Reed A. Cartwright posted Entry 2098 on March 6, 2006 10:54 PM.
Trackback URL: http://www.pandasthumb.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.fcgi/2093

Last month Kentucky’s creationist governor, Ernie Fletcher (BS Engineering, MD), responded to a resolution by the Kentucky Academy of Science opposing the teaching of “intelligent design” creationism. A reader has supplied me with the text of the letter.

I won’t spoil the surprise with an analysis. Feel free to do your own. Heck, try to find as many indexed claims as you can.

Look below the fold to find out what a winner they got in Kentucky.

PRESS RELEASE FROM KENTUCKY ACADEMY OF SCIENCE

For IMMEDIATE RELEASE
From: Kentucky Academy of Science
Contact: Kentucky Academy of Science (859) 227-2837
Date: December 22, 2005

KENTUCKY ACADEMY OF SCIENCE CALLS FOR REJECTION OF ATTEMPTS TO TEACH “INTELLIGENT DESIGN” AS A SCIENTIFIC THEORY

During the recent Kentucky Academy of Science (KAS) Annual Meeting, members voted unanimously to oppose any attempt by legislative bodies to mandate specific content of science courses. The KAS objects to attempts to equate “scientific creationism” or “intelligent design” with evolution as a scientific explanation of events. KAS members believe the content of science courses taught in public schools in Kentucky should be determined by the standards of the scientific community. Science involves a continuing systematic inquiry into the manifold aspects of the biological and physical world. It is based upon testable theories, which may change with new data; it cannot include interpretations based on faith. Teaching faith-based models implies that these views are equivalent alternatives among scientists. These models mislead students as to what is considered the scientific method.

There is a widespread consensus among theologians that biblical accounts of creation are misunderstood if they are treated as literal scientific explanations. The KAS fully respects the religious views of all persons but objects to attempts to require any religious teachings as science in public schools.

There is overwhelming acceptance by scientists of all disciplines that evolution is consistent with the weight of a vast amount of evidence. The understanding of the processes underlying evolution has provided the foundation upon which many of the tremendous advances in agriculture and medicine and theoretical biology have been built.

The KAS joins fifty-three organizations including: the National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Center for Science Education, the National Congress of Science Education, the National Association of Biology Teachers, the National Science Teachers Association, and the academies of science in many other states in calling for the rejection of attempts to require the teaching of either “scientific creationism” or “intelligent design” as a scientific theory.

The Kentucky Academy of Science, founded in 1914, is an organization that encompasses all the accepted scientific fields. The 700 member strong organization encourages scientific research, promotes the diffusion of scientific knowledge, and unifies the scientific interests of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The KAS has passed resolutions in favor of evolution in 1981, 1983, 1999, and 2005. For more information visit the Kentucky Academy of Science website at kas.wku.edu/kas .

And now the response.

Ernie Fletcher, Governor
Commonwealth of Kentucky
Office of the Governor
700 Capitol Avenue
Suite 100
Frankfort KY 40601

February 13, 2006

Ms. Jeanne Harris
Kentucky Academy of Science
101 UKMC, Annex 5
Lexington, KY 40536

Dear Ms. Harris:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the teaching of “intelligent design.” My educational background provided me with thorough understanding of science and the theory of evolution. Our nation, however, was founded on self-evident truths. Among these truths are inalienable rights “endowed by their Creator.” From my perspective, it is not a matter of faith, or religion, or theory. It is similar to basic self-evident objective truths that are the basis of knowledge. For example, 2 + 2 = 4. It disappoints and astounds me that the so-called intellectual elite are so concerned about accepting self-evident truths that nearly 90% of the population understands. In fact, this acknowledgement led to the intellectual curiosity Einstein spoke of that, in turn, led to the exploration of new knowledge.

To deny this understanding of our nation’s beginning, and prevent it from being taught to American students, is to undermine the foundation of our nation. Schools should be able to approach this subject from a historical prospective, not a religious one, without offending anybody. I have not suggested any new legislation, and none is needed. Since 1970, state law specifically allows public schools to teach “creationism” in conjunction with the theory of evolution. In 1990, under the landmark Kentucky Education Reform Act, control of curriculum now rests with local districts. I urged school districts to utilize this freedom and empower students with all possible considerations regarding the origin of matter and species. It will be up to the teachers and local school officials, however, to make this decision.

Our nation’s founders gave credit for our inalienable rights to a Creator. Among our rights are your liberty to disagree with government officials and my liberty of free speech. Those who laid the foundation for our country knew this would be the greatness of America. Although you my question the intelligence of raising this issue, the computer, which is state-of the-art, and less sophisticated in function than this writer, was built by an intelligent designer.

Sincerely,

[Signed]

Ernie Fletcher

Commenters are responsible for the content of comments. The opinions expressed in articles, linked materials, and comments are not necessarily those of PandasThumb.org. See our full disclaimer.

Comment #84327

Posted by Mike Z on March 6, 2006 11:18 PM (e)

Sigh…

The founders had religious beliefs.
Therefore, my religious beliefs should be taught in every class and in every every subject.
To do otherwise is to deny history.

btw, I have no idea what he was talking about with the Einstein reference.

Comment #84331

Posted by BWE on March 6, 2006 11:22 PM (e)

Dice

Comment #84332

Posted by Captain Renault (possibly steve s in disguise) on March 6, 2006 11:23 PM (e)

I am shocked, shocked! that an engineer in Kentucky could be a creationist.

Comment #84337

Posted by AD on March 6, 2006 11:24 PM (e)

Our nation’s founders gave credit for our inalienable rights to a Creator.

And we believe this creator is the FSM. I trust that alternative theory will be given equal time with intelligent design and evolution in your new classroom atmosphere.

Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?

Although you my question the intelligence of raising this issue, the computer, which is state-of the-art, and less sophisticated in function than this writer, was built by an intelligent designer.

As someone with an associates in IT (along with a bachelors and masters in mathematics, which leans heavily on computers now), I can most assuredly state that the designers of the computer were not nearly as intelligent as we’d have liked.

Comment #84338

Posted by Andrew McClure on March 6, 2006 11:25 PM (e)

Although you my question the intelligence of raising this issue…

Was this error on the part of Gov. Fletcher, or Panda’s Thumb?

Comment #84340

Posted by steve s on March 6, 2006 11:29 PM (e)

Seriously, most of my relatives are from Kentucky. At family gatherings, they reminisce about working on George Wallace’s campaign. A relative’s prank involving deer urine sparked a terrorism scare. (http://www.bluegrassreport.org/bluegrass_politics/2005/08/so_apparently_t.html) Ernie Fletcher is Truman Capote compared to many of his constituents.

Comment #84343

Posted by Reed A. Cartwright on March 6, 2006 11:34 PM (e)

Was this error on the part of Gov. Fletcher, or Panda’s Thumb?

The text above was sent to me by a reader who mentioned that he has a scan of the original letter sent to KAS. More than likely it was an error in converting the scan to an email.

Comment #84344

Posted by Andrew McClure on March 6, 2006 11:35 PM (e)

Just curious, thanks :)

Comment #84348

Posted by UnMark on March 6, 2006 11:47 PM (e)

I’m ashamed to be considered an engineer after reading that drivel…. Then I remember that my state is proposing legislation that would ban drivel like ID from science class (Wisconsin). Speaking of which, I rather lost track of that - have there been any developments?

