Religion and ignorance go hand in hand.

Gee thanks. That makes me look forward to the next semester all the more. I have taken to kicking the obstreperous out of my class. You lay a bible nect to your cellular biology textbook in my class, you're outta there.

Here I am, busting my ass in the lab and I could have gotten a job as a patent clerk if I wanted to make a name for myself.

Remember, Mickey Kaus is the enemy, not the teacher's unions.

SCIENCE UPDATE....Well, at least we beat Turkey.

Yawn. More attacks on people of faith from you. Americans should be PROUD that we still hold on to traditional Judeo-Christian values and have not abandoned them as secular decadent Europe has. I don't expect Ned Lamont Democrats like you to understand.

This, more than anything else, is the thing that will ultimately bring America down. Our survival as a nation -- as a species -- depends on our understanding of, and respect for, objecive reality. It's not just believing things that aren't true, it's also not believing things that are true. When reality takes second place to belief, we're done for. God help us -- so to speak.

aa

Yikes!

Kevin,

Is there any possibility of creating a GreaseMonkey script that will allow users to individually axe-out commenters whose cracked ramblings they never need to see?

I appologise for my last comment, I thought the artical was on science education in general until after I posted.

:sigh: Goethe said it best: "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain." Al, AH, slim (above), and the like will persist in their illusions no matter how clearly or often they are refuted.

Like the de-Xeni script for boingboing?

And Frank Zappa said "There are only two universals: Hydrogen and stupidity." I miss Frank!

While we're on biology and evolution,

A dog cancer may have evolved into its own parasitic life form,

http://scienceblogs.com/loom/2006/08/09/an_old_dog_lives_on_inside_new.php

It all ultimately comes down to the destructive nature of religious faith.

When you teach people that they are justified in holding firm beliefs about what is true in the absence of evidence that those things are true, you shouldn't be surprised when they believe absurd things like Jesus is Lord, or that the Earth is only 6,000 years old, or that the Pope is infallible, or that when they die they'll be rewarded with 72 virgins. It's all part of the same disease.

yes, Al, so much to be proud of. Zzzzzz....

Here is why I can't take the Religious Right seriously - they say it is playing God if we take frozen surplus embryos and use the stem cells for research that might save legions of people from suffering horrific deaths...But I never hear any of them say anything about humans playing god when the embryo was artificially created.

Okay, I know I really just started hanging out here in the comments on a regular basis recently, so please excuse if this seems a silly question but ... Al's a bot or satire, right?

Okay, I don't take the Religious Wrong seriously on a whole lot of things. That one is my current favorite on the Hypocrite Hit Parade.

Global Citizen:

Cuz the thing they do in Washington
is called Looking Out For Number One

And Number One ain't yoo-oou ...
Heck, you're not even Number Two!

--Frank Zappa, "The Meek Shall Inherit Nothing"

Bob

The real Al died some time back. But even at the end he was hard core conservative. The Al or Al's you read here are to the real al what the Zoso cover band is to Zeppelin.

It's paricularly pathetic for so many people to deny evolution, given what we now know about the genome. Scientists today understand far more about he mechanism of evolultion than they did just a few years ago.

Okay - this has to stop! First I found common ground with waterfowl on public transit. Now ex-liberal and I are in agreement about evolution. Guys - lemme take the plunge...Wanna join me in a "Draft Hagel" committee?

Goethe said it best: "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain."
Posted by: LeisureGuy on August 10, 2006 at 8:59 PM | PERMALINK

Actually, I rather think that the gods are contending FOR stupidity. They seem to try their best to encourage it.

The quote is from Schiller, not Goethe.

What with Bush as Our Leader and Decider and stuff like this, geez it's getting embarrassing.

Then there is the t-shirt that Goethe's heirs should get royalties on: "God must love stupid people because he sure made a hell of a lot of 'em."

But I prefer this Mark Twain classic: "First, God made idiots. This was for practice. Then he made school boards."

I suppose if you are ignorant about evolution then the following blog entry would not trouble you:

Recent Human and Avian H5N1 Sequences Do Not Match

http://www.recombinomics.com/News/08100601/H5N1_Indonesia_No_Match.html

The odds of a pandemic are getting shorter, but there is still no certainty. If the US Government were to pay serious attention to Avian Flu, it would have to talk about how the flu genome is evolving within Asia. Imagine how that would play to The Base!

Global Citizen:

According to our ol' pal rdw (who *does* have his, uhhmm, finger on the pulse of the national GOP primary electorate), Chuck Hagel is unelectable.

Don't get me wrong, he's one of my favorite GOPpers, too. I certainly like him more than Lindsey Graham, who used his JAG experience to weasel-word the McCain *cough* "no-compromise" on torture.

