The new Natural History magazine has a great letters section. They did a smack down of Intelligent Design, noting several design flaws in the Human animal, such as the appendix, and lots of folks wrote in to add stupid design flaws of their own. I had never thought about the human eye and it's reversed positioning of the retina and nerve arrangement before. As a half assed designer myself, even I know better than to put the neurotransmittors in the way of the light receptors.....Duh!
The best line was from a reader who lamented the loss of our tail. We only have the vestigal remains to give us grief when we bump our asses on the bike seat, but nothing to help hold that flashlight when we're working on the sink pipes. I can visualize my tail holding my beer while I pocket the white one in a game of eight ball. (That is exactly why I don't hang around in bars, by the way)
Funniest letter was from a guy who was outraged that they were even questioning ID. The writer defined "Science" as knowlege, which is so wrong as to define the Creationist ignorance of Science. Science is not "Knowlege"...Remember this, if you remember nothing else:
Science is not Knowlege...It is the Art of Knowing.
It is the method of determining Truth. It is the process by which we know facts to be facts.
If we know a fact through Science, and it contradicts religious dogma, we should re-examine religious dogma. Ther is no need whatsoever to call for a re-examination of Science because this will happen by definition of Science itself, anyway.
Science wants you to "know".
If by that knowing, your religion is challenged...Well, Science wants you to be able to "Know" the facts. If you need the supernatural, fine. About half of all Doctoral level scientists are religious, by their own definition. They accept the allegory and metaphor of religious writings. Nearly all Scientists have strong ethical standards...philisophical boundaries that govern their lives...Even the a-theists among the scientific community.
A-theism does not mean that they "believe" there is no god, by the way. It means they go about their day without expecting the intereaction or interference of the supernatural. It means that scientists do not put god in too small a box, to be opened and entreated when convenient. No...It means that god is to be placed in the "I don't know (and I don't think anybody else does either) file, awaiting further factual evidence. In the mean time, we (you and I) will just have to get along and plan for the future as if there really will be one.
And...There you have the one thing I, personally, believe in....A Future!
How about we get together and make it the best one we can, how 'bout it?
I watched a bit of Albert Gonzales' testimony before Congress. He's the Attorney General and is supposed to represent the interests of "The People" but he is acting more like the White House Attorney than anything else. His testimony was so transparent, and frankly stupid, that even Fox News must have had a time finding some sound bite that made a favorable case for warrantless wiretapping.
Since the Attorney General was speaking in tounges, I have found a translator who is fluent in the Washington Bullshittese dialect to help us out: