Slashdot Mirror
Oklahoma, Vatican Take Opposite Tacks On Evolution
nizcolas writes "Notable evolutionary biologist, author, and speaker Richard Dawkins was recently invited to speak on the campus of the University of Oklahoma as part of the school's celebration of Charles Darwin. However, Oklahoma lawmakers are working to silence Dawkins with the passage of House Bill 1015 (RTF), which reads in part: '... the University of Oklahoma ... has invited as a public speaker on campus, Richard Dawkins of Oxford University, whose published opinions, as represented in his 2006 book "The God Delusion," and public statements on the theory of evolution demonstrate an intolerance for cultural diversity and diversity of thinking and are views that are not shared and are not representative of the thinking of a majority of the citizens of Oklahoma ...'" Pending legal action, Dawkins is set to speak tonight at 7 pm. (Luckily, we no longer live in the era of Bertrand Russell's court-ordered dismissal on moral grounds from the College of the City of New York.) And reader thms sends word of the Vatican's Darwin conference (program): "The conference, marking the 150th anniversary of the publication of "The Origin of Species," has been criticized by advocates of Creationism or Intelligent Design for not inviting them. The Muslim creationist Harun Yahya, most famous for his Atlas of Creation, also complained about not being invited."
Celebrating cultural diversity? You've got to be fucking kidding me.
Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
Evolution or no evolution, I think Dawkins is unlikely to speak at the Vatican any time soon. His being an atheist and an advocate for atheism is the main reason. They'd sooner invite Lucifer; at least he believes in God.
Really, what do you expect from the Oklahoma legislature anyway -- they're all descended from a bunch of apes anyway.
Indeed. Such intolerance for "diversity in thinking" could quickly lead us down the slippery slope to fact-based reasoning. This would be devastating to many a philosophy, religion, stereotype, and political stance. Must. Stop. Use. of. Scientific. Method. Yesterday.
Everyone knows we came here after we destroyed Mars.
"I guess I'm gonna fade into Bolivian."
Can of worms? With the Vatican, we get a Diet of Worms!
Ok, assuming that his Flying Spaghettiness Herself didn't just create the Universe 30 seconds ago with our memories of anything beyond that being created as well... Either that or we are "memories" in the FSM and She has been too lazy to create the Universe yet. Yeah, or something like that. But anyway!, Consider Evolution: all it says is things that change over time tend to change like "this" whether you're talking about a particular species or a mountain-range. Think of the moment our Universe first condensed from pure energy. This was "Eden", a purity of representation - just hydrogen which went on to fuel the first stars and the fusion reactions within them later on created the "crusty" stuff in the Universe: all the other elements. Everything you can see except hydrogen was once in a star. Evolution is a selection process, according to the laws of our Universe's constants some things will be more reproductive than others and the same constants allow for lower energy-states to create higher-ones with there always being a little net energy that slipped through the molecules radiating off everything. The Evolution of our Universe has taken thirteen billion years to produce us. Big number. Um, no, think of how many billions of years are ahead for our Universe (not necessarily including us). There is a lot more Evolution left to go. Consider the far future: say another twenty billion years. If you or I were to be transplanted through time to that distance we would probably be eaten by the first grasshopper to come along. Things will get more efficient. It has to to make up for the overall increase in Entropy. Now consider that if our Universe will have an end wouldn't that final state define a "calculation" it was performing? And if you want to get metaphysical then you could say that maybe God was there waiting for our Universe to tell Him what it was. The End of time is "Judgment Day" and its predators-against-prey to decide the final representation of our Universe.
Shh.
So is Senator Bluto sending this to Dean Wormer?
Hey, we umm... don't like those things he ummm... says... yeah... and ummm now you know ummm... that we don't... you know ummm like it... umm what he says...
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
knapper_tech writes:
"This is after we had to put up with giant anti-abortion posters on campus during the presidential election week that just happened to have horrid pictures of late-term abortions that are already illegal everywhere as far as I know anyway. WTF."
A fetus is a child, not a choice, or so the anti-abortion folks tell me.
If so, the people who put up the fliers were plastering your university with pre-term necrophilia pornography.
Nice.
My
Limekiller
<blink>Yes, as a matter of fact, it is!!!!!!!</blink>
"I do not know if you support or do not support this bill but asspeaker you might want consider stopping this nonsense before more of the American people give up on the government's ability for rational thought."
Dude, asspeaker? LOL.
"but asspeaker"
Please tell me you actually sent it in that way.
Sent from your iPad.
He can just take it down the road to Oral Roberts University.. I am sure they are more open to this kind of thing.
waiting for ad.doubleclick.net
I love that the atheist proposes that lack of evidence of God is proof of his non-existence.
Perhaps if there was some way to provide evidence against God's existence that might turn some heads, but simply saying that there isn't evidence proves nothing. 200 years ago there was no evidence for relativity, does that mean that it didn't exist back then?
If science required that one not entertain a thought until it was proven, then science couldn't ever expand (hypothesis would be against science). It thus stands that a scientific mind should be able to entertain a thought without belief or evidence.
his 2006 book "The God Delusion," and public statements on the theory of evolution demonstrate an intolerance for cultural diversity and diversity of thinking
No, you fucktards, your attitude is the intolerant one. Mr. Dawkins makes claims, cites the supporting evidence, and draws conclusions, and then arrives at an opinion that he can solidly argue. And - from what I've seen of him - he does not mind listening to those who have a different opinion, and doesn't deny them forum.
Oh yes, he also doesn't belong to a group of people with a thousand year history of silencing and killing its opponent. Like you.
If the penalty for stupidity were death, Oklahoma would have to hold new elections.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
Oh, for mod points...
Is the cannibalism of your opponent an ad-hominem attack?