Is Canada's Science Minister a creationalist?

[ToadBrother]

S'funny. I've been thinking the same thing since I started reading this thread.

It's a grandstand show of ignorance and bigotry by the lefties!

I don't what kind of mentality thinks that science is somehow politically aligned. Well, I lie, I do know what kind of mentality thinks that.

[Alta4ever]

I don't what kind of mentality thinks that science is somehow politically aligned. Well, I lie, I do know what kind of mentality thinks that.

then you are a fool.

[ToadBrother]

then you are a fool.

Do you actually think evolutionary biology has a political alignment? Tell me, what political alignment does General Relativity have? How about quantum mechanics? What side of the House would geology sit on? Who would more likely be elected in Calgary West, marine biology or particle physics?

[Chuck U. Farlie]

Why should the public give any credence to someone who believes in fantasy?

alta4ever keeps saying that evolution is 'just a theory' - meanwhile creationism and all religions are just a fantasy. You can't even call what you believe a 'theory' because there is absolutely no evidence to back it up what-so-ever.

[Alta4ever]

Do you actually think evolutionary biology has a political alignment? Tell me, what political alignment does General Relativity have? How about quantum mechanics? What side of the House would geology sit on? Who would more likely be elected in Calgary West, marine biology or particle physics?

Go and apply for job at any research university and if you tow the right part line or share their beleifs good luck getting a job.

As I said before watch Expelled Ben Steins documentary, you will come to see just how politized the science community is, or the debate on global warming is another example.

It isn't the virtuous pillar you seem to think it is.

[ToadBrother]

Go and apply for job at any research university and if you tow the right part line or share their beleifs good luck getting a job.

Can you give me an example?

As I said before watch Expelled Ben Steins documentary, you will come to see just how politized the science community is, or the debate on global warming is another example.

It isn't the virtuous pillar you seem to think it is.

You mean the movie that the distributors refused to let Richard Dawkins into see? The only people expelled were some well known scientists.

[Alta4ever]

Why should the public give any credence to someone who believes in fantasy?

alta4ever keeps saying that evolution is 'just a theory' - meanwhile creationism and all religions are just a fantasy. You can't even call what you believe a 'theory' because there is absolutely no evidence to back it up what-so-ever.

Why should we give any credence to you since you live in the liberal world of la la land.

[Alta4ever]

Can you give me an example?

You mean the movie that the distributors refused to let Richard Dawkins into see? The only people expelled were some well known scientists.

A professor at the university of Ottawa is in the process of being fired because of his views on afganistan. This is a tenured professor, he teaches engineering, and is being removed due to a political veiw point.

[Keepitsimple]

If anyone is interested in what Gary Goodyear actually had to say about evolution and how the Government is investing in Science & Technology, here's a link to Jane Taber's interview with him on Power Play.......this thread, thanks to the original tunnel-visioned, controversy-seeking "journalist", is a huge tempest-in-a-teapot.

Link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/sto...90317.wevol0317

[ToadBrother]

A professor at the university of Ottawa is in the process of being fired because of his views on afganistan. This is a tenured professor, he teaches engineering, and is being removed due to a political veiw point.

First of all engineering isn't science. Second of all, is there some particular reason I should believe that a tenured engineering professor is being removed simply because of his views on Afghanistan?

Michael Behe, one of the formulators of Intelligent Design, is a tenured microbiologist (and one of only a handful of working scientists in the entire world who accepts ID) at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania, who is considered a complete joke by his own department, made a fool of himself in the Dover Trial, hasn't lost his job, and his advocacy is in direct contradiction to every other member of his department.

[Alta4ever]

I think his name was rancour or something like that.

[Alta4ever]

First of all engineering isn't science. Second of all, is there some particular reason I should believe that a tenured engineering professor is being removed simply because of his views on Afghanistan?

Michael Behe, one of the formulators of Intelligent Design, is a tenured microbiologist (and one of only a handful of working scientists in the entire world who accepts ID) at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania, who is considered a complete joke by his own department, made a fool of himself in the Dover Trial, hasn't lost his job, and his advocacy is in direct contradiction to every other member of his department.

You seem to think that scientist are above this they aren't they have and hold political leanings they are people they discriminate, how are they able to put aside human nature simple they aren't.

[Molly]

Kimmys point would be fine if Goodyear was just the minister of state for technology, but he's not.

He's also responsible for the money that goes into pure research- of the sort that won't be bringing products onto the market any time soon, but which illuminate the workings of the world around us. Is that being decided on a theological basis?

How goes the funding for the Royal Tyrell?

[Alta4ever]

Kimmys point would be fine if Goodyear was just the minister of state for technology, but he's not.

He's also responsible for the money that goes into pure research- of the sort that won't be bringing products onto the market any time soon, but which illuminate the workings of the world around us. Is that being decided on a theological basis?

How goes the funding for the Royal Tyrell?

Do you have any real proof that t isn't?

The funding for royal tyrell seems to be very good, considering the state of the museum, I take that family atleast once a year since i live so close.

[ToadBrother]

You seem to think that scientist are above this they aren't they have and hold political leanings they are people they discriminate, how are they able to put aside human nature simple they aren't.

Of course they hold political beliefs. The whole point of methodological naturalism (the heart and soul of science) is that through the basic requirements of testable predictions which can be performed by multiple people, you overcome the so-called "observer's bias". We've seen it a number of times recently, the South Korean scientist whose cloning claims turned out to be BS, the Fleischmann-Pons debacle over cold fusion. The whole point of peer review, for instance, is that a pack of ornery scientists try to tear down your theory.

What science does have, as opposed to every other epistemological system out there, is a means of self-correction. In the short term, a scientist might be able to pull one over, but in the long term, at some point, someone is going to find them out. And it usually isn't all that long, because once something is published in a journal, it's "out there".

[Molly]

Keepitsimple.... all I can say is 'Wow.'

But I have to add that it wasn't the journalist who created the tempest. What a jackass answer to a straight question!

[Oleg Bach]

Cold fussion - turning ice into eternal fire..was a lot like turning lead into gold. Some respect science and assume that all scientists are soothsayers and men and woman of total honour - Look at the pharma buisness...where scientists put there sticker of approval on drugs that are dangerous to human health - Or scientists who in the past said that cigarette smoking is good for you - Men of science can always be bribed - probably easier than the bribing of a creationist - who fundamentally will stick to his or her sense of principles - scientist for instance who instist on using stem cells from abortions - are not willing to give up their funding by admitting that these types of cells cause tumors and are useless in their applications. BUT a scientist must eat and some of these acedemics are use to taking free rides at the expense of the public - Some have not ethics what so ever -----in fact Ethics are counter productive in the mind of science.

[Alta4ever]

Cold fussion - turning ice into eternal fire..was a lot like turning lead into gold. Some respect science and assume that all scientists are soothsayers and men and woman of total honour - Look at the pharma buisness...where scientists put there sticker of approval on drugs that are dangerous to human health - Or scientists who in the past said that cigarette smoking is good for you - Men of science can always be bribed - probably easier than the bribing of a creationist - who fundamentally will stick to his or her sense of principles - scientist for instance who instist on using stem cells from abortions - are not willing to give up their funding by admitting that these types of cells cause tumors and are useless in their applications. BUT a scientist must eat and some of these acedemics are use to taking free rides at the expense of the public - Some have not ethics what so ever -----in fact Ethics are counter productive in the mind of science.

You know I am finding more and more of your posts that I like or argree with.

[ToadBrother]

Cold fussion - turning ice into eternal fire..was a lot like turning lead into gold. Some respect science and assume that all scientists are soothsayers and men and woman of total honour - Look at the pharma buisness...where scientists put there sticker of approval on drugs that are dangerous to human health - Or scientists who in the past said that cigarette smoking is good for you - Men of science can always be bribed - probably easier than the bribing of a creationist - who fundamentally will stick to his or her sense of principles - scientist for instance who instist on using stem cells from abortions - are not willing to give up their funding by admitting that these types of cells cause tumors and are useless in their applications. BUT a scientist must eat and some of these acedemics are use to taking free rides at the expense of the public - Some have not ethics what so ever -----in fact Ethics are counter productive in the mind of science.

Of course scientists can be bribed. As I said, that's the point of processes like peer review. No matter how much you get paid to claim you've found some wonderous cure, at some point, someone is going to figure it out. In fact, my opinion is there isn't enough proper *peer review* in pharmaceuticals, that some universities have become far too chummy, and that what's needed is more independence.

As to stem cell research, it's early days. Why some people seem to think that either we have miracle results now, or it's all evil and wrong is ludicrous. Basic research is extremely expensive and often very lengthy, but without it, most of the technological advances we've seen over the last century would not happen. Directly or indirectly governments are pretty much the major suppliers of funding. It may have been private businesses who developed the first miniaturized silicon transistors (the microchip), but it was NASA and Department of Defense, needing super-accurate and super-small guidance systems for their rockets (or missiles, as the case may be) that pretty funded it.

[DrGreenthumb]

Someone should ask the minister if he believes in Carbon dating. You might have to explain to him that it is a method used to determine how old something is. Also if he believes the world is only about 6000 years old, how come we havn't found any man-made dinosaur saddles? We might have had a Harper ancestor with a dino-boy hat and a seaweed sweatervest rounding up all the cavemen sinners who were picking a certain weed he didn't approve of?

[Oleg Bach]

Someone should ask the minister if he believes in Carbon dating. You might have to explain to him that it is a method used to determine how old something is. Also if he believes the world is only about 6000 years old, how come we havn't found any man-made dinosaur saddles? We might have had a Harper ancestor with a dino-boy hat and a seaweed sweatervest rounding up all the cavemen sinners who were picking a certain weed he didn't approve of?

There is a much forgotten discovery under a layer of shale - where researchers found dinosaurs' foot prints and human ones along side. Humans have been around in their present form for millions of years..and yes we are related to primates - and we are also related to microbes and all live forms. This minister just needs a quick catch up course in science and biblical study. Kind of sad that there is not a person in the nation that is willing to teach science and theologians that both are correct - to a degree....now time for a bannana - and the day is bright - think I will climb a tree.

[ToadBrother]

There is a much forgotten discovery under a layer of shale - where researchers found dinosaurs' foot prints and human ones along side.

If you're referring to Paluxy, it was a fraud.

Humans have been around in their present form for millions of years

Nope, fully modern humans did not appear until approximately 180,000 to 150,000 years ago.

..and yes we are related to primates - and we are also related to microbes and all live forms. This minister just needs a quick catch up course in science and biblical study. Kind of sad that there is not a person in the nation that is willing to teach science and theologians that both are correct - to a degree....now time for a bannana - and the day is bright - think I will climb a tree.

I sure the hell wouldn't want you teaching science.

[Argus]

I don't what kind of mentality thinks that science is somehow politically aligned. Well, I lie, I do know what kind of mentality thinks that.

First of all, I haven't seen one of you who shows much awareness or knowledge of science, much less its history. Second, this is a political web site. People not heavily into politics don't come here. And thirdly, this thread is a prime example of the bug-eyed lefties going all indignant over a (gasp!) Christian being in some position of power. Christians are the big boogey man to the Left. The whole lot of you would be howling for blood if anyone dared question the right of a devout Muslim, Hindu, or Sikh to hold any kind of job. If anyone else questioned them you'd be calling them bigots, and pompously be declaring that this person had a right to perform the job until and unless they demonstrated they were letting their personal religious beliefs get in the way of the job.

The nasty, sneering tone displayed towards Christianity demonstrated the vitriol and bigotry the political left feels for Christians, who they rightly or wrongly condemn for being on the wrong side of political "moral" arguments. Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus are on the wrong side too, but they're mostly "brown people" who you forgive for their ignorance because in your heart of hearts you don't consider them fully equal in any way - sort of like backwards children for whom allowances have to be made, and who must be protected from attacks by their betters (cough-cough - white people).

