[ RadSafe ] Drawing the line between science andpseudo-science. (was Rational Thought) Bit off-topic

[Neil, David M]

If you go with the calculations by Dr. Gerald Schroeder, it's all a tempest in a teapot in the first place. Relativistic time effects of the expansion of the universe make both numbers correct for their respective referential frames. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Schroeder

When in doubt, I fall back on Galileo and Catherine Faber.
"I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use." ― Galileo Galilei
"Men wrote the Bible.  God wrote the rocks." - Cat Faber "Word of God" 
At http://www.echoschildren.org/CDlyrics/WORDGOD.HTML

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu [mailto:radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Demetrios Okkalides
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 1:39 PM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Drawing the line between science andpseudo-science. (was Rational Thought)

Dear Howard,

I think it matters because that is what it is stated in the bible. I think 
that the real question is: "Is the bible the written word of god?" If 
someone thinks it is, then it should be taken at face value and there should 
not be anything mistaken in it, never. Not 1000 years ago, nor 1000 years 
from now. Nothing mistaken in its morals, nothing mistaken in its history, 
nothing mistaken in its physics, nothing mistaken in its engineering. There 
should be any need for explanations, interpretations and disabmiguations. 
For if one phrase is evidently mistaken then more may also be mistaken.


Demetrios Okkalides
THEAGENEION Anticancer Hospital
Thessaloniki
Greece



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Howard" <howard.long at comcast.net>
To: "The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) MailingList" 
<radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu>
Cc: "radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu" <radsafe at agni.phys.iit.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2011 8:39 PM
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] Drawing the line between science andpseudo-science. 
(was Rational Thought)


>
>
> I am deeply troubled by the forceful insistence of some conservative 
> friends that
> God created the earth in 7 revolutions of the earth. It crowds out 
> attention to traditional values.
>
> If we but accept the possibility that time is an aspect of God that is 
> beyond our understanding,
> like the incomprehendably complex chemical reactions in healing, then we 
> can keep our attention on restoration of traditional values.
>
> What does it matter if human beings took millions of years instead of 
> thousands
> to reach where we are now, compared with promoting the Ten Commandments?
>
> For example, the traditional value, "Thou shall not steal."
> Thomas Jefferson wrote John Taylor in 1816,
> "Funding - to be paid by posterity - is swindling."
>
> Most conflict of Christians with science disappears and morality remains 
> top issue,
> when we accept human incapacity to comprehend the extent of God's "Day",
>
> Howard Long MD MPH family doctor and epidemiologist
>
> On Oct 5, 2011, at 8:40 AM, "Busby, Chris" <C.Busby at ulster.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> Steven Dapra takes some time to attack me.
>> But talking about creationism, I believe that Steven Dapra is a 
>> Creationist. Is that right, Steven?
>> And dont knock Sternglass. His work is broadly correct.
>> Chris
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: radsafe-bounces at agni.phys.iit.edu on behalf of Harrison, Tony
>> Sent: Wed 05/10/2011 15:02
>> To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
>> Subject: [ RadSafe ] Drawing the line between science and pseudo-science. 
>> (was Rational Thought)
>>
>> Interesting blog here:
>>
>> http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/doing-good-science/2011/10/04/drawing-the-line-between-science-and-pseudo-science/
>>
>> The example given is the debate between evolution and "creation science" 
>> but the arguments apply just as much to anti- (or pro-) nuke opinions. 
>> Take a moment to think about what sort of evidence it would take to 
>> convince you that your beliefs are false, and then see if such evidence 
>> exists.
>>
>> Busby's citation of Sternglass et alia is laughable, but so are some of 
>> the pro-hormesis papers cited here over the years.  Both just show that 
>> the peer-review process is far from perfect.  Too many propagandists out 
>> there, and not enough scientists.
>> _______________________________________________
>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>>
>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood 
>> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
>> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>
>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
>> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>>
>> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood 
>> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
>> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>>
>> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
>> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
> _______________________________________________
> You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list
>
> Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood 
> the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: 
> http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html
>
> For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings 
> visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu
> 

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood the RadSafe rules. These can be found at: http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu