Wingnut Daily says: NASA finds religion on Mars
johac
thing that this Wingnut is trying to be serious.
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37774
---
NASA finds religion on Mars
Posted: March 27, 2004
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Kelly Hollowell
© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com
Who doesn't like gazing at the stars? Whether you're a hopeless
romantic, a geek scientist or deep-thinking philosopher, it is hard not
to be amazed at an uncorrupted view of the night sky. I still remember
one occasion driving through the Italian Alps when I opened my eyes and
lost my breath at the sight.
Even as a kid my favorite show was "Star Trek": "Space the final
frontier Š to boldly go where no man has gone before." I mean, how cool
is that? But if geeky space stories and sci-fi drama don't getcha,
close-ups of the real thing will.
Some of the most amazing pictures I have ever seen come from NASA
probes. I am so enthralled with astronomy; I actually had a difficult
time choosing between the study of outer space and inner space
(molecular biology). I chose the latter but have always retained my
fascination with the stars.
Much to my interest there was plethora of space-related news last week.
* An asteroid nearly 100 feet in diameter made the closest approach
to Earth ever recorded a mere 26,500 miles away. (For a little
perspective, the Moon is about 238,000 miles away from Earth.)
* In a lucky shot of the Martian sky, the rover Spirit caught a UFO
on its camera. Astronomers say it could be a meteor or a spacecraft left
in orbit from a previous mission to Mars.
* Billionaire Paul Allen donated $13.5 million to help fund the
ongoing search for intelligent life in outer space. This brings Allen's
total donations to the project to $25 million dollars.
Of course, the biggest news of all was that the latest rover on Mars,
Opportunity, has achieved its main goal of detecting the past-presence
of water. This has created quite a maddening buzz in the scientific
community. So what exactly is the evidence?
Well, like a dormant crime scene, the evidence is in pieces. For
example, there are craters that look like dried lake beds and channels
that look like dried riverbeds. There are lava-like rocks with cracks
and cavities likely created by seeping water. There are recently
discovered "blueberries" embedded in stratified bedrock, which are
similar to structures on Earth that form inside wet rocks. There is also
a substantial amount of a mineral in the bedrock that only forms in the
presence of trapped water. And there are images of odd ripples and
angles in the bedrock, indicating sediment was pushed around by flowing
water.
But the piece de resistance appears to be evidence of rocks not only
modified and altered by water but also formed in the water, perhaps in a
shallow salty sea. Specifically, rocks were found similar to those on
earth that are formed by a process of evaporation of seawater. NASA
scientists suggest that this indicates a shallow salty sea once pooled
on the now-frozen surface of Mars that could have supported life. They
claim this discovery has profound implications for astrobiology.
In response, many NASA-funded scientists are ecstatic. In short, they
assume the presence of water is a necessary condition for life. And
since a great many of them also assume life evolved on earth, they
believe it must have evolved on other planets as well. That means they
view the discovery of the past-presence of water on Mars as a twofer.
First, it's a big return on the billions of dollars poured into space
research. Second, it brings believers in evolution one step closer to
refueling the weakening presumption of this theory on earth.
The question is "Will they find any signs of past or present life on
Mars? If they do, what will it really mean?"
By now it should be painfully obvious that for many, space exploration
and the search for life on other planets reflect not only man's quest
for adventure and knowledge but the search for why we are here and how
we arrived. In other words, discover life on Mars; prove evolution;
disprove God.
As evidenced by their comments, researchers are already and unabashedly
setting the stage to claim evolution was at work on Mars. To which I can
only say this is where I part company with many scientists and space
enthusiasts.
The bottom line is life cannot rise from inanimate material. No one
needs a Ph.D. to know that a rock sitting in a pool of salt water will
not produce life no matter how many times lightening strikes. So if
signs of life are found on Mars, what are the other possibilities? There
are at least four:
* Intelligent design;
* Contamination from one or more of the many space probes we sent to
the red planet;
* Catastrophic plate tectonics that could have launched volcanic
rock from earth eventually landing on Mars; and/or
* Fragments from a collision of a large asteroid with earth
jettisoned into space from the impact.
In any case, the explanation is not an automatic eight ball in the side
pocket of evolution. There are alternatives. So wouldn't it be
refreshing if NASA scientists could disentangle the evidence from their
religious worldview?
Kelly Hollowell, J.D., Ph.D., is a scientist, patent attorney and
adjunct law professor of bioethics. She is also a nationally recognized
conference speaker and founder of Science Ministries Inc.
---
Science Ministries, Snork! She claims to be a molecular biologist, even
though her article shows little understanding of the subject. She makes
the common creationist mistake of confounding origin of life
(abiogenesis) with evolution. Life from 'lightening' striking a rock?
