I remember hearing that if a scientific stance was not allowed to be challenged scientifically then you no longer have science. You have religion. That explains a great deal in the world today.

Science has been pretty dead for quite some time. Oh, it pops up occasionally in environments trying to generate new product. But, for the most part, the gov/grant/university/health arena is polluted to the point of being an entirely different animal.

That sounds like hate-mongering against a specific institution. 91% of the US is a member of an organized religion, the vast majority being Christian in some capacity. Is that saying that 91% of the populace does not embrace science?

There are many things about the physical world that cannot be easily explained with science... what was before the Big Bang? The likelihood that we are only one of many universes, the fact that many incorrect beliefs about Earth being the center of the universe or whatever was assumption and not in scripture, or maybe the transition from ape to intelligent human may take a spark of divine intervention. Whatever it is, there is a lot of room for faith and science and not everything in scripture has to be taken literally. It doesn't diminish either.

Catholic dogma is the opposite of science in method and content. That some who call themselves Catholics manage to occasionally understand something about science in spite of religious belief does not mean the religion is in anyway scientific.

The Catholic Church's acknowledgement of the scientific advances of others who are more rational is a constant retreat before the advance of science, not embracement of science.

Wiki says the Pontifical Academy of Sciences has been around since 1936.

sorry -- just can't see "family" going that large. . "home," however,
into which we admit immigrants and visitors, works for capitalism
where selectivity and caveat emptor reign!!! -- j
.

People who voluntarily join religious orders think that it works for their whole 'family group' ie the whole Order.

Jan

well said!!! . Thank You For Clarifying!!! -- j
.

Jan, my wife and I have a communist family -- just us, and what's hers
is mine and what's mine is hers. . beyond the tiny family union, it sux. -- j
.

The pope is wrong about a lot of things (so much for infallibility...) but what is good about the PAS has nothing to do with the pope, but with the stance and religious expertise of the massive Catholic Church.

For example, the CC has formally endorsed evolution since...I think around the 1960's. One of my responses to religious arguments against evolution is to say, "Well, the Catholic Church endorses it. I think they read the bible - go argue with them."

I do not personally care if the bible agrees with science, since the bible is a origin fable of a nomadic population, who were trying to hold their culture intact in spite of being surrounded by a lot of much more advanced civilizations. So what if it disagrees with science? That is not its purpose. It has done a good job of holding the Judaeo-Christian religion together and THAT was its purpose.

But there are a lot of people for whom these things matter, and I would rather have them argue with each other than with me. If the PAS wants to take them on (as in Massive and Catholic and Experts), that is great; one less thing for me to do.

Jan

because the pope endorses global warming? . or because he's
endorsing scientific ANYthing? . just because he's wrong about
which scientific theory to back, backing one is a virtue? -- j
.

As with the Clinton/Gore years... protecting the President requires the Secret Service to also look at the immediate replacement... so they have to hold their nose and choke back the gag-reflex I'm sure with Obama.

Very True!

And the SIG SG550..

http://www.guns.com/2014/04/13/guns-s...

I'm sure mush shall be gained from this branch of Catholic science--

http://www.casinapioiv.va/content/acc...

Excuse me while I pry my tongue from my cheek.

Many of the religious orders are voluntarily communist. This cannot help but slant the view of religious people towards how well communism works. They see successful microcosms (many of which are supported by commercial enterprise outside of their communes) and conclude that the major Communist experiments 'must not have been implemented properly' when they are disastrous.

No, the default is that 'communism does not work for the human species per se'...but I observe that it can work for selected subsets of humanity. I am all in favor of having Communists form their own communes within a matrix of a Capitalistic society.

Jan

And they are the only modern professional unit that still knows how to use a pole arm!

Jan

Actually, he is grinning from bony ear-hole-to ear-hole: This is his victory. The Catholic Church now not only enthusiastically endorses a heliocentric solar system, but deeply regrets its tarnishing of its own reputation by the persecution of Galileo.

I applaud the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. This is a wonderful thing to have on 'our side'. I do not know of any group of Protestant born-again scholars who would be able to out-bible a bunch of argumentative and picky Jesuits on religiously intrinsic defense of science.

What this boils down to is that we who appreciate science for its own sake can now say, "Go argue with PAS." (Either because we do not give a rap about what the bible says or because we think that the bible is a vague allegory provided to Mesolithic goat-herders by a wise deity.)

Jan

This illustrates the fundamental difference between belief and understanding. If science is vulnerable to political or theological acceptance then it has lost all of its value.
Belief drives both politics and religion and belief is a fundamentally irrational act.
I was once asked if I believed anything. My answer was "No!" My appreciation of the world is based on understanding not belief. I was asked if I believed that two plus two makes four. Again my answer was "No!". but because I understand the principals of mathematics I understand WHY two plus two makes four.
That is the difference between belief and understanding.

I guess I'm wondering what the bewilderment is about. I'm Catholic, the church has had a very large science wing for a very long time, the Vatican even has a very large observatory that is used in collaboration with NASA, the European Space Agency, etc.. The Catholic Church has an "insignificant" Medical system in the US (Mercy Healthcare)... now called Dignity Health... (one of the largest in the Western US).

There are many orders of clerics in the Catholic Church, the Jesuits for example do not take a vow of poverty and are very pro-scientific advancement. (Think Notre Dame University, Benedictine, Boston College, De Paul, Xavier, University of San Francisco... and maybe 300 others). http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teac...

The Vatican Library is probably the largest on Earth...

The Swiss Guard is better trained and equipped than the US Secret Service Protective Services and has a massive armory under the Vatican.... (Haven't had any jumpers at the Vatican walls...) (The Swiss Guard is entrusted to guard their faith and the symbol of their faith... the US Secret Service has to make a conscious decision if protecting Obama is worth taking a bullet...)

The church has changed quite a bit since the Middle Ages... one of the things about an organization with about 1900 years of history and about 1/5 of the world's population as membership (at least), you will have to take the good with the bad.

Abaco,
speechless is the word.

I had a monster argument with an apologist on Quora regarding the church's persecution of Galileo regarding heliocentricism. His position was that the church was enlightened and ready to support heliocentricism, but Galileo was too aggressive and pugilistic. Of course driving a spike through Bruno's tongue and pallate and burning him at the stake some couple of years before Galileo was "asked" by the church to write a version of this finding suitable to them had no bearing on the church's real position or Galileo's response.

This is the same nonsense as the 1600's!

Is this where Common core originated? cough Vatican Morons. cough Cough **

ROFL.

Mr. Pope (not really sure how to address him) - if you're really interested in true science, I'd advocate that you start with classic Economics (Adam Smith, etc.). Let's see how long your economists last before their Keynesian heads explode.

I predict that Obozo will be fully involved in this, via the UN most likely, after this term. You heard it from me first...

Being listed in the same sentence as religious leaders, government officials, and global urban networks may be a clue. A guess- community organizer.

Communism. Funny how it's packaged. Honestly, based on what I see, I don't think for a second that they are serious about stopping slavery and human trafficking. They have the resources to do something. As my dad used to say, "Show me, don't tell me."