Science... don't talk to me about science.

More caustic than I would have put it, but no less precise, particularly dunning the oxymoronic popularist hijacking of "science."

Young people, angry at God, but not fully committed to the rigors of atheism often cop this attitude. It reveals my own sorry flaws when I want to slap them for onotological immaturity instead of loving them through it. I am sorry, angry people. I will try to love you better.


Neil deGrasse Tyson: pedantry in space

Neil deGrasse Tyson strides onto stage to say that actually the Earth orbits the sun, that actually living beings gain their traits through evolutionary processes, that actually your hand has five fingers, that actually cows go moo, that actually poo comes out your bum – and you are then supposed to think yes, I knew that, and imagine someone else, someone who didn't know it already, some idiot, and think: I’m better than that person, I’m so much smarter than everyone else.

See also:

‘Science’ comes to metonymically refer to the natural world, the object of science; it’s like describing a crime as ‘the police,’ or the ocean as ‘drinking.’ What ‘I Fucking Love Science’ actually means is ‘I Fucking Love Existing Conditions.’

Amazing science linkdump March 2013

One thing I really like about science is how we can use it to stop human misery. We could probably even use it help poor people too!

But I'll take helping the rich as a starting place.

Gel that stops bleeding instantly
I'm confused about why there's so much ballyhoo about this being used in wars. Drones don't bleed, right?

Another option is WE COULD STOP HAVING SO MANY FUCKING WARS.

Gene therapy cures leukemia in 8 days
For once, we're not curing mice. Actual people in actual remission.

Retinal implant gives sight to blind
If you have a certain kind of blindness to start with. But seriously, a much bigger deal than Google Glass.

Science vs. religion: why religion loses

I recently hit on the reason why the concept of evolution is so divisive. Theists who accept God as creator of the universe get all pissed when you tell them their God didn't do it.

Which is not what evolution says. But it is what many evolution proponents want to say out of their personal theology, and so they try to use their scientific theorem to say it for them.

The theists pick up on this understated intent handily, and want to fight this clear, unspoken challenge to their God's sovereignty.

The problem rears when theists respond with the same tactics. Using legal and intellectual rhetoric, they try to refute the implied meaning (a challenge to God's existence) by winning the surface argument (evolution's factuality). So theists fight the shadow war on their opponents' ground. That's the roadmap to Losertowne.

Look, using scientific principles to determine God's involvement in nature has so far been unprovable. (Other principles render God more apparent, but dogged materialists demur the evidence of unmeasured experience.) Therefore, suggesting that a set of observations obviates God is in fact, empirically unknowable. And to a serious rational atheist, it's intellectually dishonest. So, end of argument. Whatever else an aggressive unbeliever brings to the table after that is bear baiting.

Theists: Don't be bears.
This is what theists need to bring to the table: bread. Break it with the unbelievers and relax.

For my branch of theists, hearken: Jesus is revealed more eloquently in what you do than in the best-rendered arguments. We are here to win hearts, not fights.