(no subject)
Nov. 11th, 2005 11:23 amSo, the Wrestler and I got into this huge discussion last night about Intelligent Design. He was all, "Scientists should at least try and prove that there's a creator and not just dismiss it out of hand because that's prejudicial and small-minded." and I was all, "But Intelligent Design isn't science its religion and you can't quantitatively prove that there was a creator!" and then he accused me of not believing in God and I threw a pop can at him.
Return missionaries. *shakes head* Of course there are things like faith and belief and revelation that convince and assure us that there is a creator, but those are not the same thing as quantifiable scientific proof. Science is about observation and experimentation in order to discover physical evidence that define natural processes. And yes I know I'm preaching to the choir, I just get so annoyed when people don't know what it is they're really arguing about.
And, to think I actually missed these conversations.
Am not in a terribly coherent mood but OMG!!!!, Lost was so great this week! I agree with everyone that AnaLucia is a raging bitch but I'm willing to cut her some slack. Those people from the tail section obviously went through hell during their first month, or so, on the Island and they must be dealing with their own, particular types of PTSD. Raging bitch is AnaLucia's defense mechanism, just as not talking was Mr. Eko's.
The Others are starting to freak me out. What the hell do they want with all of the people they've been kidnapping? Is it a terror technique or is it something more nefarious? Has the Island driven them insane or are they serving the Island's purpose? Or perhaps have they become so perverse that the Island had to bring in fresh blood in order to rid itself of their blemish? I'm with Locke, there's no such thing as 'luck' or 'chance' on that island and it was a happy coincidence that landed our survivors on the beach rather then in the jungle. There's more going on here.
But then, there's always more going on and questions left unanswered. Like, why was Shannon seeing Walt? What does that signify? Obviously the Walt that she and Sayid saw in the Jungle of Mystery was the real Walt, one who had been with the Others who were trailing the tail section survivors. Were her visions somehow tied to her ownership of Vincent and will they continue with whomever (probably Michael) who is the dog's next owner or were they tied to Shannon for other, more personal, reasons?
And how great was Shannon? Maggie Grace really hit it out of the park. It's really a shame that she's dead because there she had real potential of becoming an integral character. Poor Shannon, Poor Sayid. That family was a complete tragic mess. *sniffle*
You wanna know the best news of all? No Jack or Kate. And there won't be any next week either. The celebrations may now commence.
Am off to see U-MI battle against Indiana tomorrow. I'm sure we'll kick their poncy asses. It'll be great.
Return missionaries. *shakes head* Of course there are things like faith and belief and revelation that convince and assure us that there is a creator, but those are not the same thing as quantifiable scientific proof. Science is about observation and experimentation in order to discover physical evidence that define natural processes. And yes I know I'm preaching to the choir, I just get so annoyed when people don't know what it is they're really arguing about.
And, to think I actually missed these conversations.
Am not in a terribly coherent mood but OMG!!!!, Lost was so great this week! I agree with everyone that AnaLucia is a raging bitch but I'm willing to cut her some slack. Those people from the tail section obviously went through hell during their first month, or so, on the Island and they must be dealing with their own, particular types of PTSD. Raging bitch is AnaLucia's defense mechanism, just as not talking was Mr. Eko's.
The Others are starting to freak me out. What the hell do they want with all of the people they've been kidnapping? Is it a terror technique or is it something more nefarious? Has the Island driven them insane or are they serving the Island's purpose? Or perhaps have they become so perverse that the Island had to bring in fresh blood in order to rid itself of their blemish? I'm with Locke, there's no such thing as 'luck' or 'chance' on that island and it was a happy coincidence that landed our survivors on the beach rather then in the jungle. There's more going on here.
But then, there's always more going on and questions left unanswered. Like, why was Shannon seeing Walt? What does that signify? Obviously the Walt that she and Sayid saw in the Jungle of Mystery was the real Walt, one who had been with the Others who were trailing the tail section survivors. Were her visions somehow tied to her ownership of Vincent and will they continue with whomever (probably Michael) who is the dog's next owner or were they tied to Shannon for other, more personal, reasons?
