| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"maff" |
| Date: |
18 Nov 2005 07:13:06 AM |
| Object: |
Phony Theory, False Conflict |
Phony Theory, False Conflict
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/17/AR2005111701304.html
'Intelligent Design' Foolishly Pits Evolution Against Faith
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, November 18, 2005; Page A23
Because every few years this country, in its infinite tolerance,
insists on hearing yet another appeal of the Scopes monkey trial, I
feel obliged to point out what would otherwise be superfluous: that the
two greatest scientists in the history of our species were Isaac Newton
and Albert Einstein, and they were both religious.
Charles Krauthammer
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/f9bbf31cb5afbb14
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Phony Theory, False Conflict |
18 Nov 2005 03:39:49 PM |
|
|
maff wrote:
Phony Theory, False Conflict
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/17/AR2005111701304.html
'Intelligent Design' Foolishly Pits Evolution Against Faith
By Charles Krauthammer
Friday, November 18, 2005; Page A23
Because every few years this country, in its infinite tolerance,
insists on hearing yet another appeal of the Scopes monkey trial, I
feel obliged to point out what would otherwise be superfluous: that the
two greatest scientists in the history of our species were Isaac Newton
and Albert Einstein, and they were both religious.
Charles Krauthammer
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.atheism/msg/f9bbf31cb5afbb14
Count in George Will ... http://tinyurl.com/7qhta
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "J Forbes" |
|
| Title: Re: Phony Theory, False Conflict |
18 Nov 2005 07:22:27 AM |
|
|
maff wrote:
Phony Theory, False Conflict
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/17/AR2005111701304.html
'Intelligent Design' Foolishly Pits Evolution Against Faith
from the article:
"Or are we to teach children that God is behind every hydrogen atom in
electrolysis?
He may be, of course. But that discussion is the province of religion,
not science. The relentless attempt to confuse the two by teaching
warmed-over creationism as science can only bring ridicule to religion,
gratuitously discrediting a great human endeavor and our deepest source
of wisdom precisely about those questions -- arguably, the most
important questions in life -- that lie beyond the material."
hmmmm....how could it be that the most important questions are the ones
that cannot be answered? seems to me that indicates that they are the
least important.
Other than that, it's a pretty good opinion piece.
Jim
.
|
|
|
| User: "Navillus" |
|
| Title: Re: Phony Theory, False Conflict |
18 Nov 2005 09:33:04 AM |
|
|
Great article. Everytime I see that guy on FOXNEWS he seems so
overboardly conservative that it's nice to know he's not totally crazy.
J Forbes wrote:
maff wrote:
Phony Theory, False Conflict
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/17/AR2005111701304.html
'Intelligent Design' Foolishly Pits Evolution Against Faith
from the article:
"Or are we to teach children that God is behind every hydrogen atom in
electrolysis?
He may be, of course. But that discussion is the province of religion,
not science. The relentless attempt to confuse the two by teaching
warmed-over creationism as science can only bring ridicule to religion,
gratuitously discrediting a great human endeavor and our deepest source
of wisdom precisely about those questions -- arguably, the most
important questions in life -- that lie beyond the material."
hmmmm....how could it be that the most important questions are the ones
that cannot be answered? seems to me that indicates that they are the
least important.
Other than that, it's a pretty good opinion piece.
Jim
.
|
|
|
| User: "explainer" |
|
| Title: Re: Phony Theory, False Conflict |
18 Nov 2005 02:12:16 PM |
|
|
You're right. He is both conservative and intelligent, a potent
mixture for provocative views.
.
|
|
|
| User: "CreateThis" |
|
| Title: Re: Phony Theory, False Conflict |
18 Nov 2005 02:40:34 PM |
|
|
explainer wrote:
You're right. He is both conservative and intelligent, a potent
mixture for provocative views.
Well, many of his conservative views are not so intelligent. This one is.
CT
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
