Unfortunate Dr Coyne will not be available to lend his perspective on the meeting of the scholar's circle.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
Due to the unfortunate intrusion of real life into blogging resulting in the inability of this week's previously scheduled host to be able to fulfill his hosting duties for the February 28 edition of the Skeptics' Circle, there has been a last minute change of hosts for the next Circle. The 81st…
'Tis a bittersweet moment.
On the one hand, I am happy that the 102nd Meeting of the Skeptics' Circle has landed over at Bing McGhandi's place. Not only is it chock full of excellent skeptical blogging, but the story is amusing, as evidenced by this little taste:
BM: Next, Orac from Respectful…
Ulf Bodin and his team at the Museum of National Antiquities in Stockholm have built a really, really sweet database and search interface for Hjalmar Stolpe's Birka graves. Between 1871 and 1895, Stolpe dug about 1100 graves in the cemeteries surrounding the Viking Period town of Birka on an…
It's been an interesting week for this week's host of the Skeptics' Circle, Skeptico. He had a creationist appropriate his name, create a Blogspot blog, and actually post comments on other people's blogs under the name "Skeptico." Not good. Fortunately, no one was fooled, and it was the False…
omfg...
This is bad news. It wouldn't make much of a difference for people in the US, where the catholic church is a minority, but it would elsewhere. I always have fun reading the debunkings of ID in SBlogs, while having the comfort of coming from a country where it is not an issue, and living in another where it isn't one either (and this applies even to their continents, Southamerica and Europe). But if the Pope jumps into the boat, I'll start hearing about it here and there. Specially there. I'd join the fight, sure, but it's a fun I'd rather not have.
The partial embrace of enlightenment ideas by some religious sects was merely a delay of the inevitable-- like the compromises between Northern and Southern states prior to the Civil War.
A knock-down drag-out conflict between faith-based and reason-and-evidence-based worldviews is inevitable. This is shaping up to be the major cultural conflict of the 21st century. It will probably decide whether humanity will permanently accept it's industrial/technological experiment or will revert to a more primitive way of life.
Point of Logic on Natural Theory of Evolution:
The hypothesis of a Solar System evolution (i.e., formation by random events) is in dispute with Reality. Random events do not dominate the Universe. POINT OF LOGIC: In order for an event to be truly random, the event needs to be Sub-Natural (i.e., an event of Chaos - entropy product). Once the Sub-Natural event has entered the Natural Template, the event becomes confined and directed; the event loses the true randomness of Chaos. Therefore, there can be no Natural Theory of Evolution - only a Sub-Natural Theory of Evolution. Thus, the best lie is the subtlist lie.
The Natural Template of the Solar System is not a random event. PLEASE NOTE: The Pluto/Neptune anomaly of the Titius-Bode progression is predicted in the Initial Mass Displacements of the Solar System. The anomaly is not a random event.
Best Regards,
Frank Hatch
"subtlist lie" should read "subtlest lie" - Sorry, I'm sloppy.
The "subtlest lie" is dialectical logic: pretending to know the thesis and the antithesis to form a synthesis (Gensis 3: 4-6). All religions (including atheism) use it and rationalize it.
In Christianity, we've been commanded to wash each others feet from it. "Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees" (Matthew 16: 6,11). Don't worship your rationalization of God - worship God.
Best Regards,
Frank Hatch