I might like Richard Lugar a little more, though ...

Bob

Okay, make that Schiller's heirs....

Bob, I have tipped my locale before - I live 10 blocks from the national headquarters for the VFW and pull the occasional shift in a VA hospital. Tell the vets that Hagel is unelectable and from 19 to 90 they will arm for battle. He's their guy, as far as I can tell.

Global Citizen:

Those who can, do.

Those who can't, teach.

{and Woody Allen's collorary}

Those who can't teach, teach gym.

Bob

sigh: Goethe said it best: "Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain."

Tis sadly true. The interesting difference though is that some cultures are more encouraging of the stupid wallowing in their ignorance - nay, bellowing it out - than others.

And what goes for evolution, goes for politics.

Global:

I really have no idea ... He's one of those sensible GOP lions of the Senate who have been enjoyable to see on the Sunday shows since the consensus on Iraq has been collapsing ...

Rdw just makes the point that from the POV of staunch party loyalists, Hagel has a McCain problem to the 10th power ...

I personally wouldn't have any idea of internal GOP primary election dynamics at that level of granularity ... just passing the scuttlebutt along.

Bob

Yeah, but I can "do" - I just got worn out and burned out doing, and teaching at the community college gets me free graduate hours at the University.

Here is an example of organized lying by Jews, namely, the establishment of some unknown patent clerk as the "greatest" scientist the world has ever known.

"H. Poincare had already completely solved the problem of time several years before the appearance of Einstein's first work (1905)", H. Thirring, 1927.

"Einstein simply postulates what we have deduced, with some difficulty and not altogether satisfactorily, from the fundamental equations of the electromagnetic field." Lorentz in his book "The Theory of Electrons" (1906)

"... While Lorentz must be considered as the first to have found the mathematical content of the relativity principle, Einstein succeeded in reducing it to a simple principle...." Wilhelm Wien (1911 Nobel Prize in Physics).

"No unprejudiced person can deny that, in the absence of direct and incontrovertible proofs establishing his innocence, Einstein must, in view of the circumstantial evidence previously presented, stand convicted before the world as a plagiarist." Prof. Arvid Reuterdahl

"almost every idea and formula of the theory (of relativity) had been anticipated (actually, in most cases published previously) by others. For example, Voigt formally derived the Lorentz transformations in 1887 based on general considerations of the wave equation. In the context of electro-dynamics, Fitzgerald, Larmor, and Lorentz had all, by 1892, arrived at the Lorentz transformations, including all the peculiar "time dilation" and "length contraction" effects (with respect to the transformed coordinates) associated with Einstein's special relativity. By 1905, Poincare had clearly articulated the principle of relativity and many of its consequences, had pointed out the lack of empirical basis for absolute simultaneity, had challenged the ontological significance of the ether, and had even demonstrated that the Lorentz transformations constitute a group in the same sense as do Galilean transformations." Kevin Brown in "Reflections on Relativity" (believe it or not, Brown is an Einstein supporter).

"It is easily proven that Albert Einstein did not originate the special theory of relativity in its entirety, or even in its majority. The historic record is readily available. Ludwig Gustav Lange, Woldemar Voigt, George Francis FitzGerald, Joseph Larmor, Hendrik Antoon Lorentz, Jules Henri Poincaré, Paul Drude, Paul Langevin, and many others, slowly developed the theory, step by step, and based it on thousands of years of recorded thought and research." Christopher Bjerknes in "Albert Einstein: The Incorrigible Plagiarist"

Albert Einstein: Plagiarist of the Century
Albert Einstein: The Incorrigible Plagiarist
Test Your Knowledge of the History of the Theory of Relativity.
E = mc^2 is Not Einstein's Discovery

I signed up for his senate newsletter and read about him on-line in the Omaha and Lincoln papers. I have some family farming in Nebraska, and they think he could prabably walk on water if it wasn't for that shrappnel in his chest.

Global:

I have no doubt; he's always seemed quite impressive to me. Bear in mind that rdw doesn't give a rat's ass about what's best for the country -- only what can be gamed politically.

He'd probably call the reincarnation of Abraham Lincoln unelectable, too ...

Bob

Help ! Somebody do a Loreena Bobbitt's husband emergency reattatchment on me, before I shrivel up and turn blaaack !

Three cheers for Iceland.

Slim: fuck off.

I don't think a country's degree of belief in evolution has much significance. It's degree of understanding of Darwin's principle of Natural Selection is far more important.

This survey on evolution beliefs makes sense because America is becoming more and more Southern. We're already football and NASCAR-crazy; will the next step be nostalgia for de jure segregation? (We already have the de facto.)

Jonrog1.......Al that you see posting here is many people.I and many others are sure that Kevin Drum himself posts early as Al so as to kick-start the comments!You will see a Al comment in the first 1-6 comments and then no other unless someone fakes him!

I take back every nasty thing I've ever said about Iceland.

Wait -- I've never said anything nasty about Iceland.

Guess I'll have to start, so I can take it back...

Iceland is wonderfully green, and Greenland is splendidly icy. Quirky, huh?

It's paricularly pathetic for so many people to deny evolution,... ex-liberal 9:36 PM

from the original article:

“American Protestantism is more fundamentalist than anybody except perhaps the Islamic fundamentalist, which is why Turkey and we are so close,” said study co-author Jon Miller of Michigan State University.

No need to comment on that.

Global Citizen.......I too could go with Hagel even over many Dems.Of course you have to throw out how he was first elected(very rigged election) and then go from there.Great background!

Well, I'm outta here. I have once again survived "meet the department" and I need to get to the bus stop. Viva Science! I'll tilt that windmill til the day I die!

Goodnight everyone! I couldn't have survived this night without you. Everyone have a good night and keep that piece of common ground we managed to find, eh? In fact, I do believe there were two...(evolution and Hagel?)

Anyway, unless I want to walk or catch a cab, I have to go now.

Al:

This isn't about values, it's about physical reality. Can't you tell the difference?

I don't think a country's degree of belief in evolution has much significance. Its degree of understanding of Darwin's principle of Natural Selection is far more important.

Point taken though I would tend to think the two go hand-in-hand for the most part. And to the extent that there is a difference, the importance is in who has these beliefs/understandings.

I guess what you're getting at is does the higher percentage of believers in evolution in European countries simply indicate belief w/o understanding? Is this simply a result of the citizenries of those countries having a greater trust in elite opinion? Ie. for the average European punter is belief in evolution as much an article of faith (in this case a faith in the beliefs of experts) as is lack of belief? Or do they believe it because they better understand it?

I have lived in this country for 36 years now, but have never personally met any individual who I would even remotely guess to be someone who does not believe in evolution. Where do such people live?

Kansas

Trailer Parks?

Everywhere.

If I lived in Kansas I would doubt evolution too. What's that old joke? If you have a terminal illness, and only have six months to live, get married and move to Kansas. It will be the longest six months you ever experienced ...

What, no Muslim nations ahead of us on the list? Suprising. They seem so progressive ...

Slim = a perfect example of the reason why we only beat Trukey.

Um Slim, I second the motion, fuck off.

What? Australia is below Turkey & the US?

"Al" continues to entertain.

His full name is Slim Meyer-Rubenstein.

He's a watchmaker in Manhatten; his son's a lawyer.

I've got an idea: the U.S. could start a fund that would allow U.S. citizens to relocate to places more to their liking. "Liberals" could choose to go to one of the Nordic countries, while libertarians might choose something like Sudan or some disputed territory somewhere. What do you say?

-- PleaseLeaveThe.US

slim, the general theory of relativity was Einstein's big accomplishment anyway. No one else was close to it.

So your anti-semitic ranting is irrelevant.

Ah ... creationists... Wonderful subject !

Sane people should not try to engage creationists on factual arguments. Creationists are by definition impervious to facts. We should try jingoism. That, they understand.

So at the next school board meeting, when the creationists open their mouths, just scream at the top of your lungs something like

“ I’m fed up with those creationist morons ! I’m fed up they try pushing their stupidity on everybody ! They screw their kids if they want but I’m not gonna let them screw with mines ! Do you think they teach creation science in India ? In Japan ? In China ? Of course, they don’t ! They are too busy closing the gap with us ! Those creationists are literally a fifth column for the ! The ! And the ! Our kids are gonna end up shining the shoes of those if we continue to loose our time with this creationist crap ! Ahh, if it was up to me, I’d put those traitors’ back against a wall and it wouldn’t last long, let me tell ya ! Because this is what they are, those creationists ! Traitors ! Outright traitors who undermine our country ! They are worse than Bin Laden ! We should just shoot them ! “

And etc and so on and so forth. Be very offensive.

It’s not very glorious but I’m pretty sure it would seriously change the terms of the “debate” and people would start to look at those oh so Christians activists in a very different way (that is, if you don’t get dragged out of the room in the middle of your rant by the security detail, of course).

And don’t forget to bring the Stars and Stripes to wave it menacingly during your rant. A big one, it goes without saying.

It seems that the more basic issue is the literal interpretaion of the bible vs. the bible-as-metaphor. Evolution seems to be only one in a laundry list of items where a literal interpretation of the bible is at odds with science, not to mention experience.

A more productive strategy might be to attack biblical literalists/fundamentalists in those areas where they are weakest, thus undermining literal interpretation, and promoting the bible-as-metaphor position.

*sigh*

Slim, I mean, I know you're a buffoon, but at least get your facts straight. Special Relativity was a trivial deduction made from the Lorentz transformations. Like most everyone else with a physics bent, I was able to read the paper and work through the math when I was nine or ten. That's not why Einstein is revered.

Now, General Relativity...that's something. Vector Calculus, ten years of hard work (maybe some help from his wife,) and an elegant, provable theory.

Plus, there's his Nobel-winning paper on the photo-electric effect which helped pave the way to quantum mechanics.

Special Relativity is just the easy, accessible theory with the cutesy equation Rod Serling used in his Twilight Zone credits.

Oh, and peddle your anti-Semitism elsewhere. I hear Mel Gibson's going to be at Betty Ford for a spell.

Ah ... creationists... Wonderful subject !

Sane people should not try to engage creationists on factual arguments. Creationists are by definition impervious to facts. We should try jingoism. That, they understand.

So at the next school board meeting, when the creationists open their mouths, just scream at the top of your lungs something like

“ I’m fed up with those creationist morons ! I’m fed up they try pushing their stupidity on everybody ! They screw their kids if they want but I’m not gonna let them screw with mines ! Do you think they teach creation science in India ? In Japan ? In China ? Of course, they don’t ! They are too busy closing the gap with us ! Those creationists are literally a fifth column for the [racist expletive] ! For the [racist expletive] ! And the [racist expletive] ! Our kids are gonna end up shining the shoes of those [racist expletive] if we continue to loose our time with this creationist crap ! Ahh, if it was up to me, I’d put those traitors’ back against a wall and it wouldn’t last long, let me tell ya ! Because this is what they are, those creationists ! Traitors ! Outright traitors who undermine our country ! They are worse than Bin Laden ! We should just shoot them ! “

And etc and so on and so forth. Be very offensive.

It’s not very glorious but I’m pretty sure it would seriously change the terms of the “debate” and people would start to look at those oh so Christians activists in a very different way (that is, if you don’t get dragged out of the room in the middle of your rant by the security detail, of course).

And don’t forget to bring the Stars and Stripes to wave it menacingly during your rant. A big one of course.

What? Australia is below Turkey & the US? Kurzleg

Kurzleg - have you seen our wildlife? How could you posit evolution as a theory?

;)

Seriously though, I guess we'd rank near the UK - we're a pretty secular society.

I really hate to disagree with people anwering a nut, but you do need to get your own facts straight. Other people got the equations of Special Relativity first, but Einstein had the fundamental physical insight, and it is not trivial at all. It profoundly changed our understanding of the nature of space and time, not to mention matter and energy.

Also, Hilbert got the equation of General Relativity right first, but once again Einstein had the fundamental physical insight, as Hilbert himself admitted. Subtle is the Lord, a scientific biography of Einstein by Abraham Pais has lots of details.

It seems that the more basic issue is the literal interpretaion of the bible vs. the bible-as-metaphor.

It's much more complex than mere biblical literalism. All Christians "interpret" some parts of the Bible literally and others metaphorically. Many Christians who are deeply skeptical of evolution do not take the Genesis creation account literally. More sophisticated forms of creationsism ("Intelligent Design") involve the rejection of both evolution and a literal interpretation of Genesis. The deeper problem is the conflict between the idea that the world was created as part of some masterplan by a benevolent and omnipotent God, and the cold, chaotic, purposeless processes of creation and destruction revealed by evolution.

Cap. Pig, thanks for the clarifications. The point I was trying to make was simply that SR, while evolutionary in its math (and, granted, revolutionary in insight) wasn't Einstein's greatest achievement, just the most accessible.

I didn't realize that Hilbert had worked the GR math first; I'll be sure to check out Subtle is the Lord.

Atheist: The deeper problem is the conflict between the idea that the world was created as part of some masterplan by a benevolent and omnipotent God, and the cold, chaotic, purposeless processes of creation and destruction revealed by evolution.

Hmmm... well, the Catholic Church, not to mention many scientists past and present with strong religious beliefs, argue otherwise, and they don't necessarily consider it "cold, chaotic, purposeless"; quite the contrary.

An "omnipotent God" could take many forms, including that of "cosmic engineer" or "cosmic scientist", which does not necessarily mean "benevolent", "chaotic" or "purposeless", nor does it preclude a "masterplan".

If "cosmic engineer" or "cosmic scientist" works for people, and allows them to reconcile faith and science, I'm not going to argue with them (well, not much anyway :).

Can't we just pretend that the red states, the morons, don't really count? I do that anyway, of course, but in these international competitions... can't we arrange some sort of handicap, like "I've got this red state monkey on my back, help me please"?

