Funny, isn't it? Now Einstein's theory of relativity is a liberal plot. You know, I'm wondering how anyone could possibly write a satire of these people. What could you say that would be funnier and more idiotic than what they really believe?
Rachel Maddow does a great job with this, but I saw it first on TPM:
To many conservatives, almost everything is a secret liberal plot: from fluoride in the water to medicare reimbursements for end-of-life planning with your doctor to efforts to teach evolution in schools. But Conservapedia founder and Eagle Forum University instructor Andy Schlafly -- Phyllis Schlafly's son -- has found one more liberal plot: the theory of relativity.
If you're behind on your physics, the Theory of Relativity was Albert Einstein's formulation in the early 20th century that gave rise to the famous theorum that E=mc2, otherwise stated as energy is equal to mass times the square of the speed of light. Why does Andy Schlafly hate the theory of relativity? We're pretty sure it's because he's decided it doesn't square with the Bible.
In the entry, "Counterexamples to Relativity," the authors (including Schlafly) write:
The theory of relativity is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions. It is heavily promoted by liberals who like its encouragement of relativism and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.
Heh, heh. Of course, for those of us with a few brain cells still functioning, Einstein's theory of relativity has nothing to do with relativism as a moral or philosophical stance. The names are similar, that's all. But Schlafly should know that. After all, he has a degree in "Engineering Physics," supposedly. What, is that Princeton's version of Rocks for Jocks or something?
Of course, maybe he skipped that part of the course. It's dangerous, you know. As Conservapedia warns, "virtually no one who is taught and believes relativity continues to read the Bible..." Well, that's the whole point of Conservapedia, isn't it? Conservatives never want to hear anything that might cause them to question their preconceived biases. Cults are the same way. You keep your people from interacting with anyone outside the group. That way the group's views are all they ever hear.
Indeed, science makes every effort to counter preconceived biases. We all have them, even scientists. But the scientific method has been designed to overcome such problems. It's the best way we've ever discovered to overcome biases and determine the real truth. Maybe that's what bothers conservatives the most.
And yes, people who get a good education in science tend to stop reading the Bible. Gee, I wonder why that is? It's not just physics, either. In fact, I believe that understanding biology tends to have a bigger impact on fundamentalist religious beliefs. But any science will do. Science is a way of looking at the real world that makes it harder to lie to yourself. Give it half a chance, and you'll start to understand why your religious fantasies can't hold up to an honest examination.
OK, it's easy to laugh at lunatics like Schlafly, when they come up with something crazy and new like this. But what about the old crazy? What about global warming deniers? What about creationists? These people are just as crazy, but we don't laugh anymore, do we? To any rational American's intense embarrassment, they're darned near mainstream. Evolution is the bedrock of modern biology, and global warming is the overwhelming consensus of climatologists. But only a minority of ordinary Americans accepts either. I guess there's nothing as easy to spread as ignorance.
And now, rejecting science has become the standard Republican position. How's that for scary? One of the two major political parties in America is explicitly anti-science. That's not to say that the Democrats are pro-science, necessarily, because all politicians are terrified of seeming to be anti-God. And the left has plenty of woo of its own, mostly New Age and alternative medicine pseudoscience. But at least the Democratic leadership tends to support science, if not as vigorously as I'd wish.
But the Republican leadership is explicitly anti-science these days, even more so because they're terrified of appearing sane in the age of the Tea Party and Fox "News." When crazy is in charge, you can't afford to be any less crazy than the real lunatics. In fact, you need to try to lead the parade of crazies, if you can. We've seen what happens when you can't keep up. It's the French Revolution all over again, with Republicans running as fast as they can to keep up with the extremists.
It's a frightening time. We are abandoning science just when we need it the most. So yeah, laugh at Schlafly and the other crazies. We've got to keep our spirits up somehow.
Posts
3 comments:
I must admit, Bill, that I really don't understand what's happening in the USA. Where is all this anti-science BS coming from? Surely it can't all be the fault of religion - plenty of Europeans are religious without descending to such idiocy. Despite our (more or less) common language and historical/cultural background, I actually feel more at home in mainland Europe than in the US - the culture seems less alien.
Hey, Tony, this seems alien to me, too, and I've lived here all my life. I just don't get it.
But it's got to be the fault of religion, I'd think. I was just reading an article that said Britain was now the most irreligious country on Earth. Apparently, polls show that 63% of you are non-believers, and only 6% regularly attend religious services.
That's just astounding to me, considering the firm hold that superstition has in America. I've got to say that I'm jealous - and I don't understand why there's such a difference. Little of what's been happening in America in recent years makes any sense to me.
Yes, that's one thing we Brits can still be proud of!
The irony is that we have an official state religion (one of the monarch's titles is "defender of the faith"), whereas in the USA I understand that religion is supposed to be kept entirely separate from the state (so what would be the chances of a declared atheist becoming your President? Don't bother answering that...)
I'm really not sure why we Brits are so uninterested in religion, particularly since there is a loose tradition of following American cultural trends. But attempts by religious groups (often from the USA - you send us missionaries!) to get people involved have only a very small effect. Churchgoers in England tend to be mostly elderly (they see the local church as a kind of social club) with a minority attending one of the few evangelical, US-style churches (which seem to be mostly in London). It isn't that the British are strongly anti-religion; we just seem to see it as irrelevant.
Despite this, there is a strong wish amongst many middle-class parents that their children should attend a faith school, and the planned easing of restrictions on setting up schools is like to lead to a lot more of them. However, this is because such schools have a reputation for providing a more disciplined environment with better educational results. So you get atheist, or at best agnostic, parents attending a local church purely in order to boost their chances of getting their kids into the associated school.
Apart from this, most people only attend church ceremonies for weddings, christenings (still bizarrely popular) and funerals, simply because it's traditional.
Post a Comment