I cannot pretend I am without fear. But my predominant feeling is one of gratitude. I have loved and been loved; I have been given much and I have given something in return; I have read and traveled and thought and written. I have had an intercourse with the world, the special intercourse of writers and readers.
Above all, I have been a sentient being, a thinking animal, on this beautiful planet, and that in itself has been an enormous privilege and adventure.
i bump into the hiddenness of God often when i think about science.
now convince all the scientists in the world that your God should be their God.
at the same time get the same amount of work done in science.
see the problem?
we will fight over God forever but we can agree what is science and cooperate at that level
if and only if no one can put their God at the center of science.
that is why biology is basically the same around the world but two churches side by side can’t agree on much of anything.
it is the great genius of modern science to get out of the God discussion business altogether.
the really curious thing is why can’t we see God? the hiddenness of God is not something most theologians in 1700 thought would happen.
they thought we would see heaven with telescopes or see the hand of God at the smallest level in living things.
this is the heart of paley’s design argument.
the thing that bugs me in this discussion is why can we see some signature of God in the natural world?
i don’t see anything in the Bible to prepare us for such a deep hiddenness.
there are a couple of lutheran theologians on my reading list on the topic but i don’t know when i’ll get to them.
exactly how do you see the hand of God in the heavens?
i’ve thought of ways God could have signed life but i’ve never seen arguments about how God could put some type of divine skywriting so that everyone who understood it would see the God of the Bible.
God could have signed life in such a way that by 1980 no biologist could deny that human life was created by God separate from all other living things. very simply very convincingly.
there were theologians in the 19th C that predicted such a signal from God.
but we’ve never seen one.
is it still in humanities future?
It’s worth remembering that true empirical science is measurable, testable, repeatable, and observable. Therefore evolutionary theories require at least as much blind faith as the Genesis account, if not more. And yet the wonky religions of Big Bang Cosmology and Darwinian Evolution have done an amazing job of frightening theologians with their façade of pseudo-scientific evidence.
one of the reasons i keep getting into the young earth discussion is that i am fascinated by the structure of arguments and what people find persuasive. take my current reading: http://www.gty.org/Blog/B150217
True biblical scholarship seeks to arrive at exegetical conclusions in conformity with the biblical text, not impose humanistic conclusions upon the text, thus changing its meaning.
nothing is in conformity with any text. the text is just marks on paper, what he means is conformity with the system of his biblical hermeneutic community, to his way of reading the text. he completely misses the fact that people in community read a text, the text does not simply exist emitting meaning directly into the brains of a passerby. it is interpreted during the active process of reading. the passive text just sitting on the desk has no meaning. every reader “imposes” meaning during her reading, that is simply what it means to be reading, to derive meaning from markings on paper.
being as charitable i can, i think young earth creationists are badly mislead,but he-KH- has been corrected so many times about this canard of “no new information” that i can only believe he is willfully lying. both gene duplication(hemoglobin) and retroviral insertion- a horizontal transfer- being co-opted(syncytin) are so clearly new information that KH is simply without excuse for posting such a lie.
the whole Y chromosome STR process at ftdna relies on counting random repeats to build descendant trees, it’s used by many people to do genetic genealogy. if that isn’t added information i don’t understand information theory at all.
but read the comments at his page, people just don’t get the science at all, nor do they apparently have much commitment to being truthful.
Tax avoidance really underlines how different life is for the rich and for everybody else. Wealthy individuals can afford accountants to zealously hunt down loopholes and exploit legislation. The “big four” accountancy firms are themselves employed by government to advise on drafting tax laws. As the House of Commons public accounts committee has detailed, they then use their expertise to tell their clients how to get around the legislation they have helped to draft. Imagine benefit claimants were employed by the Department for Work and Pensions to draw up legislation on social security. They are not because British law is rigged in favour of the rich, while it cracks down on the smallest misdemeanours of the poor.
this is the take home message that since reagan’s lurch to the right, greed has allowed the rich to get 100% of the doubled productivity of the workplace. see GINI index
my dad told me a story about a math class he took for his bsee.
the prof said that he would throw the chalk at anyone who asked what the equation was for.
the great divide between engineers and mathematicians
/* are of equal precedence. as is addition and subtraction. the issue is the implied multiplication. 2(1+2). put 2x/2x into google for an example. in some circles(physics & engineering) implied* has precedence over / so our intuition that 2x/2x is 1 not x^2 holds true. others like wolfram alpha,compsci and mathematicians deny the implicit* matters. the answer is how you were taught about the implicit* operation, it is ambiguous at best. if the problem was written 6/2*(1+2) there would be no ambiguity, it is 9. if you want 2x/2x to be 1 then the answer is 1, if you’re content with 2x/2x being x^2 then the answer is 9. your choice.
see comments at http://www.askamathematician.com/…/q-how-do-you…/ because the dates matter see “One last time:
6 ÷ 2n = 3/n (the infamous wolfram even agrees on this)
6 ÷ 2 * n = 3n” posted on January 20, 2013 at 9:17 pm . wolfram became consistent that year unlike google which continues to mangle 2x/2x into 2x/(2*x) anyhow thanks for keeping me awake an extra hour to do this!
