Michael Lemonick has an excellent reply to Sam Brownback's recent attempt to weasel away from creationism.
What he ended up doing was demonstrating that he doesn't really know much about science. If, writes the senator, "evolution means assenting to an exclusively materialistic, deterministic vision of the world that holds no place for a guiding intelligence then I reject it."
How curious. Does this mean that the senator also rejects the laws of gravity? Last I heard, they reflected that same view of the world. No scientist I've ever run into, nor even any senator, thinks that things fall to earth or planets orbit stars because God is there shoving on them. Yet many scientists do believe in God; they just don't think he has to meddle with the physical universe to make things turn out right.
Which makes gods rather superfluous, yet they believe anyway…but correct, unless Brownback invokes a mysterious supernatural force intervening in every single physical process going on around him, that's a silly statement that doesn't reflect any rational interpretation of the world. Although I do wonder sometimes if the religious crazies aren't living in an imaginary environment saturated with pixies and angels and devils and demons, all tugging away at every molecule around them — as if Brownian motion were named after Brownies.
- Log in to post comments
heck of a job Brownie!
Didn't you know, PZ? Brownian motion is caused by the Jesus particles.
So this God of theirs neither hears nor answers prayers? And doesn't work miracles? And doesn't communicate with his followers?
I have some bad news: a thing that doesn't meddle with the physical universe does not possess the requirements for existence. Having the properties described, and nonexistence, are logically equivalent.
Scientists who believe anyway? Not very bright scientists.
At least some of the creationist types do apparently think that little pixies push everything around. At least, Jack Chick does. His tract, "Big Daddy" basically says that atomic nuclei are held together personally by Jesus, not by gluons. How Chick thought that this sort of nonsensical rambling was supposed to convince Professor Strawman of anything, I really don't know.
Most religious scientists turn out to be Deists when questioned, even if they call themselves Christian for the benefit of non-scientists. Except the really prominent ones who are merely going for a Templeton windfall.
And yet, I have a regular visitor to my blog who insists that Occam's Razor forces to shave away purely naturalistic explanations for cosmology and speciation, because "science doesn't provide all of the answers."
I told him that's fine for him to believe that way; however, I still ask him how he proposes that we use personal revelation to provide any additional shared answers.
Dawkins: "What are 'why questions,' and why should we feel entitled to think they deserve an answer? There may be some deep questions about the cosmos that are forever beyond science. The mistake is to think that they are therefore not beyond religion, too."
Yet many scientists do believe in God; they just don't think he has to meddle with the physical universe to make things turn out right.
God having a rough day:
To meddle, or not to meddle: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The atoms and photons of outrageous gravity,
Or to take arms against a sea of particles,
And by opposing bend them?
Brownback, the senator from the christian wingnut banana republic of kansas, isn't too bright is dumb.
Science is neutral on religion, concerning itself with what is observable in the real world by real people.
Evolution is a scientific theory. It is not a religion and is neutral on religion as well. People who accept the reality of evolution and old earth and older universe are of all faiths and none. If Brownback was capable of thought, he would know that already.
This is simple stuff that anyone of modest education and intelligence could figure out in 5 minutes. Brownback isn't going anywhere. As one newly retired general put it, "We've just tried the experiment of having a moron for president and it didn't work." Hard to believe that the USA wants a repeat of moronacracy but the world is a strange place.
"Although I do wonder sometimes if the religious crazies aren't living in an imaginary environment saturated with pixies and angels and devils and demons,"
Yes, PZ, they are. I guess most non-religious folks don't realize this. But the reason evangelical Christians are so paranoid about everything is that, in addition to the doctrines of their own religion, they also believe in every other supernatural entity and power that you can imagine -- tarot cards, palm reading, witches, seances, and so forth -- only they believe that these occult powers are demonic, so they are afraid of everything. It's quite sad.
Raven - that is a delightful quote! Who said it?
:-)
Yes, sometimes it feels like the crazyholics runs the place. :-(
Hmm, so if angels hold atoms together does that mean when physicists spin up CERN, all those particle traces are really the angelic equivalent of bugs hitting a windscreen?
It feels that way because the crazyholics do, in fact, run the place.
What's the senator bitchin' about? "Believing" in the laws of physics is not deterministic position. It is certainly less "determined" than anything determined by a cosmic yo-yo twiddler.
The quote is as follows: I abreviated and paraphrased it.
I'm surprised no one brought up this.
raven sez: Hard to believe that the USA wants a repeat of moronacracy but the world is a strange place.
The correct word, as I recently found out from Grrlscientist, is "kakistocracy": government by the worst/government by the least qualified and most unprincipled. Sadly, I think this covers government by morons, as well.
Indeed. Government by morons has failed.
How's this for a radical idea? Government by neurons!
Which makes gods rather superfluous, yet they believe anyway...
could be an example of what i call "Plan B" theists.
they see no reason to express real belief, it's just that they grew up constantly being exposed to stories about how they would go to "hell" if they didn't, so part of their minds reserves a Plan B escape clause, "just in case".
typically, Plan Bers also see no harm in it, rather like carrying around a four-leaf clover.
Speaking of the creation museum, you all may enjoy this:
http://www.funnyordie.com/v1/view_video.php?viewkey=57778f906e5563b75718
Funny stuff.
Yes, they really do believe that there are "real" demons and angels and stuff. My kids were warned not to touch or buy anything in the gift shop of churches on non-christian faiths when on a field trip because they would be infested with demons. The east is really full of demons. That's why bird flu started there, yeah, see, it all makes sense. And they (the ones I know anyway) also believe in an interventionist god that dinks around with everything that happens to them. You slow down to avoid a cat in the road so you get to the intersection two seconds later than you would have and just then a big truck is blazing through the intersection. That is PROOF of god acting in your life. Even things that seem bad are probably things god is doing to help you or teach you and if he fails to head off that truck then he just needed to call you home right then in his mysterious way and god will be there to comfort your grieving family. Besides, what are the odds it just happened by chance?? There had to be a reason. How can you just accept that things happen for no reeeeason??? That takes a lot more faith.
Oh my gosh, just typing their lingo infects you with the punctuation and bolding symptom of mental illness. I don't even want to run my spell checker.
Yikes.
Sam Brownback's Op-Ed also revealed a style of thinking I've heard called "logical preposterism."
Logical preposterism is where you start with your conclusion and evaluate evidence depending on whether it supports your predetermined conclusion. Brownback is putting what is supposed to come last, the conclusion, first.
The most remarkable thing about Brownback's Op-Ed is how nakedly the logical preposterism shines through with statements like "we know with certainty at least part of the outcome," and "Those aspects of evolutionary theory compatible with this truth are a welcome addition to human knowledge. Aspects of these theories that undermine this truth, however, should be firmly rejected as an atheistic theology posing as science."
I've got more on that here:
Brownback Mountain
MORONARCHY.
(The all-caps are part of the spelling.)
Raven, thanks a lot for that quote!
Norman, it's called rationalization. You start out with what you believe for psychological and/or social reasons, then you justify it with "reason". Of course, it's bad-faith reason - that square peg will fit in a round hold somehow, since we rarely (if ever) are capable of doing a full formal proof or deduction.
It's nothing more sophisticated than what a quitting-smoker does everyday when he smokes one last cigarette.
Yes.
... an imaginary environment saturated with pixies and angels and devils and demons, all tugging away at every molecule around them -- as if Brownian motion were named after Brownies.
I give you... Maxwell's Demon
:-)
Yes, sometimes it feels like the crazyholics runs the place. :-(
MORONARCHY.
(The all-caps are part of the spelling.)
Raven, thanks a lot for that quote!