Comments on: Guest Post: Dan Brown’s History of Science

By: Freedom, Science and Christianity: A Response to James Valliant Part II « Theology Geek NZ

Wed, 03 Mar 2010 02:52:27 +0000

[...] The Theology of the Declaration of Independence The “Dark Ages” and Other Propaganda Guest Post: James Hannam on Dan Brown’s History of Science Slavery, John Locke and the Bible 666 The Number of the Beast R 13: Romans, Revelations and the [...]

By: Jason

Jason — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 10:11:44 +0000

The Irrational Atheist is Vox Day’s contribution to the anti-Dawkins (and Harris and Dennet) literary storm.

Relative motion, as used by engineers, does make determining the centre of the Earth-Sun system imprecise. Because every body in the solar system is in motion relative to every other body we can take any body as an arbitrary fixed point.

Galileo had no evidence for the motion of the Earth, except for the movement of the tides, which we now know has nothing to do with the Earth’s motion. He was less wrong than the Aristotelians who opposed him, but he was less wrong for the wrong reasons. When he took his book and put the words of the Pope (a former sponsor) in the mouth of his character Simplico, he guaranteed that he would find himself on trial.

What is science?

1. Science is a changing and growing collection of knowledge, characterized by transparency (all methods are documented, and the lineage of ideas can be traced) and testability (prior work can be repeated or its results evaluated). It is an edifice of information that contains all of the details of its construction.

2. Science is what scientists do. We have institutions that train people and employ them in the business of generating new knowledge and we have procedures like the bestowal of degrees and ranks that certify one’s membership in the hallowed ranks of science.

3. Science is a process. It is a method for exploring the natural world by making observations, drawing inferences, and testing those inferences with further experimentation and observation. It isn’t so much the data generated as it is a way of thinking critically about the universe and our own interpretations of it.

This applies to most things, except anthropogenic climate change of course.

By: Madeleine

Madeleine — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 04:08:53 +0000

The Illuminati?

Okay…
.-= My last blog-post ..Anna’s Last Post =-.

By: Dantalion Jones

Dantalion Jones — Sat, 05 Dec 2009 12:27:06 +0000

It should be no surprise how far the Illuminati will go to gain control of the world.

Here is a book that will detail the mind control techniques used by the illuminati to create mind control slaves.

These are TRUE MIND CONTROL SLAVES that are being made and used for drug mules, international assassins, sex slaves, suicide bombers and secret messengers. This could be anyone, from your congressman to your cable guy.

It is 350 pages of detail descriptions with illustrations.

http://mindcontrolpublishing.com/book_illuminati.html

By: Max

Max — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 09:26:51 +0000

“Evolutionists usually respond by asking what’s stopping micro changes become macro over long period of time … ”

Lack of any empirical evidence that this has ever happened is a pretty good answer to that….

Selective breeding examples (which ironically people like Dawkins lean upon heavily) are notorious for leading to dead-ends and infertility (in both animals and plants).
.-= My last blog-post ..rssCloud Update =-.

By: Bob

Bob — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 06:36:20 +0000

Evolutionists usually respond by asking what’s stopping micro changes become macro over long period of time …

if that’s the case, in relation the existence of God, we should just ask them what’s stopping God from existing?

By: Shawn

Shawn — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 22:29:05 +0000

Macro-evolutionism is simply the creation myth of the false religion of Secularism. There is no serious evidence to prove it, and a growing mountain of evidence to suggest that Darwin got it badly wrong. The total lack of support from the fossil record being one example.

Evidence based? Yeah right.

http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/

http://www.truthinscience.org.uk/

By: Bob

Bob — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:44:26 +0000

Not at all. I’ve read your comments around this blog. Life’s just too short to play your game.

By: Ken

Ken — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 03:28:46 +0000

So, Bob, that’s an admission you have nothing to back up yor belief? Even the “new evidence” you quote you are too ashamed of to provide references?

I guess you are one of those poor souls who claim evolution violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics?

The stupidity of this is that you will probably also claim there is no conflict between science and religion when it is claims like this which are causing the conflicts.
.-= My last blog-post ..Why Evolution Is True =-.

By: Bob

Bob — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 03:11:35 +0000

One thing I’ve learned is that you’re not worth anyone’s time to argue Ken.

You’ve decided that Galileo was not wrong. On the other hand, I thought Galileo was right, but in light of new information, I now doubt that he was right.

And while we’re at it … Darwin was wrong too …