McCain says he sees the hand of God at the Grand Canyon

[NNN0LHI]

http://blogs.usatoday.com/onpolitics/2007/05/you_say_you_wan.html

Three GOP presidential candidates don't believe in evolution

<snip>Arizona Sen. John McCain did not raise his hand but asked to elaborate. "I believe in evolution," McCain said. "But I also believe, when I hike the Grand Canyon and see it at sunset, that the hand of God is there also."

Most scientists consider evolution a pillar of biology, but religious conservatives have challenged it in recent years.

[liberal N proud]

1. What a profound idiot

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Dorian Gray]

28. Why does that make him a profound idiot?

Many people look around the world and see the hand of God in life. If you believe in God (in the Judeo-Christian sense), then you probably see His hand in the creation of the world. That doesn't mean that one doesn't believe in evolution, though. Most Christians I know believe that evolution is the natural process of God's creation. Of course most of the Christians I know are Catholic, Lutheran, Episcopalian, Presbyterian and Eastern Orthodox. I don't know many born-again multi-denominational Christians that would be more prone to full on Creationist belief. And none of the Christians I know dismiss Scientific belief. Nor do any of the Jewish that I know.

[Deep13]

49. "And none of the Christians I know dismiss Scientific belief."

Scientific belief is a contradiction in terms. Scientific discoveries are scientific because they do not depend on belief. I don't have a response for your subject-line question.

[Bluerthanblue]

65. what a myopic statement-

and how incorrect you are.

"Scientific belief is a contradiction in terms."-

SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERIES owe their EXISTENCE to the very much maligned notion of "belief"-

To have a theory, you start with a concept which has no proof- no evidence- and go looking for 'evidence' to lend social power to your belief. When you accumulate enough evidence, you put your 'scientific 'laws' out into society as "infallible"- sometimes they later prove less than "iron-clad". But until then they are what much of today's modern 'man' will hold as "gospel".

My late father was a true- rocket scientist- phd and all and was much respected by his colleagues- He wasn't a religious fanatic, but a rather humble man, who said
"we think we know so much, but what we have yet to learn will make this time in history look like the kindergarten class".

There is much that has not been understood, discovered, or "proven" YET- That doesn't mean it does NOT exist- or that it isn't true- It only means that we haven't 'arrived' yet.

I personally don't care for mc cain as a politician, and don't much 'like' anything about him- but his statement is one I've heard, and do not feel threatened by, or appalled about. To say that there are things we witness and cannot truly comprehend by 'concrete' standards is not a threat to me- or to my 'understandings'.

peace,
blu

[Deep13]

70. Let's be clear on our terms.

Much disinformation occurs by using words for something other than their real or intended meanings.

"To have a theory, you start with a concept which has no proof- no evidence- and go looking for 'evidence' to lend social power to your belief."

A theory in the scientific sense is an explanatory model based on well documented and repeated observation and evidence. To get to be a 'theory' it has to has considerable evidence behind it. Without evidence it is merely a hypothesis or even a conjecture. To verify a hypothesis one constructs experiments designed to disprove it. If the hypothesis survives the experiment, it is repeated by others. Eventually, it is subjected to peer review. 'Social power' is a meaningless phrase. Scientific theories do not depend on social acceptance except to the extent that they are subjected to critical peer review. Evolution by natural selection is an established fact. We are as sure of that as we are of gravity. Yet a large segment of the U.S. population rejects part or all of it.

Fallibility is a purely behavioral notion. Scientific theories or laws as well established ones are often called are always subject to change if the evidence demonstrates a need to modify or reject the existing theory. Science has never advocated otherwise, though individuals are sometimes so protective of pet ideas that they refuse to consider new evidence. Science is self-correcting even if its individual practitioners might not be.

"'we think we know so much, but what we have yet to learn will make this time in history look like the kindergarten class'"

Perhaps, still science does not claim to know everything. "I don't know," is always acceptable as an answer. I wish priests would admit as much! The fact that we do not know something is not an invitation to fill-in the gaps with religious fantasy. God does not win by default. Modern science follows the evidence and so far no evidence points to anything supernatural. I believe that there is a ceramic tea-pot orbiting the Earth exactly between the Earth and moon. It is too small to see with a telescope, of course, and the odds that any space vehicle would have detected it are remote in the extreme. Prove it is not there. A lack of evidence is never evidence.

I was not commenting on McCain's statement, only one response to it.

