part as a propaganda tool and if we stay silent then the only message the public will hear is theirs.
Posted by: Blake Stacey
|
September 15, 2009 10:28 PM
PZ Myers wrote,
I think we all know the only way to settle this question.
Posted by: Jonny | September 15, 2009 10:31 PM
Intellectuals--what a hoot. As an observer I thought I would tell you that your efforts to impress (yourselves--omg, the word is now out!!) only resonate within your group of (pompous) piers. I marvel at your vocabulary and, oh yeah, impotence.
Please use your amazing wit to help the rest of us understand the evolution/id/creationsim issue, not add to the bullshit clouding the issue. Otherwise what good are you doing, really?
Posted by: Aseem | September 15, 2009 10:40 PM
@ Benjamin Allen at # 50
Sure. I was planning to show 'Religulous' around September 30, being Blasphemy Day and all, but that is not exactly a pro-evo/anti-ID movie. We showed 'Flock of Dodos' last semester. If anybody has any good suggestions for educational Darwin/evolution movies that the public can enjoy, I am open. We could have it shown a day or two after the IDEA club event. But I would suggest staying away from the ID movie and Meyer's talk.
Posted by: Coleslaw | September 15, 2009 10:41 PM
Group of piers? Is PZ now running a yacht club?
Posted by: chrisD | September 15, 2009 10:42 PM
Well said Jonny. Why don't you use your propensity for stunningly accurate recriminations against atheists to start your own stand-up career, a la Don Rickles? Only, focus on the pseudo-intellectuals, I'm sure you have plenty of material already just dying to escape your vacuous lips!
Posted by: John Morales | September 15, 2009 10:43 PM
Jonny, your anti-intellectualism is noted.
PS What makes you imagine overhearing others' chewing the fat indicates they're out to inform you? :)
You could join in, you know, instead of moaning from the sidelines.
Posted by: Benjamin Allen | September 15, 2009 10:43 PM
Alright Jonny, what do you want to know? Do you have a specific question? There are several biologists here who can discuss the matter with you, as a matter of fact between the lot of us I think we pretty much have the bases covered when it comes to content.
So please, ask away.
Posted by: hje | September 15, 2009 10:45 PM
"only resonate within your group of (pompous) piers."
Ships ahoy, dumbass.
Posted by: jonny | September 15, 2009 10:50 PM
I don't have any questions at this time. Thank you. I am intimidated so I will just watch from the sidelines.
Oh--right. I should have spelled that "peers." My bad. Thanks, Coleslaw. You are part of the very arrogant problem I describe. Go and be amazed at yourself.
Posted by: chrisD | September 15, 2009 10:51 PM
But his desire for Schadenfreude of the self-inflicted variety would go unfulfilled! Don't be daft, man!
Posted by: aratina cage
|
September 15, 2009 10:52 PM
It's times like this that I'm glad we can't edit our posts, kind of like when Sean Pitman spelled out fsaar as "Fairy Specified Amino Acid Residuals". Talk about a hoot! Thanks Jonny! Come again.Posted by: vhutchison | September 15, 2009 10:54 PM
To add to the comments already made by OU faculty and students, the following additional points should be made:
PZ: I usually agree with your stands on things, but not this one. Do you recall posting how universities should respond to such events when we put down Dembski? Your congratulatory message was appreciated. There will be strong similar responses to the DI crap this time. Details, for obvious reasons, will not be revealed at this time. Also, UM at Morris has never had speakers you disliked? Your
negatives against the Museum and OU are undeserved and show a lack of understanding about how major universities must allow such events. You must know that similar talks, etc., have been allowed at many other colleges
The science faculty and local organizations were unaware of the DI event until it appeared yesterday as a press release from the DI. It is thoroughly opposed by the science department faculties. Also, the museum director, a vertebrate zoologist, is strongly on our side. Under OU policy he could not refuse, as would be the case I expect at almost any university.
OU has perhaps the most thorough and excellent Darwin Year
events anywhere with well-known speakers, special courses, exhibits, etc. Check the schedule of speakers and events on the Oklahomans for Excellence in Science Education web site (http//www.oklascience.org) right column. Also note on the website other activities (e.g., Teacher Workshop on Teaching Evolution).
Also, right next door to the auditorium where the DI will hold forth is a new and outstanding exhibit on the Cambrian, with examples of pre-Cambrian precursor organisms, etc. This will be pointed out, but will not change the minds of the creationists - they ignore facts, of course.
In my opinion this really has nothing to do with OU's great willingness to allow debate on the topic, but is DI's attempt to counter our very good and highly successful Darwin Year events and to grand stand in a very conservative state where they think they will be well received by the right wing news media (e.g., the 'Daily Disappointment') and where a legislature has shown a willingness to attack evolution (e.g., the Thomsen resolutions, Sally Kern and Brogdon's bills, etc). It might even be some 'payback' for the tremendous putdown we had of Dembski a few years back.
The planned events bring no honor to Oklahoma or OU. They will only further the impression elsewhere that this reddest of states continues to live up to its reputation as a bastion of far-right conservatism and religiosity. The DI may simply see us as a soft target to further their anti-evolution agenda. It will NOT aid our opposition to anti-science and anti-evolution legislation, but will only enhance them. Could it also be some payback for the Dembski
put down about three years ago?
The event does not, however, reflect the attitude of the University and the overwhelming majority of the faculty. I also point out that, unlike Texas, Louisiana and a few other places, that we have been able to defeat legislative attempts to place religion into science courses for the past ten years, due mainly to an active group of organizations and individuals, even including some faith-based groups such as the Interfaith Alliances of Oklahoma City and Tulsa.
Posted by: Kagato | September 15, 2009 10:55 PM
Go one further and take a play out of their book.
Don't state the intentions of the follow-up, keep it innocuous-sounding.
Screening of 'Darwin's Dilemma'
6:30pm in Lecture Hall 1
Followed by
Discussion Evening
8:30pm in Lecture Hall 2
(refreshments provided)
No need to state loudly that the latter wasn't organised by the same group as the former, now is there? :)
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
September 15, 2009 10:55 PM
Jonny, either join in or shut up. Otherwise, check the dungeon. Several people who did nothing but insult the regulars are there. So, either ask or just lurk.
Posted by: strange gods before me | September 15, 2009 10:56 PM
Please use your amazing wit to help the rest of us understand the evolution/id/creationsim issue, not add to the bullshit clouding the issue.
Here, Jonny. I thought it was fun; maybe you will too: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
Posted by: strange gods before me | September 15, 2009 10:59 PM
I like your idea, Kagato.
Posted by: Blake Stacey
|
September 15, 2009 10:59 PM
jonny (#59):
No questions? Not even, "Know any good books for people interested in learning?" People around here love to talk about that sort of thing. We each started off knowing nothing, after all.
Posted by: M | September 15, 2009 11:01 PM
I graduated from the physics department at Oklahoma. The museum is really pretty good, but don't think that the biology department is going to jump out to help. I found out about a month before I defended my Master's Thesis that my adviser, Michael Strauss had started the ID club on campus.
http://www.ou.edu/idea/faq.htm.
Here is a sample of some of the talks I had with a man who knows his physics, but doesn't really know much about how evidence should be used.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5A9G8k02vpI&feature=related
After all of the paperwork went through and my degree was posted, I proceeded to mock any ID club I could find. I am glad that I got out when I did.
Posted by: Aseem | September 15, 2009 11:02 PM
Keanus at # 49 wrote OU biology and related faculty should find out how tickets are being distributed and try to commandeer as many as possible. If it's open seating, which I doubt, they should pack the audience with faculty and students. But even if it's closed seating, someone should organize guerilla action to make the DI look foolish.
We've tried that before. Arrived early and tried to pack the audience with pro-science students and faculty. It is still a no-win for us. Here is why (and please note that this is solely my observation and my opinion; you are more than welcome to correct me): Almost everybody that attends is strongly pro-ID or strongly pro-evo. There is hardly any audience member that is sitting on the fence and is waiting to pick a side depending on the result of the talk and Q&A/debate. The IDers twist and misrepresent facts as usual. When out of matter, they appeal to decency of language and politeness and such (Casey Luskin showed 3 slides full of expletives hurled at him over the internet) while the pro-ID audience nods in agreement. Even if they are asked uncomfortable questions during the Q&A and they fumble, the pro-ID audience is not convinced. They keep coming back. (As I said above, Dembski visited OU a second time even after ERV destroyed him in 2007.) They have nothing to lose. It is a win-win for them. At the end, it turns out to be a pointless exercise for the pro-science people. At least by boycotting the event, we can save ourselves some time, and deny the IDers large audience numbers they would love to boast about.
Posted by: Sven DiMilo | September 15, 2009 11:02 PM
re: #62
Told ya.
Posted by: Ichthyic | September 15, 2009 11:08 PM
Discussion Evening
8:30pm in Lecture Hall 2
(
refreshments providedFREE BEER!)that'll get 'em.
Posted by: Urmensch
|
September 15, 2009 11:08 PM
What a maroon?
Some kind of hybrid between a moron and a loon?
Posted by: Benjamin Allen | September 15, 2009 11:10 PM
Jonny:
This is a comment board on a blog filled with nerds (yes we are all nerds). In the absence of questions we will banter amongst ourselves, it just so happens that this banter occurs with people who already have a grasp of the subject material and thus have no need to engage in "thoughtful discussion". There is simply nothing to discuss save to mock rank stupidity. Collectively I don't think we see a need to fake such discussion for your benefit, nor am I willing to write a dissertation to bring you up to speed. I already have to write one, I dont need to write another.
Therefore, if you have a question ask it. We (or at least I) will be more than happy to answer it. What you do not get to do is come in, call us a bunch of pompous idiots for NOT faking a discussion for the benefit if the ignorant (such as yourself), and then bow out of asking a relevant question when cordially invited to do so.
That is my polite way of saying "Fuck off troll"
Posted by: PZ Myers
|
September 15, 2009 11:12 PM
I'm afraid I'm also a firm believer in tough love, Vic Hutchison. Oklahoma will get my congratulations when they stand up and do something to oppose this nonsense -- like, as I suggested, organizing a lecture/discussion to address the lies that will be told -- but not before. It isn't enough to say you've got good people and smart people...they've got to do something first. Anything else leads to complacency.
Posted by: jonny | September 15, 2009 11:19 PM
hje-- Benjamin Allen didn't punctuate the end of his kind remarks. Is he a dumbass too?
Thank you 'strange gods.' I will check out that site for objective content, as I have here (finding none).
Posted by: Eric | September 15, 2009 11:19 PM
They found (and killed) Trogdor!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wildlife/6187320/Snake-with-foot-found-in-China.html
Posted by: vhutchison | September 15, 2009 11:24 PM
P.Z. - Not a bad idea, but it is just one of several ways to counter the crap. More than one response is needed. Tough love accepted, but your put down before the events and lack of understanding of how most university policies apply to such events was surprising.
