‘
The Stanford Medicine Magazine just released their new issue and it has a heavy evolution bent to it. The lead article, "Darwin Lives" has a pretty good discussion of things, and even has a quotation (near the end) by a ticked-off astronomer you may know.
Update: Shortly after posting this, I found out that the national academies of 67 nations has joined their voices to this as well. Their verdict: creationism is wrong. It’s really just that simple.’
If you went to BadAstronomy.com and found yourself here, never fear: the BA Blog has moved to its new home at Discover Blogs. The original BA site (with the Moon Hoax debunking and all that) is still online, too.
Phil Plait, the creator of Bad Astronomy, is an astronomer, lecturer, and author. After ten years working on Hubble Space Telescope and six more working on astronomy education, he struck out on his own as a writer. He has written two books, dozens of magazine articles, and 12 bazillion blog articles. He is a skeptic, and fights misuses of science as well as praising the wonder of real science.
Contact me: The Bad Astronomer "at" gmail "dot" com
|
| Bad Astronomy is a Wikio Top Blog! Clearly, Wikio has excellent taste. | |
 | ||
 | Bad Astronomy was chosen as one of Time.com's Best Blogs of 2009. |
 |
"Reading this book is like getting punched in the face by Carl Sagan. Frightening, but oddly exhilarating."
-- Daniel H. Wilson, author of How to Survive a Robot Uprising
DISCOVERmagazine.com: Latest Articles on Space DISCOVER Blogs: The Loom
June 26th, 2006 at 1:39 pm
The Bad Astronomer said:…even has a quotation by a ticked-off astronomer you may know.
Yeah…that quote…
“You’ve heard them complain about activist judges. Be an activist scientist. Let them complain about that.â€
is really cool.
Reading the comments there, I noticed the very old “notion” by the ID proponents that if they “prove” Darwin wrong, then somehow…by “default” that would prove ID to be correct.
Which is just silly, and demontrates a HUMONGOUS misunderstanding about just how science actually works.
June 26th, 2006 at 1:59 pm
It’s shocking to see how many people have fallen for the garbage of creationism and I.D, according to the polls mentioned in that article.
The advice, “Be an activist scientist.” is the best that can be given. Spread the word!
June 26th, 2006 at 3:21 pm
The article in the guardian included the sentence:
It is more accurate to say “… 4,600 million years ago as scientific evidence suggests.” (And here I even used the softer “suggests” instead as “says” or “proves.”)
This original quote paints the “debate” as
creationists vs. scientists rhater than creationists vs. facts.
June 26th, 2006 at 3:25 pm
When you are taught from birth about God/Jesus/Bible, it is hard to just throw it off.
I still don’t understand why religious people are so concerned. I am one of those oddballs that believes in God, and loves science. I think people should learn about God/religion in church, and science in school.
I don’t have any problems/arguements with Evolution(I find it amazing how evolution works, and by how the scientists are able to use it to help people out!!), just like most scientists don’t have a problem with the fact that I believe in God…but then again, I am not some nut case trying to run science out and instill some stupid…yes, I said stupid…way of making religion a science and putting it in schools.
I don’t do a lot of reading on Evolution, but that’s just because I am more interested in Astronomy/Physics, so forgive me my ignorance on most of it
June 26th, 2006 at 3:42 pm
Those 67 signatories include the U.S. NAS, I hope?
June 26th, 2006 at 4:08 pm
You can find the press release with a full list of signatories here: http://www.interacademies.net/CMS/6159.aspx
June 26th, 2006 at 5:33 pm
Thanks for that, Phil. It was a very good read. The comment section, however, is very sad. I’ve taken the liberty (with appropriate hat tip to you and a link to this page, of course) of passing that link on at several of the blogs I visit daily. (The Panda’s Thumb, Science Just Science, and Antievolution.org)
Perhaps reason will someday prevail amongst the general American public, but judging by the comments to that article, I don’t hold out much hope of that happening any time soon.
June 26th, 2006 at 6:39 pm
“Not only is the universe stranger than we think, it is stranger than we can think.”
— Werner Karl Heisenberg
That above quote has always kept me sane in this ongoing debate. If I was on an island alone, and had a choice between one of the two following two volume sets: (Old & New Testaments’) or (Principia, Vol. I The Motion of Bodies & Principia Vol. II The System of the World by Isaac Newton) I would have to pick The Bible because I am way too dumb to understand Newton.
