At least that's what Tristero of Hullabaloo says:
Actually, science isn't that hard, even the fuzzy math. Because as difficult as it may be, say, to wrap one's mind around the details of stem cell biology, it can be comprehended, if you're willing to spend the time to do so. What's really hard is trying to grasp creationism or astrology, because there literally is nothing there that is capable of actual meaning. Nor are there legitimate ways of finding meaning in pseudo-science. To understand that crap - now, I've always found it well-nigh impossible.
I always knew Hovind and Chopra were unrecognized geniuses...
- Log in to post comments
More like this
A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing.
There's no shortage of stupidity in the world. And, alas, it comes in
many, many different kinds. Among the ones that bug me, pretty much
the worst is the stupidity that comes from believing that you know
something that you don't.
This is…
If you're reading this the morning it's published, there's a good chance that right at this very second I am sitting with pen in hand doing battle with a statistical mechanics final. Topics: fermions at zero and low temperature, virial expansion of the equation of state, critical constants and…
This time around, we're talking to Mark Chu-Carroll of Good Math/Bad Math.
What's your name?
Mark Chu-Carroll
What do you do when you're not blogging?
Chase my children around.... (I've got a 6 year-old girl and a 3 1/2 year-old boy.) Cook. Chase my children some more. Make bizarrely elaborate…
So, why math?
The short version of the answer is remarkably simple: math provides
a tool where you can, without ambiguity, prove that something is true or false.
I'll get back to that - but first, I'm going to make a quick diversion, to help you understand my basic viewpoint on things.
This…
Hi Mike:
Your comment on astrology, "there literally is nothing there that is capable of actual meaning" was on the google daily alert for science astrology. You are wrong, and your error is symptomatic of a broad prejudice within modern science, verging on bigotry. You would not make such dogmatic statements about any other discipline about which you knew nothing, but astrology seems to be fair game. I recently put together what I consider a sound logical defence of the scientific basis of astrology at http://exegesis.dyndns.org/pipermail/exegesis/2006-October/000118.html Happy to discuss
kind regards
Robert Tulip
Other pseudo sciences an mystical exercises include multiverses, String Theory, and SETI.
However, alchemy gave rise to chemistry, and astrology gve rise to astronomy (and provided records of many useful observations).
Ya gotta start somewhere.
Considering that your scientific theories will always remain provisional, don't get too cocky.
Atheists dream of less that exists in heaven and earth, methinks.
Astrology = poetry.
it sounds all nice and pretty, and can be used to paint pretty words into sentences. But it's not science.
I'm pretty sure you can still get a higher degree in poetry. But show me where the same is offered for voodoo?
(Online diplomas don't count)
ps - the Choir Invisible has many non-conformers:
http://sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=0009F18C-C8F1-12DB-8822834…
Grady,
why do you think I'm an atheist?
Proably due to your narrow focus and faith commitment that all existence, life, mind and reason itself can be accounted or by mindless processess.
It is quite possible to be a Christian (or hold any other religious beliefs) and accept the facts/data/theories of science. These can be non overlapping areas of thought. It is also possible to recognize pseudo science for what it is.