|Subject:||Re: Intelligent Design Invading Liberal Classrooms was: South Park taunting Scientology|
|Date:||Thu, 1 Dec 2005 08:23:43 +0000|
|Newsgroups:||sci.astro, sci.physics, sci.skeptic, sci.archaeology|
In message <lOujf.50$45.3634@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
In article <1133408861.796609.247250@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "PD" <TheDraperFamily@xxxxxxxxx> writes:That is a blanket overgeneralization that is completely unwarranted. You are maintaining that those with faith cannot be scientists because their faith would cloud their vision of evidence. In so doing, you are dismissing any scientist who is not also an atheist. Is this really what you would claim?I happen to know some excellent, religious physicists. Never noticed their faith interfering with their science in any way.
Or vice versa?In one of his stories Arthur Clarke asks "why are medical men such notorious atheists?"
I've already posted a reason why that might be true, but is it really?
|<Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread>|
|Previous by Date:||Re: Posted Draft Paper: Is Quantum Mechanics a Consequence of Requiring The Laws of Nature in Integral Form to be Invariant Under Special and General Coordinate Transformations?, Jay R. Yablon|
|Next by Date:||Re: *** HILAL (Crescent Moon) SIGHTING: Thu/Fri 1/2 Dec 2005 CE; Zul-Qada 1426AH (11th Islamic Month) ***, Paul Schlyter|
|Previous by Thread:||Re: Intelligent Design Invading Liberal Classrooms (was: South Park taunting Scientology), mmeron|
|Next by Thread:||Re: Intelligent Design Invading Liberal Classrooms (was: South Park taunting Scientology), mmeron|
|Indexes:||[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]|