[Dorian Gray]

74. Okay... Scientific Fact

Is that better? Or Scientific Discoveries. I was talking about religious beliefs, so the word belief was in my head.

[Deep13]

75. I didn't mean to be pedantic but...

...it is an important distinction. I find a lot of people seem to think that science is based on belief and do not understand the fundamental difference between it and religion.

[Dorian Gray]

79. I understand.

I know that science is... well... science. Based upon experiment and proof. Religion is based upon faith. Belief is a word most associated with faith, so using it in that other post might have seemed like I was being dismissive of science. I wasn't, I just chose my words badly. :) It's all good!

[fishwax]

77. certainly there is such a thing as scientific belief

just as there is such a thing as non-scientific belief.

This is true in the simple sense that a belief is simply something we hold to be true. The word belief does not necessarily imply an absence of evidence in the same way that, say, faith does. So while it might be true that there is no such thing as scientific faith, there is such a thing as scientific belief.

It is also true in the more conceptual sense that science structures a specific belief system--one that Stephen Jay Gould would say is the only appropriate belief system with respect to the physical world of observable fact, as opposed to a religious belief system which is appropriate for the why or the moral or other questions for which science is not ideal to address.

It's certainly true that scientific "belief" is an entirely different animal than religious "belief" ... scientific belief must reconcile it to observable fact in a way that religious belief need not. I certainly don't take issue with the distinction you're making between what science represents and what religion represents, as they are too often conflated or falsely equated.

[ljm2002]

76. I totally agree...

...and still shake my head that we (not just DU) still argue as though science and religious faith are mutually contradictory.

In my view, science discovers "how" things work. It does not address the "why" -- at least, not the philosophical "why". Religion, on the other hand, attempts to address the "why" and also to express a moral code.

When you try to treat religion as science, you're in trouble. Also, when you try and treat science as religion (don't even get me started on some of the shenanigans in federal agencies such as NIH, for example), you're also in trouble.

One of my favorite stories that addresses this issue in a way, is a famous exchange between Albert Einstein and Niels Bohr. Einstein was not comfortable with the findings of quantum mechanics, where statistics held sway, and it was said that there was no direct cause and effect as in Newtonian mechanics. Interestingly, it was his own findings that had spurred these findings. What he said was, "God does not play dice with the universe." Niels Bohr responded thus: "Stop telling God what to do!" I always thought it was a perfect illustration of the fallacy: because, if one does believe in an omnipotent being, then why would we quibble with that being's methods? When finding out about science and stuff, would that not just allow us to explore the wonders of God's creation, and marvel and the intricacy and subtlety of it all? And taking the Bible -- or any other religious text -- literally as though it is a science text is just so misguided, on so many levels, that is really is and should be treated as just laughable.

Sorry, got a little long winded there.

[Dorian Gray]

80. Long winded? Nah! Beautifully stated, though!

:)

[ljm2002]

81. Why thank you!

:blush:

[waiting for hope]

2. I wonder how many

archaeologists, geologists and anthropologists are RW fundies? Or can they be? McCrazy is doing his usual, move to the left, move to the right.....anybody up for some Rocky Horror this morning?

[Squatch]

3. How can one go to the Grand Canyon and NOT think that?

/rhetorical question

[Deep13]

51. One knows better.

[truebrit71]

52. I dunno...maybe when you realize that erosion probably had a hell of a lot more to do with it...

...than some invisible cloud-being you might...

[Squatch]

54. And why can't my invisible cloud-being not create the mechanism

for that erosion?

And, thank you kindly for denigrating my faith.

[truebrit71]

58. Does your invisible cloud-being have a degree in liquid dynamics and it's impact upon soil erosion..

..I was denigrating McCain's "faith" not yours...

[BurtWorm]

66. One might not believe in gods, for example.

Or one might even not believe that god has a hand. :shrug:

[gollygee]

4. When I look at the Grand Canyon

I see something that's more than 6,000 years old. It is beautiful.

[spoony]

5. I had no idea God was only 6,000 years old

I also must've missed where McCain said that.

[Jackpine Radical]

6. I just made coffee 10 minutes ago. Would you conclude

on the basis of that information that I'm 10 minutes old?

[spoony]

11. Maybe you could circle back to the point at hand and try again. n/t

[Dorian Gray]

31. I think that's what McCain was saying.

Look, I don't like him, and I wouldn't want to embrace him as president. But I don't see how saying he saw the Hand Of God in the Grand Canyon as saying he believed it was proof of Creation 6000 years ago.

[gollygee]

38. Since you're less reactionary than the other person who replied

I'll answer you. I wasn't referring to him - I was talking about the people he was defending himself against, or pandering to, or whatever, who believe that the world is 6,000 years old. He had to defend his belief in evolution by invoking the name of God and citing an example where he saw evidence? I think that's very sad.

[EstimatedProphet]

40. Now that's a good point

We're at the stage in this country that people have to qualify their acceptance of scientific fact.

[Dorian Gray]

72. I'm not very reactionary at all.

:) I DO see why you feel disturbed that he felt he needed to invoke God in the political process. It shouldn't matter at all, and it feels false to me as someone who does believe. Having to prove your belief in order to garner some votes is really pitiful. But, the sentiment itself I have absolutely no problem with.

[truebrit71]

60. When I look at the Grand Canyon I see a bloody great big hole in the ground...

...

[fishwax]

7. that doesn't really strike me as unusual

I know a lot of people who feel similar.

[Squatch]

15. Exactly. I don't know why *this* particular sentiment is being met

with such ridicule.

The guy believes in evolution and God. Good on him.

I believe the same thing.

Now, can we get to the real issue at hand, namely that McCain is a raving lunatic?

[fishwax]

20. no doubt. he's definitely a raving lunatic, but

given that most voters and most democrats are probably likely to agree with him here (and given that whoever the dem nominee is almost guaranteed to voice some sort of kindred sentiment), this hardly seems the most productive way of demonstrating that fact. So I guess I don't get it either.

The three folks who didn't raise their hand on believing in evolution, on the other hand :wow:

[Squatch]

27. There are people on DU who seek to absolutely polarize

groups of people into the extremes of political discourse. The reality is, that most Americans fall somewhere in the middle...we may differ in who we vote for at the polls, but despite our political beliefs, we are really a ideologically homogeneous country.

[Dorian Gray]

32. Exactly, Squatch!

:)

[EstimatedProphet]

8. Yeah, well, I see the hand of God there too

and I also see it in evolution. That's the part that the fundies are blind to.

[spoony]

13. Too bad even that makes you and I profound idiots here.

Extremists have made it very clear in the last week that no one may see God in nature, evolution, or anything else without being a freeper dumbass.

[EFerrari]

16. I don't think it's the spirituality but the hypocritical pandering

that people have a problem with re McCain. Someone who has hands as dirty as his are should pretty much run and hide if he sees his Maker anywhere.

[spoony]

18. Not just about McCain

I think he's a pandering pompous jerkwad. But there are threads with polls about evolution and discussions of evolution where even religious people who acknowledge evolution are called idiots for involving God at all. The fringe here does not distinguish between McCain, me, or anyone else who sees God in nature.

[EFerrari]

21. There are strong opinions on DU, that's true.

[EstimatedProphet]

35. Ha! That made me laugh! Thanks!

[Renew Deal]

43. This is hypocritical pandering

McCain has sold his soul.

[EFerrari]

67. I can't ever forget this:

[ChazII]

24. If a single post could be nominated for the greatest

page, I'd recommend yours. Thanks for making the point. It is too much to hope it will anyone's opinion.

[siligut]

61. Sorry

It’s just because the freepers are so dumbass about religion and most everything else, they are yucky and we want to be the polar opposite. Gotta stop running away and fight the fight, but I seriously get nauseous just thinking about it, they make my head spin.

[SoCalDem]

9. And I'm guessing that hand was waving "Buh-byee" n/t

[Double T]

10. conservatives, religious and otherwise, are continually attempting........

to rewrite history, economics and now science; they conveniently leave out the facts and truth.

[spoony]

14. What, exactly, is your problem with what he said?

[Double T]

30. I assume 'he' is mccain, 'he' has made himself irrelavant...........

I was talking about conservatives in general, referring to the last sentence of the OP's thread.

[EFerrari]

12. Anyone ask him about the popes in the pizza?

Someone stop him before he speaks again.

lol

[blondie58]

17. I thought that was beautiful

And I feel the same way.

I did a week long river rafting trip down the Grand Canyon some years ago and the trip was like a spiritual retreat. I have been to a lot of wondrous places, but this was awesome. I saw God, not literally, but being in nature it is hard for me to not believe. Of course, I see the wonder in every change of season, every budding leaf, every little bit of life. Our planet is so beautiful and everything was made so well, it is hard to not believe that it wasn't made by a higher being.

Personally, I think that the problem with religion is when people think that you have to follow MAN's rules, not Gods.

[C_U_L8R]

19. You could also go to the Grand Canyon

for visible proof of a world that predates the Bible.
All depends on what you want to see.

[fishwax]

34. one could, of course, see both

they aren't mutually exclusive, i suppose ...

[Tyler Durden]

22. I wish the "Hand of God" was a FIST punching McCain in the nose.

[Philosoraptor]

23. Mark Twain on seeing the Grand Canyon.

Don't know if it's really Twain, but I read where he wrote that two men saw the Grand Canyon for the first time, the one dropped to his knees and praised God saying His hand was on the face of the land, the other guy just said, "Well I'll be God Damned"!

[Zomby Woof]

25. And that hand...

...was giving him the finger.

I don't see god or even Paul Bunyan's footprints in the Grand Canyon. What I do see is the immense sweep of geologic time and the feeling of our fleeting existence. That, and it sure is purty!

[William769]

29. Damn I hate it when you make me defend people like this.

I am in the Smokey mountains right now and I see the hand of God everywhere. Meaning his touch made this a beautiful place. I am sure McCain meant the same thing. Stick to the real issues please.

[Zomby Woof]

36. The Smoky Mountains

...are really the hand of the New Deal. That land was once heavily settled and developed before the Depression, but its popularity with travelers and the need for works programs in rural areas led to its creation as a national park under FDR. Research the history of the park and you'll find that most of the growth is fairly recent, even if the underlying land is ancient. The government drove people from their homes and planted trees and other plant life over what were once settled areas. The beauty is undeniable, but came with a price.

[William769]

41. Yes it did come at a price

I spoke to a lady yesterday that is 103 and was born & raised in the smokies, they sold their land under the plan When FDR made it a National park in order to save the park from being ruined. Research is not a problem for me and thats just a tidbit of information of what I know since my family is from these parts also.

[TheCowsCameHome]

33. He should be watching for the RW foot kicking him off the edge.

[Buzz Clik]

37. I liked George Will's response to McCain's comment:

"It was the Colorado River."

George has grown weary of the pandering.

[NNN0LHI]

47. I hate George Will. Please don't tell me he got it right

Oh no.

Don

[trotsky]

50. Will is perhaps the most pompous arrogant windbag on the right...

but he DOES need to consider himself an intellectual, so he can be counted on to criticize some of the worst god-based pandering.

[Buzz Clik]

53. Excellent summary of Will.

He seems himself as the rights Deep Thinker. Perhaps more than any other rightwing pundit, he needs to be listened to, if for no other reason than to get a considered opinion. I view him as full of ca-ca most of the time.

[Philosoraptor]

39. Satan has his hand up mc cain's ass like a sock puppet.

[Renew Deal]

42. That's got to be one of the most duplicitous responses I have ever heard in politics

And I've heard a lot of duplicitous shit.

[undeterred]

44. Right hand or Left hand?

[Blue-Jay]

45. He probably shouldn't stand near the edge while mentioning the "hand of God".

[skamaria]

46. I looked into the Grand Canyon.........

I also saw the hand of God. I believe it was George the Geology God.

[Ino]

48. Whew! I'm so glad he clarified that!

Heaven forbid anyone should express a belief in gravity or the benefits of aspirin without adding "but I believe in God too."
:sarcasm:

[spoony]

56. Heaven forbid they do add it.

[bdamomma]

55. he is losing his mind isn't he???

[Joe Fields]

57. I wonder what else he sees, when he's eating peyote ?

[InvisibleTouch]

59. If he had, it would have reached down and slapped him. n/t

[DemGa]

62. Sounds reasonable to me

He's juxtaposing what he knows about science with the feeling he gets from creation. And I don't care one bit for McCain politically.

[ToeBot]

63. I see uplifting and downcutting, but I'm not a pandering gimp. n/t

[jollyreaper2112]

64. I have a picture of it

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

68. Anyone who thinks God created the Grand Canyon ...

... has not hiked from the river to the North Rim. Halfway up you realize that Satan created the canyon, God created mules and helecopters. And you wish you had a mule or helecopter.
:rofl:

[Seabiscuit]

69. Dear John: What color was the skin on the "hand" that you saw there?

[133724]

71. I thought the Canyon was made by Paul Bunyan draging his ax.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

73. does he see the hand of god in tornadoes and droughts?

[karlrschneider]

78. What does he see looking at the pictures of Greensburg?

:eyes:

[Manifestor_of_Light]

82. Damn, where are the fingerprints???