Posted by: Benjamin Allen | September 15, 2009 11:35 PM
Jonny,
I have attempted to give you objective content. You however have refused the invitation. I have however noticed that you are not sufficiently intimidated to refrain from cowardly sniping.
Posted by: PZ Myers
|
September 15, 2009 11:37 PM
No, I understand the rules about university facilities -- we've had a few creationist events in the physics auditorium at my university, it's a very popular place for the loons to pretend they are talking about science.
It's better that I offer rude put downs before the event, so you can do something to make me apologize, than to wait quietly and have to be rude when it's too late.
Posted by: Beanjavert | September 15, 2009 11:38 PM
"This remarkable explosion of life is best explained by the existence of a transcendent intelligence."
I lol'd
Posted by: John Morales | September 15, 2009 11:40 PM
vhutchison, please. Hyperbole doesn't advance your case.
PZ's "put down":The real shame, though, is that they've [DI] landed a respectable venue for the premiere: The Sam Noble Museum of Natural History in Oklahoma. Well, it was respectable. This will put a little spot of schmutz on their glossy reputation, I fear.
[...]
So, where are the University of Oklahoma biology professors? Where is the staff of the museum? Where are the rational people of the state of Oklahoma? They should all be rising up in disgust to mock this ridiculous affair.
I see it more as an observation, an opinion and an exhortation. I think you are overly defensive, and I suspect I know why.
Posted by: Blake Stacey
|
September 15, 2009 11:40 PM
Benjamin Allen (#78):
And in the time he spent sniping, he could have Googled whatever fancy vocabulary in PZ's post he found so off-putting. "Morphological"?
Etc.
Posted by: hje | September 15, 2009 11:41 PM
"hje-- Benjamin Allen didn't punctuate the end of his kind remarks. Is he a dumbass too?"
I was just usin' the barnyard lingo you're accustom to--none of them there high falutin' egghead words--so as to avoid confusin' you.
Oh yeah, bad Benny, bad. A sentence should always end in punctuation
Dang, I forgot that period. Bad hje, bad.
Posted by: Jonny | September 15, 2009 11:55 PM
Isn't it true that we can be a lot more productive when we are trying to solve a problem instead of being smarter than everyone else? That is my disappointment with both "sides," as well as blogs, sites, etc., like this. There is never a hint of humility, nor is there any indication either side is willing to concede the possible validity of the other's viewpoint.
But many of us can't get past that. That is where civility and progress fail. And we are probably doomed as a result. Tonight many of us are part of the problem.
Posted by: Aseem | September 15, 2009 11:58 PM
Mabus is attempting to get a quick Ph.D under his advisor William Dembski.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
September 16, 2009 12:01 AM
Jonny, we do not typically debate from a philosophical perspective. We debate from a scientific, that is evidence based, perspective. If you claim your deity exists, we want to see physical evidence. The same if you claim an Intelligent Designer. The same if you claim libertarian politics works. So, without evidence, we don't change our minds much. With evidence, we do.
Posted by: Blake Stacey
|
September 16, 2009 12:09 AM
Jonny (#85) wrote:
I don't know how we're supposed to solve problems by being stupid.
Not even twenty comments after I admitted "We each started off knowing nothing".
Why should we be "willing to concede" a possibility which we examined in the light of the relevant evidence and then dismissed as scientifically deficient? If you spend time reading science blogs, you'll find that we think more carefully about what creationists say than the creationists do themselves (applying the actual mathematics of information theory to William Dembski's blatherings about evolution not being able to create information, for example, or bringing the real facts of molecular biology to bear on Michael Behe's pseudo-scientific sophistries). We don't dismiss them out of hand; we read their books and endure their PowerPoint presentations, and then we weigh them and find them wanting.
We just don't feel it necessary to repeat this entire process with every breath we take.
Posted by: John Morales | September 16, 2009 12:09 AM
The entirety of Jonny's opening comment @52¹:
Jonny @85, after some interaction:
Need I say more? :)
--
¹ subject to renumbering once the troll's droppings are removed.
Posted by: MAJeff, OM | September 16, 2009 12:10 AM
Please use your amazing wit to help the rest of us understand the evolution/id/creationsim issue, not add to the bullshit clouding the issue. Otherwise what good are you doing, really?
There is no value whatsoever to ID or creationism. These are basically the same approach. However, although there are some distinctions between them, none of the ID/Creationist "schools of thought" have anything to do with actual science.
How's that? Simple enough for you?
Posted by: Kel, OM | September 16, 2009 12:11 AM
In science the validity of a viewpoint is determined by empirical evidence and the peer review process. When arguing science it's not a matter of that the two people in the discussion could have different perspectives on what is the same truth. You don't look at geocentrism and the heliocentric solar system as two sides. One is just plain wrong. Should we have to approach the notion of earth's relative position and motion to the other solar bodies with humility when quite clearly one side is utterly wrong?So in the case for biology, it could be that a designer was involved in the process. Just as it could be that the earth is flat and at the centre of the universe. But science, being the cumulative endeavour that it is, clearly has pointed to the fact that all life stemmed from a common ancestor. Should we really take it with humility when people who either don't know the evidence or misuse the evidence to support a religious agenda that their point of view just might be right - when any foray into the discipline is showing that those arguing against it are either wilfully or unwittingly lying to support their position?
Posted by: strange gods before me | September 16, 2009 12:18 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation
Posted by: ERV | September 16, 2009 12:23 AM
Morales-- I think you are overly defensive, and I suspect I know why.Who the fuck are you?
PZ-- Im with Vic. What are you talking about?
2007-- DembskiTARD comes to town. Eaten alive by OU students and professors. Lulz abound.
2009-- OU organizes a fantastic year-long Darwin celebration. Faculty harassed by state legislators for inviting Dawkins (HA! Not Lynch lol!). OU administration backs up the faculty. Everything goes off without a hitch. And we have lots of OU profs, and profs from around the country speaking about science. Its great.
2009, in a parallel universe-- OUs IDEA club is brought back to life by a local evangelical church. Basically, no one is in this group that isnt a member of this crazy ass church (same church that invited Demsbki in '07). Because this group has Church Money, DI fellows want to cash in. In the past seven months weve had to deal with John West, Casey Luskin, DembskiTARD 2.0, Stephen Meyer, and Johnathan Wells.
OU professors do come to these events to counter Creationists claims directly (when allowed), in addition to running Evilution Education seminars for high school teachers/teachers in training, running Evilution essay contests for students, +12 hours talking about how they use evilution in their research for a 'Day of Darwin', and the Darwin Year events... The retaliation weve been getting recently is entirely because of the success of OUs Darwin year festivities, put on by OU faculty! So what, specifically, do you want? A presentation on how Meyers/Wells are wrong comes off as BAWWWing, so basically youd be happy with a presentation on archeology and molecular bio and evolution for the public? Theyre already doing/have done that.
Look, there are two kinds of people at these *DI* events at OU:
1) Crazy Cult Evangelicals, who dont give a rats ass what I, or a faculty member, says about science.
2) Us, for the lulz, and to maybe learn something new in the Q&A.
Its a small auditorium, they dont fill it, and I pretty much recognize everyone at this point (churchie, churchie, CFI kids, OK Atheist, churchie, OK Atheist, profs, etc).
If there is some random person who gets swept into the event just out of curiosity, the best thing to do is to hand out a flier for the real Darwin Celebration events.
If you want direct conflict, Id be happy to debate
MoonieWells on the existence of both HIV and evolution, but I dont think he would accept...Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | September 16, 2009 12:27 AM
The film, shot on location at fossil digs in China and Canada, traces Darwin's own study of the fossil record...
Pretty good trick, since last I heard The Glorious Prophet Charles never set foot in either land. Poor Janet Browne is going to have to add two more chapters to her Darwin
hagiobiography after she sees this, right?Meanwhile, just imagine the propaganda mileage the creos would whomp up if they were the only prospective renters ever barred from the SNMNH...
Posted by: Jonny | September 16, 2009 12:29 AM
Morales: Notice I included myself by using the pronoun "we." I am probably not helping, either.
Nerd: Good point. I appreciate your post. I cannot produce a deity. Can you produce evidence of love? I would bet you think it exists in your life. What about intuition? Is it real?
Don't presume I am a bible-thumping zealot. I am open minded a good bit of the time, actually, and just am trying cut through the bull.
Blake: Last paragraph: I know you must be subjected to tons of material you'd prefer not to read, observe, hear, etc. And I would guess you are right.
Posted by: John Morales | September 16, 2009 12:36 AM
ERV:
I'm a commenter, responding to a comment.
I'd've thought it obvious, but I suspect I know why you ask. :)
Posted by: strange gods before me | September 16, 2009 12:37 AM
Yes. Can't you? Don't you have any evidence that the people who raised you loved you?
Posted by: Blake Stacey
|
September 16, 2009 12:41 AM
Jonny (#95) asked:
There's an entire industry built on providing "evidence of love". It ramps up shortly before the fourteenth of February every year. Granted, this evidence is not always of high quality, but then again, in the sciences we're accustomed to double-checking our work.
As a type of human thought process, sure: psychologists make careers out of studying it. If by "intuition" you mean something more like ESP, all the evidence gathered to date points to "No".
Posted by: Rorschach | September 16, 2009 12:43 AM
Agree with Abbie here, these guys have the right to rent that auditorium, and OU faculty, from what i read at ERV seem pretty active already, really.What more would you want?
Posted by: Jonny | September 16, 2009 12:48 AM
Yes. Can't you? Don't you have any evidence that the people who raised you loved you?
Not really, I don;t think so, no. But I BELIEVE it. Isn't that all you're doing, too?
Let's see. Love is an emotion--not tactile. You could say it is spiritual. You could also say that the love a parent may exhibit by, for example, giving a kidney to a child leaves a scar that, taken out of context would be hard evidence of something harmful,sinister or anything other than loving or spiritual.
I am not a philosopher so please cut me some slack here. I am sure you see where i am going with this.
Why can't all this co-exist without the possibility of being practical, feasible or even sensible? That is the part that gets me. Maybe I (we) are not equipped to understand it all.
Posted by: Rorschach | September 16, 2009 12:48 AM
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16255001
Posted by: Anonym | September 16, 2009 12:50 AM
It seems to come down to how often, or for how long, must one sniff a fetid dog pile before deeming it neither palatable nor salubrious.
Posted by: Kel, OM | September 16, 2009 12:51 AM
I'm not PZ, but I'll try.Intelligent Design advocates are claiming a new revolution in thought about biology. And that's fine, scientific knowledge is tentative and there is always the possibility for a paradigm shift. But the place to do this is in academia. While ID advocates are making documentary films, speaking to church groups, writing books and lobbying education boards, the academic fight for ID goes wanting.
