From all of my anecdotal evidence it happens to be Fundamentalists, Evangelicals, and anyone else who would profess the literal inerrancy of their scriptures that deny the very possibility of the existence of, oh, evolution and oppose any scientific venture that threatens their world-view. That they haven’t quite gotten to astronomy yet is generally because they’ve not figured out that distance = time in a relativistic universe (light years, anyone?) and those that do generally then go for a Last Thursdayism argument which makes Jehova end up being a bit more like Loki.

Ah well.

Note that I was very careful not to include all of Christianity in my call-out, as that truly would have been patently unfair, instead concentrating on the fundamentalist sects which, no original research required, have appeared to have been those most vehemently opposed to the promulgation of science qua science–as has been said many times, evolution and cosmology are just as much ‘facts’ right now as universal gravitation. If you (KC) classify as an exception to that estimation of the Evangelical and Fundamentalist schools of thought, I do apologize, but in terms of the greater number of those schools of thought the shoe most certainly fits.

the Traveller came as a large and moving Torb!

Call me the Traveler then.

@ JTankers:

Dr. Hawking was apparently was unaware that any particles a high energy cosmic ray might create by striking Earth’s atmosphere would travel so fast (nearly the speed of light) that they would just pass through the planet.

Impossible. And we detect them, directly refuting your phantasm version of physics.

Davros isn’t in charge of CERN by any chance, is he?

How can you be sure statements that we are anti-science isn’t based on bias and stereotype? If what I related is anecdotal information, then so is the testimony of every person who takes a witness stand.

OK… fair point… but if I have a large sample size of a multitude of similar data over a long period of time, evidence begins to pile up in favor of a specific tendency… no? That’s quite a bit different from the single anecdotal data of an individual person, and that was the point I was trying to make. The position that fundamentalists and evangelicals are, have shown, in general, an anti-science leaning, is not based on the single anecdotal data of one person or another… it’s the preponderance of data that all these pieces of evidence build up to that make a pretty strong case for supporting the claim.

How can you be sure statements that we are anti-science isn’t based on bias and stereotype? If what I related is anecdotal information, then so is the testimony of every person who takes a witness stand. What you want to ask, I think, is whether what I witnessed is a accurate sampling. There’s a strong possibility that some many sky gazers in one church is a statistical blip. However, I note that the other issues I mentioned have been discussed by pastors, whether or not it’s come up in church hierarchy or conferences or conventions. About the only denomination that would fall into the Fundamentalist / Evangelical category that I don’t have info on is Church of God. Which is odd since I have contacts in the denomination and they are more uniform on doctrine than, say, Baptists. And you can add Mennonites to this list: I have no contacts in the Mennonite church.

What you will find is churches taking stand on moral issues of, say, embryonic stem cell research (please note there’s no opposition to adult stem cell research – since news reports usually refer to embryonic stem cell research as just stem cell research, some people aren’t aware of that). Some may call that “anti-science, ” yet I’m reminded that some said that about religious opposition to eugenics in the very early 20th Century.

You will also find scattered opposition to the space program on the theory that the funds could be better spent on social programs at home. Yet I notice the same argument rearing it’s head among those in non-Fundamentalist / Evangelical churches, or who don’t attend church much at all. Off-hand I can’t think of a denomination that’s officially opposed the space program, and I know for a fact that churches prayed for the Apollo 13 crew and the families of the Columbia and Challenger crews.

The only other issue I could think of is some denomination might come out in support of Young Earth Creationism, but offhand I don’t know of any. I found a run-down of what various denominations officially believe here:

http://www.answersincreation.org/denominationlist.htm

Be aware that I noticed an error on their listing of Southern Baptist Churches. The late Adrian Rogers, former SBC president, was a YEC, and that may have skewed their assumptions. Since they have an error in their SBC listing, they may have errors in others as well.

Gozer the Traveller – he will come in one of the pre-chosen forms.

Not while I’m Zuul the Gatekeeper!

Am I the only one here who thinks JTankers might be C. Dvd Prsns by another name?

/snark

Dr. Egon Spengler: There’s something very important I forgot to tell you.
Dr. Peter Venkman: What?
Dr. Egon Spengler: Don’t cross the streams.
Dr. Peter Venkman: Why?
Dr. Egon Spengler: It would be bad.
Dr. Peter Venkman: I’m a little fuzzy on the whole “good/bad” thing here. What do you mean, “bad”?
Dr. Egon Spengler: Try to imagine all life as you know it stopping instantaneously and every molecule in your body exploding at the speed of light.
Dr. Ray Stantz: Total protonic reversal!
Dr. Peter Venkman: That’s bad. Okay. All right, important safety tip. Thanks, Egon.

