09.30.06
Terror 2016
From Rad Green Read the rest of this entry »
Collins and Kant
In the process he conveniently makes it appear that virtually Collins’ entire case for the existence of God boils down to the moral law in the human heart.
I was puzzled that religious Darwin critics did not jump on the issue of morality as does Collins, instead restricting themselves to the barren ID argument.
But suddenly I see why. The resemblance of Collins’ argument to Kant is striking, but the differences are significant. Collins actually does what the ID people are too sneaky to try: the reason is that (something I didn’t realize) Kant’s argument on morality and god is uncomfortably close to ‘atheism of some kind’, at least in the minds of various Christian so-called Kantians. (Steven Palmquist recently edited a book on this subject, and an effort to take back Kant for Christianity is underway, a notably futile effort). Kant’s effort to ‘redefine god’ isn’t enough for these fundamentalists.
Collins stumbles into this area with a poor version of Kant. I might recommend he upgrade his act, since his thinking is already fairly well battled over terrain.
Heresy charge: anti-science
Wilkins brandishes some mooneyish hand-wringing.
There is absolutely no reason why the American public should fall in line around Darwin dogma just to satisfy the biotech industry’s desire for cloned science jocks who are perfectly trained in Darwin theology. Tough luck, guys, Darwin’s theory isn’t science, and the public found out first, not the scientists. The reason is the way science education is designed to cripple intelligent minds.
This isn’t a question of science. It is a question of capitalist domination, and the immense profits to be made. I fail to see how the opinions of fundamentalists are going to make any difference. Compute the total geography of Singapore and divide that into the landmass of old US of A. There must be some place you can do this.
As far as that goes, science is not a nationalistic question. If the Singaporeans wish to impose secret police control on science methodology to do stem cell research, then I am fearful of what nervous competitors in this country will do to us to maintain their profits.
So thank god for fundamentalist idiots.
No end of suffering
An End to Suffering seems to me to be misleading. All Indian forgetting their own cultural history (granting the point that Buddhism is very unpopular in large swaths of Indian society. Perhaps that’s the reason it evokes interest: India became alienated to one of its greatest ‘heros’, but then I wonder why!
Read the rest of this entry »
Complexity
The simplistic character of Darwinian simulations is obvious, but the issue is more than the question of complexity. There ought to be a simple model showing a simple case of evolution–assuming simulations a la genetic algorithms are valid at all. Maybe they are not.
It is interesting that the eonic model, as I point out passing, shows an amusing resemblance to a stylized evolutionary computation. But the only thing left is the computer clock ticking the intervals. The functionality of ‘computation’ is gone, replaced with a strange something operating on the surface of the planet, with three centuries intervals roughly for the prime focus of its action, comprising all variables of culture, in all dimensionalities….
Complexity indeed. The action is completely invisible to the naked eye and shows only relative transformations of cultural entities, these executed by humans from the ‘in between’ of freedom and causality, or in the model terminology ’self-consciousness’.
09.29.06
Evil Buddhas, Sufi Hyenas
Will the Dawkins atheist gang et al. get wiped out? I watch them with some trepidation. Modern science has produced a new kind of idiot, with Michael Shermer as their pope, skeptics all the way to sitting duck’s ville.
I do not refer to the ninety percent of Buddhists and Sufis who are piously harmless and good cover for the fascist manipulations of the hidden operators conspiring to destroy modern freedom, sufistic occult thugs who prey on spiritual children on the fringes of civil society, ….
I would admire the attacks on religion by the Dennett/Dawkins picnickers if they had any remote conception of the religious worlds they think Darwin has rendered dispensable. Such fatal naivete…
Know your enemy (enemies).
Ethics on the brain
Ethics on the brain: the problem is not this research but the unreasonable inflexible and narrow views of those doing it. Along with the proven inability of such scientists to deal objectively with such questions as evolution: a theory claimed but inadequately documented, a scandalous situation that puts a whole through scientitic credit ratings.
Atheism derails?
Dawkins’ tactics to attack religion are so puzzling one wonders if he isn’t unconsciously wishing to fail. The tantrum approach simply isn’t going to work, nor is the presumption that Darwinian theory gives atheism some king of foundation.