i guess the right answer is “it depends” on if 6/2(1+2)=6/(2(1+2)) that is implicit* has precedence over / or if 6/2(1+2)=6/2*(1+2) without any implicit v explicit distinction. but as the link above shows 2x/2x just doesn’t look right as x^2 so the implicit distinction has some basis in our math intuition. in fact put 2x/2x into google and it plots 2x/(2x) not x^2, thus making the 2nd 2x an implicit operation. but put in 2x/2*x and it plots x^2. so much for being consistent ….. the big point….use () to avoid ambiguity. interesting that the discussion seems to put physicists + engineers vs mathematicians + computer folks. … http://www.neatorama.com/…/whos-smarter-engineers-or…/
i posted this on another fb wall:
re: Forced vaccination is a human rights violation …the big problem is that there isn’t an ongoing discussion in this society about the individual and the various collectives we all are a part of. for several hundred years the discussion has been dominated by a cry for human individual rights. yet the growth and success of (for profit)corporations belies the fact that only in groups can we actually be productive and successful. the poverty of the discussion is evident when i don’t even know of a reference that outlines and clarifies the basic issues.
its an interesting issues, this continuum from individual through the various collectives to political nation states. the problem is i haven’t an idea where to start reading!!
there is no scientific controversy. the safe sensible wise thing to do is follow the recommended vaccination program. the controversy is a political one not a scientific one. the immunology of vaccinations, although complex and poorly understood in several areas coupled with the clear public health epidemiological data shows that the private and public benefits vs risk curve is so tilted towards the benefits that there shouldn’t even be a controversy let alone the current measles outbreak. vaccines are their own public information nightmare. since immunizations eliminated so many of the childhood diseases we now do not have a first hand feeling for how bad they really were. i’m afraid we will, the antivaxxers are tied into several deep undercurrents of thinking in this country and have or will soon bring the needed % immunized down to where these diseases will again be common. then the pendulum will swing back the other way when enough unvaccinated children get sick enough to cause parents to rethink their goals. one interesting thing to me is that unlike the other major science denial movements currently afoot, this one is both liberal and conservative parents.
i read through page 70 on google reader. even in those few pages her attraction to natural healing like her discussion of bechamp is obvious. … science is an amazing tool, it helps us to be less wrong and more right than we were before. herbalist, naturopathy. even lots of midwifery, might be interesting or even useful but its not science….. is science always right? of course not, but it learns and evolves towards being more right. something i dearly wish theology could learn to do. is our current understanding of vaccinations 100% correct? no, maybe 70%, but we don’t know what 30% is wrong. maybe those insights will come from people like her eventually, but they will be studied scientifically if they become part of the accepted wisdom and displace their more error prone current thinking…. i wish her well, she is obviously an interesting, very driven person. but i have no interest in learning more of her “alternative” medicine ideas. i just don’t have the time, nor frankly the interest. i have a book at my elbow which i am fascinated by and intend to spend a pleasant warm afternoon on the porch with it. … but i’m intrigued by the antivaxxers because they are like luddites a concrete example of the important intersections of thought in our society.. i’m sure i’ll return to thinking about it again.
re: As long as the science is not 100% correct, science does something like “beyond reasonable doubt:. re: is morally wrong to take away that informed choice. … ethics is not politics, nor is it science, nor even economics. although it might appear to underlie parts of each. but we consistently confuse all of them. politics is the art of getting along in regional groups. “informed choice” appears in the vaccination debate like a shibboleth, there really is no meaning to the phrase but in some narrow political/legal way in signing a specific piece of paper. we by nature operate on incomplete partial and error filled sets of ill defined choices that are more apparent than real.
KH says since science learns things and modifies past beliefs that this is a bad thing. he furthermore says that his brand of the Faith remains ever consistent.
i guess he doesn’t read much history. my own denomination springs from those divisive civil war years. despite my admiration for him robert dabney was wrong in defense of virginia. the church fortunately does change it’s understanding of the Bible’s text, unfortunately some folks remain in the ever present now and don’t know this. thoughtful change is both good and necessary, why does he think stasis is more faithful to God????
fasting day from both food and spending money
The test of the American Republic came when the idea that all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights was juxtaposed with the brutishness of slavery. Prior to the revolution, these United States were divided into sovereignties so profound that many states saw themselves as individual nations not bound by the promises of the Declaration of Independence. They believed themselves free to withdraw from the federation if displeased by others’ moral interpretations of the Declaration. What ensued was the Civil War, which was fought, as Abraham Lincoln put it, to test whether a nation so constituted could long endure.
Read more: The European Union, Nationalism and the Crisis of Europe | Stratfor
Follow us: @stratfor on Twitter | Stratfor on Facebook
at frog pharm early- 8am.
chris starts working today.
light rain, came back empty, too dark cold and wet to load anything
get gutters on east side, panels bolted, oil pan gasket this week, get quonset hut pieces
i can hear the school PA system over a mile away. not in the city anymore
looks like coyotes got 2 more roosters last night
Non-existing persons book (obefintlighetsbok)
The non-existing persons book or “obefintlighetsbok” is a list of the persons within the parish whose whereabouts are unknown or in other words missing.