A Gravity Debate now?

Jo Canadian

Council Member
Mar 15, 2005
2,488
1
38
PEI...for now
:lol: Whether true or not, it's quite amusing.
http://www.theonion.com/content/index/4133


Evangelical Scientists Refute Gravity With New 'Intelligent Falling' Theory

KANSAS CITY, KS—As the debate over the teaching of evolution in public schools continues, a new controversy over the science curriculum arose Monday in this embattled Midwestern state. Scientists from the Evangelical Center For Faith-Based Reasoning are now asserting that the long-held "theory of gravity" is flawed, and they have responded to it with a new theory of Intelligent Falling.

"Things fall not because they are acted upon by some gravitational force, but because a higher intelligence, 'God' if you will, is pushing them down," said Gabriel Burdett, who holds degrees in education, applied Scripture, and physics from Oral Roberts University.

Burdett added: "Gravity—which is taught to our children as a law—is founded on great gaps in understanding. The laws predict the mutual force between all bodies of mass, but they cannot explain that force. Isaac Newton himself said, 'I suspect that my theories may all depend upon a force for which philosophers have searched all of nature in vain.' Of course, he is alluding to a higher power."

Founded in 1987, the ECFR is the world's leading institution of evangelical physics, a branch of physics based on literal interpretation of the Bible.

According to the ECFR paper published simultaneously this week in the International Journal Of Science and the adolescent magazine God's Word For Teens!, there are many phenomena that cannot be explained by secular gravity alone, including such mysteries as how angels fly, how Jesus ascended into Heaven, and how Satan fell when cast out of Paradise.

The ECFR, in conjunction with the Christian Coalition and other Christian conservative action groups, is calling for public-school curriculums to give equal time to the Intelligent Falling theory. They insist they are not asking that the theory of gravity be banned from schools, but only that students be offered both sides of the issue "so they can make an informed decision."

"We just want the best possible education for Kansas' kids," Burdett said.

Proponents of Intelligent Falling assert that the different theories used by secular physicists to explain gravity are not internally consistent. Even critics of Intelligent Falling admit that Einstein's ideas about gravity are mathematically irreconcilable with quantum mechanics. This fact, Intelligent Falling proponents say, proves that gravity is a theory in crisis.

"Let's take a look at the evidence," said ECFR senior fellow Gregory Lunsden."In Matthew 15:14, Jesus says, 'And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.' He says nothing about some gravity making them fall—just that they will fall. Then, in Job 5:7, we read, 'But mankind is born to trouble, as surely as sparks fly upwards.' If gravity is pulling everything down, why do the sparks fly upwards with great surety? This clearly indicates that a conscious intelligence governs all falling."

Critics of Intelligent Falling point out that gravity is a provable law based on empirical observations of natural phenomena. Evangelical physicists, however, insist that there is no conflict between Newton's mathematics and Holy Scripture.

"Closed-minded gravitists cannot find a way to make Einstein's general relativity match up with the subatomic quantum world," said Dr. Ellen Carson, a leading Intelligent Falling expert known for her work with the Kansan Youth Ministry. "They've been trying to do it for the better part of a century now, and despite all their empirical observation and carefully compiled data, they still don't know how."

"Traditional scientists admit that they cannot explain how gravitation is supposed to work," Carson said. "What the gravity-agenda scientists need to realize is that 'gravity waves' and 'gravitons' are just secular words for 'God can do whatever He wants.'"

Some evangelical physicists propose that Intelligent Falling provides an elegant solution to the central problem of modern physics.

"Anti-falling physicists have been theorizing for decades about the 'electromagnetic force,' the 'weak nuclear force,' the 'strong nuclear force,' and so-called 'force of gravity,'" Burdett said. "And they tilt their findings toward trying to unite them into one force. But readers of the Bible have already known for millennia what this one, unified force is: His name is Jesus."


 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
RE: Hee Hee, a Gravity Debate now?

There have been arguments about exactly what gravity is for some time now.
 

Twila

Nanah Potato
Mar 26, 2003
14,698
73
48
You gotta love The Onion. Somewhere someone is believing this........
 

GL Schmitt

Electoral Member
Mar 12, 2005
785
0
16
Ontario
Re: RE: A Gravity Debate now?

Say what you want, but if it weren't for Intelligent Design some people would have no intellectual activity in their lives. :roll:
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
Nice observation GL, of the trenchant sort I've come to expect from you. Unfortunately, Intelligent Design really isn't meaningful intellectual activity, it's pure pseudo-scientific bullshit of the worst sort. It does require something that might be called thought to understand and believe it, but it's a case where I'd have to say that anything is not better than nothing. And as somebody once said, a lot of people believe they're thinking when all they're doing is rearranging their prejudices.
 

Cosmo

House Member
Jul 10, 2004
3,725
22
38
Victoria, BC
Dexter Sinister said:
And as somebody once said, a lot of people believe they're thinking when all they're doing is rearranging their prejudices.

Love it, Dexter. Great quote.

I used to have a bumper sticker on my car that said, "Gravity is an illusion -- the Earth sucks". Of course that was back in my cynical days. ;)
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
Dexter Sinister said:
Nice observation GL, of the trenchant sort I've come to expect from you. Unfortunately, Intelligent Design really isn't meaningful intellectual activity, it's pure pseudo-scientific bullshit of the worst sort. It does require something that might be called thought to understand and believe it, but it's a case where I'd have to say that anything is not better than nothing. And as somebody once said, a lot of people believe they're thinking when all they're doing is rearranging their prejudices.


But you must admit that the level of concessions made by the creationist community in this matter have been huge. It must somewhat be a victory for the evolution community.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
They didn't really make any concessions, Jay. What they have done historically is fight to force their religious beliefs on to others. Now they've revived an old, discredited theory and are trying to present it as science without having it exposed to the rigors of scientific testing.

They haven't made concessions, what they have made is false claims.
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
I think serious concessions have been made on the topic of evolution.
 

meitme

Nominee Member
Nov 1, 2005
86
0
6
i was looking at the cristian extremist views and found some great pardoys
Last Thursdayism (sometimes Last Tuesdayism or Last Wednesdayism) is a humorous version of omphalism. It is the idea that the world was created last Thursday, but with the appearance of age: people's memories, history books, fossils, light already on the way from distant stars, and so forth.

There used to be a website that took the parody further, claiming that the Universe was created Last Thursday by Queen Maeve the housecat, who would destroy the world Next Thursday, saving those who were nice to cats and damning evildoers to the never-cleaned Eternal Litterbox.

Flying Spaghetti Monsterism
Many of the "beliefs" proposed by Henderson were intentionally chosen to parody arguments commonly set forth by proponents of Intelligent Design:

* An invisible and undetectable Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe, starting with a mountain, trees and a "midgit" (sic). All evidence pointing towards evolution was intentionally planted by this being.
* Global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct consequence of the decline in numbers of pirates since the 1800s. A graph showing the inverse correlation between the pirates and global temperatures was also provided. This component of the theory highlights the logical fallacy of correlation implying causation.
* It is disrespectful to teach their beliefs without wearing "His" chosen outfit, full pirate regalia.
* The monster continues to guide human affairs with his "noodly appendage".
* Prayers to "Him" are typically ended by "Ramen", instead of "Amen".
* Heaven has a stripper factory and a beer volcano.
* Bobby Henderson is the "prophet" of this religion.
* Every Friday is a religious holiday.


invisile pink unicorn
The Invisible Pink Unicorn (IPU) is the goddess of a satiric parody religion aimed at theistic beliefs, revolving around the notion that she takes the form of a unicorn that is paradoxically both invisible and pink.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
also i got another thing on what bush said
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/artic.../08/01/national/w200833D87.DTL&type=printable
it says that bush belives that evolution and creative design should be taugt in classes similatiously.
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
Look at what prominent ID people are saying compared to what used to be said by the creationist camp.

I think Dexter will know what I mean.
 

pastafarian

Electoral Member
Oct 25, 2005
541
0
16
in the belly of the mouse
I think serious concessions have been made on the topic of evolution.

I find this to be a remarkable statement. I can see how one can make concessions about differences of opinion, as in :"Serious concessions have been made by progressive Christians with respect to same-sex marriage." Or. "Serious concessions have been made by followers of Jerry Falwell with respect to the Godliness of Jim Crow laws."

But I'm not sure that ackowledging that the moon is not made of cheese, or that schizophrenia has causes other than demonic possession actually qualifies as a "concession".

It's more a case of being dragged kicking and screaming to ackowledge that you were wrong in the first place and that it becomes clearer with each new discovery just how wrong you were.

"Concessions?" Not quite. :roll:
 

Jay

Executive Branch Member
Jan 7, 2005
8,366
3
38
I prefer to look at this issue in the context of human history.
 

Reverend Blair

Council Member
Apr 3, 2004
1,238
1
38
Winnipeg
I prefer to look at this issue in the context of human history.

Human history is a history of evolution though, Jay.

Look at what prominent ID people are saying compared to what used to be said by the creationist camp.

Yeah, I have. What they are saying is their god still must have created us because they say so. They have no legitimate scientific proof, yet they want their "theory" accepted as sound science. Not only that, but because their "theory" is part of their religious belief system, they also don't want that "theory" questioned or criticised. I've spoken to people on mushrooms who had a better grasp of reality than the ID folks do, but the people on mushrooms weren't claiming that I should accept their hallucinations as scientific fact.
 

Dexter Sinister

Unspecified Specialist
Oct 1, 2004
10,168
536
113
Regina, SK
Re: RE: A Gravity Debate now?

Jay said:
I think Dexter will know what I mean.

Oh yeah, I know what you mean alright, but I don't agree with you. Trying to beat down the front door didn't work, so now they're trying to sneak in the back door. They've tarted up their nonsense with scientific-sounding terminology and enlisted a few people with legitimate scientific credentials, but they've made no real concessions that I can see. They've just changed tactics.

And they're still wrong.