Whoever claimed that? Where did she get that Ph. D.? Bob Jones U?
--
John Hachmann aa #1782
"Men become civilized not in their willingness to believe, but in
proportion to their readiness to doubt." - H. L. Mencken
*nemo*
W. Syme <Winston.Syme....@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 01:43:57 -0800, johac <jha...@ixpresremove.com>
> had the following opinion:
>
> >If this were posted somewhere else, I would say it was satire. Sadly, I
> >thing that this Wingnut is trying to be serious.
> >
> >
> >
> >http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37774
>
> "No one needs a Ph.D. to know that a rock sitting in a pool of salt
> water will not produce life no matter how many times lightening
> strikes."
>
> That a gigantic enough strawman for ya?
But coming from a biologist... that's amazing. I wonder if she got her
PhD from Bob Jones U?
--
Nemo - EAC Commissioner for Bible Belt Underwater Operations.
Atheist #1331 (the Palindrome of doom!)
BAAWA Knight! - One of those warm Southern Knights, y'all!
Charter member, SMASH!!
http://home.earthlink.net/~jehdjh/Relpg.html
Draco Dormiens Nunquam Titillandus
Quotemeister since March 2002
Lord Calvert
>> water will not produce life no matter how many times lightening
>> strikes."
>>
>> That a gigantic enough strawman for ya?
>
>But coming from a biologist... that's amazing. I wonder if she got her
>PhD from Bob Jones U?
If you look at her bio you will find that she has done far more work as an
attorney than as a biologist. She is currently teaching bioethics at the
University of Richmond and Regent University Law School however nowhere can I
find which university she obtained her PhD or her JD from.
Whoops...found it.
Kelli Hollowell got her B.A. at the University of South Florida at New College
in 1987. She got her PhD in Molecular and Cellular Pharmacology at the
University of Miami School of Medicine in 1996. She got her JD at the Regent
University (aka "Pat Robertson U") School of Law in 1999.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Department of Applied Rattan Use
"Without faith we might relapse into scientific or rational thinking, which
leads by a slippery slope toward constitutional democracy." - Robert Anton
Wilson
Brian Westley
>In article <268abd60f0f3cdcd...@news.1usenet.com>,
> W. Syme <Winston.Syme....@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 01:43:57 -0800, johac <jha...@ixpresremove.com>
>> had the following opinion:
>>
>> >If this were posted somewhere else, I would say it was satire. Sadly, I
>> >thing that this Wingnut is trying to be serious.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37774
>>
>> "No one needs a Ph.D. to know that a rock sitting in a pool of salt
>> water will not produce life no matter how many times lightening
>> strikes."
>>
>> That a gigantic enough strawman for ya?
>But coming from a biologist... that's amazing. I wonder if she got her
>PhD from Bob Jones U?
University of Cracker-Jacks?
---
Merlyn LeRoy
Mark K. Bilbo
<jhachm-F65420....@news-60.giganews.com> we saw our hero johac
<jha...@ixpresremove.com>:
> Kelly Hollowell, J.D., Ph.D., is a scientist, patent attorney and adjunct
> law professor of bioethics.
Another Ph.D. "in science?"
--
Mark K. Bilbo - a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
"Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism,
because it is a merger of State and corporate power."
- Mussolini
Bob
"W. Syme" <Winston.Syme....@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:268abd60f0f3cdcd...@news.1usenet.com...
> >thing that this Wingnut is trying to be serious.
> >
> >
> >
> >http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37774
>
> strikes."
>
> That a gigantic enough strawman for ya?
Well, organics need to be present if our type of life is to start.
Obviously she is more a lawyer than a scientist of whatever field she got
her degree in.
> --
>
> W. Syme, European, "soft" atheist.
> To send email, remove superstitions.
jwk
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 01:43:57 -0800 in episode
> <jhachm-F65420....@news-60.giganews.com> we saw our hero johac
> <jha...@ixpresremove.com>:
>
> > Kelly Hollowell, J.D., Ph.D., is a scientist, patent attorney and adjunct
> > law professor of bioethics.
>
> Another Ph.D. "in science?"
Yep. They're everywhere.
jwk
johac
forl...@aol.complicated (Lord Calvert) wrote:
> >> "No one needs a Ph.D. to know that a rock sitting in a pool of salt
> >> water will not produce life no matter how many times lightening
> >> strikes."
> >>
> >> That a gigantic enough strawman for ya?
> >
> >But coming from a biologist... that's amazing. I wonder if she got her
> >PhD from Bob Jones U?
>
> If you look at her bio you will find that she has done far more work as an
> attorney than as a biologist. She is currently teaching bioethics at the
> University of Richmond and Regent University Law School however nowhere can I
> find which university she obtained her PhD or her JD from.
>
> Whoops...found it.
>
> Kelli Hollowell got her B.A. at the University of South Florida at New College
> in 1987. She got her PhD in Molecular and Cellular Pharmacology at the
> University of Miami School of Medicine in 1996. She got her JD at the Regent
> University (aka "Pat Robertson U") School of Law in 1999.
>
I don't know much about South Florida, but I thougth that Miami was a
decent school. Oh, well. But why a Ph. D. in science would want to study
anything at a fundy school like Regents U. is totally beyond me.
From the introduction to their Law school site:
http://www.regent.edu/acad/schlaw/
"Regent University School of Law is distinctive among law schools
approved by the American Bar Association because of the integration of
Christian Principles into our curriculum. It is this balance of
professional legal training and the affirmation of biblical principles
that enables our graduates to provide excellent legal counsel to their
clients."
<gag>
johac
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 01:43:57 -0800, johac <jha...@ixpresremove.com>
> had the following opinion:
>
> >If this were posted somewhere else, I would say it was satire. Sadly, I
> >thing that this Wingnut is trying to be serious.
> >
> >
> >
> >http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=37774
>
> "No one needs a Ph.D. to know that a rock sitting in a pool of salt
> water will not produce life – no matter how many times lightening
> strikes."
>
> That a gigantic enough strawman for ya?
That's all that their arguments are. Straw.
johac
"Mark K. Bilbo" <y...@hoo.com-amikchi> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 01:43:57 -0800 in episode
> <jhachm-F65420....@news-60.giganews.com> we saw our hero johac
> <jha...@ixpresremove.com>:
>
> > Kelly Hollowell, J.D., Ph.D., is a scientist, patent attorney and adjunct
> > law professor of bioethics.
>
> Another Ph.D. "in science?"
I have a Ph. D. in science, and I know many others Ph. D. scientists. I
am disgusted with these people who claim to be scientists, but obviously
ignore scientific methods and principles in their assertions and
arguments.
Mark K. Bilbo
<jhachm-357462....@news-60.giganews.com> we saw our hero johac
<jha...@ixpresremove.com>:
> In article <pan.2004.03.27....@hoo.com-amikchi>,
> "Mark K. Bilbo" <y...@hoo.com-amikchi> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 01:43:57 -0800 in episode
>> <jhachm-F65420....@news-60.giganews.com> we saw our hero
>> johac <jha...@ixpresremove.com>:
>>
>> > Kelly Hollowell, J.D., Ph.D., is a scientist, patent attorney and
>> > adjunct law professor of bioethics.
>>
>> Another Ph.D. "in science?"
>
> I have a Ph. D. in science, and I know many others Ph. D. scientists. I am
> disgusted with these people who claim to be scientists, but obviously
> ignore scientific methods and principles in their assertions and
> arguments.
Yeah but I bet you have a degree in *a* science (or two or so). Not one of
those really cool degrees in Science!
Remember, if you have a degree in Science, you can babble with authority
about subjects you haven't studied since High School *and get lecture fees
from creationist organizations.
They're handy degrees those...
Doc Smartass
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 22:53:32 -0800, johac <jha...@ixpresremove.com>
> had the following opinion:
>
>>"Regent University School of Law is distinctive among law schools
>>approved by the American Bar Association because of the integration of
>>Christian Principles into our curriculum. It is this balance of
>>professional legal training and the affirmation of biblical principles
>>that enables our graduates to provide excellent legal counsel to their
>>clients."
>>
>><gag>
>
> how anyone could see the point in integrating religion in a goddamn
> law school is beyond me. Are they such children that it is impossible
> to spend ANY time of their day away from their nanny-god?
I see it as part of their ongoing desire to undermine the Constitution;
since they've found so little support in the Courts for their agenda
(banning various things, outlawing other things), they're going to try
to tweak the system by making more sympathetic lawyers. Lawyers can
eventually become judges. Judges can get to the Supreme Court.
--
Dr. Smartass
BAAWA Knight of Heckling -- a.a. #1939
Q: Why did the chicken cross the Moebius strip?
A: To get to the other...er, um...
[seen on a math jokes site]
Lord Calvert
>law school is beyond me.
It makes sense if you understand that they want to replace the Constitution
with Mosaic law. When you throw out the Constitution, which is their primary
goal, they will need trained lawyers in the new system of government.
johac
W. Syme <Winston.Syme....@fastmail.fm> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 22:53:32 -0800, johac <jha...@ixpresremove.com>
> had the following opinion:
>
> >"Regent University School of Law is distinctive among law schools
> >approved by the American Bar Association because of the integration of
> >Christian Principles into our curriculum. It is this balance of
> >professional legal training and the affirmation of biblical principles
> >that enables our graduates to provide excellent legal counsel to their
> >clients."
