Intelligent Design

So, over at Clew's Blues, Clew rants about a young punk and Bush's right to be a creationist and we voted him in, so just buckle up for the ride, junior.

I sort of agree. If you disagree with an administration's policies, you should say so... maybe even make an appeal to others in hopes that it becomes big enough to concern the policymakers. But it's not like he took the oath and surprised us by becoming Christian all of a sudden. So odds are the majority is okay with that... and whiners are stuck.

But she made mention of a peeve of mine: THEORY. I used all caps for a reason. This came under the whole THEORY of Evolution vs. Creationism, and that, due to Evolution being only a THEORY, we should discount it, or give it very little credence.

F*** that.

Scientific Theory is like rock, baby. Sometimes that rock is talc, such as the lamarkian theory of evolution (notice that one in the text books lately?), but it's put forward and given a serious going over by professional thinkers. I cannot begin to express the value of people like Einstein, whose body of work is considered THEORY, to society. Anyone think those Nuclear Plants are running on Pixie Dust? How about Angel Dust? Hope not.

It is outside the scope of science to determine the presence or lack of presence of an omniscient being that doesn't want to be found out by direct observation... and it's really not the job that science sets out to do. Scientists don't go looking for proof of Oprah, or Trump... why bother?

Science sets forth to determine the natural laws that bind us, or set us free. And give man a framework that can be used to allow us to climb higher.

Feel free to put a "Tower of Babel" reference in the comments. I won't complain.

Thing is... nothing can be proven.

Let that sink in. Nothing. There's a line of philosophy that sets you up as a brain, in a jar, at a lab, with sensations being sent to you, making you believe this is your life. Your body is an illusion. And you can't really disprove it.

Proving that light goes at a certain rate [i]is[/i] provable... but only under ideal circumstances... matter slows it down or stops it. And the speed becomes a variable. It's still fast, but there's little way of knowing exactly how fast.

Prove that gravity exists. Go ahead. Prove that nothing else does it. Nothing else. It's not simply God's will, or a force that pulls things to planets (which is not all that gravity does, lest we forget), nor the work of infinite invisible gnomes.

Prove, mathematically, that your couch exists. Frustrating, isn't it? It takes some serious work. Your couch doesn't exist until you can measure density, by the way. Or can prove that it isn't simply solid light or some bizarre hitherto unknown natural phenomenon. Or the will of God that your butt hover 1.5 feet off the floor with the illusion of a couch.

I'm kind of a science geek, so that's where I'm coming from, and I can only imagine the frustration that Newton would've expressed at having his life's work scoffed as nothing but THEORY. Which it would be under today's guidelines for such things. Nothing is made scientific law anymore.

Christ.