Welcome to Science Court

Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal ^ | 1006 | Chris Mooney

[tpeters]

I wish someone would be as rigorous in debunking the claims of the environmentalists.

[HEY4QDEMS]

and gain acceptance in the scientific community."

Einstein dismissed quantum mechanics as junk science. For that reason it was never studied for almost three decades, now it is one of the hottest research areas of physics.

It's a good thing a Judge didn't affirm Einstein's sentiment.

[tallhappy]

I wish someone would be as rigorous in debunking the claims of the environmentalists

Don't worry, the courts will decree that environmentalism is the only true scientific view acceptable.

And of course you'll have to accept it because after all, judges determine what is science or what is true.

[mlc9852]

Paul Kurtz - Chairman of CSICOP

How Do Secular Humanists View Religious and Supernatural Claims?

Secular humanists accept a world view or philosophy called naturalism, in which the physical laws of the universe are not superseded by non-material or supernatural entities such as demons, gods, or other "spiritual" beings outside the realm of the natural universe. Supernatural events such as miracles (in which physical laws are defied) and psi phenomena, such as ESP, telekinesis, etc., are not dismissed out of hand, but are viewed with a high degree of skepticism.
Are Secular Humanists Atheists?

Secular humanists are generally nontheists. They typically describe themselves as nonreligious. They hail from widely divergent philosophical and religious backgrounds.

Thus, secular humanists do not rely upon gods or other supernatural forces to solve their problems or provide guidance for their conduct. They rely instead upon the application of reason, the lessons of history, and personal experience to form an ethical/moral foundation and to create meaning in life. Secular humanists look to the methodology of science as the most reliable source of information about what is factual or true about the universe we all share, acknowledging that new discoveries will always alter and expand our understanding of it and perhaps change our approach to ethical issues as well. In any case their cosmic outlook draws primarily from human experiences and scientific knowledge.
What Is The Origin of Secular Humanism?

Secular humanism as an organized philosophical system is relatively new, but its foundations can be found in the ideas of classical Greek philosophers such as the Stoics and Epicureans as well as in Chinese Confucianism. These philosophical views looked to human beings rather than gods to solve human problems.

During the Dark Ages of Western Europe, humanist philosophies were suppressed by the political power of the church. Those who dared to express views in opposition to the prevailing religious dogmas were banished, tortured or executed. Not until the Renaissance of the fourteenth to seventeenth centuries, with the flourishing of art, music, literature, philosophy and exploration, would consideration of the humanist alternative to a god-centered existence be permitted. During the Enlightenment of the eighteenth century, with the development of science, philosophers finally began to openly criticize the authority of the church and engage in what became known as "free thought."

The nineteenth century Freethought movement of America and Western Europe finally made it possible for the common citizen to reject blind faith and superstition without the risk of persecution. The influence of science and technology, together with the challenges to religious orthodoxy by such celebrity freethinkers as Mark Twain and Robert G. Ingersoll brought elements of humanist philosophy even to mainline Christian churches, which became more concerned with this world, less with the next.

In the twentieth century scientists, philosophers, and progressive theologians began to organize in an effort to promote the humanist alternative to traditional faith-based world views. These early organizers classified humanism as a non-theistic religion which would fulfill the human need for an ordered ethical/philosophical system to guide one's life, a "spirituality" without the supernatural. In the last thirty years, those who reject supernaturalism as a viable philosophical outlook have adopted the term "secular humanism" to describe their non-religious life stance.

Critics often try to classify secular humanism as a religion. Yet secular humanism lacks essential characteristics of a religion, including belief in a deity and an accompanying transcendent order. Secular humanists contend that issues concerning ethics, appropriate social and legal conduct, and the methodologies of science are philosophical and are not part of the domain of religion, which deals with the supernatural, mystical and transcendent.

Secular humanism, then, is a philosophy and world view which centers upon human concerns and employs rational and scientific methods to address the wide range of issues important to us all. While secular humanism is at odds with faith-based religious systems on many issues, it is dedicated to the fulfillment of the individual and humankind in general. To accomplish this end, secular humanism encourages a commitment to a set of principles which promote the development of tolerance and compassion and an understanding of the methods of science, critical analysis, and philosophical reflection.

No agenda here, right? LOL

[SalukiLawyer]

Courts function to give finality to questions of public importance. If they get the right answer that is a plus, and oftentimes they do. To pretend that they are the best arbiters in questions of science is ridiculous, however. (Anyone remember Roe?) The hoopla Darwinists have been giving this decision (which is not above criticism) is the online equivalent of turning over cars in the wake of your team's big win. We've seen these cases before, and no one should be surprised at the result.

Having read the opinion (okay, I'll admit, I skimmed it because it is long and I wasn't getting paid to read it) it looked to me that the decision was based as much on the motivations of the ID-favoring school board members as science. I do not think it is accurate to pretend that this court was equipped for and had the inclination to determine purely scientific merits for all time. (Remember, any court's opinion is a piece of PERSUASIVE, APOLOGETIC writing whose purpose is to explain and justify the decision. It is emphatically not, in itself, a fair review of the evidence!)

Having said that, I think the whole debate detracts from both science and religion. Darwinism has been used to beat religion over the head for a long time now, and some religious people have, wisely or otherwise, decided to fight back with the same weapons. Maybe the latter will have the better science after all. However, western Christianity has sometimes tended to be a little too far removed from the "my kingdom is not of this world" theme. And I am not here to debate or disparage anyone, but this whole controversy is more important to the minority of Christians who believe in the literal interpretation of the Bible in all regards.

Darwnisim? To the extent many people use it to stridently promote an agenda it is going to have to exist alongside global warming, heterosexual AIDS epidemic, Korean cloning and all the other junk science we have become accustomed to in these days. (Not saying it IS junk science, just saying that it tastes similar, which makes you wonder.)

In the end, I prefer Dembski to Dawkins and the fact that Darwinists seem to enjoy having people like Dawkins as their unofficial spokesman leaves me with the same feeling when the Moslem world does not object to the latest blathering from a black-turbaned cleric. When it comes time to choose up sides, I just can't see Dawkins as my leader, so here we are.

[orionblamblam]

> I wish someone would be as rigorous in debunking the claims of the environmentalists.

See: Penn & Teller.

[orionblamblam]

> As young people become atheists, it encourages them to engage in promiscuous sex, drug use, and anti-family behavior.

Wow. You actually *believe* that rubbish?

[PatrickHenry]

Evolution Ping The List-O-Links

A conservative, pro-evolution science list, now with over 330 names. See the list's explanation, then FReepmail to be added or dropped. To assist beginners: But it's "just a theory", Evo-Troll's Toolkit, and How to argue against a scientific theory.

[antiRepublicrat]

Atheists cause enormous damage. As young people become atheists, it encourages them to engage in promiscuous sex, drug use, and anti-family behavior.

Hmmm, I'm an atheist who was not promiscuous, doesn't do drugs and has a pretty solid family. So where did you get this crap?

They come to believe that no one is watching and no one cares.

You are the one who is morally bankrupt if the only reason you don't do bad things is because you think someone's watching. What truly matters is your conduct when no one's watching.

Atheistic teachings in the schools should be reported, schools that actively propagate atheism should be identified,

There is a difference between not teaching religion and teaching atheism. Given the number of highly religious people who accept evolution, including the Pope, I can't see how teaching the scientific theory of evolution in itself can be teaching atheism.

OTOH, teaching kids critical thinking skills in general can lead them to atheism.

[antiRepublicrat]

No agenda here, right? LOL

Not everybody at CSICOP is a secular humanist. But they are all skeptics, supported by the fact that nobody has been able to pass their million dollar challenge by demonstrating paranormal abilities.

[Netheron]

Quantum mechanics was not studied for three decades???

Then the Manhattan Project didn't happen?

[antiRepublicrat]

See: Penn & Teller.

Damn, you beat me.

[HEY4QDEMS]

The Manhattan Project was "Particle Physics" not quantum mechanics.

[peyton randolph]

This is because they are protected by a strong Christian nation.

No. We live by the grace of the FSM.

[Senator Bedfellow]

What truly matters is your conduct when no one's watching.

" 'Character' is what you are in the dark."

- John Whorfin

:^)

[Right Wing Professor]

Einstein dismissed quantum mechanics as junk science. For that reason it was never studied for almost three decades, now it is one of the hottest research areas of physics.

Complete nonsense. In fact, most of the major advances in quantum mechanics were made in the three decades after its first formulation.

[Vaquero]

I don't believe in the existence of a benevolent, concerned god. I believe there may or may not have been a prime mover who set the wheels in motion of the universe and then went out for a beer and hasn't been seen since.

I am conservative in most peoples definition of the word. I have a strong sense of morality and right and wrong. I believe these things are necessary to keep a viable society.

I would fight and die for my country, my countrymen and I resent holier than though people like you who assume differently. People like you who call people like me names like stupid and malicious.

You have no scientific backup for your feelings...and using feelings to diagnose the world, good and evil is the purview of the left.

If anyone sounds smug and cocky its you.