Greetings from beyond everyone, it has been a few weeks since my last entry but I have returned. Blogs are really funny things, you can be all about them and write in them all the time, but skip a week and its just as easy to skip four more, I honestly don't know what it is. I also don't get paid for this or anything so the only thing compelling me to write is my willingness to have the public eye on my words, perhaps to get some feedback, mayhaps not. Anyway, on with the show...
I read something today that really shocked me, more because someone actually had the idea rather than it actually working. This article comes from CNet, but takes place in Wales where teenage loitering is SO rampant that this guy has come up with a High Frequency Teenager whistle that emits a high frequency sound people under 20 can here, but people over 30 find inaudible, supposedly. This is not an exact science here, even though its proven that you lose your ability to hear high frequency sounds as you grow older, the change is pretty slow going so its not like one day you wake up and your immune to high frequency sounds. The idea is innovative though and supposedly works. RTFA, there are some pretty choice quotes in there.
And another update in the battle that is Intelligent Design. In this story a couple is suing UC Berkeley because they believe a website that seeks to explain envolutionary theory to students favors one religion (The religion of evolution??) over others (I did not know evolution was a religion). This couples says that the web site which speaks about other religions and there ability to co-exist with the theory of evolution is improperly swaying students to accept evolution as true when it most certainly has many flaws. I love this shit, this has now gotten to a point where a couple is calling evolution itself a sort of religion and bashing it because it is promoting itself over other religions. If you read this I am sure you will be confused because the whole notion makes no sense.
I recently read an article in Harpers magazine that talks about how ID proponents are using persuasive and definitive left wing arguments to support the idea of ID. Using phrases like knowledge and understanding is never ever set or steadfast and that it must always be challenged, they say the argument for ID CANNOT be thrown out because of the necessity to have differing viewpoints in the academic circle. This is a very compelling argument, but it is really knocked on its head when the author of the article points out that when scholars and men made these statements it was implicit that the arguments brought to challenge whatever theory it was going to challenge would have validation from the peers that were in discussion of the theory in question. Basically if you want to refute a theory by putting it up against another one, the theory that you bring with you cannot be seen as ludicrous and a waste of time by the people that are involved in the debate. This would seem obvious to most rational people without an agenda.
I wrote in a post a long time ago that I also had a theory of evolution that involved us coming from a super intelligent race of sea monkeys. If I raised this as a real theory opposing evolution I would be laughed at, things might even be thrown. Before you say that my theory and ID are vastly different, take a close look at both of them. Neither have any substantial proof and are based on speculation and fantasy. I am not trying to knock any religion or its story of creation, but once you put things into the context of scientific theory you open yourself up to a whole lot of examination that many semi valid theories cannot withstand, much less the theory of ID or Seamonkeyism.
No comments:
Post a Comment