Religions > Atheism > Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Sound of Trumpet" |
| Date: |
04 Apr 2006 04:19:23 AM |
| Object: |
Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1608026/posts
Meeting Doctor Doom [Top scientist advocates eliminating 90% of
population for ecology]
The Citizen Scientist ^ | 3/31/2006 | Forest M. Mimms III
Posted on 04/02/2006 4:48:49 PM PDT by Star Traveler
Meeting Doctor Doom
Forrest M. Mims III
Copyright 2006 by Forrest M. Mims III.
There is always something special about science meetings. The 109th
meeting of the Texas Academy of Science at Lamar University in Beaumont
on 3-5 March 2006 was especially exciting for me, because a student and
his professor presented the results of a DNA study I suggested to them
last year. How fulfilling to see the baldcypress ( Taxodium distichum )
leaves we collected last summer and my tree ring photographs
transformed into a first class scientific presentation that's nearly
ready to submit to a scientific journal (Brian Iken and Dr. Deanna
McCullough, "Bald Cypress of the Texas Hill Country: Taxonomically
Unique?" 109th Meeting of the Texas Academy of Science Program and
Abstracts [ PDF ], Poster P59, p. 84, 2006).
But there was a gravely disturbing side to that otherwise
scientifically significant meeting, for I watched in amazement as a few
hundred members of the Texas Academy of Science rose to their feet and
gave a standing ovation to a speech that enthusiastically advocated the
elimination of 90 percent of Earth's population by airborne Ebola. The
speech was given by Dr. Eric R. Pianka (Fig. 1), the University of
Texas evolutionary ecologist and lizard expert who the Academy named
the 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist.
Something curious occurred a minute before Pianka began speaking. An
official of the Academy approached a video camera operator at the front
of the auditorium and engaged him in animated conversation. The camera
operator did not look pleased as he pointed the lens of the big camera
to the ceiling and slowly walked away.
This curious incident came to mind a few minutes later when Professor
Pianka began his speech by explaining that the general public is not
yet ready to hear what he was about to tell us. Because of many years
of experience as a writer and editor, Pianka's strange introduction and
the TV camera incident raised a red flag in my mind. Suddenly I forgot
that I was a member of the Texas Academy of Science and chairman of its
Environmental Science Section. Instead, I grabbed a notepad so I could
take on the role of science reporter.
One of Pianka's earliest points was a condemnation of anthropocentrism,
or the idea that humankind occupies a privileged position in the
Universe. He told a story about how a neighbor asked him what good the
lizards are that he studies. He answered, "What good are you?"
Pianka hammered his point home by exclaiming, "We're no better than
bacteria!"
Pianka then began laying out his concerns about how human
overpopulation is ruining the Earth. He presented a doomsday scenario
in which he claimed that the sharp increase in human population since
the beginning of the industrial age is devastating the planet. He
warned that quick steps must be taken to restore the planet before it's
too late.
Saving the Earth with Ebola
Professor Pianka said the Earth as we know it will not survive without
drastic measures. Then, and without presenting any data to justify this
number, he asserted that the only feasible solution to saving the Earth
is to reduce the population to 10 percent of the present number.
He then showed solutions for reducing the world's population in the
form of a slide depicting the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. War and
famine would not do, he explained. Instead, disease offered the most
efficient and fastest way to kill the billions that must soon die if
the population crisis is to be solved.
Pianka then displayed a slide showing rows of human skulls, one of
which had red lights flashing from its eye sockets.
AIDS is not an efficient killer, he explained, because it is too slow.
His favorite candidate for eliminating 90 percent of the world's
population is airborne Ebola ( Ebola Reston ), because it is both
highly lethal and it kills in days, instead of years. However,
Professor Pianka did not mention that Ebola victims die a slow and
torturous death as the virus initiates a cascade of biological
calamities inside the victim that eventually liquefy the internal
organs.
After praising the Ebola virus for its efficiency at killing, Pianka
paused, leaned over the lectern, looked at us and carefully said,
"We've got airborne 90 percent mortality in humans. Killing humans.
Think about that."
With his slide of human skulls towering on the screen behind him,
Professor Pianka was deadly serious. The audience that had been
applauding some of his statements now sat silent.
After a dramatic pause, Pianka returned to politics and
environmentalism. But he revisited his call for mass death when he
reflected on the oil situation.
"And the fossil fuels are running out," he said, "so I think we
may have to cut back to two billion, which would be about one-third as
many people." So the oil crisis alone may require eliminating
two-third's of the world's population.
How soon must the mass dying begin if Earth is to be saved? Apparently
fairly soon, for Pianka suggested he might be around when the killer
disease goes to work. He was born in 1939, and his lengthy obituary
appears on his web site.
When Pianka finished his remarks, the audience applauded. It wasn't
merely a smattering of polite clapping that audiences diplomatically
reserve for poor or boring speakers. It was a loud, vigorous and
enthusiastic applause.
Questions for Dr. Doom
Then came the question and answer session, in which Professor Pianka
stated that other diseases are also efficient killers.
The audience laughed when he said, "You know, the bird flu's good,
too." They laughed again when he proposed, with a discernable note of
glee in his voice that, "We need to sterilize everybody on the
Earth."
After noting that the audience did not represent the general
population, a questioner asked, "What kind of reception have you
received as you have presented these ideas to other audiences that are
not representative of us?"
Pianka replied, "I speak to the converted!"
Pianka responded to more questions by condemning politicians in general
and Al Gore by name, because they do not address the population problem
and "...because they deceive the public in every way they can to stay
in power."
He spoke glowingly of the police state in China that enforces their
one-child policy. He said, "Smarter people have fewer kids." He said
those who don't have a conscience about the Earth will inherit the
Earth, "...because those who care make fewer babies and those that
didn't care made more babies." He said we will evolve as uncaring
people, and "I think IQs are falling for the same reason, too."
With this, the questioning was over. Immediately almost every
scientist, professor and college student present stood to their feet
and vigorously applauded the man who had enthusiastically endorsed the
elimination of 90 percent of the human population. Some even cheered.
Dozens then mobbed the professor at the lectern to extend greetings and
ask questions. It was necessary to wait a while before I could get
close enough to take some photographs (Fig. 1).
I was assigned to judge a paper in a grad student competition after the
speech. On the way, three professors dismissed Pianka as a crank. While
waiting to enter the competition room, a group of a dozen Lamar
University students expressed outrage over the Pianka speech.
Yet five hours later, the distinguished leaders of the Texas Academy of
Science presented Pianka with a plaque in recognition of his being
named 2006 Distinguished Texas Scientist. When the banquet hall filled
with more than 400 people responded with enthusiastic applause, I
walked out in protest.
Corresponding with Dr. Doom
Recently I exchanged a number of e-mails with Pianka. I pointed out to
him that one might infer his death wish was really aimed at Africans,
for Ebola is found only in Central Africa. He replied that Ebola does
not discriminate, kills everyone and could spread to Europe and the the
Americas by a single infected airplane passenger.
In his last e-mail, Pianka wrote that I completely fail to understand
his arguments. So I did a check and found verification of my
interpretation of his remarks on his own web site. In a student
evaluation of a 2004 course he taught, one of Professor Pianka's
students wrote, "Though I agree that convervation [sic] biology is of
utmost importance to the world, I do not think that preaching that 90%
of the human population should die of ebola [sic] is the most effective
means of encouraging conservation awareness." (Go here and scroll down
to just before the Fall 2005 evaluation section near the end.)
Yet the majority of his student reviews were favorable, with one even
saying, " I worship Dr. Pianka."
The 45-minute lecture before the Texas Academy of Science converted a
university biology senior into a Pianka disciple, who then published a
blog that seriously supports Pianka's mass death wish.
Dangerous Times
Let me now remove my reporter's hat for a moment and tell you what I
think. We live in dangerous times. The national security of many
countries is at risk. Science has become tainted by highly publicized
cases of misconduct and fraud.
Must now we worry that a Pianka-worshipping former student might
someday become a professional biologist or physician with access to the
most deadly strains of viruses and bacteria? I believe that airborne
Ebola is unlikely to threaten the world outside of Central Africa. But
scientists have regenerated the 1918 Spanish flu virus that killed 50
million people. There is concern that small pox might someday return.
And what other terrible plagues are waiting out there in the natural
world to cross the species barrier and to which scientists will one day
have access?
Meanwhile, I still can't get out of my mind the pleasant spring day in
Texas when a few hundred scientists of the Texas Academy of Science
gave a standing ovation for a speaker who they heard advocate for the
slow and torturous death of over five billion human beings.
Forrest M. Mims III is Chairman of the Environmental Science Section of
the Texas Academy of Science, and the editor of The Citizen Scientist.
He and his science are featured online at www.forrestmims.org and
www.sunandsky.org. The views expressed herein are his own and do not
represent the official views of the Texas Academy of Science or the
Society for Amateur Scientists.
.
|
|
| User: "R. Pierce Butler" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
04 Apr 2006 04:49:22 AM |
|
|
"Sound of Trumpet" <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> wrote in
news:1144142363.870882.179620@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Meeting Doctor Doom
Forrest M. Mims III
Now I know where I have heard the name Forrest Mims. Radio Shack project
books. He wrote a few electronics books that were sold widely in Radio
Shack.
http://www.forrestmims.com/
pierce
.
|
|
|
| User: "westprog" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
04 Apr 2006 05:18:52 AM |
|
|
"R. Pierce Butler" <spamsucks@google.com> wrote in message
news:Xns979B31102B222mc2500183316chgoill@10.232.1.1...
"Sound of Trumpet" <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> wrote in
news:1144142363.870882.179620@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Meeting Doctor Doom
Forrest M. Mims III
Now I know where I have heard the name Forrest Mims. Radio Shack project
books. He wrote a few electronics books that were sold widely in Radio
Shack.
http://www.forrestmims.com/
The phrase "Darwinist scientist" tells us a lot about the author.
J/
.
|
|
|
| User: "R. Pierce Butler" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
04 Apr 2006 06:05:01 AM |
|
|
"westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:e0thbk$5d1$1@news.datemas.de:
"R. Pierce Butler" <spamsucks@google.com> wrote in message
news:Xns979B31102B222mc2500183316chgoill@10.232.1.1...
"Sound of Trumpet" <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> wrote in
news:1144142363.870882.179620@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Meeting Doctor Doom
Forrest M. Mims III
Now I know where I have heard the name Forrest Mims. Radio Shack
project books. He wrote a few electronics books that were sold widely
in Radio Shack.
http://www.forrestmims.com/
The phrase "Darwinist scientist" tells us a lot about the author.
J/
Yes, he is likely an objectivist and a realist.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Darth Breather" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
09 Apr 2006 08:02:36 PM |
|
|
R. Pierce Butler wrote:
"Sound of Trumpet" <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> wrote in
news:1144142363.870882.179620@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Meeting Doctor Doom
Forrest M. Mims III
Now I know where I have heard the name Forrest Mims. Radio Shack project
books. He wrote a few electronics books that were sold widely in Radio
Shack.
http://www.forrestmims.com/
He was interviewed for New Scientist in Jan 06:
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/opinion/mg18925351.600.html
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ingeborg Denner" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
04 Apr 2006 04:45:43 AM |
|
|
1. This is untrue.
2. This is old news.
3. The plot described is a movie scenario.
4. The plot described has been shown historically to be useless in
reducing world population.
5. Everyone dies anyways.
6. Mass murder != genocide. A mad scientist would want to keep genetic
diversity.
7. You are a crossposting troll.
inge
.
|
|
|
| User: "Therion Ware" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
04 Apr 2006 05:11:53 AM |
|
|
On the auspictious date of Tue, 4 Apr 2006 11:45:43 +0200, Ingeborg
Denner said unto the multitude in message-id
<e0tf87$ban$1@mail1.sbs.de>:
1. This is untrue.
2. This is old news.
3. The plot described is a movie scenario.
Which one? Worth watching?
4. The plot described has been shown historically to be useless in
reducing world population.
5. Everyone dies anyways.
6. Mass murder != genocide. A mad scientist would want to keep genetic
diversity.
7. You are a crossposting troll.
More generally, I would have thought that Ebola, airborne or not,
wouldn't be too good as a mechanism for wholesale population reduction
in as much as it kills people too quickly and thus limits the
possibilities for transmission.
--
"Do unto others as you would have them do unto you".
attrib: Pauline Réage. Cine To DVD? http://www.video2cd.co.uk
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
04 Apr 2006 06:35:17 AM |
|
|
Previously, on alt.atheism, Therion Ware in episode
<deh4329rn8v2cv0gr78hfvn181rcm9lpus@4ax.com>...
On the auspictious date of Tue, 4 Apr 2006 11:45:43 +0200, Ingeborg Denner
said unto the multitude in message-id <e0tf87$ban$1@mail1.sbs.de>:
1. This is untrue.
2. This is old news.
3. The plot described is a movie scenario.
Which one? Worth watching?
4. The plot described has been shown historically to be useless in
reducing world population.
5. Everyone dies anyways.
6. Mass murder != genocide. A mad scientist would want to keep genetic
diversity.
7. You are a crossposting troll.
More generally, I would have thought that Ebola, airborne or not, wouldn't
be too good as a mechanism for wholesale population reduction in as much
as it kills people too quickly and thus limits the possibilities for
transmission.
Exactly. That's what keeps it so limited now, it kills too fast to spread...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
"As hip as it is for outsiders to blame New Orleans
for everything bad that happened during and after
Hurricane Katrina, the truth is that the people
who lived here were much more prepared for a big
storm than the federal government that promised
us flood protection."
http://makeashorterlink.com/?V180525DC
I just love this one...
"For those of us who grew up in Louisiana,
'The Wizard of Oz' was like a documentary.
Dorothy left Kansas and simply went to Mardi Gras."
http://makeashorterlink.com/?W2EA439BC
"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Therion Ware" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
04 Apr 2006 07:34:12 AM |
|
|
On the auspictious date of Tue, 04 Apr 2006 06:35:17 -0500, Mark K.
Bilbo said unto the multitude in message-id
<C4-dnY2CuKFoxK_ZnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@megapath.net>:
Previously, on alt.atheism, Therion Ware in episode
<deh4329rn8v2cv0gr78hfvn181rcm9lpus@4ax.com>...
On the auspictious date of Tue, 4 Apr 2006 11:45:43 +0200, Ingeborg Denner
said unto the multitude in message-id <e0tf87$ban$1@mail1.sbs.de>:
1. This is untrue.
2. This is old news.
3. The plot described is a movie scenario.
Which one? Worth watching?
4. The plot described has been shown historically to be useless in
reducing world population.
5. Everyone dies anyways.
6. Mass murder != genocide. A mad scientist would want to keep genetic
diversity.
7. You are a crossposting troll.
More generally, I would have thought that Ebola, airborne or not, wouldn't
be too good as a mechanism for wholesale population reduction in as much
as it kills people too quickly and thus limits the possibilities for
transmission.
Exactly. That's what keeps it so limited now, it kills too fast to spread...
Right. And of course it's probably not a terrible bright move to
release a fast moving, mostly fatal pathogen unless you're damn sure
you've got an effective antidote, which may be a problem given the way
diseases are prone to mutate if spread over a wide population.
Ah ... that was the movie .. the Satan Bug...
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059678/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
06 Apr 2006 01:56:26 PM |
|
|
In article <1144142363.870882.179620@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> "Sound of Trumpet" <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> writes:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1608026/posts
Meeting Doctor Doom [Top scientist advocates eliminating 90% of
population for ecology]
I did always want to know who's in charge of deciding who
are the "Top Scientists". You know, like in "Bobblehead
Jesus Cures Arthritis! Top Docs Baffled!"
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brion K. Lienhart" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
07 Apr 2006 12:48:49 PM |
|
|
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1144142363.870882.179620@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> "Sound of Trumpet" <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> writes:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1608026/posts
Meeting Doctor Doom [Top scientist advocates eliminating 90% of
population for ecology]
I did always want to know who's in charge of deciding who
are the "Top Scientists". You know, like in "Bobblehead
Jesus Cures Arthritis! Top Docs Baffled!"
You must have missed the Steel Cage Matches after the main Nobel Prize
ceremonies.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cary Kittrell" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
07 Apr 2006 01:02:03 PM |
|
|
In article <sp-dnUWsDe6cO6vZRVn-gA@comcast.com> "Brion K. Lienhart" <brionl@lienhart.name> writes:
Cary Kittrell wrote:
In article <1144142363.870882.179620@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com> "Sound of Trumpet" <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> writes:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1608026/posts
Meeting Doctor Doom [Top scientist advocates eliminating 90% of
population for ecology]
I did always want to know who's in charge of deciding who
are the "Top Scientists". You know, like in "Bobblehead
Jesus Cures Arthritis! Top Docs Baffled!"
You must have missed the Steel Cage Matches after the main Nobel Prize
ceremonies.
Shhhhh! If the Ignoble Award people hear you, they'd be
on that one like a shot!
-- cary
.
|
|
|
| User: "Brion K. Lienhart" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
08 Apr 2006 12:19:33 PM |
|
|
Cary Kittrell wrote:
I did always want to know who's in charge of deciding who
are the "Top Scientists". You know, like in "Bobblehead
Jesus Cures Arthritis! Top Docs Baffled!"
You must have missed the Steel Cage Matches after the main Nobel Prize
ceremonies.
Shhhhh! If the Ignoble Award people hear you, they'd be
on that one like a shot!
Cientifico Libre! Sunday! Sunday! Sunday! BE THERE!
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Wilson Heydt" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
04 Apr 2006 03:08:30 PM |
|
|
In article <1144142363.870882.179620@z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> wrote:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1608026/posts
Meeting Doctor Doom [Top scientist advocates eliminating 90% of
population for ecology]
_Panda's Thumb_ has a full run-down on this and shows that it's just
a fundie hit piece.
Mim's has a history of being a fundie (he tried to tie an incipient
job at Scientific American as support for a creationist speech years
ago) and has threatened at least one persons job over critical
usenet posts.
--
Hal Heydt
Albany, CA
My dime, my opinions.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
07 Apr 2006 02:45:36 PM |
|
|
In misc.survivalism Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> wrote:
So tell me: Are there any scientists who are NOT "darwinists"?
.
|
|
|
| User: "High Miles" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
07 Apr 2006 03:01:30 PM |
|
|
wrote:
In misc.survivalism Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> wrote:
So tell me: Are there any scientists who are NOT "darwinists"?
How could there be ?
To be a scientist you have to keep searching for facts.
Faith doesn't enter into true scientific exploration.
Emotion belongs in the ice cream parlors of life.
And perhaps............................drive in movies.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Sturgeon" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
08 Apr 2006 09:34:18 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006 19:45:36 +0000 (UTC),
EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
In misc.survivalism Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> wrote:
So tell me: Are there any scientists who are NOT "darwinists"?
No. There are some who called themselves "scientist," but
they aren't.
--
Robert Sturgeon
Summum ius summa inuria.
http://www.vistech.net/users/rsturge/
.
|
|
|
| User: "dan" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
08 Apr 2006 05:07:04 PM |
|
|
Robert Sturgeon wrote:
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006 19:45:36 +0000 (UTC),
EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
In misc.survivalism Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> wrote:
So tell me: Are there any scientists who are NOT "darwinists"?
No. There are some who called themselves "scientist," but
they aren't.
That's pretty unfair to the physicists... Few of them would consider
themselves "Darwinists," unless they dabbled in biology.
Dan
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Sturgeon" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
08 Apr 2006 08:07:49 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 15:07:04 -0700, dan
<dnadan56@hotmail.com> wrote:
Robert Sturgeon wrote:
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006 19:45:36 +0000 (UTC),
EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
In misc.survivalism Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> wrote:
So tell me: Are there any scientists who are NOT "darwinists"?
No. There are some who called themselves "scientist," but
they aren't.
That's pretty unfair to the physicists... Few of them would consider
themselves "Darwinists," unless they dabbled in biology.
Go out and ask all the physicists you know if they are
Darwinists or creationists. Don't take any "physics" advice
from the creationists. They'll probably get you killed.
hmmm...
--
Robert Sturgeon
Summum ius summa inuria.
http://www.vistech.net/users/rsturge/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Schilling" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
08 Apr 2006 09:14:41 PM |
|
|
"Robert Sturgeon" <rsturge@inreach.com> wrote in message
news:heng32h8e08e19of3hq4iec91gb3244uhh@4ax.com...
Go out and ask all the physicists you know if they are
Darwinists or creationists. Don't take any "physics" advice
from the creationists. They'll probably get you killed.
You're overlooking the remarkable ability of highly educated, intelligent,
and skilled men to be complete idiots outside their area of specialization.
Look at William Shockley
.
|
|
|
| User: "westprog" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
09 Apr 2006 09:41:27 AM |
|
|
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:l6_Zf.9452$4L1.6609@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
"Robert Sturgeon" <rsturge@inreach.com> wrote in message
news:heng32h8e08e19of3hq4iec91gb3244uhh@4ax.com...
Go out and ask all the physicists you know if they are
Darwinists or creationists. Don't take any "physics" advice
from the creationists. They'll probably get you killed.
You're overlooking the remarkable ability of highly educated, intelligent,
and skilled men to be complete idiots outside their area of
specialization.
Look at William Shockley
If we define science as the systematic study of the universe*, then it's
very difficult for a scientist to accept the arguments in favour of
creationism. So many of them involve simple ignorance of principles of which
all scientists should be aware.
That's a good reason why Maths should not be considered a science**. Maths
does not involve any kind of study of the universe. It involves
understanding of self-contained systems. It's possible to be a fine
mathematician and not know any physics. It isn't possible to be a good
chemist or biologist and not know any physics.
It's just about possible to imagine a scientist so absorbed in his
speciality that he would be a believer in creationism without seeing the
scientific flaws, while remaining competent at his work. Such a belief
system would probably be closer to being religious than scientific, and
there's no reason why good scientists shouldn't have many kinds of religious
beliefs.
J/
*That's a POOMA definition, and I'd be happy with something better.
**The reasons why it's "Maths" and not "Math" are obvious.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Schilling" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
09 Apr 2006 04:38:19 PM |
|
|
"westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e1bu1o$hdg$6@news.datemas.de...
**The reasons why it's "Maths" and not "Math" are obvious.
They're identical to the reasons it's "colour".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
09 Apr 2006 04:42:25 PM |
|
|
"Mike Schilling" <mscottschilling@hotmail.com> said:
"westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e1bu1o$hdg$6@news.datemas.de...
**The reasons why it's "Maths" and not "Math" are obvious.
They're identical to the reasons it's "colour".
Heh. I once told a Brit friend, "Your gallons differ from ours." He
said, "No, *your* gallons differ from *ours*."
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gene Ward Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
09 Apr 2006 04:52:01 PM |
|
|
Mike Schilling wrote:
"westprog" <westprog@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:e1bu1o$hdg$6@news.datemas.de...
**The reasons why it's "Maths" and not "Math" are obvious.
They're identical to the reasons it's "colour".
If you remove the "ematics" from "mathematics" you are left with
"maths". It is smiley-face mathematics; mathematics without all the
emetic icks. If you remove "color" from "colour" you are left with "u".
"Colour" is color made personal and cozy. The Brits are just saying
have a nice day in their own reserved manner.
How old is this "maths" usage, anyway?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gunner" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
09 Apr 2006 02:15:59 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 02:14:41 GMT, "Mike Schilling"
<mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Robert Sturgeon" <rsturge@inreach.com> wrote in message
news:heng32h8e08e19of3hq4iec91gb3244uhh@4ax.com...
Go out and ask all the physicists you know if they are
Darwinists or creationists. Don't take any "physics" advice
from the creationists. They'll probably get you killed.
You're overlooking the remarkable ability of highly educated, intelligent,
and skilled men to be complete idiots outside their area of specialization.
Look at William Shockley
Or Noam Chomsky
Gunner
"Pax Americana is a philosophy. Hardly an empire.
Making sure other people play nice and dont kill each other (and us)
off in job lots is hardly empire building, particularly when you give
them self determination under "play nice" rules.
Think of it as having your older brother knock the ***** out of you
for torturing the cat." Gunner
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Robert Sturgeon" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
09 Apr 2006 09:37:30 AM |
|
|
On Sun, 09 Apr 2006 02:14:41 GMT, "Mike Schilling"
<mscottschilling@hotmail.com> wrote:
"Robert Sturgeon" <rsturge@inreach.com> wrote in message
news:heng32h8e08e19of3hq4iec91gb3244uhh@4ax.com...
Go out and ask all the physicists you know if they are
Darwinists or creationists. Don't take any "physics" advice
from the creationists. They'll probably get you killed.
You're overlooking the remarkable ability of highly educated, intelligent,
and skilled men to be complete idiots outside their area of specialization.
Look at William Shockley
You're right.
--
Robert Sturgeon
Summum ius summa inuria.
http://www.vistech.net/users/rsturge/
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Aaron Denney" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
08 Apr 2006 05:08:05 PM |
|
|
["Followup-To:" header set to rec.arts.sf.written.]
On 2006-04-08, dan <dnadan56@hotmail.com> wrote:
Robert Sturgeon wrote:
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006 19:45:36 +0000 (UTC),
EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com wrote:
In misc.survivalism Sound of Trumpet <soundoftrumpet@mail2world.com> wrote:
So tell me: Are there any scientists who are NOT "darwinists"?
No. There are some who called themselves "scientist," but
they aren't.
That's pretty unfair to the physicists... Few of them would consider
themselves "Darwinists," unless they dabbled in biology.
Well, yes, and no. We won't call ourselves Darwinists, but you bet that
the fundies are calling us that
--
Aaron Denney
-><-
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gene Ward Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
08 Apr 2006 12:42:24 PM |
|
|
Robert Sturgeon wrote:
So tell me: Are there any scientists who are NOT "darwinists"?
No. There are some who called themselves "scientist," but
they aren't.
So if a scientist working in any field isn't a darwinist, they aren't
really a scientist?
.
|
|
|
| User: "SeppoP" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
08 Apr 2006 01:03:45 PM |
|
|
Gene Ward Smith wrote:
Robert Sturgeon wrote:
So tell me: Are there any scientists who are NOT "darwinists"?
No. There are some who called themselves "scientist," but
they aren't.
So if a scientist working in any field isn't a darwinist, they aren't
really a scientist?
No. If a "scientist" working in any field does not follow scientific methods, he isn't really a scientist.
Ie. if a "scientist" works on the the principle dictated by "answersingenesis" (ie. any observations and evidence which
is contrary to what the Bible says must be discarded), he *really* isn't a scientist, but a christianist.
If a "scientist" does not know what a scientific theory entails, he *really* isn't a scientist. He is a fake.
If a "scientist" does not understand what is the difference between the theory of evolution and the observed fact of
evolution, he *really* isn't a scientist, he is a fake.
HTH.
--
Seppo P.
What's wrong with Theocracy? (a Finnish Taliban, Oct 1, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gene Ward Smith" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
08 Apr 2006 01:32:54 PM |
|
|
SeppoP wrote:
Gene Ward Smith wrote:
Robert Sturgeon wrote:
So tell me: Are there any scientists who are NOT "darwinists"?
No. There are some who called themselves "scientist," but
they aren't.
So if a scientist working in any field isn't a darwinist, they aren't
really a scientist?
No. If a "scientist" working in any field does not follow scientific methods, he isn't really a scientist.
So if a scientist spouting off on something outside of his field is all
wet, that means he isn't really a scientist?
If a "scientist" does not know what a scientific theory entails, he *really* isn't a scientist. He is a fake.
So if a scientist actually does scientific work and has a PhD and all
of that, but isn't so hot on the philosophy of science, he isn't a
scientist?
If a "scientist" does not understand what is the difference between the theory of evolution and the observed fact of
evolution, he *really* isn't a scientist, he is a fake.
Well let's by all means start a purge. Should we include mathematicians
in the purge, by the way?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Wayne Throop" |
|
| Title: Re: Top Darwinist Scientist Advocates Eliminating 90% Of World Population |
08 Apr 2006 01:42:31 PM |
|
|
:: If a "scientist" does not understand what is the difference between
:: the theory of evolution and the observed fact of evolution, he
:: *really* isn't a scientist, he is a fake.
: "Gene Ward Smith" <genewardsmith@gmail.com>
: Well let's by all means start a purge. Should we include
: mathematicians in the purge, by the way?
You mean, mathematicians don't know the difference?
Not even one or two of them?
::: So if a scientist working in any field isn't a darwinist, they
::: aren't really a scientist?
:: No. If a "scientist" working in any field does not follow scientific
:: methods, he isn't really a scientist.
: So if a scientist spouting off on something outside of his field is
: all wet, that means he isn't really a scientist?
Yeah, well, I figured you meant something like that.
IMO, "scientist" isn't binary. Why would anybody think it was?
Litmus tests are for acid, not academics.
Wayne Throop http://sheol.org/throopw
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