Let me get my own facts slightly straighter. Hilbert and Einstein got the equation almost exactly simultaneously and independently(days apart), but Hilbert's interpretation was not correct. The two had been in extensive correspondence since Einstein had interested Hilbert in the problem previously with his earlier and incorrect theory.

oj - Can't we just pretend that the red states, the morons, don't really count?

Hey! I represent that. I don't think that wholesale condemnation of a State just because a minescule majority of its citizens made the wrong choice in the last election is fair. Nor is it wise, unless you plan for the Democrats to be in the minority forever.

Hmmm... well, the Catholic Church, not to mention many scientists past and present with strong religious beliefs, argue otherwise, and they don't necessarily consider it "cold, chaotic, purposeless"; quite the contrary.

You can't say both that you accept the evolutionary account of life and also that you believe that God intelligently directs the process, which is what the Catholic Church says. That's "Intelligent Design." In fact, in a statement he made a few months ago the Pope described the world in almost exactly the same language used by American ID proponents, as an "intelligent project" with "direction" provided by God.

An "omnipotent God" could take many forms, including that of "cosmic engineer" or "cosmic scientist", which does not necessarily mean "benevolent", "chaotic" or "purposeless", nor does it preclude a "masterplan".

But the God of Christianity is benevolent. I agree that it would be much easier to reconcile evolution with a creator God who is indifferent or evil, or limited in power, but that is not the God of Christianity.

That chart looks like one of the 50 states comparing social welfare statistics. From the point of view of Texas, the comment is often "Well, we beat Mississippi."

Texas does not routinely outperform any other state - except perhaps in number of prisoners incarcerated and number of death sentences carried out both absolutely and per capita.

Why does anybody bother replying to slim and watcher? Why feed the trolls, especially obviously anti-Semitic ones?

When is everyone going to admit that there is no such thing as an American conservative anymore outside of CATO and some faculty lounges at places like the University of Chicago? What we have on FoxNews and throughout Congress are just a group of etho-religious-nationalist populist theocratic wannabes. Andrew Sullivan, Fareed Zakaria, Francis Fukuyama, Milton Friedman, etc. are conservatives in the mold of Burke, Hobbes and Hayek. You can disagree with them, but at least they try to ground their arguments in some type of reason and secular logic. Limbaugh, Hannity, O'Reilly are just a bunch of thugs who worship red meat and are afraid of everyone knowing they are stupid and afraid of learning more to counteract that stupidity. They just reinforce their fans' biases by telling them they are the salt of the earth and that anyone who knows anything about history, Islam, etc. is just an evil commie out to destroy America and give Osama a BJ. This is how populist quasi-liberal authoritarian corporatism has come to the American political scene. Bill Buckley's movement has cannibalized itself.

Atheist: You can't say both that you accept the evolutionary account of life and also that you believe that God intelligently directs the process...

You are God. You create a system called The Universe. The Universe behaves according to a set of rules which You have defined (e.g., "physics" as we know it). Are you intelligently directing the of The Universe? At the design level, yes; at the operational level, no--unless you're a lousy engineer or doing OJT. Is it "chaotic" or "purposeless"? No. Will humanity's underanding of The Universe change? Yes, as we learn more. Does that in any way invalidate the concept of God as Cosmic Engineer/Designer of The Universe? No. Does that in any way invalidate the concept of a Master Plan? No.

In short, none of the views are mutually exclusive, but are entirely a matter of faith. You want to argue about the existence of God, it's attributes, or the basis for people's faith in the existence of God, go find a doorknob; I'm sure you'll be entertained. You want to find common ground that allows reconciling those of faith, science, those not of faith--and which does not subordinate science or faith to the other--then lose the "God of Christianity" schtick.

You know what's odd is that the mainstream churches managed to live with evolution being taught in schools pretty much since the era of the Scopes trial.

It's only with the advent of BushCo that the right-wing evangelicals smelled enough power to be able to frighten the regular Christians (i.e. everyone else in the church) into following a strict party line on just a few issues -- and all else be damned.

I'm just sayin' we ought to take a deep breath before simply swallowing, like idiot Al, the useless notion there's something intriniscally Judeo-Christian about being afraid of basic science.

