This year has marked, I believe, the beginning of the end of the war between science and religion. Creationism cannot last. The New Atheists are now old (or departed). And between these camps the middle ground continues to expand.

Paul Wallace, who is obviously on drugs, goes on to list the “Top Ten Peacemakers in the Science-Religion Wars.”

Some of the points Paul makes in this post may well be valid, and some of those he list may indeed be worthy of such a distinction, but I personally see the “war” between science and religion being nowhere near close to and end, and his suggestion that “Creationism cannot last” tells me that he is not very familiar with the issue of creationism in the US and its attack on science education.

One indicator that there may be something wrong here is the listing of Jack Templeton of the Templeton Foundation, “for bringing science into the church.” Also, apparently, one of Paul’s criteria for peace between science and religion is in decoupling atheism from science, once we’ve put science into the church, thus his listing of “Chris Stedman, interfaith activist and super-swell atheist guy, for decoupling atheism from science, and for being the face of a kinder, gentler atheism.” I’m sure Chris is doing great work and stuff, but if the decoupling of atheism and science is a criterion for advancement, then we are more likely to regress than progress.

I don’t know “Rachel Held Evans, author, speaker, blogger” but why is she on the list for “for making science & religion her thing, but not her main thing”? Is the “war” supposed to go away because we start ignroing it? Apparently she is a religious person who has fully accepted evolution. I suppose that is a good thing on it’s own, but religious people not being idiotic about science is hardly a victory. What we need is the full embrace of good science in science policy. Now. Not “they stopped bothering to hate science.” It is almost as though Paul Wallace is calling the American Civil War nearly over in 1863 with the assumption that the war will wind down soon and there will be an uneasy peace between the North and the South as separate nations.

How do you include “All Those People Who Are Not Backing the Ark Park” on the list of peacmakers in a post declaring the war between religion and science nearly over when the majority of Kentuckians back the Ark Park?

I have not had time to do a thorough analysis of this post, but perhaps you will and then report back! Again, the post is here. I see The Crommunist has written something up: Religion and Science “Peacemakers”? Stupid, stupid man…. Her is not as nice as I am.

For those “peacemakers” (which can be read more accurately as “appeasers”) like Mr. Wallace, this is a lengthy exercise in wishful thinking. However, as President Bush failed to learn in his first term, simply announcing “Mission Accomplished” is not a substitute for actually checking to see if your opponent is truly vanquished.

Damn, I wish I had thought of that “Mission Accomplished” thing!

Share and Enjoy:
  • Twitter
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Digg
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn

3 thoughts on “Apparently, the war between science and religion is nearly over

  1. I find it interesting that he has Jon Huntsman on the list and then says in that section, “This year’s field of Republican presidential candidates has distinguished itself as possibly the least science-friendly in history.” Yeah, that’s correct! The “war between science and religion” is winding down so much that we can have such a field! Wait… why does that sound backward? Shouldn’t, if the war is coming to an end, we have a more science-friendly Republican field?

  2. What no Stephen Jay Gould?

    I mean okay he hasn’t been with us along time but he never specified ” ..of this year” did he?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *