National Academy: Science is Correct, Superstition is Incorrect
This just in from the National Academies:
The full report can be seen HERE
I'm not going to labor the point. I just read another article where the United States is last in something -- oh yes, it was preventable deaths. We aren't third or fourth, which would have been unthinkable back in the day. No, France is first, we're last.
In other news, Pat Robertson predicts a year of worldwide violence, an increase in evangelism, and a stock-market crash, based on what God has told him.
As his web site says:
This is going to be an important time for clear-minded people to act to save our society from collapse into the abyss of Pure Ignorance.
WASHINGTON -- The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and Institute of Medicine (IOM) today released SCIENCE, EVOLUTION, AND CREATIONISM, a book designed to give the public a comprehensive and up-to-date picture of the current scientific understanding of evolution and its importance in the science classroom. Recent advances in science and medicine, along with an abundance of observations and experiments over the past 150 years, have reinforced evolution's role as the central organizing principle of modern biology, said the committee that wrote the book.
"SCIENCE, EVOLUTION, AND CREATIONISM provides the public with coherent explanations and concrete examples of the science of evolution," said NAS President Ralph Cicerone. "The study of evolution remains one of the most active, robust, and useful fields in science."
"Understanding evolution is essential to identifying and treating disease," said Harvey Fineberg, president of IOM. "For example, the SARS virus evolved from an ancestor virus that was discovered by DNA sequencing. Learning about SARS' genetic similarities and mutations has helped scientists understand how the virus evolved. This kind of knowledge can help us anticipate and contain infections that emerge in the future."
DNA sequencing and molecular biology have provided a wealth of information about evolutionary relationships among species. As existing infectious agents evolve into new and more dangerous forms, scientists track the changes so they can detect, treat, and vaccinate to prevent the spread of disease.
Biological evolution refers to changes in the traits of populations of organisms, usually over multiple generations. One recent example highlighted in the book is the 2004 fossil discovery in Canada of fish with "intermediate" features -- four finlike legs -- that allowed the creature to pull itself through shallow water onto land. Scientists around the world cite this evidence as an important discovery in identifying the transition from ocean-dwelling creatures to land animals. By understanding and employing the principles of evolution, the discoverers of this fossil focused their search on layers of the Earth that are approximately 375 million years old and in a region that would have been much warmer during that period. Evolution not only best explains the biodiversity on Earth, it also helps scientists predict what they are likely to discover in the future. Scientific Evidence Supporting Evolution Continues To Grow; Nonscientific Approaches Do Not Belong In Science Classrooms
The full report can be seen HERE
I'm not going to labor the point. I just read another article where the United States is last in something -- oh yes, it was preventable deaths. We aren't third or fourth, which would have been unthinkable back in the day. No, France is first, we're last.
In other news, Pat Robertson predicts a year of worldwide violence, an increase in evangelism, and a stock-market crash, based on what God has told him.
As his web site says:
Last year, Robertson predicted that a terrorist act, possibly involving a nuclear weapon, would result in mass killing in the United States. Noting that it hadn't come to pass, Robertson said, "All I can think is that somehow the people of God prayed and God in his mercy spared us."
This is going to be an important time for clear-minded people to act to save our society from collapse into the abyss of Pure Ignorance.
posted by JimK at 2:39 PM
15 Comments:
"Evolution not only best explains the biodiversity on Earth,"
No, it doesn't. It describes the way species adapt to environmental changes. Large complex life forms appeared during a relatively short period of time and these forms have merely changed to accomodate the conditions under which they thrive.
"In other news, Pat Robertson predicts a year of worldwide violence, an increase in evangelism, and a stock-market crash, based on what God has told him."
And what would Pat Robertson have to do with your post?
Why is the book called Evolution and Creationism when only Evolution is discussed. Creationism describes the event where the world was stocked with varied species, presumably by an intelligent designer. This designer also seemingly programmed an ability to adapt to one's circumstance within the DNA of living organisms, a process known as evolution. Not commonly known is that Darwin was not the first to observe this phenonmena. He merely attached the dubious notion that this is how species are created. This is an, as yet, unproven notion.