Of course I do not take the Bible at face value—it just has some interesting twists for my limited comprehension.
Heisenberg hit it on the Head! We are all dumb heads.
June 26th, 2006 at 6:57 pm
Heisenberg hit it on the Head!
No he didn’t. He wasn’t sure where the head was, even when he had an infinite precision hammer.
June 26th, 2006 at 7:42 pm
Bah! Heretical Slime. Next you’ll be telling us that the Earth revolves around the Sun! Or that there are more than four basic elements to the universe. Or even worse yet, that Santa Clause doesn’t exist! I won’t hear of it!
June 26th, 2006 at 9:21 pm
Simply put, Darwin rules!
June 26th, 2006 at 11:07 pm
Actually, it was Sir Arthur Eddington…
June 26th, 2006 at 11:27 pm
Or then again, maybe it was JBS Haldane
(found a citation dated 1927 on an old-earth creationist web site. Didn’t see a date on the Eddington quote.)
June 27th, 2006 at 9:36 am
1. It’s Haldane. “Now my own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we CAN suppose.” Possible Worlds, 1927, I think, though the Net is treacherous on this point.
2. Darwin may live, but his tortoise, Harriet, just died. See http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapcf/06/24/tortoise.die.ap/
June 27th, 2006 at 3:18 pm
Patrick Riley said:
“It is more accurate to say “… 4,600 million years ago as scientific evidence suggests.†(And here I even used the softer “suggests†instead as “says†or “proves.â€)”
Patrick, I think I would have used “indicates”, which gives a firmer sense than “suggests” without going as far as “proves”. Although, I think it would also be a viable option to use “proves beyond any reasonable doubt”.
June 27th, 2006 at 3:49 pm
‘S funny, you know, in a way…
Since you first posted about ID last year, Phil, I followed links you included to Pharyngula, The Panda’s Thumb and thence to Talk Origins. I think I have now read nearly the whole TO archive.
And I am more convinced than ever before that:
(a) Evolution with common descent is the only explanation for the diversity of life on Earth that makes sense; and
(b) Those opposed to evolution have frequently demonstrated astonishingly poor scholarship and have deliberately misled their readership/audience.
Who was it that said “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbour…”? ‘Cos the ID proponents didn’t listen.
Oh, and in case any of you don’t already know, here’s the link:
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs.html
June 28th, 2006 at 9:49 am
[...] Hat tip to Bad Astronomy [...]
June 28th, 2006 at 9:57 am
The whole concept of “evolution dismantling children’s belief in god” is ludicrous! I was atheist BEFORE I was even remotely aware of Darwin’s mgnificent contribution. I remember distinctly in third grade realizing that religion in general seemed to be nothing more than a tool of the patriarchy, used mostly to advance their own whims and prejudices rather than benefiting society and its people. It’s important to note that this was the era in which I was discovering the deluge of discrimination against women perpetrated by various religions. I’m 18 now, but am considering joining a synagogue only to maintain my Jewish (cultural) heritage as well as sticking it to the Jesus-Man and Hitler.
July 3rd, 2006 at 11:24 am
“I still don’t understand why religious people are so concerned.”
Well, maybe if there weren’t so many people telling them evolution and religion were incompatible, they wouldn’t care.
The funny thing is that both creationists and some atheists seem to make this point.
“I am one of those oddballs that believes in God, and loves science.”
I don’t see how you could possibly be an oddball. Science and atheism are two separate things.
“I think people should learn about God/religion in church, and science in school.”
I don’t see why people can’t learn about religion in school, in, like, history class, or even religious class if it’s a religious school. I learned all about science in my catholic school. Being ignorant about religion doesn’t make one, by default, smarter on science.
September 19th, 2006 at 5:43 am
“Creationism includes a belief that all forms of life have always existed in their present form and that the world was formed in 4004 BC”
Im curious as to how creationists came up with that date. Maybe this belongs in a theology discussion but id like to point out that 2 PETER 3:8 States “With the lord a day is like a thousand years and a thousand years are like a day”
since god took 6 days to create the earth and rested on the 7th, seems to me thats 7 thousand years before anything else happened…..