Genesis 9:20-25

"And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness. And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren."

----------------

Gus: of course this makes a lot of sense to creationists.

But to reasonable people this would represent Boloney or at best a funny moment in history without particular breadth about someone who may have lived about 11,000 years ago at the time of the big melt, the end of the last ice age... After 40 days and forty night, Noah's floating zoo would have been a smelly dirty fornicating place, bad enough to drive you to drink... Just joking.

We can cope with ignorance if we must but we cannot accept misinformation. As proper scientific facts came to the fore, religious legends should have been only visited in the fairytales context, not the pseudo-sciento-illogical denaturing way.

In the toon above I express my dismay at the way too many humans are still drugged by the opium of unquestioned religion, especially in the USA, while the planet is about to be degraded beyond its natural limits by our carelessness. No matter the ark we build, no matter many people's generous dedication to save species, on balance the onslaught from our greed is doing ten times more damage than we can fix.

So we need to care about this planet like we've never done before via scientific altruistic compassion that does not destroy. smother nor control. 

We need to restrict ourselves. We need to restrict our desires to own it all, possess it all and grab it all, selfishly. Global warming might seetle our vanity and hubris.

Creationist row forces scientist to quit Royal Society post

By Steve Connor, Science Editor
Wednesday, 17 September 2008

The scientist who said creationism should be discussed in science lessons has left his job at the Royal Society. Professor Michael Reiss stepped down yesterday as the Royal Society's director of education following remarks he made last week at the British Association for the Advancement of Science suggesting that creationism should be included in science lessons.

Robert Winston, the IVF pioneer, criticised the Royal Society for condemning someone who was only trying to engage with the growing number of children in Britain who come from deeply religious families holding creationist beliefs. "I fear that in this action the Royal Society may have only diminished itself," said Lord Winston.

"This is not a good day for the reputation of science or scientists. This individual was arguing that we should engage with and address public misconceptions about science – something that the Royal Society should applaud."

Professor Reiss had emphasised last week that he did not want creationism to be taught in science lessons, only that science teachers should be able to treat it as another "world view" that has no scientific basis. However, the Royal Society was forced to issue a clarifying statement last week saying that his remarks had been "misrepresented" by the media and that it had not changed its position on creationism, stating that it should not be taught as science.

The Royal Society issued a second statement yesterday saying that Professor Reiss has stepped down as director of education, a post that he had held on secondment from his usual job as professor of science education at the Institute of Education in London.

"Some of Professor Michael Reiss's recent comments, on the issue of creationism in schools, while speaking as director of education, were open to misinterpretation," the Royal Society said. "While it was not his intention, this has led to damage to the Society's reputation. As a result, Professor Reiss and the Royal Society have agreed that, in the best interests of the Society, he will step down immediately."

-----------------------

Gus: why not also teach fairy-tales as scientific viewpoints? I like the one with the pumpkin... or what about teaching alchemistry as well... More fool's gold about... Give an inch to the creationists, they take an arm and pump your brain with erroneous mush.

We fought them in the bloodied trenches here in Australia in the 1980s, in bruising battle of relative science versus absolute grandiose ignorance...

Too many faith schools are presently devising new battle lines not only against true science but also against each others, preparing the Jihads and the Crusades of the future. Silly...  Governments should give thousand times more money to science studies than to sport — and nix to faith studies. A Royal Society should only support science, not even give a minute entry point to garbagial belief systems.

Hey, why not teach Cartoonism as an exact science too? What's cartoonism I hear you ask... It's a simple belief that God is the supreme cartoonist who drew the human unfortunate shape in the mirror image of a naked monkey with no tail, all this about 7 minutes ago... The end of the universe is planned for yesterday... Only cartoonists go to heaven, bugger everyone else. But then have I been good...? It seems not, since quite a few of my Cartoonism venerable iconic images have disappeared from this site... Yes, as I was trying to link a few cartoonism dogma to this article, I noticed they'd vanished... HELP! This is really serious...

Sorry, Charlie: Church Apologizes to Darwin

 

Proving it's never too late to evolve, the Church of England has apologized to Charles Darwin for vilifying him for having the audacity to question, wonder, and doubt.

Darwin has been dead for 126 years, so it probably doesn't matter much to him, but the apology comes with a fascinating essay that could start a more intelligent conversation between religion and science, especially when it comes to the origin -- or genesis -- of the species.

"Charles Darwin: 200 years from your birth, the Church of England owes you an apology for misunderstanding you and, by getting our first reaction wrong, encouraging others to misunderstand you still," Rev. Malcolm Brown, director of missions and public affairs for the Church of England, wrote in an essay entitled "Good Religion Needs Good Science."

"We try to practice the old virtues of 'faith seeking understanding' and hope that makes some amends."

Brown's amends include a much needed corrective that Sarah Palin, Pat Robertson and other Christian creationists might consider.

-----------------

see toon on top and nightmare in genesis