> >
> ><gag>
>
> how anyone could see the point in integrating religion in a goddamn
> law school is beyond me. Are they such children that it is impossible
> to spend ANY time of their day away from their nanny-god?
Robertson,Falwell, and their ilk are as much about politics as they are
about religion, maybe more so. They want to use our laws to force their
religion on us and establish a theocracy. With them in charge, of course.
johac
"Mark K. Bilbo" <y...@hoo.com-amikchi> wrote:
> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 23:09:36 -0800 in episode
> <jhachm-357462....@news-60.giganews.com> we saw our hero johac
> <jha...@ixpresremove.com>:
>
> > In article <pan.2004.03.27....@hoo.com-amikchi>,
> > "Mark K. Bilbo" <y...@hoo.com-amikchi> wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 01:43:57 -0800 in episode
> >> <jhachm-F65420....@news-60.giganews.com> we saw our hero
> >> johac <jha...@ixpresremove.com>:
> >>
> >> > Kelly Hollowell, J.D., Ph.D., is a scientist, patent attorney and
> >> > adjunct law professor of bioethics.
> >>
> >> Another Ph.D. "in science?"
> >
> > I have a Ph. D. in science, and I know many others Ph. D. scientists. I am
> > disgusted with these people who claim to be scientists, but obviously
> > ignore scientific methods and principles in their assertions and
> > arguments.
>
> Yeah but I bet you have a degree in *a* science (or two or so). Not one of
> those really cool degrees in Science!
Chemistry actually, but now that you mention it, I don't know of any
school that offers an advanced degree in 'Science'.
>
> Remember, if you have a degree in Science, you can babble with authority
> about subjects you haven't studied since High School *and get lecture fees
> from creationist organizations.
>
> They're handy degrees those...
Right. If you have a degree in 'Science' and don't know something,
instead of looking up the answer, asking someone who knows, or finding
out for yourself, you simply make something up.
Phÿltêr
0B60D6.215...@news-60.giganews.com:
> In article <e2914aedc630ec03...@news.1usenet.com>,
> W. Syme <Winston.Syme....@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 27 Mar 2004 22:53:32 -0800, johac <jha...@ixpresremove.com>
>> had the following opinion:
>>
>> >"Regent University School of Law is distinctive among law schools
>> >approved by the American Bar Association because of the integration of
>> >Christian Principles into our curriculum. It is this balance of
>> >professional legal training and the affirmation of biblical principles
>> >that enables our graduates to provide excellent legal counsel to their
>> >clients."
>> >
>> ><gag>
>>
>> how anyone could see the point in integrating religion in a goddamn
>> law school is beyond me. Are they such children that it is impossible
>> to spend ANY time of their day away from their nanny-god?
>
> Robertson,Falwell, and their ilk are as much about politics as they are
> about religion, maybe more so. They want to use our laws to force their
> religion on us and establish a theocracy. With them in charge, of course.
The "United Theocracy of America" has a kind of ring to it.
As does "Theocratic Republic"
Wait, wait, what about "United American Theocratic States"
Hell, it's not far removed from "United Soviet Socialist Republic"
My rough Russian recollection is Salyutska Sovietski Socialistische
Respublica. SSSR, or, in Cyrillic, CCCP.
Ok, I'm rambling now....
--
Phÿltêr
Denizen of Darkness #44 & AFJC Antipodean Attaché
http://www.rudraigh.com/afjc/regulars.html
Change "freeway" to "hotmail" to respond
johac
"Phÿltêr" <Phÿltêr...@freeway.com> wrote:
Or The Christian Republic of America like The Islamic Republic of Iran,
or wherever. To reflect the true nature of the new country, they might
call it, The Christian Republic of America - Halliburton, Inc.
Phÿltêr
BossBushLand. No admittance without a Bible and contempt for anyone but
white, rich christians with shares in Halliburton. M16 optional...
johac
"Phÿltêr" <Phÿltêr...@freeway.com> wrote:
I think that the M16s are for the cannon fodder, i. e. anyone who is not
a rich white christian. BushCorp needs an willing underclass to fight
its neoimperialist wars.
Phÿltêr
That's suberversive talk Johac, keep an eye out for black helicopters and
men in black knocking on your door...
--
Phÿltêr
Denizen of Darkness #44 & AFJC Antipodean Attaché
http://afjc.clickhalah.com/forum/index.php
johac
"Phÿltêr" <Phÿltêr...@freeway.com> wrote:
Heh! Heh! I'm sure that I'm on Asscrack's 'little list'. I'm not
worried. I may be getting old, but I can still put up a nasty fight. :-)