Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Pushes for Expansion of Science and Technology (B.O. officially divorces morality and science)
ICR ^ | April 30, 2009 | Randy J. Guliuzza, P.E., M.D.

Posted on 04/30/2009 8:18:57 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-22 last
To: wagglebee

He's "restoring" science to its rightful place, huh?
Including the Frankenstein embryonic stem cell experiments and
the global warming hysteria. What a crackpot!

Scientism


21 posted on 05/01/2009 12:00:16 PM PDT by HowlinglyMind-BendingAbsurdity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Fichori
Uh, chemistry is the foundation of (to my knowledge) all life.

I'm sorry, I just assumed that everyone would understand the difference between a chemist and a life scientist. Of course the basis of life is chemical reactions. A chemist knows chemical reactions. He doesn't need to understand metabolism or genetics. I'm a biochemist; I understand biological pathways and genetics. I don't need to understand complex chemical reactions. I can genetically engineer a mouse; a chemist cannot. A chemist can synthesize a complex organic molecule in the lab; I cannot. In a way, the difference between a biochemist and a chemist is like the difference between an architect and a building engineer. To an outsider, their work might look the same, but it really isn't.

For some reason, what you just wrote gives me the impression that, when it comes to creationism, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Please try not to be offended, but most of what is passed off as "intelligent design" or creationism is neither based in the Bible nor in science. There simply is no scientific framework within the creation story with which to even begin to develop working hypotheses.

The irony of that compared to your opening statement is truly amusing.

Its like a software engineer telling an electrical engineer he's off his rocker when it comes to electromagnetic theory.

If you can understand that there is a rather large difference between the training received and type of work a chemist performs, vs. a life scientist, then you would see there is no irony. Your example isn't a very good one. The software engineer doesn't need to understand electromagnetic theory because it's not his function to make sure all the components of the newly designed computer work together without something getting fried. The electrical engineer absolutely needs to know electromagnetic theory, so that he can design a computer that isn't going to melt into a heap of slag the moment it's plugged in.

22 posted on 05/01/2009 10:03:42 PM PDT by exDemMom (Now that I've finally accepted that I'm living a bad hair life, I'm more at peace with the world.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-22 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson