Slashdot Mirror


The Decline of Science and Technology in America

puke76 writes "There's a good article over on the BBC about the decline of science and technology in the U.S.. Vint Cerf and others are going on record to voice their concerns about the current administrations recipe for 'irrelevance and decline.' Scientists are increasingly concerned about the White House's pandering to the religious right at science's expense. From the article: 'radically we have moved away from regulation based on professional analysis of scientific data ...to regulation controlled by the White House and driven by political considerations.'"

34 of 1,347 comments (clear)

  1. America has a choice.. by Ckwop · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's a saying that I hear a lot of religious people say: "You reap what you sow". Ironic then that in this case America gets precisely what it sows. You teach kids that ID is science and you get crappy scientists. You cut the percentage of GDP spent on RND and you get less nobel prize winners. You ignore the science of economics and you end up with a huge current account deficit which will take a decade to repay. You ignore the *fact* that human produced carbon dioxide is warming the earth and you wreck your environment just in time for your grandchildren.

    America is at a cross-roads of sorts. It can choose to be the The Christian Republic of America or the United States of America. It seems as time goes on these options are becoming more and more mutually exclusive. The religious fanatics are intent on replacing the textbook with the Bible. The atheist fanatics (yes they do exist) are intent on removing any shred of religion from public life.

    The next fifty years are going to be interesting. Will the US continue to train world class scientists and be a home for the creative? Or will the US sink in to irrevelence through placing religious dogma before pragmatism.

    The condom policy in Africa makes me think the latter rather than the former.

    Simon.

    1. Re:America has a choice.. by duffbeer703 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The US will be irrelevant. US dominance is based on money, and we are exporting money to the Near and Far East at a record clip.

      How long could our high tech army, navy and air force equipment stay operational if the Chinese refused to export any electronics?

      --
      Conformity is the jailer of freedom and enemy of growth. -JFK
    2. Re:America has a choice.. by McDutchie · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Parent is insightful, not flamebait. For a good example of what happens when science and enlightenment are replaced by theology and repression, just look at the Middle East. The Arab world was the cornerstone of world civilization in the Middle Ages -- they invented the zero, we still use Arabic digits, they were astronomers and mathematicians, and they initiated the Renaissance by preserving ancient Greek and Roman writings. But they let all that slip and became mostly a bunch of backward theocracies instead. America is next if it continues on this road.

    3. Re:America has a choice.. by Quill_28 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What I find intersting in your post in that America is at a crossroads to choose which way to go.

      What do you think America has been that last 200 years? Christian-Judism has always had a strong influence on America the influence is less and les each year.

      Do you think the ten commandants were recently put up in court houses? Do you think pray in school is a recent thing.

      Do you the Bibles being taken out of school is a recent thing?

      When was the Conressional minister put in place?

      And yet somehow over the last 200 years America was at the fore front of science and technology.

      Take any shred of religion out of the government, but don't tell me our forefathers or constitution says it should be that way.

    4. Re:America has a choice.. by On+Lawn · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Blame Canada, or religion. Which ever your bogeyman of the day is.

      You teach kids that ID is science and you get crappy scientists.

      Where is ID being taught?

      Private Catholic schools (for instance) have higher aptitude scores for math and science. Public schools do not teach ID.

      The state of public schools in America can hardly be blamed on religion since religion plays an infinitesimal part of the curriculum. Teaching to the lowest common denominator along with a general malaise in interest in science among kids is a much larger part of the determination of the curriculum.

    5. Re:America has a choice.. by badasscat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      America is at a cross-roads of sorts. It can choose to be the The Christian Republic of America or the United States of America.

      Oh blah blah blah. People say this every generation, because they don't realize people have said it every generation. America is always at some kind of crossroads. And you know what? It usually comes out pretty okay.

      The political pendulum swings back and forth. Always has. But this country has never been particularly liberal, except maybe for a brief period in the late 1960's and early 1970's that was mainly a reaction to the Vietnam War (and the same thing may happen again in a few years). People talk about how even Democrats today are basically conservatives - well, who the hell do you think dropped the atom bomb on Japan? It wasn't a Republican.