Comment #84349

Posted by Dizzy on March 6, 2006 11:48 PM (e)

AD wrote:

Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?

It’s His Noodly Appendage, heathen!

I bet you weren’t even wearing your pirate regalia when you typed that.

It is a serious offense to mock FSM.

Comment #84366

Posted by caerbannog on March 7, 2006 12:34 AM (e)

The good governor is working hard to ensure that Kentucky’s two leading exports will continue to be coal and college graduates…

Comment #84371

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 12:49 AM (e)

Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?

why do i feel like i need to wash my hands now?

Comment #84373

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 12:52 AM (e)

Ernie Fletcher is Truman Capote compared to many of his constituents.

lol.

It might be worth exploring the analogy further…

Comment #84376

Posted by Bruce Thompson GQ on March 7, 2006 12:55 AM (e)

Poor political move on the governors part. Since teaching creationism is already legal in Ky a condescending letter directed at “so-called intellectual elite(s)” is overkill. When the inevitable lawsuit ends up on the front page of the Louisville Courier Journal, the governor will fortunately have Ken Ham and Bill Dembski for support.

Delta Pi Gamma (Scientia et Fermentum)

Comment #84395

Posted by Craig T on March 7, 2006 1:56 AM (e)

Ya gotta love the classic rebuttals. Fletcher’s letter boils down to “Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but we’re not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America!”

Comment #84418

Posted by Popper's Ghost on March 7, 2006 4:23 AM (e)

Doonesbury weighs in on situational science.

Comment #84464

Posted by t.f. on March 7, 2006 6:58 AM (e)

You have to wonder if “self-evident” means the same thing to him that it did to the Dec of Ind author(s):

TJ, et al wrote:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. –That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

Now, if we substitute “their Creator” for “Nature”, have we changed the meaning, intent, anything? What was self-evident was the equality of men, and the rights they are afforded when in society, not the existence of the putative Creator.

I guess we “intellectual elites” just can’t seem to make “man + incredulity = God”. I’m glad it’s so self-evident to him, but I would prefer a formal argument.

Comment #84466

Posted by Corkscrew on March 7, 2006 7:52 AM (e)

It’s really rather ironic that he brings up Einstein - the guy’s entire life’s work was devoted to challenging what most people think of as self-evident truths. We used to think that it was self-evident that space was flat. We used to think that particles were points. If we insisted on accepting our “self-evident truths” in the face of actual evidence, we’d have to say goodbye to quantum mechanics and general relativity.

And, since quantum mechanics is necessary for transistor creation, we can happily point out that the design of his computer relied heavily on the challenging of self-evident truths.

Comment #84471

Posted by steve s on March 7, 2006 9:02 AM (e)

I wonder. At any point, did Fletcher yell “THER TAKN ERR JUBBBBBSSSSSSSSS!!!!!”

Comment #84477

Posted by wamba on March 7, 2006 9:38 AM (e)

From my perspective, it is not a matter of faith, or religion, or theory. It is similar to basic self-evident objective truths that are the basis of knowledge. For example, 2 + 2 = 4. It disappoints and astounds me that the so-called intellectual elite are so concerned about accepting self-evident truths that nearly 90% of the population understands.

??? 10% of the population doesn’t know that 2 + 2 = 4?

Comment #84480

Posted by Michael Wells on March 7, 2006 9:39 AM (e)

Ow. Ow. Owwwwwwwwwwww! Make it stop MAKE IT STOP!!! PLEEEEEEEEEEEASE, AAAAAAAGHH!!!!!

Oooo, my head.

“Historical prospective”?! “HISTORICAL PROSPECTIVE”?!

If I were a ninth-grade English teacher and a kid turned in this essay, I’d give him a C if he were lucky. And this is a state governor.

The second-to-last sentence in the first paragraph is clear as mud. The one right after, about Einstein, is both a baffling non-sequitur and internally incoherent. The openings of the second and third paragraphs are mutually redundant.

How did this man read his campaign speeches well enough to get elected?

And that isn’t even mentioning the core subject of the letter. A quick and dirty count gives me seven basic creationist nonsense claims/tactics packed into those three paragraphs, including one of my personal favorites, the endlessly adaptable “You intellectual elites with your degrees and your big words - you’re so smart you’re dumb.”

Comment #84483

Posted by Miguelito on March 7, 2006 9:40 AM (e)

It’s self evident to me that he’s an ignorant dumbass.

Comment #84484

Posted by wamba on March 7, 2006 9:43 AM (e)

Since 1970, state law specifically allows public schools to teach “creationism” in conjunction with the theory of evolution.

Didn’t Edwards v. Aguillard have something to say about that? IANAL, but my understanding is that Supreme Court precedent outweighs state law.

Comment #84486

Posted by Pud on March 7, 2006 9:48 AM (e)

Jeez, and to think there’s a big press story over here because Tony Blair said he asked God for advice…

Comment #84489

Posted by The Constituent on March 7, 2006 9:48 AM (e)

Believe me, when I watched his State of the Commonwealth address I about smacked my fist directly through my forehead.

To understand why he got elected you have to know what the guy before him did. The sad thing is he was elected on a “no corruption” campaign. He is now under investigation by the Attorney General (along with most of his administration) for illegal hiring practices.

And besides, if he’s so intelligently designed why did his gall bladder go whacky on him and stick him in the hospital for 18 days? I want to meet this designer and smack him around…

Comment #84490

Posted by wamba on March 7, 2006 9:52 AM (e)

The KAS joins fifty-three organizations including: the National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the National Center for Science Education, the National Congress of Science Education, the National Association of Biology Teachers, the National Science Teachers Association, and the academies of science in many other states in calling for the rejection of attempts to require the teaching of either “scientific creationism” or “intelligent design” as a scientific theory.

Does someone have a web resource listing these organizations, particularly the ones that include IDC in their language? I looked around the NCSE web site but didn’t find anything like that.

Comment #84493

Posted by wamba on March 7, 2006 10:00 AM (e)

The ACLU has a list of scientific organizations which support evolution and condemn ID but links go to the organizations, not the policy statements, so I can’t easily check the language.

Comment #84499

Posted by SteveF on March 7, 2006 10:13 AM (e)

What exactly does this letter have to do with evolution? I looked hard but couldn’t see it.

I guess, at least, it provides a neat example of where most creationists are coming from when they approach evolution.

Comment #84500

Posted by AD on March 7, 2006 10:15 AM (e)

As an aside…

For example, 2 + 2 = 4.

Not so fast. 2 + 2 = 1, if you’re working in mod 3. I think the problem here is that Fletcher simply forgot to mention his context.

Allow me to interject it…

Our nation, however, was founded on self-evident truths. Among these truths are inalienable rights “endowed by their Creator.” Also, the truth that if you are not a biblical literalist christian, we will oppress you, indoctrinate your children, ruin our education system, and abolish those pesky things known as facts. After all, freedom to practice our religion on YOU is precisely why we came to this country, right?

The rest of the statement reads pretty coherently once you realize that context.