It goes further than that, the unwillingness to tackle the issue scientifically means that faults in the argument go unnoticed. Heard of Irreducible Complexity? Well such a system was proposed in 1918 and expanded upon in 1939. Interlocking Complexity describes exactly what Behe is stating, yet a Darwinian mechanism can build what Behe is saying is impossible.
The best illustration of this lack of scientific rigor was the Dover trial, where Behe testified about the nature of the immune system. When confronted with paper after paper and textbook after textbook on the evolution of the immune system, he dismissed it out of hand. This is what happens when one is espousing ideology as opposed to science.
Scientists want the ID advocates to fight for their ideas in academia, to look at what the evidence says and follow that. By circumventing the scientific process, they aren't doing science. Instead they are using scientific qualifications and the scientific qualifications of those who publically debate their ideas to give the appearance that they are doing science.
This is incredibly intellectually dishonest, the same recycled discredited arguments are given to a credulous public time and time again. Even when corrected on their dishonestly, they persist to push the same lies out there.
So forgive my lack of humility in this. But if one side has to lie in order to support their position, then their position is not worth supporting. This isn't a scientific discussion, it's a moral / existential discussion dressed up as a scientific one.
Posted by: PZMinion
|
September 16, 2009 12:53 AM
Can you produce evidence of love? I would bet you think it exists in your life. What about intuition? Is it real?...
...Let's see. Love is an emotion--not tactile. You could say it is spiritual.
blah blah blah blah blah
Gee, disingenuous trolling, anyone?
Posted by: Jonny | September 16, 2009 12:56 AM
Thanks, KEL. I will think on that without contaminating the blog further (tonight, or until I am blocked).
Posted by: Ichthyic | September 16, 2009 12:57 AM
It's better that I offer rude put downs before the event, so you can do something to make me apologize, than to wait quietly and have to be rude when it's too late.
preemptive ridicule strike?
Posted by: Blake Stacey
|
September 16, 2009 1:09 AM
Jonny (#99):
There is belief, and then there is belief justified by evidence.
The context of the observation of the scar would then be determined by gathering additional evidence. Really, the idea that the significance of an observation depends upon the context — that a datum can't be considered in isolation — is a perfectly ordinary part of science.
Bah. Bedtime for me. When I wake up, I expect this poll to be Pharyngulated.
Posted by: James Brown | September 16, 2009 2:10 AM
Is "ignorant maroon" some sort of internet joke that I just don't get???
Posted by: Polyester Mather DD | September 16, 2009 2:21 AM
" We find a picture of the rapid appearance of fully developed, complex organisms during the outset of the Cambrian geological era. Organisms that embody almost all of the major animal body plans that exist today."
As soon as I finish putting in my five contact lenses and tying the rest of my seven shoelaces, I shall dash off a note to Seattle's foremost think-tank for the symmetry challenged. They have at last filled the gap separating hallucinia from its forebears, Marc Morano and Sen. Inhofe.
Posted by: Polyester Mather DD | September 16, 2009 2:26 AM
" We find a picture of the rapid appearance of fully developed, complex organisms during the outset of the Cambrian geological era. Organisms that embody almost all of the major animal body plans that exist today."
As soon as I put in my five contact lenses and tie my seven shoelaces, I shall dash off a note to Seattle's foremost think-tank for the symmetry challenged, thanking them for filling the gap separating hallucinia from its forebears, Marc Morano and Sen. Inhofe.
Posted by: Ermine | September 16, 2009 2:54 AM
Johnny @ #84 :
Oh really? I double- No, I TRIPLE-dog-dare you to search through the archives here and see just how many times and how many of the folks here have said something to the effect of: "Yes, I could be wrong. I'd change my mind in a heartbeat if presented with any real, positive evidence for the (existence of God/'Theory' of Intelligent Design)."
I'll bet you find one hell of a lot more people here on the pro-science side saying things like that than you ever will on the side of ID or religion. Care to try the experiment and see for yourself, or is that too science-y for you?
I know that even Richard Dawkins, in his most recent book, 'The God Dilemma', states very clearly that he is not adamant that there can be no possibility of any god existing. He admits that he'd be willing to give full credence and open-minded thought to any empirical evidence of their existence, should he ever be presented with any. I don't think you'll find a single person here on the side of science who would claim to be any more sure of things, or any less willing to change their mind if real evidence of God(s) or ID was presented.
The other side.. Do I even need to ask? YOU may not know the answer, but I and a lot of people here have seen that very conversation played out enough times to make a pretty educated guess at how willing THEY are to examine evidence or change their minds.
So I'm afraid I have to say that I don't think your statement was exactly honest, and you either know that, or you're too ignorant to say anything on the subject until you've educated yourself a little better. Care to try that before sniping at us? Several very intelligent people have offered to answer any real questions you might have about the Theory of Evolution or the real 'truth' about Intelligent Design.
Or do you prefer to remain ignorant? Willful ignorance gets absolutely no respect in my book, and damned little civility. So which is it going to be?
Posted by: Kagato | September 16, 2009 2:59 AM
Love and intuition are states of mind, concepts, mental constructs. Both are "real", but neither is an objective entity in its own right. They are both names for subjective experiences.
Unless you are a solipsist, you can assume that most other people's minds share at least approximate similarities in experience to yours, and therefore the experiences defined by these terms describe a "real" experience.
Nobody would deny that the idea of God is real, in this sense.
If the definition could be restricted to only the following:
- God is that emotional state that makes you feel at peace
- God is the conceptual idea of an all-powerful being
then I doubt anyone would argue.But for the majority of religious folk, God is an actual, all-powerful entity that exists independent of the human mind. And for this, there is no evidence.
Posted by: geru | September 16, 2009 3:04 AM
Hm, I wonder if the Discovery Institute did a children's movie, would they use the same tactics to get actors into it, as they have with Expelled and this crap?
I guess they'd get a big van and some candy, and start driving around near schools and daycare centers...
Posted by: Pompous Pier | September 16, 2009 3:29 AM
No bullshit on our side of the debate Jonny, it comes thick and fast from the i d /creationist side, they don`t make waders high enough unfortunately,you would be better off if you jumped aboard the science boat Reality Bites.
Posted by: DarkStar888 | September 16, 2009 3:36 AM
Posted by: Kagato | September 16, 2009 2:59 AM
"I cannot produce a deity. Can you produce evidence of love? I would bet you think it exists in your life. What about intuition? Is it real?
Love and intuition are states of mind, concepts, mental constructs. Both are "real", but neither is an objective entity in its own right. They are both names for subjective experiences.
Unless you are a solipsist, you can assume that most other people's minds share at least approximate similarities in experience to yours, and therefore the experiences defined by these terms describe a "real" experience.
Nobody would deny that the idea of God is real, in this sense.
If the definition could be restricted to only the following:
God is that emotional state that makes you feel at peace
God is the conceptual idea of an all-powerful being
then I doubt anyone would argue.
But for the majority of religious folk, God is an actual, all-powerful entity that exists independent of the human mind. And for this, there is no evidence."
Darkstar888 Response:
Hmmmm. This is not to pick on just your comment Kagato, but your sentiment about God & Love seems a common theme. I'll address and explain a few things for you.
IF YOU DON’T WANT TO KNOW WHAT’S TRANSPIRING THEN STOP READING NOW. IF YOU SINCERELY CHOOSE TO KNOW WHAT’S TRANSPIRING THEN CONTINUE TO READ, BUT KNOW THAT YOU’RE REALITY WILL BE DESTROYED AND EVERYTHING YOU’VE EVER BEEN TAUGHT AS BEING REAL WILL BE SHATTERED. IN RETURN FOR THIS REALIZATION, A TRANSITION FROM THE TRANCE STATE AND A RECONNECTION TO WISDOM THROUGH AWARENESS, AND THE FREEDOM AND LIBERTY OF THE ETERNAL PARADISE STATE WILL BE YOURS.
The Monster Called Religion
First, we’ll discuss the monster in the world named religion. Religion, wielding the twin weapons of guilt and fear, was the first strategy employed to manipulate the world. Did you ever wonder where religion came from? I don’t mean, why do people turn to religion and worship gods? Sure, when things get tough, people feel a need to call on something to save them from their predicament. But where did the very concept and this need for religion originate? Why was there a predicament in the first place? Once this problem was introduced into the scheme of things, why was there a response from the people that they needed to be saved? And of course, once the population responded to the problem, who came up with the notion of worshipping a god?
In Psalm 14:1 we are told that “The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.”
Now if this is the word of god, and for that matter, if god were really a wise and great creator, I might be a tad shaken by these words. What follows may appear foolish, but to the open minded, it may be a breath of fresh air. You see, this bible quote was written by the luciferian mind, the corrupt entity that rules the planet. There is no god, there is only the luciferian mind of corruption that conjures up the 3D reality we are experiencing. In fact, the bible and every religious book written is inspired by the corrupt entity that governs the illuminati agenda. When I say every religious book, that includes every science text, every new age bestseller, every book on esoteric magic, every astrological/numerological notion … everything!
We will consider the question – Where did religion come from? I’m talking all religion, including atheism. Yes, even atheists are religious zealots. Even though I state there is no god I am not an atheist in as much as I do recognize infinite awareness and wisdom do exist. This awareness and wisdom is NOT SPIRIT, neither does it have any connection to learned knowledge. The worship of a creator, a supreme being who cares if I’m good or bad, and I better obey … I don’t buy it!
Everything that everyone does is the result of his or her particular religion. It doesn’t matter the lifestyle we choose to lead, we are all duped into being religious dogs for the luciferian mindset, constructed to imprison humanity’s awareness. We all have been thrust into this religious system called the 3 dimensional reality – and we exist in a hypnotic stupor, bewildered by it all. However, we don’t need to exist this way. Quite simply, we don’t need to buy it anymore. The whole 3D experience is symbolized in the short little word - BUY.
BUY – is an accurate reference to the former World Trade Centre. These 2 towers symbolize Boaz and Jachin or Gachin, the two pillars flanking the entrance to the old Hebrew Temple. B for Boaz. J/G or Y for Jachin/Gachin, as there is no jay or jee or gutteral guh sound in Hebrew. These two pillars together enunciate as BY or BuY. This was the World Trade Centre: the mighty symbol of commercialism in the world. The system of BuYing.
BUYING = B u Y EYE = BIG EYE = the ALL SEEING EYE
GOD Is LOVE
GOD Is The LIGHT BRINGER – LUCIFER Means LIGHT BRINGER – LUCIFER Is LOVE
Another subliminal hidden in our language is the word LOVE. We talk about LOVE but you really can’t nail it down, just what this word really means. Here goes…
LOVE = LOVe with a long O vowel sound as in LOAVE
LOAVE = BREAD
BREAD = BRED as in BREEDING
BREEDING = SEX
BRED = BA-RE or WAter-Death Sacrifice sound from Egyptian mythology – RED = BLOOD
The word RED means Water Death.
LOVE = EVOL = EVOLVE = VULVA = EVE-AL = EYE ALL = ALL EYE = ALLAH
EYE ALL = AISLE = as in getting MARRIED, we WALK down the AISLE. An extremely trance inducing ritual.
Marry is Mare, the Sea, and marriage is to succumb to the seduction of the SEA/SEE.
LOVE is the worship of ALLAH, or the ALL SEEING EYE. This worship relates to SEX, to DEATH, to REGENERATION, and is used to manipulate our reality. As always, this is not right or wrong, or sinful, because sin doesn’t exist. But it is deception, meant to forfeit our power into the control of the luciferian mindset.
LOVE is only a hypnotic incantation word, that when repeated enough times, the victim falls into a completely vulnerable state. All we’re saying when we keep telling someone that “we love them”, from a romantic perspective, simply means, “I want to have sex with you”. From a security perspective it simply means, “please take care of me and I’ll let you have sex with me”, or “I’ll do something beneficial for you in return”. Sex is not always intercourse either. Sex is in the mind, and involves interaction of energy, which is thought. That’s all fine and dandy, but let’s be aware of what’s going on. There’s no such thing as love, the kind of caring and compassion we somehow dream it to be.
The ultimate expression of being is WISDOM through AWARENESS! Awareness of what this 3 dimensional realm really is. Awareness, that it is completely correct to be totally cynical , (without any emotional involvement), that any good or bad is present within this 3D illusion. This whole 3D thing is a fabrication and a lie and a mere dream state. It simply does not exist! Because of its non-existence, placing value, or lending credence to an illusion by declaring strong sentiments of love within this illusion is simply manipulation of reality by the THOUGHT PROCESS.
-DarkStar888-
Posted by: B | September 16, 2009 3:41 AM
Wow. Just... wow.
Posted by: Rick R | September 16, 2009 3:49 AM
Between Mabus, Always and the rest of the trolls (and now DarkStar, and the pharma-bots) Phayngula is like that brownstone apartment in "The Sentinel".
The gates of hell are flung wide.
Posted by: Michael Kingsford Gray | September 16, 2009 4:41 AM
I doubt that it would have taken deception or fraud to entice Conway-Morris to lend his hand to enhancing kookdom, given his record.
He appears to have rapidly progressed into the curious senility reserved for Anthony Flew, et alia.
Simon has progressively revealed his descent into infantile superstition over the decades.
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
September 16, 2009 4:45 AM
@Johnny #84: Your disappointment is your own problem, then, since it could be fixed simply by reading what the people on this blog actually say rather than making assumptions.
Posted by: Richard Eis | September 16, 2009 5:19 AM
Darkstar888 - Classic. But you forgot to include a government conspiracy.
Jonny seems to be under the illusion that we woke up one morning and decided to ridicule ID because we were bored. That we are all big meanies for not taking them seriously.
Jonny needs to learn that we can spot lying shite when we see it and it has nothing to do with love, rainbows and unicorns.
Posted by: Smoggy Batzrubble OM4Jesus | September 16, 2009 5:23 AM
Dear Brother DarkStar888,
You are very funny, but I think you have overdone it a little. If your post were slightly more normal it would be at the extreme end of loony, but unfortunately you took the bus of weird one stop too far.
While I am a great advocate of masturbation in your case I think you need to cut back to once an hour as it has clearly made your brain mushy to the extent that you are exhibiting all the symptoms of a man with syphilitic dementia.
Yours in concern for your pulpy gray matter
Smoggy
Posted by: uksceptic | September 16, 2009 5:29 AM
The Cambrian explosion happened around 500 million odd years ago and the new earth creationists want to use this as evidence for a 6,000 year old earth. Seriously? Are they fucking mental? Oh wait, yes they are.
Posted by: Chi Iron | September 16, 2009 5:58 AM
Real life observation tells us that, more often than not, those who work the hardest achieve the most.
Posted by: uksceptic | September 16, 2009 6:14 AM
DarkStar888 DO NOT READ ON IF YOU WISH TO CONTINUE LIVING YOUR LIFE THE WAY YOU DO, THIS WILL REVOLUTIONISE YOU AND WILL TEAR APART YOUR VERY EXISTENCE.
Darkstar - brokenbulb - bulbs = balls - brokenballs - boballs - SMELLYBOLLOCKS.
888 - Harshad number - comes from the Sanskrit harṣa, meaning "great joy".
Darkstar888 = Great joy in smelly bollocks.
Now please stop talking it.
Posted by: Thinker | September 16, 2009 6:41 AM
Wouldn't it be great to sit in the audience during the screening, and when there is a factual error, simply yell:
"You Lie!!!"
It wouldn't be civil, of course, but it would be interesting to see the reaction...
Posted by: adagio | September 16, 2009 6:54 AM
Thinker - You're right; it wouldn't be civil. What a naughty thought!
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
September 16, 2009 7:19 AM
Jonny, spoken like a true sophist philosopher. Emotions are irrelevant to your argument. And, at the end of the day, all emotions are biochemically based. Oxytocin in the case of love. Scientists know things. If you don't, it is frustrating to talk to us since you can't get any traction with your arguments. That is why you need to keep asking yourself, what is your purpose? And, are you achieving it? If not, don't waste your time here.Posted by: DarkStar888 | September 16, 2009 7:29 AM
FIRST: Posted by: uksceptic | September 16, 2009 6:14 AM
"888 - Harshad number - comes from the Sanskrit harṣa, meaning "great joy".
Darkstar888 = Great joy in smelly bollocks."
Gald you had something intelligent to say for a change uksceptic, but Since you brought it up, here is the real meaning of 888, and not your hack version.
Number 8 is hideous in that it represents the fascist mentality of the luciferian mind. Total absolute control is all this number represents. Nothing matters but the luciferian domination of our original eternal state utilizing the intellectually indoctrinated illuminati elite. As you progress through, you’ll see the incredible significance of the NUMBER 8, the word EIGHT, the word ATE, the shape of the OCTAGON, the 135 degree angle of the octagon and the INFINITY SYMBOL. The number 8 suggests destruction to anything that attempts to hinder this control. The endless coil of the 8 is symbolic of the electromagnetic coil wrapped around humanity. Keep in mind, we are conjured up by the luciferian egregore thought form as illusory light energy and therefore are electrical and magnetic in our 3 dimensional makeup. This light energy form of how we physically appear is riddled with deceit. The coils of our three dimensional reality are manufactured to squeeze DISCONNECT US FROM REALITY, just as a snake coils around and strangles its prey. Everything in our 3 dimensional existence acts upon our consciousness endlessly coiling and manipulating our actions to fulfill the aim of the agenda. The number 8 is symbolic of infinity. It is a never ending symbol. Its the serpent that swallowed its tail and maintains relentless control.
The evidence is overwhelming that the world systems control us. The systems have all been established using manufactured number systems and are completely designed to destroy all connection with REALITY we might dare to retain. Every major empire throughout history has furthered the cause of world fascist control, which is simply a front, or a SMOKESCREEN for luciferianism, and today we see the American Empire taking its turn at the helm. The American Empire will be the last one used to bring in the one world fascist regime for those left alive. Keep in mind, this fascist mentality is total manipulation of our original state of being. Through indoctrination of the luciferian mindset, working its insanity, we are taught to believe that freedom in the 3 dimensional scheme of things is somehow … FREEDOM. Being FREE in the 3D sense, without realizing that EMOTIONAL CONNECTION TO, or BELIEVING that the 3D experience is real, has no freedom in it whatsoever. And this is the MANIPULATION of our eternal Paradise State. Belief in the 3 dimensional realm as being real, and assigning VALUE and CREDENCE to it, is the ULTIMATE FASCIST IMPRISONMENT and CONTROL.
The United States was established in 1776. Not such a notable year when observed from a calendar perspective. However, look at it from an entity driven perspective and something quite sinister appears. Luciferian symbolism is obsessed with adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing. This is the magic of sacred geometry. They also mirror numbers, and mirroring anything in this existence if it serves their purpose. So the year 1776 divided by 2 = 888. Now mirror this number – it’s still 888. Trying mirroring it in any direction – above – below – left – right – it’s still 888. From this you should see that the date for the creation of the United States was no accident. Its highly significant in the plan of the agenda. Just how significant the United States is concerning the luciferian THOUGHT PROCESS for TOTAL CONTROL is almost indescribable, and was never meant to be uncovered. Patiently bear with these words as more groundwork is laid, to assist in understanding the complete lunacy that has pieced together this whole agenda, and for that matter, the entire UNIVERSE
It should also be noted that after the luciferian mind controlled government elite and agencies used to attack the World Trade Centre using the American administration, secret service agencies, etc. and destroyed the complex, the new Freedom Tower is already under construction and will be 1776 feet tall. When observed from directly above, the shape is a perfect octagon. Once again, the symbolic number of 1776 divided by 2 = 888. Is this really Freedom?
Furthermore, July 4, the birthdate of the United States is the number 4 – the FOURSQUARE FOUNDATION of the mother goddess, which represents the whole trinity of all religion. The 4th of July is 14 days (or 2 x 7) after the summer solstice, a high point in occult, or hidden, or SECRET, circles. Its also the 7th month, the number of perfection and completion. Combine all this number symbolism with 1776 (which is two 888’s) and you have a highly significant date in regards to the birth of the USA.
The number 4 has significant symbolism, and thereby significant manipulation attributes. Used in combination, the words FOUR and SQUARE, refer to the FOUNDATION STONE that the whole of the luciferian agenda is built upon. This is what the words attributed to the illusory Jesus were referring to when he said to Peter, ‘thou art Peter, and upon this ROCK I’ll build my church’.
FOURSQUARE = 4 ERAUQS in reverse = 4 ROCKS
ERAUQS also is the source behind the name IRAQ, the CRADLE of CIVILIZATION, or more appropriately, the CRADLE of the CONJURED 3D EXPERIENCE, of the luciferian agenda in BABYLON.
ERAUQS = IRAQS = IRAQ = A ROCK
Also, this is important to consider:
All vowels represent LIGHT, or the ALL SEEING EYE, from which the LIGHT, ENLIGHTENMENT, or LEARNED KNOWLEDGE proceeds.
A = a PRYAMID, or a PRISM, dividing the LIGHT into a RAINBOW of Colour.
E = the 3 PRONGED TRINITY, the Electron, Proton and Neutron, the ELECT, ELECTRICITY, or SPIRIT of the LIGHT Beam
I = EYE – the All Seeing Eye – or ALL A – as in ALLAH – and the ENLIGHTENED Ones
O = the CIRCLE – another symbolic form of the EYE, and the LIGHT extending from that EYE
U = YOU – the vowel symbolizing our illusory physical form, which is a LIGHT ILLUSION – a vessel, cup, with arms upstretched, worshipping the luciferian THOUGHT PROCESS
All vowels can be pronounced without closing the lips or teeth. There are 5 vowels, representing the SACRIFICE of our connection to REALITY.
Each ROCK is 1/4 of a SQUARE, or 25% of the whole (see The ROCK Video on YouTube)
The number 888 is a multiple of 111 x 8 which equals 888. Where and why does this show up? The number of the christ/antichrist is 666. The antichrist is the manipulated ‘black side’ of religion and intellectualism, (derived from SUBTRACTIVE COLOUR MIXING) – while at the same time, the fabricated christ, is the ‘white side’, (derived from ADDITIVE COLOUR MIXING) – together they represent 333 + 333 (or 111 x 3 + 111 x 3). The 10th clockface shows the number 111 coincides with the number 3. The number 3 is symbolic of the strongest form, or shape, of the deity, and is the pyramid triangle. The number 111 is also highly symbolic being located on the 10th clockface, as 10 is the number of inTENsity.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
September 16, 2009 7:32 AM
Yawn, DS is boring, inane, and irrelevant. A waste of bandwidth.
Posted by: DazedNConfuzed | September 16, 2009 7:42 AM
@#27
A church even when shrouded in complete horse-shit is still a church, and the DI qualifies. Thus it's likely you will hear "millions" and "billions"... they'll just be preceded by the word "donate".
Religion, it's all about the prophets ;).
Posted by: DarkStar888 | September 16, 2009 7:43 AM
Posted by: Smoggy Batzrubble OM4Jesus | September 16, 2009 5:23 AM
"Dear Brother DarkStar888,
You are very funny, but I think you have overdone it a little. If your post were slightly more normal it would be at the extreme end of loony, but unfortunately you took the bus of weird one stop too far.
While I am a great advocate of masturbation in your case I think you need to cut back to once an hour as it has clearly made your brain mushy to the extent that you are exhibiting all the symptoms of a man with syphilitic dementia.
Yours in concern for your pulpy gray matter
Smoggy"
Darkstar888 response:
- Let's set the record straight, you are not my brother.
- Next time, when you try to insult someone, use a litle intelligence. I'm sure you can do better than being a "great advocate of masturbation" and discussion your obsession with men that have syphilitic dementia.
- And as for my grey matter, it's as sharpe as a needle.
Thank you you comments though. Peace
Posted by: John Morales | September 16, 2009 7:44 AM
[OT]
Sorry Nerd, DS888 is certainly inane and irrelevant, but I find them kinda funny.
Belongs on the open thread, though, here they're just troll-droppings.
I reckon those posts rate 0.9 TimeCubes — they're that insane.
Posted by: RobertDW | September 16, 2009 7:55 AM
DS888@130:
Ah, that's the problem, then. It's meant to be soft and squishy - kind of like slightly undercooked meatballs.
If it's as sharp as a needle, then we can presume it has developed some form of crystallisation. This is obviously the explanation for your complete and utter lack of coherent thought in the last few posts you've done on this page.
I would recommend exploratory surgery to identify the extent of the problem, but it would probably be cheaper to scoop the whole mess out and replace it with an inaccurate calculator.
Posted by: Carlie | September 16, 2009 7:58 AM
Between Mabus, Always and the rest of the trolls (and now DarkStar, and the pharma-bots) Phayngula is like that brownstone apartment in "The Sentinel".
Seems more like Sigourney Weaver's apartment in Ghostbusters. More laughable than scary.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
September 16, 2009 8:01 AM
Nothing wrong with different tastes in humor. I like cerebral humor, not bizaro humor.Wow, that is up there...Posted by: a lurker | September 16, 2009 8:03 AM
Somehow I don't think that anyone going to the Discovery Institute event is going to see the exhibits. Usually private use of lecture halls, etc. in a museum is done after hours when the exhibits are closed.
As someone who has visited the museum in question, I can say that the exhibits are unabashedly pro-evolution. It has an "Explore Evolution" exhibit just like the one in Nebraska that Dawkins a video of which can be found here (scroll down to Nebraska Vignettes). The exhibits on the Paleozoic are especially evolution-centered. And checking the website shows that they host evolution related events as others have pointed out. Check out this: Darwin at the Museum: Oct. 10 through Jan. 18 and their schedule
Posted by: william e emba | September 16, 2009 8:10 AM
For your reading pleasure, there's a brand new anthology of all new science fiction short stories entitled Intelligent Design, edited by Denise Little. The anthology's theme, according to the cover, is "one of today's most contoversial [sic] topics--evolution versus creationism". Little's introduction is tripe, but the stories I've read so far are mostly good.
Posted by: uksceptic | September 16, 2009 8:59 AM
DarkStar888 I got about half way through that tirade and gave up. You so crazy.
I wonder what thats like? Getting up, washing, getting dressed, you know day to day normal shit we all do and then sitting down at the computer and expelling reams and reams of pure crazy for all to see. Do you ever tire of it?
Posted by: blondin | September 16, 2009 9:03 AM
Does this leave an opening for a new burninator?
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | September 16, 2009 10:02 AM
Urmensch @ # 72 & James Brown @ # 107 - in asking what is meant by "ignorant maroon" you bring great shame upon yourselves and your mothers, by revealing your insufficient exposure at an impressionable age to Bugs Bunny cartoons.
Posted by: McCorvic | September 16, 2009 10:02 AM
Man, I wish I were a creationist. It's so easy and I could be famous.
All you have to do is finding something that IS evidence for evolution, turn around and simply say it is NOT evidence for evolution, and the proceed to simply say "nuh-uh" in every debate afterwards.
Then POW! you're a rich, famous creationist.
Posted by: Thad | September 16, 2009 10:32 AM
I have some sympathy for Dr. Hutchinson right now.
The problem is not from the museum, but from the oily and lying implications that flow from the DI's press release:
"Intelligent Design Film to Premiere at Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History Sept. 29"
They just want that headline now and in the future to give a quick sense of scientific credibily to their venture. To use that "Premier" as a byline both now and in the future. I do not think they care about what actually happens at the event as long as they have that association.
It looks like they put the museum in a bind by hiring the hall in that stealthy and unctuous way and then issuing the press release.
It seems that the pious religous folk at DI do not have a clue about the full meaning of the ninth commandment.
Sorry it rubbed off on you Dr. Hutchinson.
Here is a link to the original PR newswire press release from the Discovery Institute. Smug with its deceptivess.
http://media.prnewswire.com/en/jsp/latest.jsp?resourceid=4062737&access=RS
Thad
Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | September 16, 2009 10:37 AM
Ermine @ # 110: ... Richard Dawkins, in his most recent book, 'The God Dilemma'...
Ahem. Two minor corrections are in order here, if this thread is to maintain proper Pharyngulative standards of pedantry:
* Richard Dawkins's latest book is The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution, due to be released 9/22 but already being dutifully flogged by the author on talk shows, etc.
* His previous book is The God Delusion, which does indeed contain the argument you outline.
It's not nice to tease us fundanatical atheists with hints of a Dawkins/atheism book we then think we missed!
Posted by: raven | September 16, 2009 10:38 AM
Sure the museum has to let the DI use its facilities, the rules in a state owned building. They are just trying to hijack the glow of respectability of science, one of the foundations of modern society.
It is important for the reality based community to at least try to counteract the propaganda. Talking to creationists is like talking to a wall, which you are, since their minds are walled off by cubic yards of religious fanaticism and delusion.
But other people are watching and they are the real target. Fundie kids are told over and over that evolution is a dying theory that no one accepts anymore. They may not even know what it is but it comes as a shock to them when they find out that the scientific community overwhelmingly accepts it and considers fundies to be hopeless, evil, morons. And when they know they were lied to once, the brighter among them wonder how many more lies they were fed.
Posted by: mafaremrga | September 16, 2009 11:14 AM
Don't protest the event, subsume it!!
I'm not sure what the capacity of the presentation hall at the Sam Noble Museum is but what if enough people to fill the place showed up 2-3 hours early, occupied EVERY available seat, sat through the screening of the film and then sat there in stony silence for the Q&A.
Sure Meyers and Wells could pontificate for a while but eventually even they would get the message that no one is listening. Bring newspapers or copies of Science and Nature to hold up in front of your faces while they blabber on about ID. It would have the added advantage of providing plenty of folks to come out from the event shaking their heads and giving solid quotes to any of the press that might show up.
Posted by: Keanus
|
September 16, 2009 11:23 AM
Thad (in comment #141)has it right. The DI is just buying access to the Sam Noble and OU name. Nothing more. What they seek is the same thrill and claim that a wealthy but tone deaf diva would seek by renting Carnegie Hall and performing for a crowd of her friends. She could ever after claim she performed on stage at Carnegie Hall. But like the DI claim to come, it would always he hollow. The entire performance is an exercise in credential buying. Perhaps the best response would be to hire a troupe of clowns to perform in the lobby before and after the show. In any event, I'd hope that OU or the faculty would make sure that contact with the local press, such as it is, is made with appropriate press releases.
Posted by: StephA
|
September 16, 2009 11:29 AM
I'm a U. of Oklahoma student, and I love the Sam Noble museum, but this is absolutely ridiculous. Is there anything us local people can do to stop this? Or perhaps letting the ID morons embarass themselves in front of OU faculty would be a better idea.
Posted by: strange gods before me, number 8 is hideous | September 16, 2009 11:47 AM
Oh wow, this Darkstar fellow is brilliant.
It's like he's reading my mind!
Posted by: MAJeff, OM | September 16, 2009 11:49 AM
Number 8 is hideous in that it represents the fascist mentality of the luciferian mind. Total absolute control is all this number represents. Nothing matters but the luciferian domination of our original eternal state utilizing the intellectually indoctrinated illuminati elite.
How dare you defame 8. Everyone knows it's 13 that's evil.
Posted by: strange gods before me, number 8 is hideous | September 16, 2009 12:11 PM
13 has 2 digits.
1 + 3 = 4.
4 * 2 = 8.
13 = 8.
The Freemasons are coming to get me now.
Posted by: bcoppola | September 16, 2009 1:07 PM
Blake #67: Don't know if you helped "Jonny" but I was wondering about a reading list, so thanks! That and PZs post on more books today means my fall/winter reading list is filling out.
Posted by: Aquaria | September 16, 2009 1:19 PM
Never defame the number 8! It's infinity standing up!
Posted by: ckoenigsberg | September 16, 2009 2:02 PM
well, I pay to read Pharyngula on my Kindle, so when I saw this warning there yesterday of course I freaked, because we have a family membership to the SNOMNH... the evolution exhibits are indeed truly great and our kids like to go there almost every weekend...
so I don't know if I can do anything to help out, Sept. 29th is a Tuesday night, but I will if I can...
Posted by: raven | September 16, 2009 2:03 PM
This is stupid.
