Posted on 01/04/2008 2:12:20 PM PST by Sub-Driver
US 'doomed' if creationist president elected: scientists Jan 4 05:29 PM US/Eastern A day after ordained Baptist minister Mike Huckabee finished first in the opening round to choose a Republican candidate for the White House, scientists warned Americans against electing a leader who doubts evolution.
"The logic that convinces us that evolution is a fact is the same logic we use to say smoking is hazardous to your health or we have serious energy policy issues because of global warming," University of Michigan professor Gilbert Omenn told reporters at the launch of a book on evolution by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS).
"I would worry that a president who didn't believe in the evolution arguments wouldn't believe in those other arguments either. This is a way of leading our country to ruin," added Omenn, who was part of a panel of experts at the launch of "Science, Evolution and Creationism."
Former Arkansas governor Huckabee said in a debate in May that he did not believe in evolution.
A poll conducted last year showed that two-thirds of Americans believe in creationism, or the theory that God created humans at a single point in time, while 53 percent believe that humans developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life -- the theory of evolution.
Around a quarter of Americans said they believe in both.
The evolution versus creationism debate has crept into school classrooms and politics, where it is mainly conservative Republicans who espouse the non-scientific belief.
"If our country starts to behave irrationally whereas all the other countries coming up and chasing us (to take over as the world leaders in science and technology) behaving rationally, we are doomed," Omenn said.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
LOL, Touche!
Reagan was a “creationist” president.
Obituary: Sadly the United States of America was able to over come so much in its two hundred plus year history, but not the thought that the president believes something other than that promoted by “scientists.” RIP
I seriously hope I wouldn’t have to label that as sarcasm. It is self-evident, right?
The squirrel didn’t get the memo. He isn’t supposed to start this crap until Huckster, second boy from Hope, becomes the Nominee. They are just supposed to be laying the groundwork by identifying his base as the “Christian Right”. The assumption is that the GOP is afraid to offend them so they can run wild until the General Election.
Conservative does not necessarily mean Christian Right any more than Neo-con mean Jew.
If Darwinism really worked, there would be no NEA as natural selection would have wiped out their grand parents...
Cyril Kornbluth wrote an SF story about that, called “The Marching Morons.” The problem is that our welfare society keeps all the idiots alive, so evolution isn’t working. In Kornbluth’s story people are getting dumber and dumber.
Actually that’s one reason why Social Darwinists like Margaret Sanger were so anxious to euthanize blacks and other “inferior” types. In a proper dog-eat-dog kind of world they would have been eliminated, but we’re keeping them alive to breed weakness.
(I hasten to add that this is their opinion, not mine.)
>> Are priorities *scientific*?
And what *right* priorities would that be anyway?
What *scientific* decisions does the president need to make?<<
Its actually quite amazing the depth and breadth of science that comes into play under the various executive agencies - Everything from the energy department, oil exploration, nuclear power, wildlife, parks, fish, farms, food and list goes on and on.
Science is not unlike intelligence, yes the President has professionals but at the end of the day he and his appointees set the policy.
No kidding!
While science can play a role in providing useful information, in the end, the decisions aren’t scientific, they’re moral, or judgment decisions; things that are outside the realm of science.
Too many scientists like the ones in this article way over estimate the role science plays in decision making.
The other thing is, they often object when decisions are being made on the person’s world view if it’s religious in nature, but certainly don’t mind when it’s THEIR world view that’s being used, although it’s really inadequate for the job.
From a letter by Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Benjamin Rush (1803)
In some of the delightful conversations with you in the evenings of 1798-99, and which served as an anodyne to the afflictions of the crisis through which our country was then laboring, the Christian religion was sometimes our topic; and I then promised you that one day or other I would give you my views of it. They are the result of a life of inquiry and reflection, and very different from that anti-Christian system imputed to me by those who know nothing of my opinions. To the corruptions of Christianity I am indeed opposed, but not to the genuine precepts of Jesus himself. I am a Christian, in the only sense in which he wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to his doctrines in preference to all others, ascribing to himself every human excellence, and believing he never claimed any other.
Yes, Jefferson believed in Jesus as a philosopher, not as the Son of Man, the Lamb of God, the Savior from Sin. A rather hollow Christianity. But Jefferson’s Bible is an interesting read, it is the four gospels but without any miracles or miraculous claims. The point being that he was far from being a six day six thousand years ago creationist as some posters were trying to claim all our early presidents were.
Thomas Jefferson would have dismissed out of hand Huckabee’s antiquated views on cosmology.
This is one of gondramB's standard strawmen. Eliminating evolution would in no way impact science, and gondramB knows it. Nothing of value has ever come from evolution or its promotion. The vast majority of scientific advances have been by, or at the direction of creationists, and without them we would all have to work much harder.
If we could remove the search for the imaginary 'glue' that connects evolution to science from the various government budgets, we could cut taxes by 50%.
We keep getting told that science only concerns itself with the material world that can be touched and observed and tested and experimented on.
Decision making is not a *scientific* process. It requires processes that cannot be determined analytically. Aside from science providing data, it has no role in making decisions about national security, immigration, religion, laws, or any other moral concerns. Things like that are way out of the scope of what science can deal with and therefore cannot be addressed by it. It is inadequate for the job and should not be considered important in it.
That is only so when science is placed in the dark, solitary dungeon of naturalistic interpretation required by the limited minds of the spiritually ignorant. Remove those recently applied restraints, and science can go anywhere that the spiritually enlightened mind can go, as it was until the darkness of the mid nineteenth century arrived.
What's funny about this fool's rant is that Huck is a big believer in both anthropogenic global warming and the nanny-state anti-smoking jihad. Apparently, this "scientist"'s religious devotion has closed his mind to the possibility that not everyone believes in either all or none of his dogmas.
I do believe the MAJORITY of founders and presidents were creationists, and frankly I think America did quite well under their leadership
“What planet did you arrive from? Please tell me how replacing science with superstition is going to make our schools better.”
The children of “superstitious” parents who are in the “superstition” schools or home “superstition” schools are generally doing much, much better on college entrance exams and in many other areas those in the government-funded Darwinian schools. So there is something to be said for the “superstitious” if you want a society that can read better and cipher better.
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.