Obama or McCain?

[Nebbiolo]

Incidentally while the Christian Church has consistently seen science as a threat (from the persecution of Copernicus onwards) the Muslim world was a hotbed of scientific progress and free thinking.

I wouldn't go as far as "hotbed" but there was a period in Muslim middle-eastern history that saw science favourably in comparison to the Christian world. I think, though, that that era has sadly been truly put to bed. The theists hold the power at the moment. In the west, I think the rationalists can at least hold their own.

 

[gordonjblair]

I wouldn't go as far as "hotbed" but there was a period in Muslim middle-eastern history that saw science favourably in comparison to the Christian world. I think, though, that that era has sadly been truly put to bed. The theists hold the power at the moment. In the west, I think the rationalists can at least hold their own.

was being the operative word. The balance has been lost in the fundamentalist States.

The issue Islam is facing now, and that which Christianity will face if it allows itself to lapse into fundamentalism is that the Religion is setting itself up in competition with scientific endeavour, and where it can't win, it is seeking to throttle (attempting to exert control over science curricula being a prime example).

Rather than taking established scientific facts that are contrary to established teachings and seeing how the teachings could be reinterpreted to accommodate them, the fundamentalist instead sets about challenging the facts or limiting their dissemination through the school system.

Just not healthy.

 

[chicoazul]

flutters eyelashes at Blair*

Its all natural baby.

 

[Nebbiolo]

Rather than taking established scientific facts that are contrary to established teachings and seeing how the teachings could be reinterpreted to accommodate them, the fundamentalist instead sets about challenging the facts or limiting their dissemination through the school system.

Just not healthy.

I'm not really into the word "fact" at all. But then I was rather taken by Popper's view that a scientific theory is at most a testable hypothesis, which is in principle falsifiable. The best hypothesis wins the day until either a better one comes along or the theory is falsified. That's why I've a big, big problem with the American fundamentalist attempts to get creationism taught alongside Darwinism in schools. The latter is falsifiable plus it is a damned good theory and fits in very well with how we perceive the world. The former can never be falsified, is faith based and is, effectively, unscientific. You ought not to present a bad theory and a good theory to impressionable minds as if they were equally good. This isn't an anti-religion post, merely an observation. And anyway, most theists worth their salt support the theory of evolution, albeit with an initial guiding hand.

 

[Reidy's Bottle Of Grecian]

this thread has gone all countdown/scrabble, i've never seen so many 8 & 9 letter words grouped together.
it must be time for giles brandreth to post now.

 

[TX Bill]

okey dokey

Of all the republican candidates, McCain was the one I looked most favourably on, mainly because he didn't bind himself to the party line, he actually seemed to give individual policies due consideration on their merits rather falling into a traditonally republican standpoint. I found that refreshing approach to politics (which is a damning indictment of the system in itself).

Sadly, he now seems to have fallen in step with the wider Republican machine to ensure his candidacy.

Which leaves Obama. The inexperience jibe doesn't really sit too well, it's not like the bloke is expected to run the country by himself. The President is there to provide leadership and direction and has the largest support network in the world to assist him. There is nothing I have seen of Obama to date that tells me he won't be at least an adequate President.

For me, Obama, purely for the message it sends out to the rest of the world. For what it's worth, I also believe the right has lost control of your economy (we're certainly feeling the effects of your *ahem* slightly cavalier fiscal policies over here), maybe the lefties need a turn to put things back on an even keel again.

I'm not going to go too far into the religion debate, what I will say is that the lack of separation between church and state over in your neck of the woods concerns me, as does the ever creeping "Creationism / Intelligent Design" encroachment on science classes.. that's the one thing that makes me angry, interfering with the teaching of science, pushing religious dogma as scientific fact rather than an issue of faith.

Incidentally while the Christian Church has consistently seen science as a threat (from the persecution of Copernicus onwards) the Muslim world was a hotbed of scientific progress and free thinking.

Oh, and from since before the days of the Crusades, Christianity has been the cause of choice for many a greedy murdering swine, but as you say with the Muslims Tx, it's just a small minority giving everyone else a bad name.

Believe it or not, I was actually brought up a Jehovah's Witness, but am by nature a scientist, personally, I found the two incompatible (I know others who can reconcile the 2 far better than me), but my studies did give quite a decent grasp of comparitive religion, a healthy level of scepticism, and a damn good line in arguments when getting preached to.

Oh, while I'm here, someone mentioned homosexuality

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=bisexual-species
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html


turns out it's about as natural as it gets...


... if only blokes had tits

Then I would ask you what "does" qualify someone to be President of the United States?

What would you feel are the minimum requirements of someone to lead this country?

I can guarantee you that even if you came up with just one or two requirements to be President (which I believe that you and I can safely say aren't near enough), Obama doesn't even meet those basic standards.

Obama is very good at one thing and one thing only. Public speaking. He's a very good orator and when he has his talking points lined up, he can sound "Presidential."

However sounding presidential does not qualify one to be President.

Dylan's already stated in his post that he lacks any experience whatsoever to be President in his post so I'll not go over that again.

And what did you expect from McCain in regards to falling in step with the Republicans? He's the Republican candidate for President. If he started moving farther left than he already is, he'd risk alienating the conservative base. A base that he must have backing from if he wishes to come out victorious in November.

 

[TX Bill]

Oh, forgot to reply to your creationism/intelligent design in classrooms.

Believe me, there's a much greater separation here of Church and State than you might believe.

As it stands, we have avowed atheists trying to get "In God We Trust" taken off of our currency. We've had people successfully get a copy of the Ten Commandments taken out of courtrooms. Yes, continue opposition to Christianity is alive and well in our country. Believe me.

But I'd rather they teach creationism vs. Darwinism which has no basis in scientific fact whatsoever. Kinda like Global Warming. No basis in FACT. None.

 

[TX Tiburon]

But I'd rather they teach creationism vs. Darwinism which has no basis in scientific fact whatsoever. Kinda like Global Warming. No basis in FACT. None.

Here, here. Darwinism has basis only in the micro-evolution sense within species but not in macro-evolution between species. Intra-species evolution is nothing but hopeful theory, repeated often enough to become "fact".

 

[TX Bill]

Here, here. Darwinism has basis only in the micro-evolution sense within species but not in macro-evolution between species. Intra-species evolution is nothing but hopeful theory, repeated often enough to become "fact".

Mmmmm...kinda like Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth."

Truth?

I'm having a laugh.

 

[TX Tiburon]

Mmmmm...kinda like Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth."

Truth?

I'm having a laugh.

Word.

 

[Walter Ego]

I concur

 

[Nebbiolo]

Oh, forgot to reply to your creationism/intelligent design in classrooms.

Believe me, there's a much greater separation here of Church and State than you might believe.

As it stands, we have avowed atheists trying to get "In God We Trust" taken off of our currency. We've had people successfully get a copy of the Ten Commandments taken out of courtrooms. Yes, continue opposition to Christianity is alive and well in our country. Believe me.

But I'd rather they teach creationism vs. Darwinism which has no basis in scientific fact whatsoever. Kinda like Global Warming. No basis in FACT. None.

A couple of points, Bill:

(1) Did you mean you'd rather creationism vs Darwinism be taught. That is, do you believe the debate between the two camps ought to be on the syllabus? If so, it would be a very short debate seeing as one is faith based so can't be tested and the other is based on evidence that can.

(2) Global warming is FACT. That is, the earth's temperature is rising. There is evidence of that. Whether it is solely down to humankind is debatable. However, there are very few in science that are willing to take the alternative view that global warming is not down to human activity. Okay, that doesn't make that idea wrong, but it begs this question: why do leaders in science believe that global warming is down to human activity.

[Awaits conspiracy theory ]

Oh yeah, and I agree with you on Al Gore. Even ardent believers in humans' causing GW were embarrassed by that man's film. Gore's insistence on taking a leaf out of the Michael Moore school of journalism was also a big mistake, at least in my opinion.

 

[TX Bill]

A couple of points, Bill:

(1) Did you mean you'd rather creationism vs Darwinism be taught. That is, do you believe the debate between the two camps ought to be on the syllabus? If so, it would be a very short debate seeing as one is faith based so can't be tested and the other is based on evidence that can.

(2) Global warming is FACT. That is, the earth's temperature is rising. There is evidence of that. Whether it is solely down to humankind is debatable. However, there are very few in science that are willing to take the alternative view that global warming is not down to human activity. Okay, that doesn't make that idea wrong, but it begs this question: why do leaders in science believe that global warming is down to human activity.

[Awaits conspiracy theory ]

Oh yeah, and I agree with you on Al Gore. Even ardent believers in humans' causing GW were embarrassed by that man's film. Gore's insistence on taking a leaf out of the Michael Moore school of journalism was also a big mistake, at least in my opinion.

1) Darwinism is theory. Strictly that. There is no factual evidence of evolution. I'd rather neither be taught in the classroom to be frank.

2) Global Warming is a hoax of the highest order. For every "expert" in weather and science that has said that it's an issue, I can find one that says it's a fraud and a scare tactic used on people. I'm not going to debate the merits of Global Warming simply because there aren't any.

But if you'd like, I'm confident that you and I can pull up all sorts of data off the internet to support our positions.

 

[ToffeeDan]

Now, let me see. Visionary or Mysogynist. I think 4 more years of disastrous Republican Presidency will be awful for the US, awful for the rest of the world. At least voting someone into the White House who actually gives a [Poor language removed] about the 60m+ Americans who live below the poverty line might be a good start.

 

[Nebbiolo]

Now, let me see. Visionary or Mysogynist. I think 4 more years of disastrous Republican Presidency will be awful for the US, awful for the rest of the world. At least voting someone into the White House who actually gives a [Poor language removed] about the 60m+ Americans who live below the poverty line might be a good start.

he's the new JFK

But seriously, I agree and am expecting Obama to make a better job of it than the current president.