… and of course …when that happens …. omg ! …..

“Gozer the Traveller – he will come in one of the pre-chosen forms. During the rectification of the Vuldronaii, the Traveller came as a large and moving Torb! Then, during the third reconciliation of the last of the Meketrex supplicants, they chose a new form for him – that of a giant Sloar! Many Shubs and Zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of a Sloar that day, I can tell you!”

Extremist Masons are idiots.

Ah, well. I doubt that means much to anyone who’s mind’s already made up.

Respecting what you’re saying… I have to say your response to Centipede is fairly anecdotal… no? Can you really say with assurance that your particular experience is truly representitve of the Fundamentalists and Evangelicals, as a whole, to which Centipede is referring? I think his claim has a good deal of evidence behind it, and it’s hard to blame him for feeling that way based on recent history, IMHO.

I find you statement that Fundamentalists and Evangelicals have been “anti-science” as a bit ironic. Remember that Sunday morning meteorite shower some years ago? Turned out a good many in our Fundamentalist Evangelical church got up to watch it. And we noted the Wednesday night lunar eclipse this year, pleased that we were able to watch it as soon as we got out of church that night.

We haven’t had a LHC discussion because we regard it as a non-issue. We have discussed science before where it touched on theological issues. Some are brief: Our discussion of cloning ended by noting identical twins are clone. Some touch moral issues, such as embryonic stem cell research.

Ah, well. I doubt that means much to anyone who’s mind’s already made up.

How did you find those links? I didn’t when I used Google. My parameters were both Large Hadron Collider and LHC with Christian protest. And from the links I didn’t see notice of a protest.

So two questions:

1) How long would it take to eat us up? Have you done that calculation?

2) You assume it has zero velocity relative to the Earth. Care to back up that assertion?

I eagerly await your answers.

Yes, he said repeated one of the safety Arguments that CERN was telling the public on their public relations web site. He was apparently unaware that the argument was fundamentally flawed, but then again, some scientists also argue that Hawking Radiation theory is also fundamentally flawed.

The argument was (paraphrase) “cosmic rays of higher power regularly strike Earth’s atmosphere and we are still here.” Dr. Hawking was apparently was unaware that any particles a high energy cosmic ray might create by striking Earth’s atmosphere would travel so fast (nearly the speed of light) that they would just pass through the planet. Some percentage of particles created by head-on particle colliders would have low enough velocity to be captured by Earth’s gravity.

If you want to learn more, first read about efforts to block references to published peer reviewed papers challenging CERN’s safety arguments in the Wikipedia article “Safety of the Large Hadron Collider” by editors representing CERN’s interests: http://www.lhcfacts.org/?cat=124

LHCFacts.org

IF the LHC makes a mistake, they’ll probably blow a whole bunch of circuit breakers or fuses and have to spend the next few months replacing them all. The IF you’re talking about is so fantastically remote it’s equivalent to saying that if I made just the right mistake in this program I’m writing for work I could permanently destroy the entire Internet. The probability is so exceedingly minute that it’s infinitely more likely that Jesus, Mohammed, and the Fanged God will come down to your local record store next Thursday from seven to nine passing out hits on the Bong of Enlightenment.

Then again, that could be exactly what the LHC is for.

Either that or being a stargate for Satan and his Nephilim.

You didn’t look very hard…

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/04/01/in-search-of-god
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2008/03/29/news-to-note-03292008

No, but there are enough whackjobs who think the LHC is a secret Masonic stargate to pierce the Van Allen Belt to allow Satan and the Nephilim to wage the final war of good and evil on Earth, probably somewhere around Megiddo. Doctor Plait’s bias (which, Doctor, I do not consider a bad thing, just a simple fact of you being human that I readily accept) is well known and quite understandable considering the Fundamentalists and the Evangelicals have been particularly anti-science in the past few decades and science is something of Doctor Plait’s bread and butter. It’s similar to me being somewhat annoyed with environmentalists painting aviation as a BIG BAD ECOKILLING BOGEYMAN when there are bigger fish for them to fry.

That being said, the Science vs. Norse Mythology comic is a work of beauty.

And the Bad Astronomer is right: The Pain is awesome. The essay accompanying this cartoon is one of my favourite.