The difference between science and religion is that science is
constantly changing what is "known" to be true, what is 'known" now
is quite different than what was "known" 50 years ago. I saw John
Kerry on "This Week" on Sunday talking about Palin and he said "She
doesn't even acknowledge that global warming is man made, she might
as well be part of the flat earth caucus". There are so many obvious
problems with that statement, and it makes me like her even more.
Liberals want debate as long as it isn't questioning what they
believe, otherwise you must be silenced for having an opinion.
At 10:48 AM 9/2/2008, Doug Grimes wrote:
>Who determines "what is true and what is not"? Scientists? We all
>know they are always accurate. My favorite in the 1970's was global
>cooling. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling
>
>It is quite possible that God created each species with the ability to
>evolve to thrive in its environment. I admit I do not know the answer to
>the creation vs. evolution question. But my faith in a higher being
>leads me to think that we are more than just a random occurrence within
>the universe and beyond.
>
>Albert Einstein once said: "Two things are infinite: the universe and
>human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the universe."
>
>
>Doug
>-----Original Message-----
>From: HP-3000 Systems Discussion [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
>Behalf Of Wirt Atmar
>Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2008 12:24 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [HP3000-L] OT: McCain Running Mate
>
>John writes:
>
>
> > To squash free thought and free speech is wrong and very dangerous.
> > The very heart of diversity is coexisting with those who think and act
>
> > differently than you do.
>
>On the face of it, this seems like a very compelling argument. It
>appeals to the
>American sense of fair play, but there is absolutely nothing democratic
>about
>the determination of what is true and what is not.
>
>In 1964, Richard Feynman, in a lecture to students at Cornell, made this
>point
>particularly explicit to his students when he said:
>
>"How would we look for a new law? In general we look for a new law by
>the
>following process. First, we guess it. (laughter) Then we... Don't
>laugh. That's
>the damned truth. Then we compute the consequences of the guess... to
>see
>if this is right, to see if this law we guessed is right, to see what it
>would
>imply. And then we compare those computation results to nature. Or we
>say
>to compare it to experiment, or to experience. Compare it directly with
>observations to see if it works.
>
>"If it disagrees with experiment, it's wrong. In that simple statement
>is the key
>to science. It doesn't make a difference how beautiful your guess is. It
>doesn't
>make a difference how smart you are, who made the guess or what his name
>
>is... (laughter) If it disagrees with experiment, it's wrong. That's all
>there is to
>it."
>
>You can view this snippet of his lecture here:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozF5Cwbt6RY
>
>Let me also add this one more image of a different species of skink.
>Scincidae
>is the largest family of lizards, with more than 1200 species. Only a
>few are in
>transition to a fossorial existence, and to the best of my knowledge, no
>fully
>legless forms have yet evolved in the family, but some of its species
>are
>clearly moving in that direction.
>
>In this image:
>
>http://www.fws.gov/verobeach/images/programs/bluetail%20mole%20skink.jpg
>
>you can see the general pattern of the reduction of the forelimbs prior
>to
>those of the hind limbs being repeated.
>
>Wirt Atmar
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
>
>* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
>* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
Regards,
Shawn Gordon
President
theKompany.com
www.thekompany.com
www.mindawn.com
949-713-3276
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