Most of the people who've contributed their "thoughts" on this issue so far seem to be nothing more than narrow minded hypocrites and bigots.

And btw, before you ask, I don't believe in creationism and am not a church-goer. It's just that I feel greasy reading the words of a bunch of two-faced jackals.

[waldo]

Alta4ever, your attempt to pronounce that branches of science take on political leanings... has failed:

Do you actually think evolutionary biology has a political alignment? Tell me, what political alignment does General Relativity have? How about quantum mechanics? What side of the House would geology sit on? Who would more likely be elected in Calgary West, marine biology or particle physics?

Go and apply for job at any research university and if you tow the right part line or share their beleifs good luck getting a job.

Can you give me an example?

A professor at the university of Ottawa is in the process of being fired because of his views on afganistan. This is a tenured professor, he teaches engineering, and is being removed due to a political veiw point.

I think his name was rancour or something like that.

so, Alta4ever, beaks off about a supposed firing of a tenured 'engineering' professor for expressed political views on Afghanistan (presumed to be right leaning political views, per Alta4ever's squawk talk)... where in actuality the physics professors firing has no political attachment; rather, it's a firing based on the principles/practices of teaching at the University of Ottawa.

The Two Languages of Academic Freedom

Dismissing critical pedagogy: Denis Rancourt vs. University of Ottawa

Rancourt, a physics professor in his 22nd year at the school, had been at loggerheads with the previous administration since 2005 when he began applying a form of critical pedagogy not traditionally practiced in North American institutions.

Critical pedagogy, for Rancourt, is all about democratizing the classroom. Students are given input over the curriculum, they are encouraged to take classroom discussion wherever it may lead, and there are no grades. Rancourt's preference is a pass/fail system, but when the university refused to allow this he announced on the first day of classes in 2007 that all students would be receiving an A+.

[ToadBrother]

First of all, I haven't seen one of you who shows much awareness or knowledge of science, much less its history.

I think I know a fair bit. What precisely have I said that is inaccurate?

Second, this is a political web site. People not heavily into politics don't come here. And thirdly, this thread is a prime example of the bug-eyed lefties going all indignant over a (gasp!) Christian being in some position of power. Christians are the big boogey man to the Left. The whole lot of you would be howling for blood if anyone dared question the right of a devout Muslim, Hindu, or Sikh to hold any kind of job. If anyone else questioned them you'd be calling them bigots, and pompously be declaring that this person had a right to perform the job until and unless they demonstrated they were letting their personal religious beliefs get in the way of the job.

And the big lie is told once again. This isn't about Christianity, since the major churches do not reject evolution. Why do you guys keep evading that point. Christianity is not synonymous with Creationism, any more than leftism is synonymous with evolution. Evolution is a scientific theory. Politics, other than perhaps as far as evolutionary psychology is involved in studying the origins of human behaviors, is not really a consideration.

The nasty, sneering tone displayed towards Christianity demonstrated the vitriol and bigotry the political left feels for Christians, who they rightly or wrongly condemn for being on the wrong side of political "moral" arguments. Muslims, Sikhs and Hindus are on the wrong side too, but they're mostly "brown people" who you forgive for their ignorance because in your heart of hearts you don't consider them fully equal in any way - sort of like backwards children for whom allowances have to be made, and who must be protected from attacks by their betters (cough-cough - white people).

Why is that you keep spreading this lie? Christianity does not mean Creationism. Is there some reason you're being dishonest, or are you just an idiot?

Most of the people who've contributed their "thoughts" on this issue so far seem to be nothing more than narrow minded hypocrites and bigots.

And btw, before you ask, I don't believe in creationism and am not a church-goer. It's just that I feel greasy reading the words of a bunch of two-faced jackals.

I don't care what you are, I'm just wondering why you, and a number of other posters, are lying and equating Christianity with Creationism. Can you explain the origins of your dishonesty in this regard?