In "Philosophical Foundations of Neuroscience", Maxwell Bennett and Peter Hacker challenge the materialist understanding that it is to evolution that we must turn to understand who we are and how we function.
Bennett is a leading neuroscientist at the University of Sydney. He also directs the Brain and Mind Research Institute. Reviewing the state of scientific knowledge about the brain, Bennett concludes that the notion that science currently has "major insights into the workings of the synaptic networks in any part of the brain" is both "misplaced" and the product of "hubris." According to Bennett, who knows what he is talking about, many non-scientist amateiurs are portraying science as having figured out things that science is a very long way from figuring out.
Peter Hacker, an Oxford philosopher who is considered the world's leading authority on Wittgenstein, takes these non-scientists to task for attributing to an inanimate object, namely the brain, qualities that are properly assigned to human beings like you and me. Hacker cites some as claiming that brains are conscious and gather information and make simplifying assumptions and use supporting information and arrive at conclusions. Hacker argues that this is a classic case of the pathetic fallacy.
In Hacker's view, brains aren't conscious; we are conscious. Brains don't gather or use information; human beings do. Brains don't draw conclusions; you and I do. Of course we use our brains to perceive and reason, just as we use our hands and feet to play tennis. But it is just as absurd to say that my hands and feet are playing tennis as it is to say that my racket is playing tennis. By the same token it is wrong to portray the brain as perceiving, thinking or even being aware of anything.
If it is humans that possess the qualities that these amateurs attribute to the brain, it follows that the brain is an inanimate object, like the pancreas. We as human beings function with and through the operation of these devices, but it hardly follows that we are "nothing more" than the sum total of them. Materialism--the doctrine that reduces man to his material makeup--is revealed not as a necessary conclusion of modern science but rather as as atheist dogma masquerading as science.
Red Baron said "No, it doesn't. It describes the way species adapt to environmental changes.".
And that my dear fool is evolution.
Red Baron said "Large complex life forms appeared during a relatively short period of time.".
No, it appeared over millions of years, which directly contradicts your bible's claim of a 6000 year old earth.
Red Baron said "And what would Pat Robertson have to do with your post?".
He illustrates the kind of religious idiocy that generated the "intelligent design" foolishness.
Red Baron said "Not commonly known is that Darwin was not the first to observe this phenonmena. He merely attached the dubious notion that this is how species are created. This is an, as yet, unproven notion.".
Unproven in the same way that the theory of gravity is unproven. The overwhelming volume of evidence shows that species evolved. There is no other explanation that fits the fossil record and accounts for the biodiversity on the planet. Virtually every scientist agrees that evolution explains what we see today and the fossil evidence.
Red Baron said "Bennett is a leading neuroscientist at the University of Sydney.".
False, he's an isolated religionist desperately trying to justify his belief in the insane. There is no evidence, and never has been any, for the supernatural. Supernatural explanations are the primitive dying past and are inevitably being supplanted by scientific explanations over and over and over.
Red Baron said "In Hacker's view, brains aren't conscious; we are conscious. Brains don't gather or use information; human beings do. Brains don't draw conclusions; you and I do.".
Utter nonsense. Our brains are us and our conciousness is centreed in our brains. Some babies are born with nothing but a brainstem, they can survive, suck and defecate, but they cannot think, draw conclusions, or use information - because they have no brains.
Red Baron said "it follows that the brain is an inanimate object, like the pancreas.".
Nonsense. Both the brain and the pancreas undertake complex biochemical operations - they are anything but inanimate.
Red Baron said "Materialism--the doctrine that reduces man to his material makeup--is revealed not as a necessary conclusion of modern science but rather as as atheist dogma masquerading as science.".
