Comments on: The law versus religion http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/ I am an astronomer, writer, and skeptic. I likes reality the way it is, and I aims to keep it that way. My real name is Phil Plait, and I run the Bad Astronomy blog. Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:45:12 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Stevo - Mungascr http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/comment-page-3/#comment-25253 Stevo - Mungascr Wed, 17 Jan 2007 08:23:49 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/#comment-25253 Case anyone's wondering, as of now (Jan. 17th) no reply to my letter to the pastor. [B]Daffy[/B] wrote : Actually, God sent himself down to die horribly to save his own creation from his own divine wrath. Am I the only one who thinks the Guy must be severely unhinged? Or, as Lewis Black observed, the God of the Bible comes off like a “raging alcoholic.” Brilliant summation! Well said - & no you sure aren't. You put it so well I may just have to quote you elsewhere if that's okay! Case anyone’s wondering, as of now (Jan. 17th) no reply to my letter to the pastor.

[B]Daffy[/B] wrote :

Actually, God sent himself down to die horribly to save his own creation from his own divine wrath. Am I the only one who thinks the Guy must be severely unhinged? Or, as Lewis Black observed, the God of the Bible comes off like a “raging alcoholic.”

Brilliant summation! Well said – & no you sure aren’t. You put it so well I may just have to quote you elsewhere if that’s okay!

]]> By: Ralph S. Welsh, PhD http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/comment-page-3/#comment-25252 Ralph S. Welsh, PhD Mon, 01 Jan 2007 23:50:22 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/#comment-25252 As a psychologists and a skywatcher, I understand the Christian need to let their flock know they are there, and let the heathens know they are there, too. The big, ugly, bright aluminum cross is a way of putting it to all of the non-believers, especially all of the skeptics, which includes most astronomy buffs. Since the world is only 6000 years old to a lot of these "born again" folks, the world of astronomy has to be out of step with God in believing the outrageous notion the universe is 13.7 billion years old, and in their opinion we secularists might as well be ignored. I have several modest proposals: a) encourage the church that it would be really cool to build a large cavern underground, set up the cross, and charge admission to see it; b) have a developer build a large brothel next door, and the "cross people" would probably decide to move, taking their cross with them: c) encourage local members of the NRA to use the bulbs for target practice. Of course, we could ask the folks at Mr. Palomar to move their telescope to a more appropriate place. I would contribute to such a fund, and we could ask the good Christians to make a generous contribution to such an effort. They would probably be only too glad to move all of these heathen scientists out of their neighborhood, anyway. As a psychologists and a skywatcher, I understand the Christian need to let their flock know they are there, and let the heathens know they are there, too. The big, ugly, bright aluminum cross is a way of putting it to all of the non-believers, especially all of the skeptics, which includes most astronomy buffs. Since the world is only 6000 years old to a lot of these “born again” folks, the world of astronomy has to be out of step with God in believing the outrageous notion the universe is 13.7 billion years old, and in their opinion we secularists might as well be ignored. I have several modest proposals: a) encourage the church that it would be really cool to build a large cavern underground, set up the cross, and charge admission to see it; b) have a developer build a large brothel next door, and the “cross people” would probably decide to move, taking their cross with them: c) encourage local members of the NRA to use the bulbs for target practice.
Of course, we could ask the folks at Mr. Palomar to move their telescope to a more appropriate place. I would contribute to such a fund, and we could ask the good Christians to make a generous contribution to such an effort. They would probably be only too glad to move all of these heathen scientists out of their neighborhood, anyway.