Comment #84508

Posted by steve s on March 7, 2006 10:29 AM (e)

Isn’t one of those inalienable rights, the right not to believe what the governor orders w/r/t a creator?

Comment #84519

Posted by Aagcobb on March 7, 2006 10:50 AM (e)

And now the good news. In his letter, Fletcher wrote:

In 1990, under the landmark Kentucky Education Reform Act, control of curriculum now rests with local districts. I urged school districts to utilize this freedom and empower students with all possible considerations regarding the origin of matter and species. It will be up to the teachers and local school officials, however, to make this decision.

Translated, this means, “if any local school district wants to pay a seven figure legal settlement to the ACLU, they are free to do so. The state of Kentucky, however, will have nothing to do with that train wreck.” IOW, Fletcher did nothing except pander to his political base, and the newly appointed republican state school board members will not adopt an ID policy.

Comment #84524

Posted by Henry J on March 7, 2006 11:04 AM (e)

Re “Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?”

I had spaghetti for dinner the other day. Does that count?

Comment #84525

Posted by Engineer-Poet, FCD, ΔΠΓ on March 7, 2006 11:07 AM (e)

wamba:  try adding a “site:<domain>” qualifier to your Google search, e.g.

“intelligent design” site:aclu.org

Comment #84527

Posted by shenda on March 7, 2006 11:10 AM (e)

“Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?”

Yes I have, and I am going to sue!

Comment #84534

Posted by wamba on March 7, 2006 11:22 AM (e)

What exactly does this letter have to do with evolution? I looked hard but couldn’t see it.

Good point. I don’t see anything in there about PYGMIES and DWARVES!

Comment #84544

Posted by Edwin Hensley on March 7, 2006 11:42 AM (e)

The real fear is that Fletcher will use ID as a desperate attempt to get reelected. The KY anti gay marriage amendment was successful in getting fundamentalists to the polls in 2004. Fletcher had a fiasco when he attempted to cut teacher’s health benefits. A bigger problem for him is a state hiring scandal for which he pardoned 9 members of his administration and any others that may have committed crimes. He is not very popular, but this may be an attempt to appeal to his strongest base. As I noted in prior comments, he recently appointed 6 new members to the KY School Board, all Republicans and one a pastor. I fear the worst is yet to come.

Fletcher Names 7 To School Board

Comment #84546

Posted by Marc S on March 7, 2006 11:45 AM (e)

“I am shocked, shocked! that an engineer in Kentucky could be a creationist.”

Sadly, it’s even worse. He’s a physician, so presumably he’s had some actual training in biology. I don’t know how much of this he really believes and how much is pandering to his base.

The previous governor, Paul Patton, had a serious hubris problem and did some things which were unethical and illegal in the cronyism department, but he really cared about education at all levels, from K through graduate school, and directed lots of money and attention to improving them. Naturally as soon as soon as the GOP took over they start doing their best to erase the gains made during his administration. If Patton was for it, it must be bad.

Best, Marc

Comment #84551

Posted by Dan on March 7, 2006 11:53 AM (e)

this is an example of why Carl Rove doesn’t let GWB open his mouth without a script. The same sort of nonsense would come spewing out in front of the whole world.
Could we please start dragging this country into the modern age?

Comment #84552

Posted by bdeller on March 7, 2006 11:58 AM (e)

“2+2=4” therefore cell+mitochondria=God or
flagella+E.coli=God.

I love math.

Founding fathers also believed in slavery, no vote for women and treating patients by
draining blood out of them. I’m certain George Washington would have liked a better theory on the
last one.

Comment #84555

Posted by Aagcobb on March 7, 2006 12:03 PM (e)

Edwin Hensley said

The real fear is that Fletcher will use ID as a desperate attempt to get reelected.

I hope you are wrong, Edwin. If that is what Fletcher is thinking, he should consider the election results in the Dover school board race last year. I’m hoping that his pander is the full extent of his attempt to use ID to energize his base.

Comment #84586

Posted by Lynn on March 7, 2006 12:55 PM (e)

Michael Wells said, “If I were a ninth-grade English teacher and a kid turned in this essay, I’d give him a C if he were lucky. And this is a state governor.”

If you were an English teacher, you might have given him a C. If you were an *American history* teacher, you’d have given him a big, fat F. If you were a *logic* teacher, you’d have kicked him out of school ;^)

Lynn

Comment #84591

Posted by Bill Gascoyne on March 7, 2006 12:59 PM (e)

Gov. Malaprop wrote:

Schools should be able to approach this subject from a historical prospective, not a religious one, without offending anybody.

And from just such a historical perspective (did he really write “prospective”?), heavy objects fall faster than light ones and the sun goes around the earth….

Comment #84607

Posted by Peter on March 7, 2006 1:27 PM (e)

“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

How convenient that he neglects to mention “the consent of the governed” in his letter. Hmm.

Engineers. I know an engineer at Penn State, who received his doctorate from CalPoly, who is the most vocal creationist on campus. He believes that the enormous skull cavity on the T-Rex that housed its olfactory bulb actually held “tanks” that it used to create an explosive mixture a la the bomardier beetle that made early man believe it was a fire-breathing dragon. Genius.

Comment #84609

Posted by Peter on March 7, 2006 1:28 PM (e)

“That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”

How convenient that he neglects to mention “the consent of the governed” in his letter. Hmm.

Engineers. I know an engineer at Penn State, who received his doctorate from CalPoly. He is also the most vocal creationist on campus. He believes that the enormous skull cavity on the T-Rex that housed its olfactory bulb actually held “tanks” that it used to create an explosive mixture a la the bomardier beetle that made early man believe it was a fire-breathing dragon. Genius.

Comment #84622

Posted by k.e. on March 7, 2006 1:38 PM (e)

Peter your engineer friend sounds like he had a condition similar to Tourette’s Syndrome or mild autism whatever but definitely something not quite right. I wonder if creationism makes rational people crazy?

Comment #84625

Posted by BWE on March 7, 2006 1:48 PM (e)

No, Crazy people make Creationism rational.

Comment #84628

Posted by Karen on March 7, 2006 1:55 PM (e)

Peter wrote:

I know an engineer at Penn State, who received his doctorate from CalPoly. He is also the most vocal creationist on campus. He believes that the enormous skull cavity on the T-Rex that housed its olfactory bulb actually held “tanks” that it used to create an explosive mixture a la the bomardier beetle that made early man believe it was a fire-breathing dragon. Genius.

Your friend must be a great singer, with all that empty space between his ears.

Comment #84629

Posted by Bruce Thompson GQ on March 7, 2006 1:56 PM (e)

Peter posts: He believes that the enormous skull cavity on the T-Rex that housed its olfactory bulb actually held “tanks” that it used to create an explosive mixture a la the bomardier beetle that made early man believe it was a fire-breathing dragon. Genius.

Did he ever test his hypothesis? Using a cast of a T-rex skull build the “tanks” and create some form of ignition system perhaps something like this. Definitely intelligently designed.

Delta Pi Gamma (Scientia et Fermentum)

Comment #84632

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 2:03 PM (e)

“THER TAKN ERR JUBBBBBSSSSSSSSS!!!!!”

I thought that was a standard Kentucky campaign slogan?

Comment #84634

Posted by BWE on March 7, 2006 2:03 PM (e)

Good ideas for possible chemistry for the tyranno-tanks can be found here Scroll down a little.

Comment #84635

Posted by k.e. on March 7, 2006 2:05 PM (e)

Of course ……alimentary my Dear Watson……Deus Ex Tyrannosaurus Rex

Comment #84636

Posted by Glen Davidson on March 7, 2006 2:06 PM (e)

The “Creator” was in the instance of the Declaration the Deistic creator, or very nearly so. It is not a long jump from Deism to theistic or deistic evolution, neither of which supports violations of the First Amendment in science class.

There’s little point in denying the religious claims made in the Declaration, of course, but there’s also little to suggest that said “Creator” is supposed to be understood via ID or Genesis. After all, HOW was this Creator supposed to have endowed us with rights?

Can such rights be designed into the biology of humans? Or is the claim frankly metaphysical and other-worldly, and thus outside of the domain of science? I don’t think any knowledgeable person would suggest that it is anything but the latter, and has no literal ties to Genesis or the Great Engineer. The claim of rights was from beyond the realm of science, and did not in the least pertain to science or science education.

In any event, the Constitution generally trumps the Declaration, particularly where there is any potential disagreement between the two. Some would argue that the Declaration has no legal force at all, however it does seem correct (IMO) to see a kind of “spiritual” connection between the two. If we accept the latter (I’m not saying that we must), the First Amendment and its Incorporation stand opposed to the Establishment of religion, including Deism. The legislators may indeed be religious, and even have their publically-paid chaplains, but this doesn’t change the fact that their religions and religious impulses are not to be forced onto the public.

Unfortunately, Fletcher appears not only to be woefully uneducated in science and evolution, but also in history, jurisprudence, and philosophy (“self-evident truths”? With due respect to the founders, the God-believing Kant showed what a crock those are). He doesn’t even understand religion in any depth or breadth, or he’d know that “Creator” is a very fuzzy concept in many sects, referring frankly to the Unknown and not to the self-evident.

At best, one should read from the Declaration that the rights are self-evident (I would dispute this, but it was, in part, a declaration of rights, not science) and are imputed to the (mostly, at least) Unknown “Creator”. We know the rights, because they are self-evident, and we attribute them to God because we do not know how they would otherwise be created–this seems to be the meaning of the Founders’ declaration. What the Founders prudently left out was any mention of “how” God created rights or humans, because they knew that they did not know.

Fletcher is by no means as prudent as the Founders (which I say even though I’d prefer that deities would have been left out altogether). He is going to wrestle God to earth, turn Him into an engineer and hydrologist, and claim that he knows what only the Almighty is said to know. Well, ID blasphemes, as usual, and so do the IDiots who think to explain God, however poorly.

Glen D
http://tinyurl.com/b8ykm

Comment #84637

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 2:07 PM (e)

I don’t know how much of this he really believes and how much is pandering to his base.

It doesn’t really matter. When a public official makes an official statement, they set themselves up for review based on the content, not the underlying motive.

I think GW often forgets this little fact as well.

Comment #84641

Posted by Arden Chatfield on March 7, 2006 2:12 PM (e)

Engineers. I know an engineer at Penn State, who received his doctorate from CalPoly, who is the most vocal creationist on campus. He believes that the enormous skull cavity on the T-Rex that housed its olfactory bulb actually held “tanks” that it used to create an explosive mixture a la the bomardier beetle that made early man believe it was a fire-breathing dragon.

Isn’t that idea straight from Kent Hovind?

Comment #84655

Posted by a maine yankee on March 7, 2006 2:37 PM (e)

Why doesn’t someone introduce legislation to rescind plate tectonics? Save life and property. Increase home values. Get busy, y’all.

Comment #84659

Posted by Com$tock on March 7, 2006 2:40 PM (e)

In January, I wrote an email to Gov. Fletcher soon after his State of the Commonwealth speech in which he endorsed intelligent design. I objected to his suggestion that intelligent design be taught in school and challenged his understanding of biology and American history.

In February, I got a response. I received the SAME LETTER as Jeanne Harris, verbatim.

I feel less special, somehow. :(

I thought the poor grammar and spelling mistake were indicative of the haste in which I imagined some aide had fired off the reply. Now I see the poorly crafted sentences and ridiculous logic were part of a letter written for multiple recipients. I’m surprised more work didn’t go into it.

Comment #84660

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 2:42 PM (e)

I’m surprised more work didn’t go into it.

How do you know this wasn’t the best they could do? It sure wouldn’t surprise me.

;)

Comment #84662

Posted by wamba on March 7, 2006 2:48 PM (e)

Our nation’s founders gave credit for our inalienable rights to a Creator. Among our rights are your liberty to disagree with government officials and my liberty of free speech.

In any event, the Constitution generally trumps the Declaration, particularly where there is any potential disagreement between the two.

Clearly Gov. Malaprop is confounding the two documents.

The Declaration of Independence doesn’t actually deal with the founding of our nation, only the independence of the colonies from British rule. It mentions “laws of nature and nature’s god”. It does not mention “free speech”, that’s from the Bill of Rights, which consists of the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. The Constitution makes no mention whatsoever of a Creator.

Comment #84666

Posted by sinneD34 on March 7, 2006 2:51 PM (e)

Last time I looked at my Draconomicon, most dragons had wings which T-Rexes seem to have lacked, and dragons tend be represented with strong forelimbs, not the weak little ones T-Rex had.

Or perhaps it’s all been blown up over time, like the story of some guy saving a couple of his goats on a few planks of wood when his farm flooded eventually turned into Noah’s Ark.

Comment #84670

Posted by DaveClay on March 7, 2006 2:53 PM (e)

He must have gotten his degree from the same Yale University that awarded GWB his history degree.

Comment #84682

Posted by normdoering on March 7, 2006 3:14 PM (e)

Glen Davidson wrote:

After all, HOW was this Creator supposed to have endowed us with rights?

Can such rights be designed into the biology of humans? Or is the claim frankly metaphysical and other-worldly, and thus outside of the domain of science?

I’ll go with the “outside of the domain of science” answer.

Our founders didn’t want to get into exitential questions and came up with a short cut. Science limits itself to “natural explanations.” This is one reason “Intelligent Design” isn’t science. When you limit philosophy to the same natural explanations what you get is something like “Atheistic Existentialism,” (or metaphysical naturalism or whatever you want to call it), a philosophy of mere existence. It also excludes supernatural explanations.

What IDers don’t want is Atheistic Existentialism in philosophy, and for them that’s their personal right. It’s also my right to endorse some form of Atheistic Existentialism.

The question is how much can you separate your science from your philosophy?

Comment #84685

Posted by J-Dog on March 7, 2006 3:16 PM (e)

Thankfully we can now research exactly what is wrong with the Gov!

http://www.world-science.net/exclusives/060221_unertanfrm.htm

Comment #84690

Posted by normdoering on March 7, 2006 3:36 PM (e)

This smells like a fraud, hoax:
http://www.world-science.net/exclusives/060221_unertanfrm.htm

Comment #84692

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 3:41 PM (e)

The researcher, Uner Tan of Cukurova University Medical School in Adana, Turkey, has posted an online video clip of an affected woman walking on all fours, her face blurred.

