What bothers me is that it’s no longer controlled by people who know what its limits should be.
Dr. A writes:
You mean like Pope Urban VIII did?
What a bone-chilling thought. At one time scientists did avoid crossing religion because they did not want to end up dead. Copernicus arranged to have his description of the heliocentric model published after his death. Giordano Bruno was burned to death in 1600. To this very day, some Catholics still defend Galileo's treatment under Pope Urban VIII.
quote:Anti-Catholics often cite the Galileo case as an example of the Church refusing to abandon outdated or incorrect teaching, and clinging to a "tradition." They fail to realize that the judges who presided over Galileo’s case were not the only people who held to a geocentric view of the universe. It was the received view among scientists at the time.
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.
“Choose silence of all virtues, for by it you hear other men's imperfections, and conceal your own.” George Bernard Shaw
"They fail to realize that [...] it was the received view among scientists at the time."
This may not be the most absurd lie the Roman Catholic Church has ever told, but it's got to be up there. Of course everyone who's taken the remotest interest in Galileo knows that he was one of the pioneers of heliocentrism, that's one of the principsal reasons why he's famous. The RCC is not blamed simply for disagreeing with him, but for forcibly suppressing his ideas. And I don't know why they even try to tell such a silly lie except that if you've been telling silly lies for two thousand years it becomes a habit.
Sorry for the delay: I went on vacation for the weekend.
And you think that, rather than the subject matter of biology, which essentially requires accepting evolution, is responsible for directing Mormons away from biology?
Yes, I do. Certainly, the subject matter is also a hang up, but, I observed (both as a student and as a teacher) that students were more willing to admit acceptance of evolution in private conversations than they were in class polls.
That tells me that it's the peer pressure that determines what they say, not the actual subject matter itself.
I didn't note Coyote making such a claim. He discusses some rudeness at conferences, but not much else.
He also said it was a turn-off for students who might have been good scientists. I assumed he was speaking from experience: as in, he knows students who left the sciences for this reason. Perhaps I assumed too much: perhaps I was letting my personal acquaintance with other conservative scientists determine how I was interpreting Coyote's comments.
I'll note that ridicule of creationists is done by even the few right leaning scientific people here. Even Buzsaw has been known to ridicule YECs. Do you really want to equate creationism with conservatism?
I didn't intend to speak only about creationists: we've had people leave over political and social topics, as well. But, now that you mention it, I've probably overstated the case here. Forget this example.
Evidence for what exactly? Is there a question about the percentage of scientists who accept human-driven climate change, or are you looking for something else?
Sorry: I quoted too much. I didn't mean to include that line about global warming in the quote box. I was asking for evidence for the position that conservatives avoid science because of the money.