婚纱摄影
婚纱影楼
网页制作
网页设计
网站建设
网站制作
网站设计
北京网站设计
网站推广
北京网站推广
北京网站制作
北京网页设计
北京网站建设
网站优化
google推广
google排名
google优化
双线空间
ＰＨＰ空间
ＡＳＰ空间
网站空间
虚拟主机
域名注册
法语
钟表
塔钟
钟表
家用中央空调
格力中央空调
助听器
助听器
助听器
发电机
发电机组
柴油发电机
发电设备
发电机出租
康明斯
发电机
发电机组
柴油发电机
发电设备
发电机出租
康明斯
法国留学
法语培训
进口轴承
skf轴承
nsk轴承
轴承
进口轴承
skf轴承
fag轴承
轴承
轴承
进口轴承
进口轴承
直线轴承
skf轴承
nsk轴承
北京装饰|装修
家装|家庭装饰
办公室装饰|装饰公司
装修公司|工装装潢
装饰装修|北京装饰公司
家居装修|室内装修
房屋装修|家庭装修公司
装修设计|室内装潢
家居装潢|家庭装潢
装潢设计|室内装潢设计
充气床
充气用品
充气游泳池
野营用品
户外用品
充气船
气垫床
钓鱼船
帐篷
户外帐篷
瑞士军刀
intex充气床|
中央吸尘
家用中央吸尘
商业中央吸尘
吸尘器
中央吸尘系统
工业吸尘
风灶清洗
通风清洗
中央空调管道清洗
机器人管道清洗
管道清洗机器人
机器人清洗
检测机器人
吸尘机
别墅吸尘
宾馆吸尘|
网站建设
网站制作
网页设计
网页制作
网络推广
网站优化
网站推广
GOOGLE优化
进口轴承|nsk轴承|skf轴承
充气床|充气用品|充气游泳池|野营用品|户外用品|充气船|气垫床|钓鱼船|帐篷|户外帐篷|瑞士军刀|

Slim: as other's have pointed out, the special theory of Relativity was just one of about 5 of Einstien's path breaking papers. Any one of them would have made him famous. And yes, special the special theory was based on Lorentz's work. So what. Einstein put all the pieces together. As for the GTR, yes he used Reimann's mathematics, but he came up with the theory. (Hilbert also derived the equations of GTR but only after hearing Einstein's argument.)
Einstein's famous papers were on:
1. Brownian motion.
2. Special relativity.
3. General relativity.
4. Photoelectric effect (no this did not directly lead to Quantum mechanics. Planck had already postulated the Quantum in 1901. Einstein used Planck's equation).
5. Statistical Mechanics. i.e Bose-Einstien statistics.

Was he the greatest physicist of the century? How does one know? There were so many geniuses. Rutherford also made several breakthroughs but his major work came before 1900? So I would have to say yes. And I am Physicist and not particularly an Einstein fan, but there is no doubting his genius.

Was he the greatest physicist of the century? How does one know? There were so many geniuses.
Posted by: ppk on August 11, 2006 at 2:44 AM | PERMALINK

Feynman?

No wait, I'm sure he plaigarized all his work too, because his name certainly sounds Jewish. (/snicker-snark)

This post seems to have gone missing:

Riesz Fischer said: "slim, the general theory of relativity was Einstein's big accomplishment anyway. No one else was close to it."

And when you grow up you might learn how to read/understand what you read. Try clicking on the links turkey

R.A. Porter said: "Special Relativity was a trivial deduction made from the Lorentz transformations."

Unlike you, I actually understand Special Relativity. The Lorentz transformations plus translations IS Special Relativity.

The Lorentz transformations are the symmetry transformations of space-time and were derived from Maxwell's equations of electrodynamics.

The Lorentz transformations were written down more than a decade before Einstein.

Poincaré showed the Lorentz transformations formed a group (the Lorentz group, not the Einstein group) and derived the "Relativity Principle" before Einstein.

Not, that I would expect any moronic Jew here, to understand that.

Jews are at sites like this one, to LIE to people. Jews want you to believe their LIES. They are not here to discuss and learn. Never were, never will be.

Albert Einstein: Plagiarist of the Century
Albert Einstein: The Incorrigible Plagiarist
Test Your Knowledge of the History of the Theory of Relativity.
E = mc^2 is Not Einstein's Discovery

ppk: which part of this "It is easily proven that Albert Einstein did not originate the special theory of relativity in its entirety, or even in its majority. The historic record is readily available. Ludwig Gustav Lange, Woldemar Voigt, George Francis FitzGerald, Joseph Larmor, Hendrik Antoon Lorentz, Jules Henri Poincaré, Paul Drude, Paul Langevin, and many others, slowly developed the theory, step by step, and based it on thousands of years of recorded thought and research." Christopher Bjerknes in "Albert Einstein: The Incorrigible Plagiarist"

didn't you understand. Christopher Bjerknes is a Jew if that helps.

Einstein was made up by the Jews the same way the HolyCost was. If you are a physicist (doubtful given the way Jews lie) then talk physics.

It seems that the more basic issue is the literal interpretaion of the bible vs. the bible-as-metaphor. Evolution seems to be only one in a laundry list of items where a literal interpretation of the bible is at odds with science, not to mention experience.

