How can a political administration that doesn't listen to science

[ogsball]

expect to encourage students to study and go into the sciences and make us a more technologically competitive country.

Do the Asians have anything equivalent to creation science?

[Maestro]

1. Good point!

I am so sick of individuals ignoring empirical science!

[whistle]

2. Possibly up through the Imperial Chinese dynasties and even the...

...Japanese Shinto religion there were efforts through religion to keep the masses content with their limitations in life. But I think today there are more enlightened individuals who can see a blend of science, philosophy and relgion. Take a look at this persons view:

<link>

http://www.religion-online.org/showarticle.asp?title=45

<snip>

Justice, Peace and Integrity of Creation: An Asian Perspective

by Yong-Bok Kim

Kim Yong-Bock (family name Kim), Ph. D., is President of Hanil University and Theological Seminary in Chonbuk, Korea (Wanju-Kun Sangkwan-Myun, Shinri, 694-1; Chonbuk, Korea 565-830). He received his Masters of Divinity and Ph.D. degrees from Princeton University. He has been a teaching fellow at Princeton Theological Seminary, an international consultant to the Commission on Ecumenical Missions and Relations, National Board of Missions, of the United Presbyterian Church (USA), and is founder and Director of the Christian Center for Asian Studies, and Director of the Doctor of Ministries Studies, a joint program with San Francisco Theological Seminary. This paper was written in August, 1989.

[whistle]

3. It also appears that Creation Science attacks not just Darwin, but...

...the science of geology and specifically the writings of one Charles Lyell who advocated "uniformitarian geology" over 150 years ago. This is the concept that we can go back in time by reverse extrapolation of present events. For example, by measuring the current known rate of erosion of the Colorado River which goes through the center of the Grand Canyon and with some adjustments based on logical flows and probable events from the past along with linear measurements of the length, width and depth of the canyon today, we are able to determine the likely age of the natural canyon building process to be about 30 million years old. Creation Science must discredit this concept entirely because if the biblical basis by which Creation Science exists is to have any credibility, God created the entire world as in is now just 6,900 years ago and He did it in six days, not over millions or even billions of years. So evolution, geology and any related science which derives its scientific basis from logic and method are discredited also. "Planet of the Apes" is here and now.

[Atlant]

5. "USA Today" had an amusing article this morning.

It stated that there's now evidence of humans in North Carolina
something like 50K years ago. (I don't remember the exact number
but it wass much more than the 12K commonly accepted under any
of the current theories.)

My first reaction was: "North Carolina? Can't be! Most North
Carolinians believe that humans were only created 6,000 years ago!"

Atlant

[izzie]

6. Ever talk to those people? They just do not believe any thing they

do not wish to. I would think to let this type of thinking to get into the school as a death to the USA. My God we are all about science. I have night mares that Bush will really fix our school like he did in TX. NE schools are still in the top in this country and I have had my kids in Southern schools and they are not good. Just the thought that Bush has put his people from TX in as head of education should make us all run like crazy.

[Crunchy Frog]

7. Creationism attacks ALL science.

Not just biology, but geology, physics, astronomy, and probably many other branches that I can't think of right now. First, because anything that touches on the subject of origins is fair game, and all scientific branches eventually touch on origins in some way or other. Second, because it attacks the fundamental basis on which science is carried out, by rejecting empiricism and the scientific method.

Anyone who has looked at the convoluted reasoning behind conclusions reached by creationism can see that their is no trace of the modern scientific method there. If it must be rejected in one area of science, how can it be considered legitimate in other areas?

This country is about to become a complete backwater in science. The one silver lining that I can see to this is that destroying our scientific base, while other countries our building theirs, will eventually undermine our ability to remain a superpower. I think this nation has amply demonstrated that it simply can't handle being "the world's sole remaining superpower".

[Atlant]

4. Magical thinking overcomes all! (NT)