« Home | Didn't See It Coming - the Friday Edition » | Rambles... » | This Is What She Means... » | Didn't See it Coming... » | We present The Disgruntled Seven » | Some people just can't get enough... » | A scary mix of party/ religion and state » | Karen Casey: Bluenose Puritan » | And the beat goes on (and it's in my wallet) » | Vous Pouvez Etre Un Cou Rouge Si... »

Reality - Open to Interpretation?

So, in a perspicacious nod to the acceptance of reality and denial of supernatural causes, the Kansas Board of Education has rewritten the science standards to exclude reference to the 'questionable' nature of evolutionary theory.

Of course, this news is not greeted with joy by all sides - the god-fascist press (I hate to even acknowledge this as a viable phrase) have the opinion that pro-evolution scientists, as well as the sane members of the School Board are 'Narrow minded':

"Don't expect the ‘mainstream’ media to notice the biting irony here: The people they like to portray as the champions of free inquiry and scientific literacy are the very ones trying to dumb-down science curricula in order to suppress information they find uncomfortable...Fortunately, Americans still have the freedom to investigate the truth for themselves, which is why the Darwinists’ current strategy will be such a loser over the long term...Trying to stamp out the discussion of ideas you don't like is a sign of insecurity, and thoughtful people will eventually see through such tactics."

Yeah. And presuming that one supernatural being, in particular your favourite supernatural being, not all those other ones, made everything is a very enlightened idea.

I don't know which makes me madder: the idea that the zombie christ worshippers can even think to characterize scientists and their work as an underhanded 'tactic', or framing the assertion of science in science classes as somehow inhibiting freedom. What'cha got there, Billy Bob, ain't science, or even legitimate knowledge - it's superstition.

Look, I'm all for people kissing the cosmic butt of whichever fake construct of human consciousness you please. Don't expect me to calmly accept it, however, when you decide to assert that natural examination of the natural world is somehow lacking something. I'm not missing some subtle inference of supernatural influence or missing the deific 'paint-by-numbers' guide for the world around me. I'm using the right methods for the right result. The tool of science is the appropriate one to explain the phenomena of the natural world with minimal bias or dogmatic intrusion.

Imposing god on nature constitutes the dulling of Occam's Razor. If I have to accept the existence of an all-powerful entity in order to explain a leaf, I don't want to explain it at all - I'm just looking to comfort myself because I don't understand it, and it frightens me.

I don't come to your church, spill your crack and chase away your male prostitute*, then tell you you've picked the wrong horse or pantheon thereof. Don't come to me and try to tell me that I'm narrow-minded because I don't accept your even narrower, tribal and childish view of the world. If the United States wants to fall further behind the rest of the world in science and technology because they refuse to let go of their invisible security blanket, that's just fine with me.

Just don't come knocking on the border when your prayers aren't answered.

*This sentence was a lot worse originally. Trust me.

Hey Flash,

I'm unable to find it at the moment, but a few weeks ago there was a rather interesting opinion piece in the LA Times on two versions of evolutionary theory. If memory serves, the author suggests that there was a serious disconnect between the scientific theory of evolution and the pundit's version of it. The obvious answer is ... duh. But the reality of the situation is that some folks actually take such pundits seriously. They present a perversion of evolutionary theory.

I find it rather ironic that many Christians actually share your frustration. The theory of evolution and religion, namely Christianity, are not mutually exclusive, and I'm not talking about this craZy intelligent design crap either !! Silliness. What's going on now is a perversion of both the religion and of science !!

Rather, this is about conservative culture v. modernization, which actually has little to do with either science or Christianity. That's my fairly contentious opinion, for what it's worth.

I was talking to a friend of mine in Kansas and he was encouraged by the move made by the education officials, but he sounded a cautionary note due to the fact that the officials that make these decisions are up for re-election every year. His feeling was that the forces of ignorance and superstition will be back to attempt to elect another slate of religious conservatives to the board, and the battle will start all over again. They have not gone away in Kansas. They are just licking their wounds and keeping their powder dry.


You summarized my argument very well. Superstition Vs. Science shouldn't even be an issue in the 21st Century, but there will always be those who long for a simpler time, when the word of god was law, when women and minorities knew their place, and you could stone to death anyone who disagreed with you. Brings a tear to their eye.
Makes me throw up in my mouth a little bit.
Thanks for the comment.

Post a Comment

Links to this post

Create a Link