Skip to comments.Dan Brown comes out of his Exeter, NH hole-
Posted on 05/25/2012 5:36:20 AM PDT by BonRad
Ive had the misfortune to run into a very few minutes of Dan Browns extended stage interview from Portsmouth NH Friday night May 18 that was part of today May 22 Word of Mouth radio program on NHPR Word of Mouth 11:01 am Thu May 24, 2012 It is available here in two parts, each under a half hour. http://www.nhpr.org/post/writers-new-england-stage-dan-brown-1
Writers on a New England Stage: Dan Brown By Virginia Prescott International bestselling author Dan Brown talks about science, religion, and life after the Da Vinci Code at a benefit performance for Writers on a New England Stage, live from the Music Hall in Portsmouth. Browns novels, and the films based on them, have been banned by the Catholic church, inspired college courses, and have renewed dialogue about the interplay between science and religion. Brown, the son of a mathemeticiaa and a church organist, talks about his lifelong inquiry into lifes mysteries. In Part Two of the broadcast, we have a conversation about his writing life, his musical influences, and address questions from the audience.
Then we have these cells as coming from fetal tissue,
These are the typical devices, the scripted rhetoric of those who advocate for the destruction of human life garnered from the tissue of BABIES KILLED IN ABORTION.
Brown uses the phrase evolutionary science. There is no such thing. Evolution is simply a theory and science does not happen to support it. As the presenter of the video I suggest below says, it not a religion vs science debate but one of a religion vs religion, as belief in evolution is a religion supported by its faithful.
As to the latter: If it was found you were able to cure a particular disease by taking the livers of male pubescent Gypsies, would you do that? Think the Nazis were capable? Even so, how long would you give for trials of a vaccine before you called it safe given especially the manifold horrendous problems seen in so many (transposing back here) embryonic stem sell experiments.
Heres the youtube search for creation vs evolution
look at them all just on the first page!
I suggest the first I see which is:
You should go to what might be the MOST ACTIVE OF ALL BLOGS OUTSIDE POLITICAL AND SOCIAL ONES, that being the evolutionversuscreation yahoo forum.
There are over 500 posts a weeks with many files each DAY uploaded. If there is a more active blog in the scientific realm Id like to know.
There is a HUGE ONGOING debate on this and you ought to investigate before taking to Browns high-brow form of derision.
DaVinci Code guy shows his head
Dan Brown is a genuine nut. I feel blessed that I never struggled with doubt about the existence of God or the truth of His Holy Word. Romans 1 tells us that as the truth of God is suppressed men are given over to their reprobate minds. Eventually the Lord gives men given over to their corrupt sinful minds to the point that they no longer think straight. It is fun to say that liberalism is a mental disorder, but in so many cases it’s literally true. They literally become untethered from what is real, true, and good and seize upon absurdity.
Here’s what happens when men suppress the truth of God: “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.” (Romans 1:22) Is there a better explanation for San Francisco?
some of the greatest growth I have ever experienced came during a dark night of the soul. It is something that even the greatest believer can go through
Town in NH about 15 miles from seacoast... with famous prep school Phillips Exeter Academy. There are four places to go to for prep school in New England (Connecticut admirers will tack on a couple of their own): Exeter, Phillips Andover (MA), Groton (MA) and St. Paul’s (Concord, NH).
All competent graduates are considered well-primed for entry to Ivy League...
I don’t know that Brown is thereabouts now but here are some wiki snips:
Early life and education
Dan Brown was born and raised in Exeter, New Hampshire, USA, the eldest of three children. Brown grew up on the campus of Phillips Exeter Academy, where his father, Richard G. Brown, was a teacher of mathematics, and wrote textbooks from 1968 until his retirement in 1997. Both of Brown’s parents are also singers and musicians, having served as church choir masters, with his mother also serving as church organist. Brown was raised an Episcopalian.
In October 2004, Brown and his siblings donated US$2.2 million to Phillips Exeter Academy in honor of their father, to set up the Richard G. Brown Technology Endowment to help “provide computers and high-tech equipment for students in need.”
que ‘dark night of soul’ ref?
Saint John of the Cross was a Carmelite priest. His poem narrates the journey of the soul from its bodily home to its union with God. The journey is called “The Dark Night”, because darkness represents the hardships and difficulties the soul meets in detachment from the world and reaching the light of the union with the Creator. There are several steps in this night, which are related in successive stanzas. The main idea of the poem can be seen as the painful experience that people endure as they seek to grow in spiritual maturity and union with God.
It is that time when things may not be going well and you are challenged to enlarge your faith....Joni Erikson Tada also speaks of it as do many others. You know it when you are in it.
“Dark night of the soul” refers to the mystical writings of St. Teresa of Avila and St. John of the Cross.
Yes, I certainly knew this of these Holy Carmelites.
I didn’t know why it was coming up here...Brown was evoking it ??
I haven’t listened to but a few minutes at two junctures.
I can’t listen as that’s my sister interviewing him.
My comment was in direct respone to someone else’s comment....it had nothing to do with Dan Brown’s interview
Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools. (Romans 1:22) Is there a better explanation for San Francisco?”
Or for that matter the entire segment of the worldwide Left who delude themselves with their self-congratulatory smug, world-weary, cynical “intelligence”.
Evolution is simply a theory and science does not happen to support it.
I certainly don't support anything Dan Brown says, but I don't understand this statement above. First, what is "simply a theory"? After all, gravity is also "simply a theory" which would cause one to wonder what value that phrase might have, and what its use might be meant to entail.
And what can you mean in saying that "science does not happen to support" the theory of evolution? What is "science" in this sentence, and how does it not "support" evolution? Science is a method of inquiry and the application of that method is what has produced modern evolutionary theories. How then can "science" not support it?
I think too many people have peculiar, and convenient, definitions of theory and science when it comes to controversial subjects. If heliocentrism were being argued today I fear many who would naturally be uncomfortable with that model's apparent contradiction to superficial biblical reading would be only too comfortable using these very words to deny that proposition as well. We would do well to remember that exegesis can be as "theoretical" as can any scientific model.
You remind me of my wanting to post a sign over my thesis (just for a bachelor of architecture) presentations for the school rep who questioned even the base words I used, it seemed to wit:
“Common English is being used here”. There has to be a point where we mere laymen have to be allowed common usages. I am not a scientist and no expert on creationism etc by any means. What you call peculiar and convenient I call “common”. Given that, let me try to be more precise.
Though the above may not be employing proper etymology, in fighting the anti-lifers MUST do is try toss a wrench into the lexicon that attaches itself to words, the galaxy-sized tide of presumptions academia has promoted in its liberal hegemony.
Evolution is such a preponderance of assembled theories (theorem? is this where the word is used? ) that its a “school of thought” . OK?
beginning of wiki on “Science”:
Science (from Latin scientia, meaning “knowledge”) is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe. In an older and closely related meaning (found, for example, in Aristotle), “science” refers to the body of reliable knowledge itself, of the type that can be logically and rationally explained (see History and philosophy below).
Evolution is NOT conforming, is NOT supported by reliable knowledge.
Its thus I maintain one should “toss a wrench” when the two words “evolution science” appears together, especially when coming from the mouth of the likes of Brown.
I am not going to get into a heliocentrism v geocentrism debate, as I am not capable. I point to the huge yahoo forum evolutionversuscreation. I can furnish some other places if you wish. There are some very sound-minded men that advocated for geocentrism. That we can launch a space module to hit the sun etc hardly proves heliocentrism, all things being relative, eh? Robert Sungenis of catholicintl.com is a geocentrist.
I cam beck in to tend the thread but also add this ref- its available via torrent (surprised google books doesn’t have it- I’d think publisher would allow since book it so old)
but you’ll get an unwanted toolbar unless you know how to avoid that. I’m not proficient here either.
The Evolution Hoax Exposed or Why Colleges Breed Communists A.N. Field
There has to be a point where we mere laymen have to be allowed common usages. I am not a scientist and no expert on creationism etc by any means. What you call peculiar and convenient I call common.
I do not object at all to common usages of these words, and wouldn't expect you to use anything else. However, from what my experience with people teaches me (and neither myself nor those I know are associated with science in any way) the common usage of science and theory are the same for all of us as they are in the scientific world, at least in a general way. Therefore I was naturally confused by your post.
Evolution is such a preponderance of assembled theories (theorem? is this where the word is used? ) that its a school of thought . OK?
Maybe, but how is that instructive? It seems to me that creationism is also anything but a monolithic and homogeneous proposition, and neither are many fields of scientific study. I don't really see why that should be taken as meaning anything in this regard.
Evolution is NOT conforming, is NOT supported by reliable knowledge.
An interesting proposition, though I must say that "reliable knowledge" in this statement seems more than a little bit subjective. What you find reliable I might find dubious, and vice versa. Would relativity or quantum physics conform to "reliable knowledge?" Many ideas in science seem counterintuitive in some ways, and yet we know from observation that many of these things are consistent with predicted behaviours.
Its thus I maintain one should toss a wrench when the two words evolution science appears together, especially when coming from the mouth of the likes of Brown.
I can't really see why one would object to the term evolution science, regardless of what the likes of Dan Brown say. He probably talks about many things which actually exist, and his references certainly don't negate them, so to speak. Evolutionary science definitely exists as a field of study. That some people have doubts about some of the proposed implications of these theories hardly seems to mean that they don't actually exist.