Should Science-Deniers Chair Technical Congressional Committees?
It should come as no surprise that I think the answer is a resolute "no". This is from Bob Park's "What's New" for 27 November 2010.
4. FAITH: LIFE IN A MULTICULTURAL DEMOCRACY.
I have a number of devoutly religious physics colleagues who are able to partition their life: scientist on one side, devout believer on the other. I can only admire the ease with which they move from one side of the partition to the other. With climate change as the greatest threat we face, we may only hope that Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), a member of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce since 1997, has such a partition and equal alacrity in making the transition. He submitted a letter to his colleagues earlier this week asking for their blessing in his campaign to assume the gavel of Energy when Republicans take control of the chamber. Shimkus rejects the posibility of man-made climate disaster. "The Earth will end only when God declares it’s time to be over. Man will not destroy this Earth. This Earth will not be destroyed by a Flood," Shimkus then quoted God's promise to Noah after the flood. "never again will I destroy all living creatures as I have done." Genesis8:21-22. "I do believe that God’s word is infallible," Shimkus said, "unchanging, perfect."
2 Responses
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Leave a Reply
To thwart spam, comments by new people are held for moderation; give me a bit of time and your comment will show up.
I welcome comments -- even dissent -- but I will delete without notice irrelevant, rude, psychotic, or incomprehensible comments, particularly those that I deem homophobic, unless they are amusing. The same goes for commercial comments and trackbacks. Sorry, but it's my blog and my decisions are final.
on Tuesday, 30 November 2010 at 00.08
Permalink
Clearly, Shimkus has no partition. Worse, his attic is short a few rafters.
I would remind Shimkus of two things. First, God only proposes to help those who help themselves, and denial doesn't qualify as self-help. Second, a god by definition is infallible, but his word as interpreted and reinterpreted down through millennia by all sorts of people with all sorts of slants and agendas is something else.
on Tuesday, 30 November 2010 at 01.31
Permalink
Certainly interpretations are quite fallible. As for the infallibility of gods I think that idea only developed after the monotheistic idea came along and started requiring one god to serve all purposes.