      The point being, this is a conservative country. Get used to it. It's always been that way, going back to its founding - remember, this country exists because people needed somewhere to go to practice their religion. The freedom to not practice religion was added later.

      This is not to say I share this view - on most issues (not all), I'm about as liberal as it gets in this country. But I've been around long enough to see several swings of the pendulum, to live through several wars, and to know that nothing that's going on right now is really all that unusual in the grand scheme of things. Sure, if you take a 10 year view, things aren't so hot right now for us liberals and scientific thinkers. Maybe even with a 50 year view we'd be at or near a low point. But those of us who lived through Vietnam (and I was young, but I do remember it) and the aftermath know how bad things can really get in terms of ideology, the economy, and yes, even science. This that we're in now, this is nothing. A blip on the radar.

      So, before you come up with these dramatic proclamations about how America's at a "crossroads" and you predict we'll take the wrong path and eventually fade into irrelevance, remember all the times people before you said those exact same things, and remember how dumb they sounded even five years later.

      America is simply doing what it always does, going through the motions of trying to find a balance of values that appeals to its people. Those values may not be your values, but they're really no different than ever. It's a balance that can never truly be attained, though, so you will see things shift back and forth periodically. We are just at the extreme edge of one of those shifts right now, but from a historical viewpoint I really don't see that this is anything unusual.

    6. Re:America has a choice.. by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Anyhow, what exactly would be wrong with a Christian republic?"

      You've got to be fucking kidding me.

    7. Re:America has a choice.. by MightyMartian · · Score: 5, Insightful
      Take any shred of religion out of the government, but don't tell me our forefathers or constitution says it should be that way.

      The Founding Fathers seemed to think differently:

      "[When] the [Virginia] bill for establishing religious freedom ... was finally passed, ... a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word "Jesus Christ," so that it should read "a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion." The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend within the mantle of its protection the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo and infidel of every denomination."
      Thomas Jefferson, Autobiography, 1821.

      "The clergy, by getting themselves established by law, and ingrafted into the machine of government, have been a very formidable engine against the civil and religious rights of man. They are still so in many countries and even in some of these United States. Even in 1783, we doubted the stability of our recent measures for reducing them to the footing of other useful callings. It now appears that our means were effectual."
      Thomas Jefferson, 1800

      "During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution."
      James Madison, 1785

      "As I have now given you my reasons for believing that the Bible is not the Word of God, that it is a falsehood, I have a right to ask you your reasons for believing the contrary; but I know you can give me none, except that you were educated to believe the Bible; and as the Turks give the same reason for believing the Koran, it is evident that education makes all the difference, and that reason and truth have nothing to do in the case. You believe in the Bible from the accident of birth, and the Turks believe in the Koran from the same accident, and each calls the other infidel. But leaving the prejudice of education out of the case, the unprejudiced truth is, that all are infidels who believe falsely of God, whether they draw their creed from the Bible, or from the Koran, from the Old Testament, or from the New."
      "It is often said in the Bible that God spake unto Moses, but how do you know that God spake unto Moses? Because, you will say, the Bible says so. The Koran says, that God spake unto Mahomet, do you believe that too? No. Why not? Because, you will say, you do not believe it; and so because you do, and because you don't is all the reason you can give for believing or disbelieving except that you will say that Mahomet was an impostor. And how do you know Moses was not an impostor?"
      Thomas Paine, 1797

      "The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion."
      George Washington, Treaty of Tripoli

      You know what's missing from American education besides a good grounding in the sciences? Even the tiniest bit of knowledge as to the opinions, beliefs and motives of the Founding Fathers, who must stand as being the most misunderstood men in history.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    8. Re:America has a choice.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Take any shred of religion out of the government, but don't tell me our forefathers or constitution says it should be that way.