In xian numerology, number 8 is the number for jesus. Hmmmm, well if jesus is a fascist luciferian, it makes sense. I doubt that is what the idiot meant though;.
In Asian numerology, number 8 is the number of luck.
Posted by: BeamStalk | September 16, 2009 2:36 PM
Kind of late for this story, but here are some pictures I took from the Sam Noble Museum of Natural History.
http://justin342.fotopic.net/c1680140.html
Posted by: vhutchison | September 16, 2009 2:44 PM
#135 a lurker. The Director of the Museum has announced that SNOMNH will be open several hours before and after the DI film. This will be posted shortly on the Museum web site and publicized widely.
Posted by: DarkStar888 | September 16, 2009 3:43 PM
Hi again all. I know it's hard for most of you to think out of the box here. Listen, I'm a scienctist to. I love science. It's what I studied in University many years ago and though-out my life.
I'm not going to defend myself here from any of your moronic attempts to attcack my sanity. You sheeple don't even actually read the material to see the logic of the informatuion I posted, and you are so quick to JUDGE people.
Since you don't seem to understand how our numbers and language are really made up and that we live in a 3D Illusion (a Matrix), I'll ask you a different question.
I'll keep this short for the ADD and ADHD's in the group.
Here is a science question for you. Tell me how Science explains the falling of a (two) massive 1400" Tower with one airplane hitting it? Or was it blown up...which would mean what?
OK. Given me Science!
-DarkStar555-
Posted by: MikeTheInfidel | September 16, 2009 4:49 PM
Two does not equal one.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
September 16, 2009 5:03 PM
DS888, you make the claim, you have to provide the evidence, preferably from the peer reviewed scientific literature, to back it up. You show us you are right. Until then, science stands as is, and doesn't need to convince the ignorant like you. Do your homework.
Posted by: m-45 | September 16, 2009 5:05 PM
An Open Letter from Dr. Michael A. Mares, Museum Director
Regarding the screening of the film “Darwin’s Dilemma” by the OU IDEA Club in the museum’s Kerr Auditorium
The Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History is dedicated to science and to elucidating the remarkable evolutionary history of life on Earth. The museum actively engages in public programs, undergraduate and graduate education, outreach education, and other efforts to increase the scientific literacy of visitors to the museum and the people of Oklahoma.
Although the museum does not support unscientific views masquerading as science, such as those espoused by the Discovery Institute, the museum does respect the religious beliefs of all people. Moreover, the museum is obligated to rent its public space to any organization that is engaged in lawful activities, free speech and open discourse. The museum does not discriminate against recognized campus organizations based on their religious beliefs, political philosophy, scientific literacy, or any other factors.
We invite everyone interested in an accurate description of how life developed over the last four billion years to visit our galleries. The well-organized and scientifically accurate exhibits illustrate – through real specimens and scientific methods – the fact of evolution by natural selection as first described by Charles Darwin and continually supported by all branches of science ever since that time. The museum also recommends that people interested in evolutionary science review the more than 1,000 publications by our curators and professional staff that are based in evolutionary biology.
The museum's many galleries will be open for free before and after the showing of the Discovery Institute’s film “Darwin’s Dilemma” on Sept. 29 so the public can see that there is no scientific controversy in evolutionary science's explanation of the development and history of Earth's biodiversity.
This calendar year – the 150th anniversary of the publication of Darwin’s On the Origin of Species –
the museum, in partnership with OU departments of Zoology, the Department of Botany and Microbiology, the Department of Anthropology, and the History of Science and History of Science Collections of the OU Library, has presented more than 15 public education programs related to evolution, with many more on the calendar ahead. We encourage the public to take part in these programs, many of which are free, to educate themselves about the true nature of the science of evolutionary biology.”
PROGRAMS HELD AT THE MUSEUM SO FAR THIS YEAR
01/22 –Ken Taylor, professor emeritus, OU History of Science, "Volcanology before Darwin: From burning mountains to Igneous Global Dynamics" In partnership with the History of Science Department Presidential Dream Course
02/03 –Paul White, Darwin Correspondence Project, Affiliated Scholar, Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge, "Darwin's Emotions" In partnership with the History of Science Department Presidential Dream Course
02/12 –John Lynch, "Was There a Darwinian Revolution?" In partnership with the History of Science Department Presidential Dream Course
02/13 – “Darwin Across the Disciplines,” Darwin Panel Discussion Part of Darwin 2009 events
02/19 – Pam Soltis, Curator, Florida Museum of Natural History, “Darwin's 'Abominable Mystery' Part of the Sutton Lecture Series sponsored by the OU Ecology and Evolutionary Biology program
02/26 –Michael Ruse, T. Werkmeister Professor, Department of Philosophy, Florida State University, "Is Darwinism Past Its 'Sell-By' Date?" In partnership with the History of Science Department Presidential Dream Course
03/12 – John Beatty, Department of Philosophy, University of British Columbia, "The Details Left to Chance: Evolutionary Contingency and its Broader Implications in the Work of Charles Darwin and Stephen Jay Gould” In partnership with the History of Science Department Presidential Dream Course
03/24 – ANTS: Nature’s Secret Power (Movie), sponsored by the SNOMNH, The Sutton Lecture Series on behalf of the Sutton Foundation, and the University of Oklahoma Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Graduate Program, Department of Zoology and Department of Botany and Microbiology
03/26 –Bert Holldobler, Foundation Professor, Arizona State University, “Order in Chaos: Communication and Cooperation in Ant Societies. Part of the Sutton Lecture Series sponsored by the Sutton Foundation, and the University of Oklahoma Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Graduate Program, Department of Zoology and Department of Botany and Microbiology
04/07 – Anne Magurran, University of St. Andrews, “Little Fish and Big Issues: Guppies and Biological Diversity,” Part of the Sutton Lecture Series sponsored by the Sutton Foundation, and the University of Oklahoma Ecology and Evolutionary Biology Graduate Program, Department of Zoology and Department of Botany and Microbiology
04/09 – John van Wyhe, University of Cambridge & Darwin Online Project, "Darwin's Secret? Was the theory of evolution really held back for twenty years?" In partnership with the History of Science Department Presidential Dream Course
04/16 – Garland E. Allen, Department of Biology, Washington University in St. Louis, "Darwin and Marx: Science as History and History as Science. Dialectical materialism and the dynamics of historical change" In partnership with the History of Science Department Presidential Dream Course
04/21 – Joe Cain, Department of Science and Technology Studies, University College London, "A Monkey's Uncle: The 1925 Scopes Trial wasn't what you think!" In partnership with the History of Science Department Presidential Dream Course
08/27 – Stephen Weldon, University of Oklahoma History of Science department, “Hopes, Fears, and Discontent in America: Four Decades of Anti-Evolutionism and Anti-Creationism” In partnership with the History of Science Department
09/08 – Piers Hale, OU History of Science Dept., “Difficulties on Theory,” In Discussion with Darwin Seminar series
09/15 – Lynn Fowler, Charles Darwin Foundation & Lindblad Expedition, “Charles Darwin: Exploring Galapagos and the Charles Darwin Foundation Today” In partnership with the History of Science Department
UPCOMING PROGRAMS
Tuesday, Sept. 22, 7 p.m.
In Discussion with Darwin: Classroom seminars on Evolution
These small group seminars focus on a variety of topics related to evolution.
Rich Broughton (Department of Zoology)
"Has Macroevolution Been Misunderestimated?"
This seminar discussion will focus on the lack of a fundamental difference between micro- and macroevolution (as the terms are commonly used). It will use molecular data to examine the basis of taxonomic groups and explore examples of evolutionary divergence in nature.
Friday Oct. 2, 7 to 8:30 p.m., and
Saturday, Oct. 3, 9 a.m. to approximately 4:30 p.m.
Adult Workshop: Invertebrate Fossil Dig Field Trip
Join invertebrate paleontology curator Dr. Steve Westrop and museum staff for an exciting journey into Oklahoma’s Paleozoic past. Explore life in Oklahoma’s ancient oceans through an informative talk on Friday evening with a close-up look at some of the museum’s finest invertebrate specimens. On Saturday morning, we will meet at the museum at 9 a.m. and travel in university vans to the dig site where you will find a variety of marine fossils.
Tuesday, Oct. 6, 7 p.m.
In Discussion with Darwin: Classroom seminars on Evolution
Phil Gibson (Department of Botany and Microbiology, Dept. of Zoology)
“Darwin’s Different Flowers”
While Darwin receives much attention for his work on animals, he was equally influential in the botanical world. This seminar will discuss Darwin’s book On the Different Forms of Flowers on Plants of the Same Species in which he applies his model of evolution by natural selection to investigate why some plants produce two or more types of flowers.
Darwin at the Museum
Oct. 10 through Jan. 18, 2010
This special exhibition at the Sam Noble Oklahoma Museum of Natural History, in partnership with the University of Oklahoma History of Science Collections, University of Oklahoma Libraries, features a complete set of first-editions of Darwin’s works, and sheds light on the man not only as the founder of evolution, but also as a global traveler, a geologist, botanist and thinker. Finally, the exhibition showcases how Darwin’s groundbreaking ideas continue to inspire the work of the scientists at the museum today. In addition to the books themselves, the exhibition features maps and illustrations, hand-written manuscripts and letters by Darwin himself, and specimens from museum collections relating both to Darwin’s studies and to the research of current museum scientists.
Tuesday, Oct. 13, 7 p.m.
Krishna Dronamraju
"J.B.S. Haldane and the Making of Darwinian Genetics "
Free public lecture
J. B. S. Haldane (1892-64) was one of the great scientists--and great science writers--of the 20th century. A central figure in the development of modern evolutionary biology, he was also a highly skilled essayist and an extraordinary, if controversial, character.
Krishna Dronamraju was Haldane’s last graduate student. Dronamraju is a Nobel Peace Prize nominee and President of the Foundation for Genetic Research in Houston. He was an Advisor to the White House and served on the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee of the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Prof. Dronamraju is a Visiting Professor of the University of Paris, the Albert Schweitzer International University of Geneva, and an Honorary Research Fellow of University College, London. Sponsored by the University of Oklahoma History of Science department and the museum.
Saturday, Oct. 24, 1 to 4 p.m.
Explore with Darwin Family Day
Join us for an exciting adventure as we celebrate the discoveries of Charles Darwin! Children's book authors Carolyn Meyer and Anne Weaver, both authors of books about Darwin and his travels, will be reading selections from their books and signing books! Visit the Darwin at the Museum exhibit, featuring first editions of all of Darwin’s books and some of his letters. Then take a journey of your own as you explore the museum, and imagine what it might be like to discover new places. Complete your adventure with a fun Darwin-inspired craft to take home!
Activities are free with paid museum admission.
Tuesday, Oct. 27, 7 p.m.
