Thursday, December 02, 2004

Tiny's Readers, Help me understand!

I did my first post yesterday that included AIDS and gays in the topic...wow, a flood of comments? So what's up with that? Clearly I have some readers that are to the left of me on some topics and yet nobody felt strongly about "And Yet More Insanity"? Those of you who worry about home land security efforts and how it could affect civil liberties, our treatment of prisoners of war, or profiling in law enforcement, blah, blah....but are you fine with our education system rewriting or suppressing our very own history? What the &*#$ gives?

6 comments:

Rico said...

Don't be weirded out Tiny. You don't know and I don't know you. I found your blog randomly. Anyways, I am glad that you express your opinions openly. It's quite refreshing actually. However, not only gay men get AIDS and no one ever wants that Anally Injected Death Serum.

Anonymous said...

Sorry Tiny. I was working most of today so I had limited time to read your blog. Not many of us have the luxury to make blog postings all day long. You must be rich!

MOV said...

Tiny,
Just because you don't get a response to EVERY single posting doesn't mean we don't care about those issues. Anyway, to address your question about me being fine with the rewriting of history, I definitely am against it. If religious references have historical significance, such as God in the Declaration of Independence, it should be allowed in the classroom. Why? Because to understand the declaration, it's important to under the social context in which it was written. The guys that wrote it obviously believed in God and were invoked references to Him for a reason. And to study how that affected the resulting document is definitely important.
But you fail to cite examples of how this can go in the other direction. Need I mention all the Biology textbooks that have disclaimers about how evolution is only a theory, and not a fact? And that creationism can be just as valid of an explanation? Well duh, the theory of gravity is just that, only a theory - but we don't teach our children that they can assume Copernicus was just giving a different interpretation, and that it's equally valid to assume the earth is the center of the universe. But an even more telling example is this:
http://www.time.com/time/columnist/jaroff/article/0,9565,783829,00.html

Apparently directives from the Bush administration are ordering park rangers in the grand canyon to stop telling people how it was formed over millions of years, because too many visitors who believe the world is only 6000 years old, were getting offended by this blasphemous talk. Oh yeah, and now the national park bookstores have to carry books which explain how the canyon was formed during Noah's flood - the creationist version of things. I can only shake my head in shame...

Tiny said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Tiny said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Tiny said...

Hi all, just wanted to see your thoughts on this issue so asked...thanks. And yes we are all rich here in s.valley! :)

Mov....the park thing is bogus....however I doubt Bush himself suggested/approved such a thing. Your examples of what people believe fact or theory doesn't really work for me. 20-ish years ago I was a junior on my way to a BS in mathematics (I dropped out to take a job as an computer design engineer) and also studied astronomy a bit. Most astronomical theories are based on direct observation and/or mathematical calculations. But because we can't obtain truly empirical data to prove them they are called theories. The label isn't really correct though....most who study higher math (and astronomy) believe based on their understanding of how the physical universe follows a mathematical formula don't need that ultimate proof. Understanding the science behind say something as simple as determining distance with triangulation I fully believe my calculated result and don't need to verify it. Copernicus who is best known for the theory that the sun lies near the center of the universe and that the earth spins once on its axis daily as it revolves around the sun relied on observation and math. He lived with a mathmatician who was credited with stimulating his interest in astronomy.

Observation and math based proofs are very different from the belief in a god. Religion, as I see it, is mostly based on questionable documents, questionable history, folkore and your being brainwashed by your parents insistance as a youth that you participate in their faith. And in the end scientific proof doesn't exist proving any deity worshiped on earth today...faith is what gets people by.

Ok, a bit long and maybe I drifted a bit...but it doesn't take much understanding of science to believe in carbon dating, partical half life, blah, blah to know (not exactly, but also not theory) the earth is millions/billions of years old. Some have overly blind faith when they believe in things so easily proven false.