Warp wrote:
> Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote:
>> Well, for people that shoot themselves in the foot, this one had to an 
>> RPG. PZ Myers, a fairly well known, but hardly world wide known, name in 
>> the so called debate between 1 AD theology and 2008 AD science, and who 
>> was interviewed, (or more like mugged), for the movie Expelled, has been 
>> expelled from the line for the movie in the Mall of America. He was 
>> there in the twin cities, with his family, and other atheists, to attend 
>> a convention *for* atheists. I will leave the punchline of who **did** 
>> get let in instead for those reading the post (Hint: This person **is** 
>> known world wide, and they also misused interview material from him in 
>> it).
> 
>   For some reason I didn't understand that paragraph at all.
> 
>   Anyways, this subject is boring. Could we please pass? I don't think
> this server needs yet another "let's all bash ID wackos" megathread.
> 
I don't think we need it either, but I am afraid we will have a couple 
of other ones to come. And they will also be mostly a intra-US flame war 
only.
So let me try to put it in a European perspective ;)
What is at stake here is nothing less than the survival of the US 
itself. On one side the group of people that noticed that moral 
behaviour is dropping while (or because) religion is losing ground with 
respect to when they were young. At which point you might shrug and 
quote some ancient roman guy (or even older) who said that already 2000+ 
years ago, but that is not the point. They feel it is something that 
never happened before and that it is their (holy) task to restore 
religion and moral values. To a certain extend I think they have a point 
(proving that I am getting old also). Some of these people came up with 
an ingenious way to increase the impact of religion on society. The 
major problem is that people nowadays are taught to think for themselves 
and not just listen to the religious leaders. So the first goal should 
be to attack science classes. And as we all know they devised a theory 
that superficially might pass as science. Before condemning then, we 
should keep in mind that their ultimate goal is to protect the ethics 
and morality of the US people. If they don't do it, the US will slide 
down a path to hell. Second, note that it is so close to a scientific 
theory that some people started to realize that it really might contain 
some value, and that at least there are things that should be rigorously 
checked before being dismissed. For argument's sake call the latter the 
'real believers' and the original group the 'pragmatics'. What happens 
again and again is that whenever a 'real believer' thinks he finds 
something, the pragmatics jump on it and even before the first 
scientific test it is proclaimed a dogma. While I do have respect for 
'real believers', the 'pragmatics' kills every attempt at science in the 
US (which, as I have already pointed out, is exactly what is needed to 
save the country). It is slightly different here in Europe, but most 
debates even here are centered around the rubbish from the 'pragmatics' 
and, hence, killed prematurely.
The other side of the debate is that another group in the US thinks that 
science is not evil but necessary for the survival of the country. The 
educational system is in a bad condition (even worse now that John had 
to leave) and they have to import scientist from all over the world to 
keep the economy running. That will only work as long as the US is a 
healthy economy and can afford these imports. The US may just survive 
the current economic crisis, but if they don't get the average US 
citizen involved in science the whole system may collapse next time 
because of a lack of well-trained people. What happens next will depend 
on who will be the next economic superpower. If it is Europe or Japan, 
they will still have some change of recovery. If it is e.g. China there 
is a big change that even IP will not be protected and the US will loose 
everything. Simply because the biggest player will dictate the rules.

In conclusion: two scenarios for doom and two completely opposite 
solutions to prevent that. Let the flame wars continue.

Post a reply to this message