And how great was Shannon? Maggie Grace really hit it out of the park. It's really a shame that she's dead because there she had real potential of becoming an integral character. Poor Shannon, Poor Sayid. That family was a complete tragic mess. *sniffle*
You wanna know the best news of all? No Jack or Kate. And there won't be any next week either. The celebrations may now commence.
Am off to see U-MI battle against Indiana tomorrow. I'm sure we'll kick their poncy asses. It'll be great.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-11 06:26 pm (UTC)Why doesn't anyone else like Jack and Kate? I'm the only one who seems to like them. Aside from the writers and producers of the show, that is...
no subject
Date: 2005-11-13 01:20 am (UTC)Well, I can't tell you why everyone seems to dislike Jack and Kate (though there are people on my f-list who adore Jack and Kate and hate Charlie) I can at least tell you why they're not my favorite characters. It's pretty much because I find them boring. Jack can have good moments in other people's episodes but when its his episode (his POV) I find him too angsty for words. His view on his life is so humourless and overwrought that I can't stop rolling my eyes. Plus, I don't think he makes a very good leader.
Kate tends to ping too many of my egregious Mary Sue alarms. She's so wonderful and perfect and everyone loves her but she has a tragic past and can do everything and anything. I just don't much like her and I don't like how most characters act when they're around her.
But, see, that's just me and my issues as viewed through the tv character lens. ;-)
no subject
Date: 2005-11-11 10:47 pm (UTC)*is celebrating*
This really was Shannon's one great episode and I agree that it's a shame they killed her off just as they were making her more interesting. But I think Maggie Grace really wants to be free to do movies, so I'm guessing that has a lot to do with it.
Did Sayid see Walt during the last vision? I thought he did, but I don't have it on tape to go back and check.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-13 01:22 am (UTC)And Sayid definitely saw Walt at the end, though I still maintain that that wasn't a vision and Walt was actually there in the Jungle of Mystery with them.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-12 05:59 am (UTC)UGH! As a scientist IDers and the freaking Kansas School board deciding they somehow have the power to define what science (and redefine it to include theories that cannot be explained by natural phenomena) piss me off so very, very, very, very, very, very much.
You want to believe in intelligent design? Fine. I have no problem with that. But there is nothing scientific about it. It was not developed as a scientific theory, there is no scientific evidence to back it up and no way to test it as a scientific theory. One of the most basic things which defines whether a theory is scientific is whether it is testable. ID is not. Therefore NOT SCIENCE.
There is not one single published paper in all of the peer-reviewed scientific literature supporting intelligent design. IDers talk about all these hand-wavey reasons like "holes in the fossil record" but never ever provide a single hard reason that stands up to scrutiny.
You want to belive in ID, fine, no problem. But DO NOT pretend it's science and DO NOT get your religious argument presented in our public classrooms as science fact. It's probably good to teach kids about the history and debate and development of evolutionary theory. But don't educate them stupid by teaching non-science as science.
Good luck creaming Indiana's ass!
no subject
Date: 2005-11-13 01:23 am (UTC)Indiana's ass was well and truly creamed. Poor, poor li'l Hoosiers.
no subject
Date: 2005-11-13 02:39 pm (UTC)Yay to ass creaming! (I'm not particularly a college football fan in general, but I'll always support beating up Indiana)
no subject
Date: 2005-11-12 09:14 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-11-14 07:23 am (UTC)As a member of the choir here, let me just say NO KIDDING!!! Nothing makes me froth at the mouth quite like explaining in detail what a scientific theory is and exactly why ID DOES NOT QUALIFY, and then having the person say, as though to wind up the argument, "well, I just think ID should be treated equally with evolution in the science classroom, since they're both just theories." AIEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!
See, that may work in a philosophical argument--I'm as supportive of religious freedom as anyone--but you just can't say that when you're arguing about science. Science is about facts, which means there are right and wrong answers. You must either accept that ID does not meet the most basic definition of a scientific theory (as even Micheal Behe, leading ID "scientist" in the Dover trial, was forced to admit), or you must admit you are in favour of redefining science itself, to include the supernatural, thus utterly destroying the power of the scientific method to tell us anything about the natural world. There is no "agreeing to disagree" in science, and trying to end the argument that way just riles me up even more. Blah! Sorry for the rant... the choir gets carried away sometimes. ;)