A new fanaticism is gestating, and it is a bit alarming that Dawkins won’t even give agnostics their due.
E.O. Wilson peace pipes Christians
Article Preview
Can E. O. Wilson really save the world?
30 September 2006
Ivan Semeniuk
Magazine issue 2571
Often cited as Darwin’s true heir, E. O. Wilson has an audacious planet-saving strategy: to unite evangelical Christians and scientific secularists
Podcast: Listen to the our exclusive feature-length interview with E. O. Wilson, part 1 and part 2 (mp3 format).Often cited as Darwin’s true heir, E. O. Wilson has an audacious strategy for saving the planet: encourage evangelical Christians and scientific secularists to unite in caring for the ecosystems and biodiversity that he calls the Creation in his latest book. Ivan Semeniuk asked him if he has a prayer of succeeding when religious fundamentalism extends to the White House
After siding so strongly with science, you are now trying to reach across the science-religion divide. Why?
I offer the hand of friendship and I am presumptuous enough to do so on behalf of scientists - secular scientists. I feel that the time has come to put aside the culture wars, declare a truce and see if we can’t meet on common ground where both sides can …
But UD has a chip on their shoulder
E.O. Wilson thinks that after years of reaming religious believers he can now ingratiate himself with them. Fine. Let him and his colleagues give up their monopoly on the teaching and government funding of materialistic evolutionary theories.
And Christians can give up their (claimed) monopoly on religious truth…
Faking randomness
If the blind-watchmaker thesis is correct for biological evolution, all of these artificial constraints must be eliminated. Every aspect of the simulation, both hardware and software, must be subject to random errors
But it is also a trap to consider that we can infer a designer from the designed character of genetic algorithms.
Actually, computers are primitive post-Neanderthal junk (I surmise) and aren’t relevant to what are so far the mysteries of evolution.
Science on Collins
DNA, Evolution, and the Moral Law
Robert Pollack
——————————————————————————–
The Language of God
A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief
by Francis S. Collins
Free Press (Simon and Schuster), New York, 2006. 303 pp. $26, C$32.95. ISBN 0-7432-8639-1.
——————————————————————————–
Holding that the principles of faith are complementary with those of science, the author presents his case for the existence of God and of miracles.
Next for Dawkins: Take on Buddhism, Sufism
Dawkins and Dennett both leave their diatribes ambiguous, since they tend to confuse ‘religion’ with monotheism, or Christianity, and never at any time attempt to consider the immense complexity of the known history of religions.
If Dawkins is so dead set against religion, perhaps he should take on Buddhism and Sufism.
Read the rest of this entry »
Dawkins Delusion(s)
The Dawkins Delusion, also the name of my Amazon review of The God Delusion, since removed, censored…
Science myths
Most popular science myths: but the most popular has to be Darwin’s theory of natural selection.
09.27.06
Armstrong PR’s Muhammed
Armstrong’s new hagiography of Muhammed seems likely to backfire. The days of covering up the facts are passing, gone.
Muhammad: A Prophet for Our Time (Eminent Lives) (Hardcover) Read the rest of this entry »
Reality bites back
Science bites back: this project looks ill-conceived step one. C’mon, guys, scientists are my heroes too, but one problem that they can’t solve is the ideology problem. Look at Darwinism. Is this good science? Think carefully before you answer, because the future of science is in the balance. If an entire infrastructure of the top nerds getting three squares a day can’t handle the Darwin debate, we are in trouble.
Invoking the Bill of Rights is totally wrong. Scientific mind control of public opinion on evolution and its Darwinian ideology is not a ‘right’.
The public has a right to something better than what they are getting on this and other questions.
A new organisation, SEFORA (Scientists and Engineers for America), has been formed to counter the abuse and supression of science currently popular in American media and politics. They have drafted a “Bill of Rights” for scientists and engineers which includes:
Federal policy shall be made using the best available science and analysis both from within the government and from the rest of society.
andThe federal government shall not support any science education program that includes instruction in concepts that are derived from ideology and not science.
Hominid, not human
An exciting find was recently reported as scientists discovered what may be the most complete australopithecine fossil specimen ever found. It is reported to be a toddler. Unfortunately, the media is misrepresenting this fossil as if it closely mimics humans.