Vatican whacks “intelligent design”
Well, here’s a fine howdy-do. The Vatican is bitch-slapping American creationists.
Vatican Paper Hits ‘Intelligent Design’
By NICOLE WINFIELD (Associated Press Writer)
January 18, 2006 4:45 PM ESTVATICAN CITY – The Vatican newspaper has published an article saying “intelligent design” is not science and that teaching it alongside evolutionary theory in school classrooms only creates confusion.
The article in Tuesday’s editions of L’Osservatore Romano was the latest in a series of interventions by Vatican officials – including the pope – on the issue that has dominated headlines in the United States.
The author, Fiorenzo Facchini, a professor of evolutionary biology at the University of Bologna, laid out the scientific rationale for Darwin’s theory of evolution, saying that in the scientific world, biological evolution “represents the interpretative key of the history of life on Earth.”
He lamented that certain American “creationists” had brought the debate back to the “dogmatic” 1800s, and said their arguments weren’t science but ideology. (Story.)
There are a lot of things I could say about American creationists here. The one I will say is that when you’re too reactionary for Pope Palpatine’s boys, it’s time to turn the wagon around and point it toward the 21st Century.
:xpost:
[THX: Dr. Mike Pecaut at the Creation Science Desk.]
lullaby pit 
Makes sense. Trying to merge religion with science was the worst idea the religious ever had; because science has rules even more hard and fast than religion does, and if they compete on the basis of which produces measurable results, science will always win. So the only possible outcome would be destruction of ‘religion’ and a complete reliance on empirical observation-driven belief (a good thing). They might try things like ‘intelligent design,’ but real science can argue rings around them in the logical arena.
It’s like that part of the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy where man discovers the Babel Fish and uses it to prove that God exists because it’s impossible that such a fish could evolve by chance (actually, the intelligent design argument), and God says, “OK, you caught me, but proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing,” and Man says “you exist, so you don’t; QED,” and God disappears in a puff of logic…
Makes sense. Trying to merge religion with science was the worst idea the religious ever had; because science has rules even more hard and fast than religion does, and if they compete on the basis of which produces measurable results, science will always win. So the only possible outcome would be destruction of ‘religion’ and a complete reliance on empirical observation-driven belief (a good thing). They might try things like ‘intelligent design,’ but real science can argue rings around them in the logical arena.
It’s like that part of the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy where man discovers the Babel Fish and uses it to prove that God exists because it’s impossible that such a fish could evolve by chance (actually, the intelligent design argument), and God says, “OK, you caught me, but proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing,” and Man says “you exist, so you don’t; QED,” and God disappears in a puff of logic…
The Vatican is bitch-slapping American creationists.
The hard core creationists, the young earther’s, etc. don’t put any more stock in what the Vatican says than they do in what Darwin said. In fact, most of them probably couldn’t tell you very much of what either one of them said.
The Vatican is bitch-slapping American creationists.
The hard core creationists, the young earther’s, etc. don’t put any more stock in what the Vatican says than they do in what Darwin said. In fact, most of them probably couldn’t tell you very much of what either one of them said.