decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
What science? | 458 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
The problems with a lying god go far beyond Science
Authored by: Winter on Tuesday, September 25 2012 @ 05:43 AM EDT
"if their God provides them with a billion of years of history fitting
together like a perfect miracle of a jigsaw puzzle"

This idea comes up from time to time. However, it presupposes that this god
lies. I think Christians will have some problems with incorporating this fact
into their belief system.


---
Some say the sun rises in the east, some say it rises in the west; the truth
lies probably somewhere in between.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

‘Science Guy’ Bill Nye says religious-based dismissal of evolution endangers U.S. science
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 25 2012 @ 11:00 AM EDT
Whilst Creation Science advocates are guilty of bad science, evolutionists
are equally guilty of equally bad science.

Like virtually every other scientific theory, the theory gains popularity, not
because it provides a better explanation, but because the advocates of the
earlier theory died out.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

‘Science Guy’ Bill Nye says religious-based dismissal of evolution endangers U.S. science
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 25 2012 @ 12:50 PM EDT
The problem I have with Evolution is that people are teaching it as if it were a
Law already. Scientists are using the theory as a "pre-determined
truth" in other theories, which is against the scientific method. Until
Evolution is proven correct for all cases, it should not be used as a base for
other theories, and it should not be taught that it is the only possible answer.
Doing so prevents scientists from coming up with other possible theories that
better explain the observed facts - and yes, those who currently try to do so
are being vilified. There are flaws and holes in the theory, which have caused
some early and well known proponents to abandon it entirely.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

What, no lawyers?
Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, September 25 2012 @ 12:58 PM EDT
In the beginning, God created evolution. And ever since, somebody has been
trying to patent it.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

‘Science Guy’ Bill Nye says religious-based dismissal of evolution endangers U.S. science
Authored by: PJ on Wednesday, September 26 2012 @ 01:53 AM EDT
The problem I have with creationists is that if their God provides them with a billion of years of history fitting together like a perfect miracle of a jigsaw puzzle, there is no point in refusing to look at this masterwork of creation and coherency and learn from it.

There certainly are those who fit that description. But I don't, and I am a Christian, and I don't believe in evolution. But I'm not ignorant or stupid. Nor do I refuse to look at and learn from anything. Just saying.

Generalizations don't usually prove to be always accurate, and if we are going to be scientific, it might be best not to generalize about entire categories of people.

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

What science?
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, September 26 2012 @ 04:51 PM EDT
Oh, I am a "science guy" myself. I have no problems with casting doubt on evolution theories. It is the job of science to cast doubt and verify, using the available data and connecting it into coherent theories.

A scientist with a job needs funding. A primary aspect of the job is to procure funding and keep the money people happy with the results. If all they want is unbiased research and truth, this is wonderful.

It is very important for anyone wanting to keep the job to know for sure what the people with the funds want, and deliver what they want, that is, if you want the funds to continue.

I think many religions false and make money selling Blue Sky after we die and never deliver the goods we paid and obeyed for. I mean, I'm not inclined to believe they are all true, or even decent for that matter.

Beware of false prophets, sharing hymn books with harlots and child molesting priests.

Are you as discriminating as me about men who call themselves Scientists? I hope so.

If not, the jokes on you and you allow yourself to be played for a chump.
Do you actually follow the money trail, before deciding that the science is actually science.

The problem I have with creationists is not their belief in God, or even a creation made 6000 years ago looking as if it had a history of billions of years: all the past I know exists only in its effects on the current state of the world including my brain, and there is no way I could prove it has not been created in this state 5 minutes ago, or not at all.



A day for us is one revolution of the Earth. For an Infinite God, a day might be one revolution of the Universe. In any event I don't know of a religion that thinks God lives exclusively on Earth and counts His days by its revolutions.


About proof, I tend to agree with you, neither can prove, both of us can however demonstrate.
The problem I have with creationists is that if their God provides them with a billion of years of history fitting together like a perfect miracle of a jigsaw puzzle, there is no point in refusing to look at this masterwork of creation and coherency and learn from it.
Refusing to look at this masterwork of creation . . .? Say what!

O Lord my God! When I in awesome wonder Consider all the worlds Thy hands have made, I see the stars, I hear the rolling thunder, Thy power throughout the universe displayed: When through the woods and forest glades I wander and hear the birds sing sweetly in the trees; When I look down from lofty mountain grandeur And hear the brook and feel the gentle breeze:


And you who probably thinks you are intelligent, are you an accident? If God exists or if She doesn't, has nothing whatsoever to do with man's opinion of Her, you know that much for sure. And you who are nothing but an Accident, dare to place if conditions on the existence of a God, for example? We aren't that smart are we? How Intelligent do you think your Accidental existence really is?
What this really is about is not a choice of faith over unbelief, but rather a choice of ignorance over knowledge, a choice of apathy over curiosity.


Do you infer that believers are ignorant apathetic people. That would be EASY for science to prove, I mean Super Easy prove if it where true. And if it were true, we probably wouldn't need scientists to tell us, because it would be so obvious.
That's a valid lifestyle choice, but it has no place in education. This choice means dropping out of education, and education can't meaningfully cover that.
You are not the product of anything Intelligent are you? I think it arrogant for a literal accident, a mishap such as you to even talk about meaning.

I'm not wanting to be harsh to you, I am trying to make a point.

Do accidents have meaning?

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

  • What science? - Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, September 27 2012 @ 08:00 AM EDT
Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )