You have heard about the need for the separation of church and state. What about the separation of science and state?
But science is neutral, we are told. Suuuuure it is.
Scientists are impartial searchers of truth. Suuuuure they are.
The space program above earth’s gravity is a Darwinist boondoggle. The money spent by the government does not pay a positive rate of return, unless you are a Darwinist who thinks life on Mars or in a nearby solar system will prove that life is not unique, mankind is not unique, Jesus is not unique, and therefore Darwinists will not go to hell. They operate in terms of a scientific formula: Life in outer space = there is no hell.
They spend our tax dollars to prove this. They force Christians to pay for it. It’s all purely scientific, you understand. No hidden agendas here. The public overwhelmingly wants NASA’s zero-payoff boondoggles to go on, we are assured. The voters have demanded that they be taxed to pay astronomers and technicians career wages at above-market rates to pursue the search for life in outer space.
Read More at lewrockwell.com . By Gary North.
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
Loading ...
I don’t know why there is this divide between religious and non-religious people. I am a conservative and follow many ideals of conservatism, but, I am not a religious person. I am more spiritual than religious, I have no problems with Christians displaying Christmas scenes or the display of the cross and whatever has been a part of out society for the past three hundred years.
I think this is where hard core republican loose some of their support, if you are atheist or agnostic you don’t fit in. I have great respect for people of all faiths and do not mock any. Science and religion can coexist, even the catholic church has recognized that life may exist elsewhere in the universe.
re: “But science is neutral, we are told. Suuuuure it is.
Scientists are impartial searchers of truth. Suuuuure they are.
The space program above earth’s gravity is a Darwinist boondoggle. The money spent by the government does not pay a positive rate of return, unless you are a Darwinist who thinks life on Mars or in a nearby solar system will prove that life is not unique, mankind is not unique…..”
I ended the excerpt at that point, before going into the author’s conclusions about Christianity being one of the targets of all this. I DO agree with that conclusion. But I think it might be more helpful to help scientists recognize their lack of objectivity BEFORE you move the conversation into theology. Why? Because once you let them know that your intention is to address their spiritual beliefs, a lot of them will simply go, “CLICK!” and the sound will be turned off. But if you can address their SUPPOSED objectivity as scientists, and then show them how they are being totally unscientific in their approach to certain things, THEN you can hopefully broach the question of WHY are you abandoning scientific objectivity? And hopefully, an honest discussion of that will open some doors into understanding their true motivation.
Along this same line, I wrote a letter to the editor of Aviation Week & Space Technology just over nine years ago — which shows that this is NOT a new issue for NASA or the scientific community. And they actually published it! It reads:
************************************************************************************
I found it strange that your article on the British Beagle-2 (AW&ST, Dec. 1, p57) stated that the Mars lander carried with it “the hopes for what would be an extraordinary gift to humanity — the discovery of life signatures on another planet.” From a scientific standpoint, isn¹t it ill advised to have such a vested interest in a specific outcome from scientific exploration? Shouldn¹t our goal to be to discover truth — whatever it may turn out to be — rather than to find things that support “truth” as we want it to be? History is replete with examples of scientists and engineers misinterpreting data because they wanted things to turn out a certain way (as occurred in the two shuttle accidents.) I am afraid that there may be philosophical or even theological factors that cause some to desire certain results from these types of interplanetary ventures. Any belief system, if valid, has nothing to fear from truth. Whether we are pursuing pure science, or are sending probes to the ends of the universe, we must avoid the temptation to try to steer results in a certain direction. To do so slows the development of knowledge and can often lead to disaster.
[[[ (Obama) Your Tax Dollars At Work ---- Yup... every time Air Force flies out with Obama on board. Think how many mouths that would feed..... How many houses that would buy.... How many less on Food Stamps... How many Emergency Rooms/Hospitals wouldn't fold... $181,757 per HOUR -- not PER TRIP... but per HOUR !!!!....... Does he care... are you kidding me? It's not HIS money... it's YOUR money he's flying with... All you suckers who voted for him... ought to be ashamed.