Its not so much "literal" literalism (though the "literalist" pretend it is, though they are no less selective and interpretationist than anyone else in reality) as the approach to the role of the bible and revelation in a more general sense. Approximately, I see the real relevant issue that divides approaches within the faith community as whether revelation is an inassailable source for answers on questions of material fact, or whether it must be interpretted in light of the evolving understanding of material fact gained through other means.

How do you know ppk is Jewish, dear slim?

It's very understandable that the results are so low in the US. Evolution is just not taught well. All they teach in school is Natural Selection, which doesn't explain evolution at all.

When the only aspect of evolution that is taught is the process of eliminating traits, it's easy to be skeptical.

While is sad that the false response is so high (is that for real?), atleast the "not sure" is large too.

Well, well, well- more people in for a big, big surprise- you know, the heat and the bad clothing etc.

At least I got chicken.

has407,

I agree with your view. Reality and God are not incompatable.

Personally I'd love to ask God, at the pearly gates, "What happened at the Big Bang? Is there a single Unified Field explanation?"

My fear is that he'll say "I don't really know. Since I can do everything I just did it. It is up to you to figure it out."

Man would that be a bummer.

I feel like a broken record, but here goes, one more time.

The curse of the Western mindset is we believe there are two sides to every question—and only two sides. So we are often forced to choose between polar opposite concepts, when most people are somewhere in between, or not even on the same page.

I have a suspicion that if you presented a choice like this: “Evolution did indeed happen, but it is all too beautiful, complex and logical to have happened by dumb luck. Somehow a directing law or a consciousness, if you will, had to be involved.” That one would win.

Of course the need to divide all points of view into two easy to understand choices would get this way of thinking labeled intelligent design and filed in the same drawer as creationism. Hooray, only two choices, again!

As aaron said, natural selection doesn’t explain evolution at all. All you atheistic Darwinists have a religious faith in your theory. (irony of ironies) You have never closely looked at the impossibilities of natural selection, which requires steady change over the millennia. It is much at odds with the short bursts of intense creative activity which characterize the actual process.

Darwin himself recognized the problem and wrote he hoped future fossil finds would smooth out the ragged shape of evolution but it hasn’t happened.

Steven J. Gould famously proposed a way of marrying the two, but most scientists believe the marriage was never consummated because of irreconcilable differences.

Better to keep an open mind folks. The entire story of human existence has not been written yet.

If I get to the pearly gates and a personal audience with the almighty, I have a few questions for the heartless son-of-a-bitch.

If "he" is all powerful, why do children suffer with cancer? Why does a benevolent God allow children to be born into homes that do not love them or protect them. Once you have seen a three year old who was placed on a glowing electric burner for peeing his pants, you have questions for that so-called God.

When you see a fundamentalist wife and mother of six who will not leave her abusive husband because of some biblical stricture, and he beats her to death, orphaning six kids, you come up for questions to ask that so-called "god."

When something like the Andrea Yates tragedy happens, I have questions for any God that would allow it.

Don't give me any garbage about the nobility of suffering. Bullshit. Suffering isn't noble, it is agonizing and no benevolent god would put his subjects through the things that happen every day - either as victim or caregiver.

我向大家推荐:中国旅行社网，打造旅行社领域专业搜索平台，提供全球旅行社品牌公司及产品展示。要想寻找机票查询信息请访问机票查询网，各种机票查询应有尽有。北京上海飞机票厂向广大客户提供上海飞机票产品及上海飞机票服务。您想要了解飞机票吗？请到中国飞机票网来寻找飞机票。北京打折机票厂向广大客户提供打折机票产品及打折机票服务。您想要了解出境旅游吗？请到中国出境旅游网来寻找出境旅游。要想寻找深圳旅行社信息请访问深圳旅行社网，各种深圳旅行社应有尽有。要想寻找深圳旅行社信息请访问深圳旅行社网，各种深圳旅行社应有尽有。要想寻找上海旅游信息请访问上海旅游网，各种上海旅游应有尽有。旅行社 网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的旅行社 ,丰富旅行社 行业资讯助您成交。上海武夷山酒店公司专业生产武夷山酒店产品，欢迎选择武夷山酒店。北京福彩3D厂向广大客户提供福彩3D产品及福彩3D服务。要想寻找上海机票信息请访问上海机票网，各种上海机票应有尽有。北京传奇私服厂向广大客户提供传奇私服产品及传奇私服服务。您想要了解打折机票吗？请到中国打折机票网来寻找打折机票。上海国际旅行社网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的上海国际旅行社,丰富上海国际旅行社行业资讯助您成交。国际旅游网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的国际旅游,丰富国际旅游行业资讯助您成交。您想要了解旅行社吗？请到中国旅行社网来寻找旅行社。中国旅行社网，打造旅行社领域专业搜索平台，提供全球旅行社品牌公司及产品展示。要想寻找特价机票信息请访问特价机票网，各种特价机票应有尽有。上海上海旅行社公司专业生产上海旅行社产品，欢迎选择上海旅行社。火车时刻表网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的火车时刻表,丰富火车时刻表行业资讯助您成交。北京上海特价机票厂向广大客户提供上海特价机票产品及上海特价机票服务。上海丽江公司专业生产丽江产品，欢迎选择丽江。中国武夷山旅游网，打造武夷山旅游领域专业搜索平台，提供全球武夷山旅游品牌公司及产品展示。要想寻找特价机票信息请访问特价机票网，各种特价机票应有尽有。要想寻找北京租房信息请访问北京租房网，各种北京租房应有尽有。您想要了解旅行社吗？请到中国旅行社网来寻找旅行社。上海武夷山旅游公司专业生产武夷山旅游产品，欢迎选择武夷山旅游。

