And the best thing about military tech is that it’s not necessarily required that one actually produce anything at the end of the day (e.g. the missile defense shield).
There are 2 stages to any Pentagon project: (1) Too early to tell; (2) Too late to stop.
Well, it’s happened before.
Yawn and turn the stereo up?
Well, I renewed my Scientific American subscription today, so take that, Religious Right!
The editor’s message in the current issue is pretty damn funny.
What’s not funny is that they still get letters criticizing them for their “uncritical” acceptance of modern evolutionary theory, to the extent that some folks have labeled them “Unscientific Unamerican”. Uncritical. Can you get over that? So, if you don’t give a “balanced” presentation of Neodarwinian Evolution as “just a theory”, whilst citing other “theories” like ID, you’re “uncritical”. Never mind that ID is a load of horseshit that refuses to die in spite of mountainous fact-based, peer-reviewd refutation. Never mind the only strong support it has is from the knee-brained Creationists of the Discovery Institute. No, despite all this, those credulous science journalists have “uncritically” bought into the Atheist Dogma of the Godless Materialists, and continue with unregenerate zeal to promote their anti-Christian theory that seeks to deny the primacy of God. How could they not see the self-evident Truth manifest in His Creation? How could those fatuous scientists allow themselves to take Evolution on faith?
“Uncritical” my hairy ass. Can these people not recognize the unbelievable irony (and perhaps hypocracy) in what they’re saying? What the hell is it that prevents them from being congnizant of their fallacious position? They can’t all be stupid. Sadly, it’s not that simple. But what can it be that prevents such a well-formuated, exhaustively-tested theoretical framework from being appreciated for what it is? Scholars from all branches of science recognize Natural Selection as one of the most powerful theoretical concepts ever devised to describe nature, one that has racked up successes easily on par with any other of our greatest ideas. Do these people not appreciate that, these days, Biology without Evolution is like Physics without Mathematics? It’s. Not. Sane. What in the hell is wrong with these people??
(P.S. Good luck Edwino! You’ll do fine; it’ll be over before you know it. I know that’s faint comfort at this point, but don’t fret!)
Ignorance is bliss.
Meet Afganistan and Saudi Arabia. Replace Bible with Koran.
Sorry, edwino! I both miscapitalized and unbolded your name, breaching doper protocol.
I nominate “Pat and Jerry” to be entered into the offical SDMB jargon and that gobear be given full and lasting credit.
And I’m with you, FWIW. Thanks and well said.
I think the essential principles here are freedom and tolerance. Although certain ignorant people here misuse the words to shut off criticism of religion, they ignore the fact that secular Americans support the rights of Pat and Jerry to worship whatever deities they like, however they like. I think that Pat and Jerry people are foolish to believe in God, particularly the irrational fellow described in the Bible, but I fully support their right to pray as they please.
Pat and Jerry, however, do not return the favor. They ignorantly think that this country was founded as a theocracy and that religious Americans’ wishes trump the rights of others. So they feel free to ban research into biotech that could save lives and heal the sick, they want their creation myth to be taught in schools and call it “science”, they wish to prevent gay people who’ve shared their lives together for years from enjoying the civil rights any drunk hetero can get in 15 minutes in Vegas, and they believe that their faith gives them the right to intervene into the private affairs of others (vide Terry Schiavo).
The pressure on IMAX theater owners not to show films that discuss modern science which conflicts with a literal reading of the creation story concocted by a pack of Bronze Age sheep herders is merely one symptom of a much more pervasive illness infecting our body politic. I oppose Pat and Jerry for the same reasons that I would oppose Osama and Ahmed for imposing their religious prohibitions on my right to drink beer, or Chaim and Shlomo if they banned me from enjoying a BLT because it offended their religious sensibilities, or Mohandas and Rama if they said that their faith trumped my right to have a hamburger.
I support Pat and Jerry’s right to pray as they please, but not their desire to make me pray as they please or to censor what I may see, read, or think to conform to their beliefs, or to keep me from enjoying the rights I’m entitled to as a citizen and a taxpayer.
As a Christian of quite different views than the Pat and Jerry Show, I have to agree with virtually every word Gobear says. The only difference I’d make is in the first paragraph, where I’d say “the irrational construct they’ve made based on selective reading of the Bible, instead of what He presents Himself as” – and that’s verging on GD territory.
But the idea of freedom is paramount here. And that’s key to any rational analysis of the situation. Gobear and rjung don’t threaten me. Pat and Jerry do. The activist neoconservatives do. If they want to bow down and worship a burning Bush, that’s their privilege; but they have no right to force me to. I think you can see where the line I’m drawing lies.
Why don’t they stick a disclaimer on. You know:
<size=5>WARNING: THIS FILM MAY CONTAIN FICTION</size>
Could everyone be happy then?
If you want to get back into with me, can I at least ask that you do me the courtesy of making an issue out of something I have done, and not something you imagine I might do?
I agree with your OP, right up to and including your identification of religious conservatives. Let’s be clear on one more point: I don’t have the time or the wherewithal to “hate” some tosser I have come across on a message board. You are contemptuous, and I don’t much like it, but that’s about it. And yes, my dear Goboy, despite another shot you took at me elsewhere, the word is correctly stated as contemptuous. My contempt for you has nothing to do with it, it is your contempt for others that is unseemly.
Yeah, yeah, yeah, back and forth, back and forth, you me them and the other.
Who cares how many neocons can dance on the head of a pin?
The reality is, the creationists are part of a well organized and purposeful community.
Anyone wants to oppose that, then get organized, start raising money, start getting political on the ground, write the letters, do the legwork.
Short of that, it is all sound and fury, signifying nothing.
At least this is getting some national coverage. Perhaps that’ll make the moronitude more apparent.
Nonsense, it is falsely applied sob sistering that is unseemly. Science centers that censor themselves for fear of incurring the wrath of superstitious morons deserve contempt.
No they don’t. They deserve greater financial support from the surrounding community so they don’t have to knuckle under to this kind of concerted pressure.
I’m all for funneling dollars toward them to keep them running and less vulnerable to external pressure, but cowardice, for that is exactly what this is, deserves scorn. If a museum indulges in self-censorship, then they’ve already lost.
This sounds a lot like certain “conservative” views toward child-rearing, aid to the poor, etc. that are so roundly criticized by the “left” – Hey, they made a choice I don’t like, so who cares why, let’s give them scorn and remove support until they shape up.
It ignores the fact that the people in charge of these places have a primary obligation to try to keep the doors open and programs running.
These are real people in the real world who have to make hard decisions – even decisions they dislike intensely – in a time of decreased public funding. If a program director and the board believe they are faced with a choice between not showing these expensive films on the one hand, or risking a loss in support from the donor base which could result in decreased funding to core programs (in some part of the country, Bible-believers are the majority, aren’t just the lower economic class, and are involved in charity work and donating to local museums etc.), then what choice do you expect them to make?
It’s not like they’re putting up displays showing that dinosaurs coexisted with humans, or the Great Flood carved the Grand Canyon.
I say, treat these institutions like you would your kids. If they make bad choices, find out why, and give more support where it’s needed, not scorn.
No actually. That sounds like GD territory to me.
And loopy GD territory at that.