The essence of science is that proof is required before something is accepted as truth. There is no proof of conciousness apart from the brain and never has been. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. The claim that there is a conciousness apart from the brain is an extraordinary claim for which there not only is no proof, but for which every detailed comprehensive attempt to find such evidence has failed totally and completely. We can rest assured that there is no conciousness apart from the brain with the same confidence that we can rest assured that we will starve to death if we don't eat.
Andrea- not anon
I predict this year there will be warm weather, cold weather, rain and Pat Robertson will still be a fool.
"I predict this year there will be warm weather, cold weather, rain and Pat Robertson will still be a fool."
I predict Andrea will confine herself to easy targets.
And stand in the rain to support Paris Hilton.
Remember this exchange at time the press was saying Romney had moved past Huckabee?:
The red Baron said " Huckabee will prevail in Iowa. McCain will win New Hampshire. Huck will get Michigan closley. Nevada goes for McCain. Huck wins South Carolina in a landslide. Florida goes for Guiliani...".
Randi mocked "You're a laugh riot Red Baron. Obviously you're a god yourself given your ability to state the future with certainty. So, how come you're still poor given your ability to know winning lottery numbers and the ups and downs of the stock market years in advance?"
Well, looks like the Baron is two-fer-two.
Laugh it up, Randi!
I am laughing Red Baron, your theocracy/gay death penalty advocate finished third.
And I'm laughing at the hypocrisy of you critizing Jim for bringing up a topic that has nothing to do with the post when you've done the same thing. Once again, your morality is subjective - whats right and wrong isn't determined by actions, its determined by who does them.
"I am laughing Red Baron, your theocracy/gay death penalty advocate finished third.
And I'm laughing at the hypocrisy of you critizing Jim for bringing up a topic that has nothing to do with the post when you've done the same thing. Once again, your morality is subjective - whats right and wrong isn't determined by actions, its determined by who does them."
Huckabee, who I assume you're referring to, did as expected. I called the election right. You might be interested to know that I would prefer McCain be the nominee for President and Huckabee be the VP nominee. I think that's what's going to happen, btw. Huck has a lot of potential but I think he could use a few years in Washington, sitting in on national security briefings before he's ready to be President.
The Republican cause got a tremendous boost last night when Hillary won. I'll admit I didn't see the piece of good fortune coming. You might also be interested to know I'm a registered Democrat and will be voting for Hillary in the primary. If she could prevail, that would be a slam dunk for the McCain-Huck ticket.
What me? A hypocrite. To quote "Longshot", a song on John Fogerty's new album, "I ain't a hypocrite, baby, 'cept most every day!" I wasn't criticizing Jim, merely asking a question.
Yawn...frankly Red Baron, I don't give a damn what you want or think will happen in politics. Bush has damaged the American economy, justice system, and world reputation so much there's no way any republican is getting in as president again for a long time to come. The democrats could run a cat for president and still win.
And you are a hypocrite. To ask what Pat robertson has to do with the post is to state that it is inapropriate to bring up something unrelated to the post - which is exactly what you did when you brought up the voting in New Hampshire. You criticize others for what you regularly do yourself - you obviously don't know right from wrong.
"Yawn...frankly Red Baron, I don't give a damn what you want or think will happen in politics."
Oh yeah, we can tell.
"Bush has damaged the American economy, justice system, and world reputation so much there's no way any republican is getting in as president again for a long time to come. The democrats could run a cat for president and still win."
You are in for a big surprise.
Hopefully, after the next election, some of these radical fringe types will live up to their promises and move to canada.
Red Baron said "You are in for a big surprise.".
Fraid not - you're in for a reality slap.
Red Baron said "Hopefully, after the next election, some of these radical fringe types will live up to their promises and move to canada.".
You want homophobic republican bigots to move to Canada?! Not likely, this country will be even less conducive to their hatred than the U.S. under a democrat. We have been happy though to take your best and brightest that have moved here during the Bush dictatorship.
You might also be interested to know I'm a registered Democrat and will be voting for Hillary in the primary.
Another homophobic closet dweller!
Post a Comment
<< Home