      Considering the large number of Atheists and Deists that were amoung their ranks, I'd say the only reason they DIDN'T say it should be that way was because it wasn't a popular opinion. It still isn't.

      Of the brightest minds I've come upon, almost all have been Atheists, Agnostic, or Deist. Few would admit it publically, however, in fear of creating enemies in the religious fanatics that abound.

      In our line of work, that kind of tension in the work place is very dangerous.

      It's kind of sad when you're smarter, nicer, more honest, and better educated than the many people around you, yet you have to conceal your true beliefs out of fear of persecution.

      The Constitution grants us the freedom to believe (or NOT) as we choose. Why then is it that despite your claims that the religious influence is shrinking that it becomes more and more difficult (and more dangerous) to openly proclaim one's Atheism?

      When our government takes actions influenced by religious beliefs they are essentially denying the Athiests their rights. Not imposing those beliefs on the masses does not hinder one's right to worship. Figure it out. There is only one constitutionally correct way to handle this, religious people just don't care about anyone else's rights but their own. Somewhat ironic, I would say.

      Posting AC for obvious reasons...

    9. Re:America has a choice.. by bushidocoder · · Score: 5, Insightful
      I think its shortsighted to blame religion on these cultural changes, when religion has been a critical part of the American culture since its inception. In fact, one could overtrivialize and look at the percentage of Americans who go to church now, compare it to fifty years ago, and say that the decline of religion in America is causing our recent problems - but of course, that's not the case either.

      The problem has nothing to do with religion - its about lowered standards of quality in American culture. Does the religious right let Bush get away with anything he wants? Sure. But religion only happens to fit into the model because that's Bush's demographic. Nixon's demographic let him get away with anything he wanted, just like Clinton's, Reagan's and Johnson's did. Voters rarely turn on the guy they put into office. Bad Presidents always reflect poorly on the individuals who support them, but that doesn't mean that the ideas that bind the demographic are neccesarily invalid simply for that reason.

      Stem cell research is a relgious / science overlap. Intelligent Design is a ridiculous idea from a very very small minority in Kansas. Past that, I don't see much overlap from religion in science in America. Sure, the conservative party is playing down environmental research, but that has nothing to do with religion - that's a culture of corporate profits interfering with science.

      You blame religion for the decrease in American science - I blame the media. I blame CNN for undercovering important issues, and spending two weeks on a runaway bride. I blame Disney for making a movie about a girl who is interested in science and math and is unpopular until she decides to drop it all and become an ice skater. I blame television networks that make 10,000 reality tv shows and 5,000 Ally McBeal spinoffs for every one Numbers or... well, I can't think of another show I like on network tv. How about the fact that TLC found it was much more profitable to stop showing documentaries and focus on home decorating shows? I also blame underfunded schools and a corporate culture that has dropped R&D in favor of easier methods of reducing profits.

      Simply blaming religion is insulting to those of us who are thoughtfully religious, and worse than that, its wrong.

    10. Re:America has a choice.. by mcc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Private Catholic schools (for instance) have higher aptitude scores for math and science.

      Well, this is a good sign, since private Catholic schools teach the theory of evolution.

    11. Re:America has a choice.. by Marcus+Porcius+Cato · · Score: 4, Insightful

      This sort of hyperbole is just infuriating. Yes, America is having a crisis in the technical fields, but blaming it on Bush is idiocy.

      Let's look at history. Arguably, the era experiencing the greatest innovations in science and technology was from the mid 17th century to the middle of the 19th. You've got Newton and Liebniz and Hooke and all those other Royal Society guys rewriting every bit of our knowledge of how the world works -- and doing so under the authority of a state and church with far, far more control then the US government has ever had.

      The second greatest technical period is probably from WWII through the 1960s in America -- especially the 1950s when we developed and perfected nuclear power, jet aircraft, rocketry, computers, etc; and all in a far more controlled society. Heck, the 50s US has become the cliche of an uptight, religous, puritanical society. Yet we grew by leaps and bounds.