…because they didn’t want to give away the joke by showing how hard she was laughing.

Comment #84693

Posted by Raging Bee on March 7, 2006 3:42 PM (e)

The BBC covers it too:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4782492.stm

Comment #84695

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 3:48 PM (e)

aww, you mean this is for real?

kind of a stretch to call it “reverse evolution”.

Comment #84700

Posted by Steviepinhead on March 7, 2006 3:57 PM (e)

Posted by Henry J on March 7, 2006 11:04 AM (e)

Re “Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?”

I had spaghetti for dinner the other day. Does that count?

You meant, I’m sure, that you had spaghetti for your evening sacrament

Posted by shenda on March 7, 2006 11:10 AM (e)

“Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?”

Yes I have, and I am going to sue!

Okay, I wasn’t actually rolling on the floor laughing, if that is construed to require direct physical contact between my body and floor, but my chair has rollers, it sit on the floor, and I was rolling around on the floor, in my chair, laughing my pin head off, which oughta count!

Only thing I couldn’t figure was, what are you going to Sue for? Does she just want to be touched by someone who has been touched by the noodly appendage? Or does she operate some kind of de-noodling service (Post Noodly De-stressing Dis-order?)? Or is she, like, Johnny Cash rein-carne-ated?

Anyway, made my day!

Comment #84706

Posted by Barron on March 7, 2006 4:15 PM (e)

Only the wisdom of Matt Groenning can help us now:

Kent Brockman: Miss Simpson, how can you maintain your skepticism despite the fact that this thing really really looks like an angel?
Lisa: I just think it’s a fantasy, if you believe in angels, then why not unicorns, sea-monsters and leprachauns!
Kent: Oh, that’s a bunch of baloney Lisa, everyone knows that lepreachauns are extinct!

Comment #84709

Posted by Henry J on March 7, 2006 4:26 PM (e)

Re “Kent: Oh, that’s a bunch of baloney Lisa, everyone knows that lepreachauns are extinct!”

Nonsense. They still show up in TV shows (on cable at least) every now and then, so they can’t be extinctified, at least not yet. ;)

Henry

Comment #84716

Posted by Gorbe on March 7, 2006 4:40 PM (e)

My first inclination is to disbelieve that this is an actual letter from the Governor of a U.S. state because it is in an abysmal form when it comes to constituent correspondence standards.

Then again, like science, maybe that doesn’t matter in Kentucky. Perhaps showing public contempt and disrespect for a constituent is acceptable, so long as the constituent is disliked by a majority of those you represent.

Comment #84718

Posted by mark on March 7, 2006 4:43 PM (e)

…laughing my pin head off…

Are you trying to start a riot, like this guy?

Comment #84726

Posted by Bruce Thompson GQ on March 7, 2006 4:53 PM (e)

BWE suggests: Good ideas for possible chemistry for the tyranno-tanks can be found here Scroll down a little.

I think a more likely scenario involves this except located at the mouth. Since cow flatulence is a serious
source of pollution
it is reasonable to suppose that T-rex also produced large quantities of gas. Considering the relative size of T-rex compared with cows, the amounts of gas would differ significantly. An additional byproduct of burning gas is micron sized particulate matter (PM10), which is regulated by the EPA and an additional source of air pollution.

It is possible that the mass extinction 65 mya was not the result of a major impact as suggested by some but rather the result of global warming as a result of T-rex induced gas production. If true, this is a testable hypothesis. It predicts that in the fossil record there should be an increase in sizes of T-rex species through time and T-rex species should reach their maximum sizes shortly before 65 mya.

Delta Pi Gamma (Scientia et Fermentum)

Comment #84728

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 4:56 PM (e)

it is reasonable to suppose that T-rex also produced large quantities of gas

au contraire. T rex was a carnivore.

now apatosaur… THERE’S a likely gas factory fer ya.

Comment #84729

Posted by Gorbe on March 7, 2006 4:56 PM (e)

We know the rights, because they are self-evident, and we attribute them to God because we do not know how they would otherwise be created—this seems to be the meaning of the Founders’ declaration. What the Founders prudently left out was any mention of “how” God created rights or humans, because they knew that they did not know.

Jefferson (the author of the DoI), ever the jack-of-all-trades and arguably the smartest of the Founders (genius, IMO), may have been doing precisely what the KY governor was doing – being savvy with the use of rhetoric for political gain. Maybe Jefferson was Leveraging the sentiments of the people to inspire a desire for independence from England. Lest people forget, less than half the population was interested in independence.

Comment #84730

Posted by Henry J on March 7, 2006 4:58 PM (e)

Does it also predict that they’d appear in movies 65my after their extinction? :)

Comment #84732

Posted by Bruce Thompson GQ on March 7, 2006 5:10 PM (e)

Sir_Toejam chastises: au contraire. T rex was a carnivore.

Don’t mess with my preconceived notions.

Henry J questions: Does it also predict that they’d appear in movies 65my after their extinction?

No, but I’m sure there is something about residuals.

I also forgot that my hypothesis predicts carbon (PM10) in sediments 65mya at the time of the extinctions.

Delta Pi Gamma (Scientia et Fermentum)

Comment #84738

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 5:17 PM (e)

I also forgot that my hypothesis predicts carbon (PM10) in sediments 65mya at the time of the extinctions.

Delta Pi Gamma (Scientia et Fermentum)

well, Scienta et Fermentation, anyway.

;)

Comment #84741

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 5:23 PM (e)

Bruce-

I think i have a name for your theory:

Fermentive Atmospheric Residual Theory

Comment #84755

Posted by Bruce Thompson GQ on March 7, 2006 5:55 PM (e)

Sir_Toejam suggests: Fermentive Atmospheric Residual Theory

Does it work in latin? Latin is such a scientific sounding language.

Delta Pi Gamma (Scientia et Fermentum)

Comment #84791

Posted by nitpicker on March 7, 2006 7:06 PM (e)

Oh, the shame of it. I actually live in the state where Dr. Fletcher is governor.

However, this letter is probably the least of his problems. (http://www.bluegrassreport.org/)

Comment #84793

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on March 7, 2006 7:14 PM (e)

IOW, Fletcher did nothing except pander to his political base, and the newly appointed republican state school board members will not adopt an ID policy.

Well it *is* an election year, after all ….

If you’re a Republicrat and you want to get elected, you simply MUST kiss ass with the nutters so the contributions and votes keep coming. Just ask McCain.

The guys who introduce these bills *know* that none of them will pass – most of them won’t even get out of committee. That isn’t why they introduce them.

Comment #84794

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 7:15 PM (e)

“People are not burning the flag,” he said, correctly. “The only time they start is when this amendment is offered.”

man, talk about flame bait.

Comment #84799

Posted by 'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank on March 7, 2006 7:20 PM (e)

In any event, the Constitution generally trumps the Declaration, particularly where there is any potential disagreement between the two.

Um, the Declaration of Independence is not a law, and it has no legal force or standing whatsoever. None. Zip. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Not a shred.

It didn’t even legally establish the independence of the United States – the Treaty of Paris in 1783 did that.

Comment #84803

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 7:30 PM (e)

The guys who introduce these bills *know* that none of them will pass — most of them won’t even get out of committee. That isn’t why they introduce them.

and as long as politicians placate the Kent Hovinds of the world, there will be ever more of them.

I hope that clearly answers the questions we get from european lurkers who just can’t understand why there are so many creationists in the US.

It’s because we allow folks like Hovind to speak to our kids at high schools, and our elected representatives only encourage them to do so.

In fact, how ironic is it that Hovind will be speaking at Dover High next week, as was just pointed out over in ATBC:

http://www.repentamerica.com/notebook/2006/02/creation_seminar_coming_to_dov.html

One can only weep.

The courts spanked the creationists there, the public voted out the old school board, and still we get Hovind speaking at the high school.

Comment #84805

Posted by Althea on March 7, 2006 7:35 PM (e)

Then there is this extremely accurate and respresentative scientific illustration of the concurrent existence of man and dragon.

Althea

Comment #84815

Posted by Bruce Thompson GQ on March 7, 2006 8:16 PM (e)

Sadly we are informed by Sir_Toejam: In fact, how ironic is it that Hovind will be speaking at Dover High next week, as was just pointed out over in ATBC:

Who locally is sponsoring Hovind?

I notice from the flyer the $250,000 offer is still in effect.

Delta Pi Gamma (Scientia et Fermentum)

Comment #84821

Posted by wheatdogg on March 7, 2006 9:18 PM (e)

Ernie had some of these same arguments in his State of the State address. A man of few (original) words, indeed. I have analyzed the logic(?) of his arguments on my own blog.

And he’s my governor. Do you feel sorry for me?

Comment #84823

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 9:37 PM (e)

And he’s my governor. Do you feel sorry for me

hey, my governor’s a b-rate actor who like to feel up women and has a bad accent.

no, I don’t feel sorry for you.

Comment #84826

Posted by KiwiInOz on March 7, 2006 10:19 PM (e)

Sir Toejam

Tyranosaurus was only a carnivore after the fall, remember?

And it is not just Europeans who look at you guys in stunned disbelief. There is actually a Southern Hemisphere too.

Comment #84828

Posted by The Sanity Inspector on March 7, 2006 10:27 PM (e)

OT, sorry if this has already been parsed here:

The April issue of Discover magazine is not online yet, but I recommend having a look through the print copy if you can find it. There’s an article about the paleontologist who discovered preserved soft tissue in T-Rex fossils from the Hell’s Creek formation. The article tells how this discovery came about, but also how the paleontologist, a Christian, is getting slagged by creationists for not throwing her lot in with them.

Comment #84829

Posted by wheatdogg on March 7, 2006 10:29 PM (e)

Hmm, point well taken. Does the Governator have an opinion about ID?

Comment #84830

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 10:36 PM (e)

There is actually a Southern Hemisphere too

hmmm. what part?

south america? nope.

Australia? nope.

South Africa? nope.

You’d have to be a bit more specific, i think.

Comment #84831

Posted by William L Kincade on March 7, 2006 10:54 PM (e)

I have a degree in geological engineering, my MLS is from Kansas, I work in West Texas.

I have heard “May you live in interesting times” is considered a Chinese curse.

I would like to ask the intelligent designer (God, alien, or spagetti), what did I do to offend the Chinese?

Comment #84832

Posted by Sir_Toejam on March 7, 2006 10:57 PM (e)

Hmm, point well taken. Does the Governator have an opinion about ID?

good question. i doubt he does (have an opinion), come to think of it, but don’t quote me on that.

Comment #84835

Posted by Henry J on March 7, 2006 11:13 PM (e)

Re “it is reasonable to suppose that T-rex also produced large quantities of gas”
Re “au contraire. T rex was a carnivore.”

Maybe this was before the “fall”?

Henry

Comment #84843

Posted by Russ on March 8, 2006 12:17 AM (e)

Three points for Mr. Fletcher:

1. Thomas Jefferson penned that phrase containing the word “Creator” in the Declaration of Independence which is not a founding document. Jefferson was, of course, taking audience into account, and framing the issues in terms easily understood by the King of England.

2. NOWHERE in the Constitution is any reference made to a god, or diety. In fact, its only mention of religion is to disallow the state from establishing a church(using various meanings of the word “establish”).

3. As an elected official you should be checking out the real science organizations like the National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the NSCE, and the American Biology Teachers Association, to name a few. These groups represent large numbers of active members of the science community and their stance on evolution and ID are not wrapped in political spin – they all endorse evolution as a foundational science topic and they do not endorse ID at all.

Comment #84859

Posted by natural cynic on March 8, 2006 2:19 AM (e)

Tyranosaurus was only a carnivore after the fall, remember?

Has anyone checked out the, uh, theory that the flood may have been caused by all those dinosaurs belching and farting? Coulda happened, especially if there weren’t enough antediluvian pirates.

Yes, I am a a pirate
200 years too late
Cannons don’t thunder
There’s nothing to plunder
I’m an over 40 victim of fate

–J Buffett

Comment #84874

Posted by MAJeff on March 8, 2006 8:09 AM (e)

hey, my governor’s a b-rate actor who like to feel up women and has a bad accent.

And mine’s a Mormon who thinks the fundamentalists in South Carolina–who consider his church a cult–will vote for him. At least none of your governors have been running around the country slamming the state they’re governing.

Comment #84878

Posted by Heselbine on March 8, 2006 8:22 AM (e)

Normally I just lurk here but I have to make a comment. Comment #84803 says

“I hope that clearly answers the questions we get from european lurkers who just can’t understand why there are so many creationists in the US.”

Well the news from the UK is that there are surprising number of creationists here too. From what I’ve seen there is a distinct polarisation of Christians towards more fundamental behaviour.

Be afraid.

Comment #84879

Posted by Lou FCD on March 8, 2006 8:39 AM (e)

Heselbine wrote:

Well the news from the UK is that there are surprising number of creationists here too. From what I’ve seen there is a distinct polarisation of Christians towards more fundamental behaviour.

Be afraid.

You might find this site and its forums of interest.

The “Science Just Science” website is dedicated to the creationism-in-the-science-class problem in the UK.

Comment #84886

Posted by Roy Crawford on March 8, 2006 9:24 AM (e)

Good grief, can’t the Governor and the rest of you get it about what the founding fathers meant when they wrote “Creator”? They were talking about people’s mothers, for cryin’ out loud. We were all created by our mothers with a little - very little - help from our fathers. None of the gods or goddesses worshipped by any of the many religions around the world were mentioned in any of those early historical documents, were they?

Comment #84887

Posted by Bob Keller on March 8, 2006 9:33 AM (e)

Russ,

The statement:

“2. NOWHERE in the Constitution is any reference made to a god, or diety. In fact, its only mention of religion is to disallow the state from establishing a church(using various meanings of the word “establish”).”

is not completely correct.

You forgot the “or prohibit the free exercise thereof. “ Allowing people worship as they choose without government intervention is just as important as the establishment clause.

Also, You will find a religion is mentioned in Article VI. where the Constitution states:

“… but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States”.

Bob

Comment #84888

Posted by wamba on March 8, 2006 9:34 AM (e)

Hmm, point well taken. Does the Governator have an opinion about ID?

I’d have to suspect he’s on our side on this one. You may recall he made a nature documentary a few years back about predator-prey relationships in Central America.

Comment #84889

Posted by MMarkey on March 8, 2006 9:43 AM (e)

Com$tock wasn’t the only one to get the same letter from Ernie Fletcher. Looks like it also went out to the Anti-Defamation League, and on the same day as it went to the KAS:

http://www.bluegrassreport.org/bluegrass_politics/2006/03/governor_fletch.html

Curiously, this was the day after his first surgery (Feb. 13). Perhaps the painkillers affected his proofreading abilities? ;)

Comment #84890

Posted by Lou FCD on March 8, 2006 9:45 AM (e)

wamba wrote:

You may recall he made a nature documentary a few years back about predator-prey relationships in Central America.

I agree. Let’s not forget the scientific experiments with genetic engineering and twins, memory recall and tampering, cryo-stasis, and several experiments with robotics and cybernetics. He’s a very scientific fellow.

Comment #84912

Posted by Bruce Thompson GQ on March 8, 2006 11:21 AM (e)

Henery J questions: Re “it is reasonable to suppose that T-rex also produced large quantities of gas”
Re “au contraire. T rex was a carnivore.”

Maybe this was before the “fall”?

To which the natural cynic replys: Tyranosaurus was only a carnivore after the fall, remember?
Has anyone checked out the, uh, theory that the flood may have been caused by all those dinosaurs belching and farting? Coulda happened, especially if there weren’t enough antediluvian pirates.

My hypothesis is based on methodologic materialism (not philosophical materialism) and does not rely on untestable poofs, only data constant with my hypothesis. Fortunately all the data, correctly interpreted, is consistent with my hypothesis.

Not withstanding my preconceived notions, I would urge the governor and local school boards to consider my hypothesis when teaching about the mass extinctions 65 mya. A comparison of the evidences for both hypotheses will not only broaden students appreciation for science but also teach critical thinking skills.

Delta Pi Gamma (Scientia et Fermentum)

Comment #84920

Posted by Henry J on March 8, 2006 12:22 PM (e)

Re “You may recall he made a nature documentary a few years back about predator-prey relationships in Central America.”

Yeah, but he went and lost the only sample of the invasive species that he was, um, “studying”.

Comment #84923

Posted by shenda on March 8, 2006 12:38 PM (e)

“And it is not just Europeans who look at you guys in stunned disbelief. There is actually a Southern Hemisphere too.”

No, there is not! The word hemisphere implies a round world. As any pubicly edjuketed person in Kentuckee can tell yu, the world if flat!

Comment #84937

Posted by Bruce Thompson GQ on March 8, 2006 1:39 PM (e)

Reasons the Gov don’t know best


Kentucky
State fossil


Kentucky coal production

Delta Pi Gamma (Scientia et Fermentum)

Comment #85025

Posted by godarwin on March 8, 2006 7:17 PM (e)

One of the great moments in copy-editing history:

In an early draft of the Declaration of Independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote, “We hold these truths to be sacred…

Benjamin Franklin, with his heavy editing pen, crossed out “sacred” and wrote above it “self-evident.”

Way to go Ben!

(This document still exists.)

Comment #85041

Posted by JS Narins on March 8, 2006 10:01 PM (e)

The founders? You mean Thomas Jefferson, who wrote his own edition of the Bible and removed all the fantasy bits?

The same founders who, in the first 50 years (at least) of their existence, can be said to have only done one act with any cognizance of religion, namely, to appoint a chaplain for themselves, a debated measure at the time?

We had mail delivery on Sundays for the longest time (at least 50 years), no matter how much the Christians complained. Because all such matters are beyond the accepted purview of governments.

Jurassic Park, the movie, _proved_ that T-Rex’s aren’t fire breathers, anyway.

Comment #85051

Posted by Kevin from nyc on March 8, 2006 11:56 PM (e)

Dizzy you are a heretic!

“It’s His Noodly Appendage, heathen!

I bet you weren’t even wearing your pirate regalia when you typed that.

It is a serious offense to mock FSM.”

It’s his/her/its noodly appendage. And we are in the middle of a crises over whether the FSM even has a sex…or ever HAD sex, either one….

and yes I’m wearing a hat and some pistols…

Comment #85055

Posted by Henry J on March 9, 2006 12:12 AM (e)

Re “Jurassic Park, the movie, _proved_ that T-Rex’s aren’t fire breathers, anyway.”

Unless the frog DNA messed up that function… ;)

Henry

Comment #85220

Posted by wamba on March 9, 2006 10:17 AM (e)

Entepreneurial opportunity: self-broiling frog legs.

Comment #85304

Posted by Steverino on March 9, 2006 1:18 PM (e)

From the link annoucing Hovind:

“Dr. Kent Hovind is considered one of the foremost authorities on science and the Bible. The former high school science teacher turned evangelist speaks over 700 times each year in public and private schools, universities, churches, camps, radio programs, as well as in many other settings. He has debated evolutionists at many colleges and universities across America and is dedicated to the proclamation of factual, scientific evidence supporting the Biblical record of creation and history of the world.

Foremost authorities on Science? Must be all them there fancy thinking degrees from that Christian University.

How about “one of the foremost authorities on Nonsense and Babble”

Comment #85319

Posted by Dizzy on March 9, 2006 1:42 PM (e)

Kevin,

1) FSM made my appendages in His/Her/Its image.

2) I use one of those appendages to have sex.

Therefore,

I) FSM has sex.

II) Evolution is wrong.

Wow, that was a blast.

Nonsensical religious rhetoric - it puts the “Fun” in “Fundamentalist!”

Comment #85326

Posted by Bill Gascoyne on March 9, 2006 2:14 PM (e)

“Kent Hovind… speaks over 700 times each year…”

Twice a day? When does he have time to do anything else?

Comment #85329

Posted by Henry J on March 9, 2006 2:17 PM (e)

Re “Twice a day? When does he have time to do anything else?”

If he gets paid for that, what else does he [i]need[/i] to do?

Comment #85347

Posted by wamba on March 9, 2006 3:02 PM (e)

Re “Twice a day? When does he have time to do anything else?”

If he gets paid for that, what else does he need to do?

Well, since he touts himself as an “authority” on something, you’d think there’d be research involved in staying at the top of his field. Like hunting down fire-breathing dinosaurs, or whatever.

Comment #85348

Posted by Bruce Thompson GQ on March 9, 2006 3:04 PM (e)

Henery J asserts: Jurassic Park, the movie, _proved_ that T-Rex’s aren’t fire breathers, anyway.

Like “Inherit the Wind”, “Jurassic Park” is just another of distortion of reality.

Delta Pi Gamma (Scientia et Fermentum)

Comment #85349

Posted by wamba on March 9, 2006 3:06 PM (e)

Jurassic Park, the movie, _proved_ that T-Rex’s aren’t fire breathers, anyway.

It also _proved_ that stampeding herds (flocks?) of Struthiomimus all run in lock-step.

Comment #85350

Posted by Henry J on March 9, 2006 3:06 PM (e)

Re “you’d think there’d be research involved in staying at the top of his field.”

Oh. You’re talking about those pathetic details, then? ;)

Comment #85353

Posted by Henry J on March 9, 2006 3:11 PM (e)

Re “Henery J asserts: Jurassic Park, the movie, _proved_ that T-Rex’s aren’t fire breathers, anyway.”

Actually is was JS Narins that asserted that, not a version of me with an extra vowel added. ;)

Comment #85361

Posted by Bruce Thompson GQ on March 9, 2006 3:32 PM (e)

Henry J, justifiable in his rebuke states: Actually is was JS Narins that asserted that, not a version of me with an extra vowel added. ;)

Sorry, proofff reading errror

Delta Pi Gamma (Scientia et Fermentum)

Comment #85434

Posted by Gorbe on March 9, 2006 6:04 PM (e)

I wonder what the Right Reverend Pat Robertson has to say about this:

Ky. Gov. Has Life-Threatening Blood Clot

Maybe God wanted to remind Gov. Fletcher to give the mind of man ala science more credit than the Gov seems willing to.

Comment #85767

Posted by BWE on March 10, 2006 12:42 PM (e)

In the most dramatic incident since the Sept. 11 attacks, thousands of people fled the Capitol, packed with members of Congress and other dignitaries, when a plane flew into the restricted air space just before the funeral procession for President Ronald Reagan last June.

A communications breakdown led federal officials to believe the plane might be targeting the Capitol, but it turned out to be carrying Kentucky Gov. Ernie Fletcher, who had been cleared to fly into the area.
(AP)

Comment #85769

Posted by BWE on March 10, 2006 12:47 PM (e)

Pat Robertson probably just has Mr Fletcher fill out an Online Prayer Request.

Comment #85853

Posted by Dick on March 10, 2006 8:01 PM (e)

Dear Ernie,

It is awareness of scientific history to acknowledge that at one time it was “commonly understood by 90% of all people” that all things were composed of four elements - air, earth, fire and water. Should we exercise our fundamental and inalienable rights, and subject all of modern physics, chemistry and engineering to re-examination and trial against the dogma of the air, earth, fire and water “theory”?

Our nation was conceived one hundred years before the advances of science led to the theory of evolution - and in the one hundred plus years since Darwin, advances in SCIENCE have led to uncovering OVERWHELMING SCIENTIFIC evidence that evolution is an accurate interpretation of how life came to be, and how it becomes ever more complex and intelligent.

The arguments for “creation” and “intelligent design” are, conversely, thoroughly UNDERWHELMING - and are only continuously advanced by ignorant and/or lying religious fundamentalists such as yourself, as well as opportunistic charlatans who prey upon the ignorance of those more “trained” in religion than in SCIENCE.

Good luck in the next life…if you manage to find it.

Your friend,
Dick

Comment #85854

Posted by Isaac on March 10, 2006 8:05 PM (e)

Dear Ernie,

It is awareness of scientific history to acknowledge that at one time it was “commonly understood by 90% of all people” that all things were composed of four elements - air, earth, fire and water. Should we exercise our fundamental and inalienable rights, and subject all of modern physics, chemistry and engineering to re-examination and trial against the dogma of the air, earth, fire and water “theory”?

Our nation was conceived one hundred years before the advances of science led to the theory of evolution - and in the one hundred plus years since Darwin, advances in SCIENCE have led to uncovering OVERWHELMING SCIENTIFIC evidence that evolution is an accurate interpretation of how life came to be, and how it becomes ever more complex and intelligent.

The arguments for “creation” and “intelligent design” are, conversely, thoroughly UNDERWHELMING - and are only continuously advanced by ignorant and/or lying religious fundamentalists such as yourself, as well as opportunistic charlatans who prey upon the ignorance of those more “trained” in religion than in SCIENCE.

Good luck in the next life…if you manage to find it.

Your friend,
Isaac

Comment #85933

Posted by the pro from dover on March 11, 2006 12:01 PM (e)

I know this is a little late, but this is a reply to Marc S. #84546. As a physician who champions science education at all opportunities I can say that with the exception of specialists in infectious diseases and/or doctors who are athiests and agnostics (approximately the same % as in the general population (12-15%) most physicians either dont care about this issue or are 100% behind ID being taught. Many physicians had only first year biology in college. It really isn’t a prerequisite any more. Most med schools don’t care what your major was and really want you to have more facility in chemistry and physics than biology. When I was in med school (1965-9) the subject of evolution never came up. Med school teaches biology very specifically related to anatomy, physiology, pathology, microbiology, biochemistry and histology pertaining to human beings. Some time is spent on human genetics, (the only potential interface with evolution), but not really with populations. Some specialties may have more involvement with evolution such as infectious diseases, genetic diseases and public health, but the rest really do not. Most med schools want you to get the basic science down quicky to move students into their clinical rotations as soon as is feasable.

Comment #86647

Posted by Trent on March 15, 2006 7:43 PM (e)

Dover,

Thanks for the insight to MDs. I frequently wondered why many MDs do not address the issue, or oppose it.

Everyone else,

Another thing (that has been mentioned on here before); what is it with engineers and ID/creationism? It’s like they don’t get their biological/geological training either. I have many friends that are engineers, they are very smart in a way, but the ID thing isn’t an issue for them, or they are on the ID side. I don’t understand it… I guess they just don’t get the academic training that geologists and biologists do. It really really aggravates me that educated people don’t ask/question the biggest questions in life. The 19Th century existentialist philosophers would be perplexed if they knew we hadn’t progressed any since then. :( I read an article the other day that indicated many more people, not surprisingly, are getting college educations, and the numbers are exponentially growing. Hopefully these people will take a few semesters of science classes, otherwise it won’t matter.

I don’t think people should be able to have a PhD or MD if you believe in ID… lol… It should be a prerequisite.

Comment #86650

Posted by Jim Harrison on March 15, 2006 7:59 PM (e)

With the vast expansion of enrollments, American colleges and universities have become high-level tech schools. This development was probably inevitable since there is no way that so many people could belong to an elite. Hence the apparent decline in both traditional liberal arts values and critical thinking–luxury goods inappropriate for the general public.

Comment #90125

Posted by Von_Brazon on March 28, 2006 2:16 PM (e)

“The United States of America have exhibited, perhaps, the first example of governments erected on the simple principles of nature; and if men are now sufficiently enlightened to disabuse themselves of artifice, imposture, hypocrisy, and superstition, they will consider this event as an era in their history. … It will never be pretended that any persons employed in that service [forming the U.S. government] had interviews with the gods, or were in any degree under the influence of Heaven, more than those at work upon ships or houses, or laboring in merchandise or agriculture; it will forever be acknowledged that these governments were contrived merely by the use of reason and the senses. …Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery… are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind”

A Defense of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, 1787–88__John Adams

Comment #90137

Posted by Von_Brazon on March 28, 2006 2:39 PM (e)

“The United States of America should have a foundation free from the influence of clergy.”

-George Washington

Comment #90434

Posted by Von_Brazon on March 29, 2006 2:17 PM (e)

“Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind.”

Albert Einstein, Famous physicist and Nobel Prize winner.

Comment #107267

Posted by Mary Box on June 21, 2006 6:04 PM (e)

You can’t be 28640 serious?!?