has407,

You are God. You create a system called The Universe. The Universe behaves according to a set of rules which You have defined (e.g., "physics" as we know it). Are you intelligently directing the of The Universe? At the design level, yes; at the operational level, no--unless you're a lousy engineer or doing OJT. Is it "chaotic" or "purposeless"? No.

What evidence is there that the universe was intelligently designed? What evidence is there that the universe has a purpose?

Will humanity's underanding of The Universe change? Yes, as we learn more. Does that in any way invalidate the concept of God as Cosmic Engineer/Designer of The Universe? No.

The absence of evidence that the universe was intelligently designed or that it has a purpose, or that it is benevolent is inconsistent with the belief that the universe was created by an omnipotent and benevolent God, such as the God of Christianity. Where is this supposed "intelligent design" evident in the universe we actually inhabit and experience? Where is this supposed benevolence on display?

If "he" is all powerful, why do children suffer with cancer?

The obvious answers are that he doesn't exist at all, or that he exists but doesn't have anything to do with the creation or operation of the world, or that he is evil or indifferent to children suffering with cancer, or that he lacks the power to stop children suffering with cancer. None of these answers is consistent with the doctrines of Christianity.

Atheist. Exactly, and to cite Bertrand Russell, that is Why I am not a Christian
.

That and the fact I was raised a Jew.

(And Hey, Slim! I teach your children about Einstein and Oppenheimer right along with Neils Bohr and Isaac Newton, so fuck you.)

Don P, posting here as "Atheist", posts on other threads as "GOP", and has no compunction about making allying with right-wing extremist theocratic fundamentalist Biblical-literalist Christians who don't believe in evolution if that's what it takes to put and keep right-wing extremist Republican politicians in power.

Don P, posting as "Atheist", wrote: "Religion and ignorance go hand in hand."

Yes, and that's the very ignorance that you depend on to keep your fake phony little god-king George W. Bush in power, you appalling hypocrite.

Well, Al, according to the chart, less than half of Americans surveyed think evolution is true. Can we attribute this victory over fundamentalist thinking to the White House?

Atheist -- If you want to argue the existence of God, take it up with those of faith. If you have a beef with Christianity, take it up with the Christians. Neither is particularly relevant to the question of whether science and faith are irreconcilable.

Atheist -- If you want to argue the existence of God, take it up with those of faith. If you have a beef with Christianity, take it up with the Christians. Neither is particularly relevant to the question of whether science and faith are irreconcilable.

Well, make up your mind. First, you were discussing the compatibility of science and Christianity, then science and theism, and now it's science and faith. I deny that science is compatible with any of those things.

Don P posting as "Atheist" wrote: First, you were discussing the compatibility of science and Christianity, then science and theism, and now it's science and faith. I deny that science is compatible with any of those things.

You don't have a clue what science is, and you are more than happy to cozy up to fundamentalist Biblical-literalist evolution-denying theocrats if that's what it takes to keep right-wing extremist Republicans in power, you incorrigible fraud.

It's glaringly obvious that your fake, phony, belligerent "atheism" is directed only at liberal Christians who vote Democratic.

Personally, I take the position that the state usually tolerates religion the same way that a dog tolerates fleas.
I see the Christian tradition eventually evolving to recognize its inspired idol saw the state/faith linkup as intrinsically corrosive to both state and law.
Since faith has to do with suppositions - no matter how subsequently tortured - it is obvious that it has no common ground with science : and likely none with philosophy either. None of which has stopped people from trying to graft them together.
Arguing logic about a subject which has made an appeal to supersitition and emotion isn't too targeted either.