      Besides, the whole "intelligent design" stuff, where it affects anything it affects pure science. And pure science very rarly is the driver of much of anything. Where the technical fields impact our lives is through engineering. It's making science practical. And that's something that the evolution vs ID really has no impact on.

      But engineering really is in dire, dire straits in this country, but for completely differnt (almost opposite) reasons. Primarily, in my mind, because of the stiffling of innovation because of government regulation and excessive lawsuits. When you codify everything, mandate everything, and ban everything else then there is no room to innovate and do new things. It's the Democrats and their state-controlled regulatory state that has stiffled the technical fields, not the religious right.

      --
      Specialization is for Insects
    12. Re:America has a choice.. by d34thm0nk3y · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There is no conflict between the two sets of quotes. It is possible to have a belief yet not wish to enforce it through the threat of violence (the only force a government actually controls).

    13. Re:America has a choice.. by Mauz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I work with 45 people from around the world and with the exception of three people, all have Masters or higher education. What is interesting is that about 53% of us were educated in church run schools up through the 12th (or equivalent) grade. From my limited sample, I don't think that religion backed education is a bad thing. Nor do I think that personal moral behavior based on the tennats of a relgion are bad.

      However, I think the problem is when a religious institution no longer concerns itself with helping people but decides that it should dictate to people that we are in trouble. I'll go so far as to apply this to all systems of belief that fall into the religious catagory. If the system of belief must protect itself by demanding that people act in a certain way and seek the power of the government to enforce that behavior, that system of belief should be burned at the stake.

      But then, what do I know. I was raised a conservative Christian, but God and I have our doubts about each other.

    14. Re:America has a choice.. by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This, not Christianity, is the American religious cult. The belief that the Founding Fathers (capitalized of course) were gods and that every litle thing they said actually matters today in a world that they couldn't possibly understand. Different factions claiming that their group, and no other, really understood what they meant. The constant recourse to original intentions in the modern high tech world as if the acquired wisdom and knowledge of the intervening 200 years was completely irrelevant. The repeated quotations about freedom from slaveholders and middle class landholders whose main care was for their own financial interests and the interests of their social class. And the complete inability to step out of this groupthink so that both conservatives and radicals are almost completely incapable of imagining anything written by a Founding Father as anything other than axiomatic truth.

      Not that I'm 100% negative about this religion. There is no doubt that the US has been economically successful as a result and that the liberties of Americans are at least on a par with some European countries.

      --
      Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
    15. Re:America has a choice.. by ppanon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Post-war Algeria, Argentina, Cambodia, Iran (Shah reign and now on a smaller scale), Nicaragua (Somoza dictatorship), Rwanda, Sudan (Darfur). In each of these, there was raping and murdering in the thousands or hundreds of thousands, if not always under the direct control of the state then at least with its encouragement or tacit agreement. None of these nations ever got rated as axis of evil material when those atrocities were committed.

      "Developing" foreign states become axis of evil material when they have something the U.S. wants or fears (nukes in N Korea) and the puppet governments get uppity and refuse to take their marching orders. For another example, remember Manuel Noriega in Panama. The historical pattern is clear and it is you who need to grow up and realize how you are being manipulated through your morals and ideals. I'm not saying those morals and ideas aren't valid or worth pursuing, just that you're fooling yourself if you think those are the real reasons behind US foreign policy rather than a pretext useful in manufacturing domestic consent.

      --
      Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
  2. Brainwashed! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Our forefathers came to America for freedom of religion, speech, etc and now our own religious citizens are shoving it down everyone else's throat. Christians need to keep their religious beliefs OUT of whitehouse.

    The sad thing is many of these christian fanatics are uneducated, Rush Limbaugh/ Bill O'Reilly products (sculpted zombies) who's life doesn't stray further than Wal-Mart.

  3. Science's Vitality by apsmith · · Score: 5, Insightful
    From the article, on a lab in Britain after WWII:

    they were concerned the government did not fully appreciate that science
    in peace was as vital as science in war.


    I think this is a key point. And not just public support for science and government funding, but the motivation of young people going into the field is critically important to whether or not scientific effort actually makes a difference in the real world. Are there real world problems (like the problems that led to development of
    radar and computing in WWII, or the needs of cold war espionage and besting the Soviets post-Sputnik) that captivate people's attention? If the critical needs are there, that ensures both public support, government funding, and highly motivated researchers bringing real advances.

    And we do have critical needs for R&D work right now - renewable energy probably most critical. Developing things further in space is a challenge that needs our best efforts now too. But our government and media, and even places reflective of geek opinion like slashdot, spend a lot of effort downplaying the seriousness of problems like oil depletion and
    global warming. People can't be motivated to do anything about it if most of the country thinks it's not really a problem at all.
    --

    Energy: time to change the picture.

  4. How can it not decline? by saskboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First off it's easy to decline when you're the world leader to begin with. Unfortunately in an age where the Internet is taking over, and unlimited possibilities for learning present themselves, the protectionists in the Bush administration are having their way with Americans. What kind of an insane world leader would suggest that we have to fight religious extremists, and then in the next breath insists that he supports Christian ideology being taught in the 21st Century science classroom?

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
  5. Corporations by pete6677 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Corporations are more to blame for the decline of science than the government. Most industrial development is ultimately driven by companies looking to make money on new technologies. Lately, most companies have been gutting research budgets in favor of more short term profits (ie. HP). Look at most job postings, how many both require an advanced degree and are willing to pay enough to hire someone? Most companies aren't interested. Until corporate America can look past next quarter's numbers, R&D will not really exist in the U.S. anymore.

  6. Fix the delusions by Bob3141592 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yet Americans continue to think that they are automatically number one in everything. The man on the street still believes that we Americans are the smartest, strongest, and most capable people in the world. Mostly that's a delusion supported by ignorance, as the typical American knows very little about what's going on in the world outside of the US.

    Certainly any American is capable of being the best, and is more likely to acheive that given good opportunities and education, and a culture that values whatever endeavor they choose. For science and technology, that's just not valued much by our culture. Americans like entertainment and instant gratification, and think the more of that they have the better they will be.

    I fear for our future.

    --
    In theory, there's no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is.
  7. Get off the political troll.. by boomgopher · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Young Americans are opting for better paid law and medicine over science and engineering and visa restrictions on bright foreign students further dilute the talent pool"

    Well, the more we blame this situation on religious/anti-religous bugaboos and other flamefests, and not on THE WAY WE RAISE OUR KIDS nothing will ever change.

    How many of you (or your wives for that matter) get on their childs teacher's case for being "too hard on my kid", "they just aren't good at math" etc. and not the other way around?

    Why do you think Asians kick so much ass in the sciences and tech fields? Because they believe in hard work and challenge their kids (granted, maybe too much sometimes)



    --
    Your hybrid is not saving the environment. Its purpose is to make you feel good about buying something.
    1. Re:Get off the political troll.. by Coryoth · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How many of you (or your wives for that matter) get on their childs teacher's case for being "too hard on my kid", "they just aren't good at math" etc. and not the other way around?

      It's a deep cultural thing though. I am a mathematician and I can't tell you how many time I've had a conversation that went

      Person: So what do you do?
      Me: I'm a mathematcian.
      Person: Oh, I was never any good at math in school.

      And that last point is always said with almost an air of superiority, like there's an underlying "I didn't do well at math and I'm successful, why did you waste your time?" - often enough people will actually come out and say that too. I'm sure any other mathematicians here on Slashdot can testify to much the same thing. There is a deep deated cultural belief that mathematics isn't important - is it any suprise teachers and parents pass that attitude on to their kids?

      Jedidiah.

  8. Maybe more researchers need to take up golf by _am99_ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Bush neoconservatives believe that their destiny is to mold the world as they see fit, and they don't care what they have to do or say to fulfill that goal. If that means lying about WMD, killing civilians, or sacrificing military personnel, then so be it. It is all for the greater good.

    So don't expect them to give a crap about the cost to science by doing what the religous right demands, cause they need them to be in power in the first place.

    Now if they could find a way to launder money out of R&D, like the defense, pharma, or oil industries, then you might get somewhere.

    Maybe some R&D project managers need to take
    Jack Abramoff or Tom DeLay out for a few rounds of golf...

  9. Irony by overshoot · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It continues to amuse me that the people who complain most about how few Americans are going into science and engineering are the ones who went into management, law, and politics.

    If not that, they ended up running universities where their business depends on having more science students to

    • provide cash to keep the gravy train rolling, and
    • work as grad students teaching the others so that the faculty doesn't have to

    Then they get stressed out that my kids look around at their father and his cow-orkers stressing over whose job is the next to vanish. They look at the management, lawyers, and politicians getting wealthier and more powerful every year, and shock! they decide not to go into tech.

    Here's the paradox: they want the best and brightest to make life decisions that they themselves saw as foolish.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  10. Re:Again by Manchot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm not sure that you understand what bias is. Just because Slashdot often paints Bush in a negative light when it comes to science-related issues, it doesn't mean that there's a bias. Face it, there's not much you can say that's positive about this administration's attitude towards science, and if the /. editors were to balance out all of the negative Bush-related science articles with positive ones, that would be extremely biased in Bush's favor. (In fact, that is the essence of what is wrong with Fox News.)

  11. I'm a Christian, and this scares me to death by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a Christian, and an amateur scientist (though not a Christian Scientist) I am increasingly disturbed by an administration that ignores whole chunks of the Bible (namely, nearly every word of Christ) in favor of pandering to a small and crazy fringe group who wants an untenable literal interpretation.

    I am disturbed as a a scientist because it's holding us back, and educating our kids with BS, and I'm disturbed as a Christian because this is not Christianity, at least not of the mainstream portion. And most Christians are too afraid to stand up and say anything at the wholesale hijacking of their faith. (I wonder if this is how Muslims feel) Please, slashdotters, don't paint with a broad brush Christians as being like.....this.......

    The "meat" of Christian teachings are _not_ incompatible with evolution, the big bang, modern society in general, etc, etc.

    Voted for Bush the first time around, voted libertarian on try number 2.

  12. Choice by simpl3x · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Many of the people who came to America were not religious conservatives, but religious liberals. The quakers, for example, were prosecuted for their views on organized religion. See this link for example. Your comments are exactly what the religious right would have us believe, that religion should be the core of our government, when in fact it was founded by people who got the harsh edge of that stick. The basis of our government is freedom of religion, not freedom to choose a state religion.

    I stay out of peoples bedrooms and churchs, for the very reason that I don't want others in mine!

  13. Not actually familiar with history, are you? by mcc · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Actually no, 200 years ago Christianity in America was absolutely nowhere near as strong as it is today. The modern evangelical American Christian movement mostly stems from the Second Great Awakening of the 1810-1820s or so; it's been getting stronger since then but didn't have much of any presence before 200 years ago. Meanwhile Christianity as a force directly in politics-- that is, Christianity acting politically in its own interest, as opposed to politicians or political movements who incidentally happen to be Christian or have Christian supporters-- is an even more recent development, one that's really even hard to identify existing in anything even remotely like the form it takes today before the 1970s or so.

    What you are saying, that America has always been a Christian nation the way it is today, is a nice little fairy tale, but it simply isn't true. Members of the Christian political movement that have hijacked America's politics in the last 45 years try to pretend that the spot they hold is their divine right and that they have always held it, that oceania has always been at war with eurasia, but the fact is a political member of the SBC stranded 200 years ago would be nothing but a ranting street preacher. Drop them 225 years ago among the deist-packed "founding fathers" that people are always trying to lay claim to, and they'd be even worse off...

    Take any shred of religion out of the government, but don't tell me our forefathers or constitution says it should be that way.

    Our "forefathers" and the constitutional law they wrote say it should be that way, in very specific terms:
    Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion
  14. Jefferson said the Bible was a dungheap by Jonathan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Look it up. Honestly, *none* of the founding fathers were Christians. At best they were "deists", which is really a polite way to say "atheists", because deists believe that while a god exists, it does nothing and everything works by natural law just as if no god existed.

  15. Re:LOL @ Joe Wilson by frank_adrian314159 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Sorry, but all those mean things that the Republicans said about Joe Wilson and his wife were true.

    Even if the things the Republicans said *were* true (something I dispute), did it justify breaking the law? Did it justify the risking of the lives of other operatives and associates that worked for and with the Brewster-Jennings cover organization? Or is it OK to break the law in the name of political expediancy if you are a Republican administration official? What a fscking moron.

    --
    That is all.
  16. This prize bollocks by Space+cowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So, I took a look at the website you've been touting on several posts. There's a book by Stuart Kauffman "The Origins Of Order", which clearly satisfies the requirements of the prize. Since other titles of Prof. Kauffman are listed, I can't see how they could have missed that one...

    TOOO shows how auto-catalytism of peptides (tiny tiny molecules, 2 amino-acids or more, occur in non-living natural form etc.) could have formed the primeval building blocks. He provides a testable model for it. The test works. He uses the results to validate his model and then demonstrates the implications of those results.

    One of the fundamental theses within TOOO is that of interconnection and interaction. A massive neural network without any connectivity is completely useless, make it highly connected and you end up with a brain. The same principles can apply to the evolution of life itself - interaction is the key, not any static properties.

    TOOO then also addresses the limits that evolution must work within, and how even the simplest of these sets of peptides can become complex and integrated. He shows that order and chaos can be harnessed by evolution in a similar fashion to mutation and sex. He shows these are complementary approaches.

    So why hasn't he won your prize ?

    As for Logically, God exists and life has meaning, or He doesn't and it does not. There is no in-between for a binary condition., well that's not a binary condition (it's total bollocks as well, but leaving that to one side...)

    There are four states for any two binary orthogonal values A and B, they are {A,B}, {A,!B}, {!A,B}, {!A,!B}. The only case your assertion holds is in the degenerate case where A=B (at which point A and B are not orthogonal)

    For example, I do not believe in god (so god does not exist, at least for me), but my life has meaning to me.

    Simon.

    --
    Physicists get Hadrons!
  17. Much as it would please me to put the blame on ... by constantnormal · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... Dubya's crowd, I'm afraid this has been going on for much longer...

    Back in the 50's and 60's there were research organizations throughout corporate America -- even a number of basic research departments (yes, that's right -- BASIC research, not just APPLIED research).

    And corporate America had at least one eye focused on the big picture, making plans beyond the next quarter and being more concerned about the welfare of the company than their bonuses and severance packages.

    Over the intervening years, we have seen not only basic, but applied research departments closed down in all but the largest companies. Emphasis has shifted to the current quarter (never mind the next quarter, we'll deal with it next quarter).

    All that Dubya can take credit for is using the Religious Right to pummel the weakened science establishment. And the most likely reason he has chosen to attack the scientific establishment is that they ARE weakened and do not represent any sort of political (or other) power in contemporary society. Dubya picks his victims well.

    The fault is in our society, and its view of science. Why we belittle the importance of science, and ignore the methodology of the scientific method, I know not, but it is manifested in the declining fraction of college and university science graduates for a much longer time than Dubya has been a factor.

    Dubya is more the symptom of the problem than the cause.

  18. The US government never had morals by hummassa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    at least, not when it concerned foreign citizens.
    in Chile and here in Brasil the CIA helped stage military coups (74 and 64 respectively) transforming what where democratic republics in bloody, raping/murdering dictatorships.
    As Deep Throat once said, "follow the money".

    --
    It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048