In Discussion with Darwin: Classroom seminars on Evolution
Cecil Lewis (Department of Anthropology)
"Race and Genetics in Health"
Are traditionally identified human "races" biologically meaningful? Are racial classifications useful in genetic disease research? This seminar discussion will address these questions. The practical importance of human evolution studies will be illuminated.
Tuesday, Nov. 3, 7 p.m.
In Discussion with Darwin: Classroom seminars on Evolution
Ingo Schlupp (Department of Zoology)
“The Origin of Sexual Selection”
Why do males often have elaborate traits that make them attractive for females, but are detrimental to survival? Why are females typically coy and males competitive for females? Charles Darwin proposed the theory of sexual selection as an answer to these questions. In our meeting we shall discuss this idea, its history and some aspects of modern research on this topic.
Thursday, Nov. 5, 6 to 9 p.m., Great Hall
History of Science Colloquium Series
Janet Browne, (History of Science, Harvard University)
Free public lecture
Janet Browne specializes in reassessing Charles Darwin’s work, first as associate editor of the early volumes of The Correspondence of Charles Darwin, and more recently as author of a major biographical study that integrated Darwin’s science with his life and times. The biography was awarded several prizes, including the James Tait Black award for non-fiction in 2004, the W.H. Heinemann Prize from the Royal Literary Society, and the Pfizer Prize from the History of Science Society. She has been editor of the British Journal for the History of Science and president of the British Society for the History of Science.
Thursday, Nov. 12, 7 p.m.
"Deceit and Self-Deception"
Robert Trivers, Professor of Anthropology and Biological Sciences, Rutgers University
Free Public Lecture
Trivers is perhaps the most significant evolutionary theorist in the world alive today, and has spent his career investigating the theoretical basis of social behavior in organisms. His theories regarding parental investment, reciprocal altruism, parent-offspring conflict and the biological basis of self-deceptive behavior have been hugely influential in a number of fields. In 2007 Trivers received the prestigious Crafoord Prize from The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. This prize promotes international basic research in disciplines that complement those for which the Nobel Prizes are awarded. The lecture is sponsored by the University of Oklahoma Zoology Department and the museum. It is free and open to the public.
Tuesday, Nov. 17, 7 p.m.
In Discussion with Darwin: Classroom seminars on Evolution
Ola Fincke (Department of Zoology)
"Beyond Darwin: How Evo-Devo Research Offers Stunning Confirmation of Darwin's View of Complexity "
Darwin postulated that complexity evolved via natural selection from less complex parts. Armed with a battery of new genetic tools, researchers are in the process of confirming that Darwin's view was of complexity was basically correct. In this session we will discuss the radical and surprising insights that “Evo-Devo” research offers for macroevolution.
Friday, Jan. 22, 7 p.m.
Darwin Remembers: Recollections of a Life’s Journey
Free public event
A historic play written and performed by Floyd Sandford, OU Zoology graduate. Much of the information was derived from Darwin's autobiography, edited and published shortly after his death by his son Francis. In the play, Darwin "remembers" his life, including the historic confrontation at Oxford in 1860, between Samuel Wilberforce, the Bishop of Oxford and the biologist Thomas H. Huxley, Darwin's most loyal and vociferous defender in public forum and debates.
Posted by: Lowell | September 16, 2009 5:06 PM
I went to what I presume is DarkStar888's (or is it DarkStar555 now?) blog. I won't link to it for your own safety. I did enjoy this nugget, though:
I'd have to agree with John Morales that were very close to a full Timecube unit here.
Posted by: Walton | September 16, 2009 5:11 PM
I call Poe on DarkStar888. While there certainly are people who really are that batshit insane, I doubt that most of them would be lucid enough to hold a comprehensible conversation. And he throws in too many conspiracy-theorist clichés ("illuminati" and "we're living in the Matrix", for a start) to be convincing. I think he's a parody (though a very good one; probably the best I've seen).
Posted by: Lowell | September 16, 2009 5:33 PM
I wish you were right, Walton, but I don't think so. Try Googling a few lines of what he's copy + pasted here. Go on, I dare ya!
Posted by: strange gods before me, number 8 is hideous | September 16, 2009 5:56 PM
I think you hold some unrealistic cliches about mental illness. You might be surprised at how lucid and conversational a person with schizophrenia can be, for example.
I really do know people who believe in the Illuminati. I don't know any who believe that the Illuminati are the whole story, but it's usually incorporated into a larger framework of the New World Order. And the Matrix is a libertarian metaphor, if most generously interpreted.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | September 16, 2009 6:03 PM
I'm not sure that word means what you think it does.
Posted by: Qwerty | September 16, 2009 7:11 PM
Wow, the IDEA club at the U of OK doesn't even list the Meyer lecture as an upcoming event.
Leave it to the Disco Institute to rent a "scientific" space in order to show an unscientific movie in order to give it some credibility.
Posted by: Kagato | September 16, 2009 8:31 PM
DarkStar888's gibberish:
Totally not worth it, but here I go again anyway.
You can't argue the semantics of English words, when discussing concepts that originate from much older languages. Clearly if the relationship existed when the concepts were formed, the linguistic associations would be relevant for those original languages, not the modern translations.
In your bizarre list:
You can't just make up connections between words and assume them to be true. Etymologists have been studying languages for a long time; this stuff is all known.
Note that most of these words do not share a common heritage and common derivations. Only one of your list has a hebrew origin.
Now I know this is all largely irrelevant, as your fevered ramblings indicate you're not a well-balanced individual in the first place. But the linguistic evidence you use to support your case (whatever the heck it is) can be clearly demonstrated to be objectively wrong, so the rest just sort of dries up and blows away, doesn't it?
Once again, all words sourced from http://www.etymonline.com
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
September 16, 2009 8:50 PM
Surely if you invoke quantum physics it can!!!?!
Posted by: Ichthyic | September 16, 2009 9:02 PM
Listen, I'm a scienctist[sic] to[sic]
ugh.
yeah, sure.
an appeal to membership is a common fallacy used by morons like yourself to try and convince others of a like minded group that they "understand" their position.
it's like born again xians claiming they used to be atheists, so they can speak from authority.
It's bullshit.
Posted by: Benjamin Allen | September 16, 2009 9:41 PM
Jonny
//Can you produce evidence of love? I would bet you think it exists in your life. What about intuition? Is it real?//
Actually we can prove love exists. It exists as a distinct emotional state using functional MRI, and is also characterized by releases of Oxytocin and Vasopression. As for Intuition, also yes.
Emotional states and thought processes are physical processes that are the products of the brain. They are bound by the laws of chemistry and physics. In now way are they special or somehow ephemeral or supernatural.
Do I know my parents love me? No. I have evidence that they do (or at least one does). However I am capable of knowing it if I put my mom into an MRI and show her pictures of me. Her emotional response will light up very specific parts of her brain like a christmas tree.
Posted by: DarkStar888 | September 16, 2009 11:57 PM
Posted by: Lowell | September 16, 2009 5:06 PM
"I went to what I presume is DarkStar888's (or is it DarkStar555 now?) blog. I won't link to it for your own safety. I did enjoy this nugget, though:
A subliminal is designed to act on the mind at a subconscious level. That’s why the information on this site seems to almost make sense, but not quite.
I'd have to agree with John Morales that were very close to a full Timecube unit here."
- RESPONSE: There is no problem linking to my site. It's just a blogspot.com site. I don't eat people there. Lowell is afraid to awaken, by seeing the truth, so he or she like many others, won't engage my type of blog.
And as for 555...it stand for SACRIFICE as in WTC Building 7 which was a SACRIFICE in case you didn't know it. The New World Order (NWO) is using science to control and manipulate you but you don't get it do you. Education yourself, and I don't mean in college either. The Elite follow the laws of Nature by Darwin. Yes, eat or be eaten is how they think. Darwin was an Illuminati, but you wouldn't know that would you?
Read carefully, I'm dead seriuos about this:
"The governments of the world and the royal elite are not here to take care of you. They are here to kill you. They are not unwittingly trying to kill you. They are deliberately trying to kill you. They are deliberately trying to kill you, but for a reason that eludes even them. Within in the trance state, what seems good and right, and what is justified as sound reasoning and socially acceptable, is absolute insanity when held up to the standard of awareness and wisdom. How this deliberate, elusive, and unwitting state of confusion drives the elite of the world to serve a master they know little of."
Here watch these vids...I dare you!
http://darkstar888.blogspot.com/2009/09/freedom-movie-2-spiritual-awakening.html
or
http://darkstar888.blogspot.com/2009/07/big-picture-nwo-by-max-igan.html
You guys are too chicken shit to open you minds and are too quick to judge by dimissing me as a nut. Good luck sheep. Anyone watching these film are welcome to say what you want on my blog...anything you want. I don't insult people's intelligents.
Last thing: A lesson in Science and how it is appled to you...the Sheeple. Read this and this is my last comment on this topic on this blog. Don't worry, I'll comment on other stuff to continue to have an oprortunity to insults as much as you can. I 'm have fun. Are you?
AIRFRAME SHOCK TESTING
(A method of testing...people to see what they will accept…this is fact…truth)
In the 1940’s the aviation industry inadvertently provided a breakthrough in human engineering (control of the cattle). A “shockwave” would be fired into an airframe of an aircraft. The recoil and vibrations were then recorded.
It was discovered that by “shocking” one part of the airframe you could determine the overall condition of the rest of the aircraft by measuring the recoil or “tremors” it gave off.
The importance of this discovery was paramount to the illuminati because they could never DEFINITIVELY MEASURE the DOCILNESS of their stock of cattle, sheep, jelly-fish and celery.
By “shocking” something in society the illuminati (elite) was now able to accurately calculate:
A) the docilness of the public
B) the point of critical mass
The method of shocking the public was devilishly clever:
Find something the public instinctively believes is “WRONG” and instantly make it “RIGHT”.
A simple example would to tell people poison is good for them, then measure their reaction to this revelation that is the exact opposite of what they know is “right”.
To measure the ‘shocking’ revelation (poison is good for you) you need to study the possible reactions:
1) disbelief
2) apathy
3) belief
This data is then input into complex Gamma Knife Computers that can then determine – with optimum precision – the collective unconsciousness of the masses of cattle and celery.
A deductive algorithm is then created that will suggest future ‘shocks’ that will expedite a permanent slave mentality among the celery.
Simply put: this super computer is working to transform the celery into a gaggle of mindless slaves.
Shock testing is conducted around the sheeple without. Only the brightest of Goy intellects have figured it out…
Ask yourself:
- Why do you pay a cable company to watch advertisements?
- Why do you pay a movie theater to watch advertisements before the film begins?
- Why do you accept the upside down stars on the Republican Party’s logo?
- Why do you accept the backwards U.S Flags on the uniforms of the army soldiers?
- Why do you pay income tax and get nothing in return?
