Joe the Archeologist
In this post at Uncommon Descent, Crandaddy posted two photographs, and asked the hypothetical question: If Joe the Archeologist only has enough funds and resources to dig at one of these sites, at which should he dig and why?
I thought that this was a great question and could inspire some great law school exam questions:
1. If public high school biology teacher Jane shows these photographs to her biology class, and asks her class the same questions, has she violated the US Constitution?
2. What if Jane is not a biology teacher, but a history teacher, and does this in her world history class?
3. What if Jane the biology teacher asks the question in #1 and then shows her class a picture of a bacterial flagellum, and then asks which of the three photos shows the strongest evidence of design and why? What if she asks which photo shows the least evidence of design?
4. Is it possible to answer Jane's questions on the basis of scientific evidence and reasoning alone, or does one need the Bible or other religious revelation?
* * *
A previous post of mine that looks at the nature of historical sciences, and the relationship of science and history is here.
posted by Lawrence Selden @ 2:35 PM
6 comments
6 Comments:
The bottom line is that your oppostion to evolution can only come from a misapprehension of the scientific method and a rejection of one of the most empirically grounded theories in science. And, the part I really don't get: the idea that the Bible is a book of science. It was written long before the advent of - science.
It also completely baffles me what on earth the threat to religion is that's supposed to be posed by the theory of evolution.
4. Is it possible to answer Jane's questions on the basis of scientific evidence and reasoning alone, or does one need the Bible or other religious revelation?
Reading comprehension is not your strong suit, Darius.
Then again, no less should be expected from someone who spends an inordinate amount of time updating their blog with obsessive-compulsive searches for biblical inaccuracy. For someone who disbelieves everything in the Bible, you sure do spend a lot of time reading, thinking, and writing about it.
It reminds me a good bit of the behavior in homophobes who turn out to actually be latent homosexuals, where they start out obsessing constantly over how bad homosexuality is but then have an epiphany and become the next George Michael.
Religion is politics. It is not about seeking the truth. It is about power and influence. When a scientist theprizes or discovers something that runs counter to religious rhetoric, it undermines the credibility of religious leaders and threatens their ability to control and influence others.
THEORIZES not theprizes.
sorry.
-----------------------------
MISSION STATEMENT: The Institution of Family in its present, unregulated, nobody's-business-how-I-raise-my-children condition is a dangerous anachronism, a relic from the days when people lived in caves and family was the highest authority in the land. Little progress has been made since then and the results of chronic parental incompetence are prominently displayed at 6 and 11 every night of the year. The purpose of this weblog is simple: I'm going to attempt to convince readers that domestic terrorism is both inevitable and necessary in order to address this problem. I want readers to complain about what I'll be writing, and then I want them to explain why anyone old enough to read this would take me seriously. If I can actually make a convincing case in favor of domestic terrorism, then it's time to stop blindly worshipping our precious Institution of Family and start holding parents criminally accountable for their role modeling. Raising a bigot, batterer, or bully and then legitimizing it's behavior should result in a lengthy prison term.
---------------------------------
BLAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA!!!
Your dad needs to beat you some more until you use proper grammar and spelling. That poor alchoholic SOB.
Post a Comment
<< Home