Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-02-2007, 09:41 PM   #31
HeWhoAsks
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
whoneedscience wrote
Okay, I sent them an email.

Who else has?
I sure did.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2007, 12:03 AM   #32
Sternwallow
I Live Here
 
Sternwallow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 23,211
Here's mine:

Dear Ms Bomar:

I am concerned to read that the National Park Service has given a collection of untruths in the form of books of Creationist dogma, a higher value than the geological truths which apply to every person in every circumstance. I understand that books claiming that a single year-long flood both laid down, and then cut the vertical mile of rock in the canyon appear with the approval of the US Government in the park shops. Worse, that the Park Service has changed its own guide signs along the trails to support these false and damaging creeds.

While it is inappropriate to wantonly insult any Americans, known scientific facts neither favor nor disfavor religion and cannot properly be insulting to anyone. Truth can, be uncomfortable, to be sure, but it, unlike religious creeds, is universally applicable.

Therefore, I strongly disapprove of any United States Government policy that approves of, supports and implements falsehoods of particular religious dogmas in direct contravention to the protections of the Constitution.

Thank you for your consideration.
:nanner: :nanner: :nanner:

"Those who most loudly proclaim their honesty are least likely to possess it."
"Atheism: rejecting all absurdity." S.H.
"Reality, the God alternative"
Sternwallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2007, 01:29 PM   #33
whoneedscience
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Not sure what to think about this given the other reports I've read, but I got a response:

Quote:
Recently there have been several media and internet reports concerning the
National Park Service’s interpretation of the formation of the Grand
Canyon.

The National Park Service uses the latest National Academy of Sciences
explanation for the geologic formation of the Grand Canyon. Our
guidance to the field is contained in NPS Director’s Order # 6 and
requires that the interpretive and educational treatment used to explain
the natural processes and history of the Earth must be based on the best
scientific evidence available, as found in scholarly sources that have
stood the test of scientific peer review and criticism.

Therefore, our interpretive talks, way-side exhibits, visitor center
films, etc use the following explanation for the age of the geologic
features at Grand Canyon. If asked the age of the Grand Canyon, our
rangers use the following answer.

The principal consensus among geologists is that the Colorado River
basin has developed in the past 40 million years and that the Grand
Canyon itself is probably less than five to six million years old. The
result of all this erosion is one of the most complete geologic columns
on the planet

The major geologic exposures in Grand Canyon range in age from the 1.7
billion year old Vishnu Schist at the bottom of the Inner Gorge to the
270 million year old Kaibab Limestone on the Rim.

So, why are there news reports that differ from this explanation? Since
2003 the park bookstore has been selling a book that gives a creationism
view of the formation of the Grand Canyon, claiming that the canyon is
less than six thousand years old. This book is sold in the
inspirational section of the bookstore. In this section there are
photographic texts, poetry books, and Native American books (that also
give an alternate view of the canyon’s origin).

The park’s bookstore contains scores of text that give the NPS geologic
view of the formation of the canyon.

We do not use the “creationism” text in our teaching nor do we endorse
its content. However, it is not our place to censure alternate beliefs.
Much like your local public library, you will find many alternate
beliefs, but not all of these beliefs are used in the school classroom.

It is not our place to tell people what to believe. We recognize that
alternate views exist, but we teach the scientific method for the
formation of the Grand Canyon.

I hope this explanation helps.

David Barna
Chief of Public Affairs
National Park Service
Washington, DC
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2007, 01:33 PM   #34
Just Us Chickens
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Whoneedscience, thats fantastic news thanks for sharing
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2007, 04:20 PM   #35
Sternwallow
I Live Here
 
Sternwallow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 23,211
While I do expect the public library to include essentially anything written on any subject, the Park Service is expected, by their own criteria, to provide secular and scientifically valid information.

"This book is sold in the inspirational section of the bookstore. In this section there are photographic texts, poetry books, and Native American books (that also give an alternate view of the canyon’s origin)."

Why is an arm of the government supporting an "inspirational" section including fallacious religion-based writings?

The existence of beds of evaporites among the other rock layers is clear, obvious proof that they were not formed during a flood of any kind.

Must we insist that all creation myths be represented in the Park Service shops? If so, don't forget to include the Aborigine tales.

"Those who most loudly proclaim their honesty are least likely to possess it."
"Atheism: rejecting all absurdity." S.H.
"Reality, the God alternative"
Sternwallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2007, 09:02 PM   #36
ryu
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
baconeatingatheistjew wrote
What is next? Nasa won't be able to say how many light years a star is away from us?
lol
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-10-2007, 09:40 PM   #37
whoneedscience
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Sternwallow wrote
Must we insist that all creation myths be represented in the Park Service shops? If so, don't forget to include the Aborigine tales.
It seems as though they did include Native American creation stories. I rather like that they put them in the same category with the rest of the primitive mythology.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2007, 06:19 AM   #38
Sternwallow
I Live Here
 
Sternwallow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 23,211
Quote:
whoneedscience wrote
Quote:
Sternwallow wrote
Must we insist that all creation myths be represented in the Park Service shops? If so, don't forget to include the Aborigine tales.
It seems as though they did include Native American creation stories. I rather like that they put them in the same category with the rest of the primitive mythology.
I wonder if there is a "Primitive Mythology" section in the bookstore at JPL or in the Pentagon or any other kind of section in St. Paul's in New York.

"Those who most loudly proclaim their honesty are least likely to possess it."
"Atheism: rejecting all absurdity." S.H.
"Reality, the God alternative"
Sternwallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2007, 07:01 AM   #39
Professor Chaos
General of the Attacking Army
 
Professor Chaos's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Pittsburgh
Posts: 12,904
Quote:
response to whoneedscience wrote
We do not use the “creationism” text in our teaching nor do we endorse
its content. However, it is not our place to censure alternate beliefs.
Much like your local public library, you will find many alternate
beliefs, but not all of these beliefs are used in the school classroom.

It is not our place to tell people what to believe. We recognize that
alternate views exist, but we teach the scientific method for the
formation of the Grand Canyon.
Who wants to send them the FSM account and demand it be added to their bookshelves?

I will grieve. Grief is not a theistic concept. ~ Sternwallow
Professor Chaos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2007, 07:15 AM   #40
Lily
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Sternwallow wrote
Why is an arm of the government supporting an "inspirational" section including fallacious religion-based writings?

The existence of beds of evaporites among the other rock layers is clear, obvious proof that they were not formed during a flood of any kind.

Must we insist that all creation myths be represented in the Park Service shops? If so, don't forget to include the Aborigine tales.
I assume that the bookstore is a money-making venture, so that the choice of what to offer is driven by the market. I know that most (if not all) the local grocery stores I have ever shopped at have an inspirational book kiosk. I am highly skeptical that they are all owned and managed by believers in anything other than capitalism.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2007, 10:38 AM   #41
Sternwallow
I Live Here
 
Sternwallow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 23,211
Quote:
Lily wrote
Quote:
Sternwallow wrote
Why is an arm of the government supporting an "inspirational" section including fallacious religion-based writings?

The existence of beds of evaporites among the other rock layers is clear, obvious proof that they were not formed during a flood of any kind.

Must we insist that all creation myths be represented in the Park Service shops? If so, don't forget to include the Aborigine tales.
I assume that the bookstore is a money-making venture, so that the choice of what to offer is driven by the market. I know that most (if not all) the local grocery stores I have ever shopped at have an inspirational book kiosk. I am highly skeptical that they are all owned and managed by believers in anything other than capitalism.
Well, Lily, all of the US government grocery stores and shoe stores and gas stations I have ever seen are prohibited from being purveyors of farcical religious materials even for profit.

"Those who most loudly proclaim their honesty are least likely to possess it."
"Atheism: rejecting all absurdity." S.H.
"Reality, the God alternative"
Sternwallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2007, 11:39 AM   #42
Choobus
I Live Here
 
Choobus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: prick up your ears
Posts: 20,553
Quote:
Sternwallow wrote
Well, Lily, all of the US government grocery stores and shoe stores and gas stations I have ever seen are prohibited from being purveyors of farcical religious materials even for profit.
Are there any other kinds of religious materials?

You can always turn tricks for a few extra bucks. If looks are an issue, there's the glory hole option, but don't expect more than ... tips.
~ Philiboid Studge
Choobus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2007, 05:49 PM   #43
Sternwallow
I Live Here
 
Sternwallow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 23,211
Quote:
Choobus wrote
Quote:
Sternwallow wrote
Well, Lily, all of the US government grocery stores and shoe stores and gas stations I have ever seen are prohibited from being purveyors of farcical religious materials even for profit.
Are there any other kinds of religious materials?
Sadly, yes. The Malleus Malifacorum, for one, contained no farce and only a modicum of humor.
Minutes of the various Bible-concocting councils are solid humor, but still no farce.

"Those who most loudly proclaim their honesty are least likely to possess it."
"Atheism: rejecting all absurdity." S.H.
"Reality, the God alternative"
Sternwallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:00 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin - Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000 - , Raving Atheists [dot] com frequency-supranational frequency-supranational