]]> By: DennyMo http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/comment-page-3/#comment-25251 DennyMo Mon, 18 Dec 2006 19:07:17 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/#comment-25251 Irishman, was the double-entendre intentional? If so, very nice. If not, very lucky... ;) Irishman, was the double-entendre intentional? If so, very nice. If not, very lucky… ;)

]]> By: ezminj http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/comment-page-3/#comment-25250 ezminj Mon, 18 Dec 2006 00:07:59 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/#comment-25250 "No, BA, you’re not on any crazy pills. I’m a Christian and I agree with you here. I’m ashamed of Christians who break laws first, whine later, and then wonder why they get attacked by everyone else." The funniest thing about this is most of the folks arguing at this point are doing so simply to argue. The bible states that christians are to respect the laws of their government, and in this day and age, there are a lot of laws to respect. The wattage debate between flourescent and your standard bulbs, the difference between a church and a casino, the lack of proper permits in changing from the wooden to the aluminum cross... these are all just the finer details that, honestly, aren't going to matter in the long run. Think of it this way: if Christians are 100% correct in their beliefs, we have scant more than a decade before the final judgement settles in and Christ comes to reclaim his territory, (given that modern estimates provide for a Gregorian error of 4-10 years,) and if not, we're still on the cusp of a scientific breakthrough that will lead us into a "singularity" of human mental evolution that will offset most major religious structures within 25 years, anyway. In defense of the skywatchers, however, the scientific observatories are built to collect light at a sensitivity thousands of times more subtle than anything the human mind could comprehend, so that even the demure light of 39 45-watt bulbs could possibly provide a haze that could complicate observations near the horizon. Not to say that it's likely, or even remotely probable, but in the realm of fuzzy logic and spooky physics, stranger things have happened. My personal recommendation would have to be talk to the church, ask them to settle for a less-powerful bulb, and if they don't, rest assured that within the next 30 years or so it'll be a completely different world. “No, BA, you’re not on any crazy pills. I’m a Christian and I agree with you here. I’m ashamed of Christians who break laws first, whine later, and then wonder why they get attacked by everyone else.”

The funniest thing about this is most of the folks arguing at this point are doing so simply to argue. The bible states that christians are to respect the laws of their government, and in this day and age, there are a lot of laws to respect. The wattage debate between flourescent and your standard bulbs, the difference between a church and a casino, the lack of proper permits in changing from the wooden to the aluminum cross… these are all just the finer details that, honestly, aren’t going to matter in the long run. Think of it this way: if Christians are 100% correct in their beliefs, we have scant more than a decade before the final judgement settles in and Christ comes to reclaim his territory, (given that modern estimates provide for a Gregorian error of 4-10 years,) and if not, we’re still on the cusp of a scientific breakthrough that will lead us into a “singularity” of human mental evolution that will offset most major religious structures within 25 years, anyway. In defense of the skywatchers, however, the scientific observatories are built to collect light at a sensitivity thousands of times more subtle than anything the human mind could comprehend, so that even the demure light of 39 45-watt bulbs could possibly provide a haze that could complicate observations near the horizon. Not to say that it’s likely, or even remotely probable, but in the realm of fuzzy logic and spooky physics, stranger things have happened. My personal recommendation would have to be talk to the church, ask them to settle for a less-powerful bulb, and if they don’t, rest assured that within the next 30 years or so it’ll be a completely different world.

]]> By: Devo - Mungascr http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/comment-page-3/#comment-25129 Devo - Mungascr Fri, 15 Dec 2006 13:22:52 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/#comment-25129 Oh forgot to add I've sent pretty much the same letter as an open letter for publication in that Desert Sun newspaper via email. Since we don't get that paper down here in Adelaide, South Oz, I doubt I'll ever know if that gets in unless someone who reads it here lets me know ... Oh well hope it does some good anyway. Oh forgot to add I’ve sent pretty much the same letter as an open letter for publication in that Desert Sun newspaper via email.

Since we don’t get that paper down here in Adelaide, South Oz, I doubt I’ll ever know if that gets in unless someone who reads it here lets me know …

Oh well hope it does some good anyway.

