Re: My local Missouri morons are at it again.

On Jan 4, 4:28 pm, Jo Schaper <jonot34schape...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
El Guapo wrote:
"George" <geo...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:KW5fj.32740$k27.18341@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Jean" <jean.len...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:477cc172$0$867$ba4acef3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
George a écrit dans le message ...
"Jean" <jean.len...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:477c9886$0$871$ba4acef3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

A legal standard for dating is needed. Using AD or BC does not
interfere
with an university using BP in the geology department or any other
dating
system for scientific use.
Umm, what part of "Neither the state, nor any political subdivision,
shall
use any
other designation", do you not understand?

George

Yes I do ! It is obvious that you do not!!

JL
Obviously, you don't understand. Our state universities are part of the
State government. Which means, according to the wording of that law, they
would be required to use AD and BC in all of their publications. This is
clearly a case of trying to force science (and society at large) to revert
back to "the good ole days". It is yet another attempt by bigoted
Christians to usurp secular society by forcing their beliefs on believers
and non-believers alike. It's absurd (and probably a violation of our
constitutional rights), and shouldn't be allowed.

OK, I agree - it's absurd. It's about as absurd as the move to stop using
BC/AD was in the first place, considering that the terms were very
recognizable to everybody. I mean, really, what's the big deal? Were
unsuspecting non-Christians going to be subversively converted to
Christianity because of BC/AD? Did it hurt people's feelings? Give me a
break. I'm an atheist myself, yet somehow I still slept at night, even
while knowing that religious references were defining our calendar
terminology. OH, the HORROR!

I have no objection if people (even the state of Missouri)want to use a
calendar based on the appearance of the Crab Nebula, or the birthday of
someone's poodle. I don't object to the use of AD/BC or CE/BCE on
correspondence or laws -- that's all the same to me. I don't think we've
got a problem of people knowing when it is. He is fixing a non-existent
problem IMO.

It is the second sentence which bothers me: "Neither the state, nor
any political subdivision, shall use any other designation."
That's an open invitation to the young earthers to sue, based on the
law, against state and state academic publications which use other time
scales, such as geologic and archaeological time scales, which would
clearly be forbidden unless converted to the AD/BC system.

I suspect, if you took a poll of all adults in the state, people who
are convinced the earth is 4-5 billion years old are outnumbered by
people who believe the earth was created at 4004 B.C. on October 22, at
11 a.m. around here, and it's that way because the Bible said so. I'd
rather peacefully co-exist with those people until they start stepping
on the toes of science.


Before you judge other people I suggest you look to yourself first and
test what you believe as an individual and as part of 'science'.You
will discover why people choose to believe in concepts which they
otherwise would not dream of doing,more as a reaction to the ultra-
secularism of the empirical cult and the awful way it goes about
applying the 'experimental method' to topics that do not require such
an 'experimental' approach,evolutionary geology,astronomy and to some
extent climatology as examples.So,how bad is the situation ! - it is
really,really desperate, so let me show you exactly how shocking your
beliefs actually are.


If I were to ask people who is was the most famous scientist of the
last century ,most people here would agree that it was Einstein.If I
asked the same people the reason why he was considered a genius ,there
would be a sharp drop in responses or they were simply in concord with
the general agreement that he did something special,something which is
proposed to this day by many of the well known universities -

'What does the word 'spacetime' mean?' Question 42

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"It means that in our universe, 3-dimensional space and time form a
single indivisible new physical object which has 4 dimensions. All
physical laws and phenomena seem to require thinking about space and
time as this blended object. That's what Einstein's relativity
theories were all about."

http://einstein.stanford.edu/


The last line of that statement is curious or at least it should be,
for although Einstein did propose space/time in the 20th century,the
actual concept existed in the 19th century as a narrative contrivance
by H.G. Wells for his enjoyable fiction novel - 'The Time Machine' -

"Scientific people,' proceeded the Time Traveller, after the pause
required for the proper assimilation of this, 'know very well that
Time is only a kind of Space" H.G. Wells

http://www.bartleby.com/1000/1.html

So,if you want to know something that actually is scary then discover
how your 'science' tries to pass off as 'achievements',concepts which
could be found in any science fiction section of a bookstore in the
late 19th century.




















That's the reason it's a big deal: to see this bill stays in committee
and dies a natural death. Incidentally, the senator who introduced this
isn't some rural yahoo-- he represents one of the most affluent urba -


suburbs of St. Louis. That's what's really scary.

Here in the MidWaste, fighting against the dark ages...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Is my CS instructor nuts?
    ... absolute blacks and whites are rare in nature. ... they can CHANGE the law at that level. ... a computer science class, but then dismissed, like Zionism or Fortran. ... the patent office do not legislate the second ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: More for Mihos, was Re: Rush Limbaugh, Astrophysicist
    ... the only science expert they had... ... first law of thermodynamics. ...  Yet, the Big Bang ... that study the evolution of the universe, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: In the News: Tenn. AG: No constitutional concerns with
    ... How is it possible to determine if life was created not by the naturalistic ... it can be explained by "natural law". ... You seem to be saying that a miracle ... I don't think science should assume that anything that can be ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Wired Article: Clive Thompson on Why Science Will Triumph Only When
    ... Clive Thompson on Why Science Will Triumph Only When Theory Becomes ... sticker on the cover that reads, EVOLUTION IS A THEORY, NOT A FACT, ... Scientists use ... more venerable language and refer to such knowledge as "law." ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: My local Missouri morons are at it again.
    ... with an university using BP in the geology department or any other dating ... He is fixing a non-existent problem IMO. ... That's an open invitation to the young earthers to sue, based on the law, against state and state academic publications which use other time scales, such as geologic and archaeological time scales, which would clearly be forbidden unless converted to the AD/BC system. ...
    (sci.geo.geology)