These things may seem petty and insignificant, but if you think back to the first time you paid for cable and watched a commercial – or the first time you sat through a commercial before a movie came on – or the feeling you got when you first saw a backwards flag on a U.S soldier…
…or the feeling you get when you pay income tax – or the feeling you get when you see the Republican logo…
That feeling is exactly what the illuminati are measuring when they ‘shock’ you.
..so what is your reaction?
4) disbelief
5) apathy
6) belief
The only way to measure docilness is to create a shocking scenario and see if the people believe it or are apathetic to it.
…invisible god anyone???
- if backwards flags don’t shock you
- if commercials before movies don’t shock you
- if upside down stars on Party logos doesn’t shock you
- if a tax that pays for nothing doesn’t shock you
- If paying a monthly bill to watch commercials doesn’t shock you….
Then you have PROVEN that you are mindless and DOCILE.
Anyone who does not respond with outrage to shocking things is DOCILE BOVINE and therefore no longer a human being!
Take care. Peace.
-DarkStar888-
Posted by: Ichthyic | September 17, 2009 12:03 AM
The New World Order (NWO) is using science to control and manipulate you but you don't get it do you.
not ME.
I've been dutifully wearing my tinfoil hat.
well, except when I'm on the internet.
...wait.
OH NOES!
Posted by: Ichthyic | September 17, 2009 12:06 AM
A simple example would to tell people poison is good for them, then measure their reaction to this revelation that is the exact opposite of what they know is "right".
poison IS good for you.
really.
try it.
you'll see.
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
September 17, 2009 6:33 AM
Ichthyic, you sure do post a lot of comments for a smoldering husk.
Posted by: Jonny | September 17, 2009 9:34 AM
Me again. Sorry.
You believe in love; you don't question its existence. Some believe in a god or the God or who/whatever. They are happy to move through with that resolution equally as you with yours. Their belief is not for you to question because your experiences exist separately.
They should not push onto you, for example, the absurdity of your belief, nor should you ridicule them for theirs. You may be wrong and so might they be.
Someone earlier was partially right, I suppose, in responding to my much earlier post about scars as "evidence" of things they are not. Further investigation may lead to more accurate resolution but it doesn't make them correct, always. If there is no direct account for their cause it cannot be proven, it seems to me.
I think the correct stance on all of this is open-mindedness. There may be no answer.
Posted by: Kel, OM | September 17, 2009 9:58 AM
I always hate this analogy. Love is, in at least some form, measurable. The phenomenon exists, it's able to be described. It exhibits internalised and externalised measurable quantities. It can be discussed, distinguished in many different forms, be understood in an evolutionary context - love is a real phenomenon.It would be a grave mistake to think that love is completely internalised, that is that it is our own subjective experience that can only be understood subjectively. This belies what love is and what role it plays in our nature. And even if love was completely internalised, God isn't. God is posited as being the creator of and an interactive force in reality. It's not subjective in the slightest. The disconnect is between the subjective nature of the evidence and universal connotations the evidence is meant to comment on.
It's always good to keep an open mind, but not so open than your mind falls out. There's a lot of different ideas out there, how do you distinguish between different and contradictory statements? Do you play cultural relativist? Do you take yourself to be right and others wrong?The problem with this line of thinking is that there are certain means to understand reality. You're sitting at a device that can do billions of calculations per second - it could do more mathematical calculations than the entire human population combined. When such complex and precise technology is built upon electromagnetic theory, is this not an indication that science actually can comprehend nature?
In the case of evolution, all evidence points to one conclusion - life evolved on this planet. Just as it would be foolish to discount electromagnetic theory with the computer, it would be foolish to discount evolution when it comes to biology. This doesn't mean that God doesn't exist, but it does mean that a god who created humans from clay doesn't exist.
Think about it this way, a theist might say "God makes rainbows". Now we know rainbows to occur when light is diffracted travelling through water in the air. Does this mean that God doesn't exist? After all, there's a naturalistic explanation for a phenomenon that it was said that God did. Likewise evolution could be God's way of making animals. After all, how else do you get dinosaurs and apes in the same process? ;)
What I'm trying to suggest here is that yes, people do believe in gods. But so what? Keep an open mind, but be sceptical. Science works, evolution is a reality, God's existence is ultimately insoluble, and there will always be an anti-religious dismissal of science and scientific theories because the process tells uncomfortable truths about nature.
If strong enough evidence were presented tomorrow I'd start believing. That to me is having an open mind. It's the ability to be swayed. It doesn't mean accept the possibility for anything - I don't stay awake at night pondering the existence of a 4th dimensional coffee-drinking alien called Ziltoid. But if evidence of Ziltoid's existence was to be demonstrated I would believe. That's being open minded, anything else is just being credulous ;)
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
September 17, 2009 9:59 AM
The problem isn't with scientists not being open minded. Being open minded is part of the job, as new evidence is always being gathered. But scientists are also trained not to be so open minded that their brains fall out. Until this happens, the religious claim we aren't open minded.We don't believe in a deity because there is no evidence for one (or more). If people privately wish to believe in a deity there would be no problem either. But some people try to bring their deity to places where it doesn't belong, like a science class. Category error on their part. And when asked for evidence, none is shown, just some vague "worldview" mumbo-jumbo.Jonny, you sound like you are very confused. Back up, and take a good look at the reality, and what people try to claim is reality. And look for physical evidence of what people say. In the case of science and evolution, there is plenty of evidence available. It is called the scientific literature, and is found in the libraries of institutions of higher learning world wide.
Posted by: Jonny | September 17, 2009 1:38 PM
For what its worth:
This morning, I heard on NPR the author of Unscientific America (Mooney, I think). What timing. He said several things I think are correct and to which I alluded on this page.
Listen, from http://www.hereandnow.org
http://www.hereandnow.org/#2
Posted by: m-45 | September 18, 2009 11:23 AM
SAM NOBLE MUSEUM TO OFFER AN EVENING OF FREE ADMISSION, LECTURE ON HISTORY OF LIFE ON EARTH IN HONOR OF CHARLES DARWIN
09-17-2009
CONTACT: Linda Coldwell (405) 325-0598, lcoldwell@ou.edu
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
NORMAN – As part of a University of Oklahoma campus-wide celebration of the 150th anniversary of the publishing of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species, the Sam Noble Museum in Norman will be offering an evening of free museum admission from 6 to 11 p.m. Tuesday, Sept. 29. The museum also will feature a free public lecture beginning at 5 p.m. by the museum’s curator of invertebrate paleontology, Stephen Westrop, titled “The Cambrian Explosion and the Burgess Shale: No Dilemma for Darwin.”
The Cambrian Explosion was one of the most important episodes in the history of life. Over some 20 to 25 million years, beginning about 543 million years ago, life in the oceans diversified. Today, we find abundant fossils of hard-shelled animals of this age in many parts of the world. The famous Burgess Shale of western Canada formed after the Cambrian Explosion but its unusually preserved fossils give paleontologists a glimpse of a nearly complete Cambrian community. These extraordinary fossils also show the wide range of animals that must have evolved earlier in the Cambrian Period. In this presentation, Westrop takes a look at recent research that gives us a new understanding of this evolutionary "explosion" of ocean life.
The museum’s Paleozoic Gallery showcases the science behind this amazing diversity of life from Earth’s Cambrian Period. Highlights include fossils, models of many of the bizarre animals of the Burgess Shale, and animated features showing how these animals may have moved and hunted.
“We invite everyone interested in an accurate description of how life developed over the last four billion years to come hear Dr. Westrop’s lecture and visit our galleries,” said museum Director Michael A. Mares. “These well-organized and scientifically accurate exhibits illustrate – through real specimens and scientific methods – the fact of evolution by natural selection as first described by Charles Darwin and continually supported by all branches of science ever since that time. Dr. Westrop is recognized internationally as an expert on the Cambrian Period, and his presentation will provide insight into the latest scientific research regarding the impact of this time period on the evolution of life on Earth. ”
Steve Westrop has been the curator of invertebrate paleontology at the museum since 1998. His research focuses on the Cambrian System and its fossils, particularly trilobites. He was a member of an international team of geologists and paleontologists who established the current radiometric dating of the Cambrian Period, including the record of the Cambrian explosion. Westrop has published more than 50 papers in scientific journals on various aspects of the Cambrian, and serves as editor of the Journal of Paleontology, published by the Paleontological Society.
Since the beginning of 2009, the museum, in partnership with OU departments of Zoology, Botany and Microbiology, Anthropology, History of Science and the History of Science Collections of the OU Library, has presented more than 15 public education programs related to evolution. Many of these are currently available to download as podcasts through iTunes. Additional information about museum podcasts and newsfeeds is available online at www.snomnh.ou.edu/rss.
Many more Darwin programs are scheduled for the months ahead, including a seminar series called “In Discussion with Darwin,” a lecture series, a family day featuring children’s book authors Carolyn Meyer and Anne Weaver, and “Darwin Remembers,” a one-man theatre performance. Mares encourages the public to take part in these programs, many of which are free, to educate themselves about the true nature of the science of evolutionary biology.
On October 10 the museum will open “Darwin at the Museum,” a special exhibition featuring a complete set of the first editions of Darwin’s books, provided by the OU Libraries History of Science Collections. This exhibition, which will include specimens from museum collections, will be on view through Jan. 18, 2010.
Additional information about programming at the museum is available online at www.snomnh.ou.edu/publicprograms. The museum is located on the OU Norman campus at Timberdell Road and Chautauqua Avenue. For more information, call (405) 325-4712.
Posted by: m-45 | September 18, 2009 2:14 PM
Additional upcoming Darwin lectures at OU
September 21:
David Ross Boyd Lecture in Philosophy (first of a three lecture series)
Elliott Sober (Hans Reichenbach Professor and William F. Vilas Research Professor at the University of Wisconsin - Madison).
"Darwin and Intelligent Design"
Neilson Hall, Rm 270. 4:30pm.
Free and open to the public.
For more information contact Wayne Riggs: wriggs@ou.edu
September 23:
David Ross Boyd Lecture in Philosophy (second of a three lecture series)
Elliott Sober (Hans Reichenbach Professor and William F. Vilas Research Professor at the University of Wisconsin - Madison).
"Did Darwin write the Origin Backwards?"
Neilson Hall, Rm 270. 4:30pm.
Free and open to the public.
For more information contact Wayne Riggs: wriggs@ou.edu
September 25:
David Ross Boyd Lecture in Philosophy (third of a three lecture series)
Elliott Sober (Hans Reichenbach Professor and William F. Vilas Research Professor at the University of Wisconsin - Madison).
"Darwin and Group Selection"
Neilson Hall, Rm 270. 4:30pm.
Free and open to the public.
For more information contact Wayne Riggs: wriggs@ou.edu
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp | September 18, 2009 2:23 PM
Is there a conspiracy theory Darkstar888 doesn't subscribe to?