]]> By: Devo - Mungascr http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/comment-page-3/#comment-25249 Devo - Mungascr Fri, 15 Dec 2006 12:04:28 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/#comment-25249 [B]JustAl[/B] If you are in the southern hemisphere you may be familiar with the "saucepan" asterism of Orion. (The trio of belt Stars plus "handle" incl. M-42) If you look at the "handle" component the middle "star" will appear slightly fuzzy - that's the Great Orion Nebula, Messier 42 which can be seen quite well in at least moderately bright and light-polluted skies. In northern continents you'll have to see that upside down - the "handle" of our "Saucepan" was the original "Sword" of the Hunter (Orion). The light pollution factor will, of course, vary from place to place. All too many people have never really had a chance to see proper natural "dark" skies - if you haven't then its worth somehow getting to somewhere far from any cities and far from any lights and looking up, it really, really is. I'll vouch for that. [B]JustAl[/B] If you are in the southern hemisphere you may be familiar with the “saucepan” asterism of Orion. (The trio of belt Stars plus “handle” incl. M-42) If you look at the “handle” component the middle “star” will appear slightly fuzzy – that’s the Great Orion Nebula, Messier 42 which can be seen quite well in at least moderately bright and light-polluted skies.

In northern continents you’ll have to see that upside down – the “handle” of our “Saucepan” was the original “Sword” of the Hunter (Orion).

The light pollution factor will, of course, vary from place to place. All too many people have never really had a chance to see proper natural “dark” skies – if you haven’t then its worth somehow getting to somewhere far from any cities and far from any lights and looking up, it really, really is. I’ll vouch for that.

]]> By: Devo - Mungascr http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/comment-page-3/#comment-25248 Devo - Mungascr Fri, 15 Dec 2006 11:35:39 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/#comment-25248 Thanks Boko999 - I've now done just that; posting him (I presume its a 'him' -theyusually are.) the message below. Hope it is okay to post the link back to here .. :-S My humble apologies if its not... Wonder what the odds are of a reply or of them doing the right thing and at least turning the (expletives not inserted but muttered under breath) thing off?! ;-) Now I just _hope_ that was the right link! ;-) ******* Dear Rector at St Margarets I am an Australian astronomer who has stumbled onto your address via the below link debating your gargantuan illuminated cross via the "Bad Astronomy' website. http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/ I believe your church is showing a gross lack of consideration for others and is adding to the already considerable light polllution problems affecting a significant and scientifically valuable astronomical observatory. I wish to add my objections to the many I am sure you will have recieved over this tacky, off-putting and wasteful religious advertisement. I will add that I consider your cross counter-productive as it puts Christianity in a bad light and makes many people - myself for one - less likely to think well of a faith that shows such disregard for its neighbours. I urge you to please turn off the crosses lights at once and preferably dismantle & remove that cross entirely. Apart from anything else, the glare reflecting off aluminium presents a potential hazard to motorists getting blinded. If you must have such a structure at all then please use a less inconsiderate plain wooden variety which, after all, would be more suited to your faith with its extra verisimilitude and much less of an eyesore for your neighbours. Yours sincerely : Steven C. Raine mungascr@hotmail.com Adelaide hills, South Australia Thanks Boko999 – I’ve now done just that; posting him (I presume its a ‘him’ -theyusually are.) the message below. Hope it is okay to post the link back to here .. :-S My humble apologies if its not…

Wonder what the odds are of a reply or of them doing the right thing and at least turning the (expletives not inserted but muttered under breath) thing off?! ;-)

Now I just _hope_ that was the right link! ;-)

*******

Dear Rector at St Margarets

I am an Australian astronomer who has stumbled onto your address via the below link debating your gargantuan illuminated cross via the “Bad Astronomy’ website.

http://www.badastronomy.com/bablog/2006/12/09/science-versus-religion/

I believe your church is showing a gross lack of consideration for others and is adding to the already considerable light polllution problems affecting a significant and scientifically valuable astronomical observatory.

I wish to add my objections to the many I am sure you will have recieved over this tacky, off-putting and wasteful religious advertisement. I will add that I consider your cross counter-productive as it puts Christianity in a bad light and makes many people – myself for one – less likely to think well of a faith that shows such disregard for its neighbours.

I urge you to please turn off the crosses lights at once and preferably dismantle & remove that cross entirely. Apart from anything else, the glare reflecting off aluminium presents a potential hazard to motorists getting blinded. If you must have such a structure at all then please use a less inconsiderate plain wooden variety which, after all, would be more suited to your faith with its extra verisimilitude and much less of an eyesore for your neighbours.

Yours sincerely :

Steven C. Raine
mungascr@hotmail.com
Adelaide hills, South Australia

]]>