<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: PreCambrian Ephemera, Satan&#8217;s Snares, and Horse Dung</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/11/15/precambrian-ephemera-satans-snares-and-horse-dung/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/11/15/precambrian-ephemera-satans-snares-and-horse-dung/</link>
	<description>Human Animals at the Crossroads of Culture, Science, Religion and Media</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 01:58:06 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dan Klarmann</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/11/15/precambrian-ephemera-satans-snares-and-horse-dung/#comment-15013</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Klarmann</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Nov 2007 22:18:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1785#comment-15013</guid>
		<description>Conservative Columnist speaks against Intelligent Design: &lt;a href="http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23404" target="_blank" title="Intelligent Design, and Other Dumb Ideas" rel="nofollow"&gt;This post gives me hope.&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;blockquote&gt;"...Intelligent Design is a really, really bad idea --scientifically, politically, and theologically.  I say this as a dedicated conservative, who has on many occasions defended and espoused religion and religious conservatism."&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Basically, his point is that the loud and minuscule demographic of Creationist boneheads leading the candidates by the nose are bad for the conservative movement. But very well put.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Conservative Columnist speaks against Intelligent Design: <a href="http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23404" target="_blank" title="Intelligent Design, and Other Dumb Ideas" rel="nofollow">This post gives me hope.</a></p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;&#8230;Intelligent Design is a really, really bad idea &#8211;scientifically, politically, and theologically.  I say this as a dedicated conservative, who has on many occasions defended and espoused religion and religious conservatism.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Basically, his point is that the loud and minuscule demographic of Creationist boneheads leading the candidates by the nose are bad for the conservative movement. But very well put.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Erich Vieth</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/11/15/precambrian-ephemera-satans-snares-and-horse-dung/#comment-15004</link>
		<dc:creator>Erich Vieth</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Nov 2007 06:31:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1785#comment-15004</guid>
		<description>The fifth slide says it all for me.  Essentially, it says thinking is bad.   That's a rule followed religiously throughout this museum.   

One can honor the mysteries of the universe by contemplating them as freethinkers do, or one can blasphemy the mysteries of the universe by (as Scalzi might say) by letting others convince you of a lot of horseshit.  

All of this silliness is possible because so many people people are only willing to think things through one step (to the Bible) and they are afraid to consider the many reasons for concluding that the Bible is not literal inerrant truth.  Is it fear or weak mindedness or fatigue or intimidation or lifetimes of propaganda (often at the knee of one's own parents)?  

For more on our craving for shallow, one-step explanations, see here.  http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1615</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The fifth slide says it all for me.  Essentially, it says thinking is bad.   That&#8217;s a rule followed religiously throughout this museum.   </p>
<p>One can honor the mysteries of the universe by contemplating them as freethinkers do, or one can blasphemy the mysteries of the universe by (as Scalzi might say) by letting others convince you of a lot of horseshit.  </p>
<p>All of this silliness is possible because so many people people are only willing to think things through one step (to the Bible) and they are afraid to consider the many reasons for concluding that the Bible is not literal inerrant truth.  Is it fear or weak mindedness or fatigue or intimidation or lifetimes of propaganda (often at the knee of one&#8217;s own parents)?  </p>
<p>For more on our craving for shallow, one-step explanations, see here.  <a href="http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1615" rel="nofollow">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1615</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Niklaus Pfirsig</title>
		<link>http://dangerousintersection.org/2007/11/15/precambrian-ephemera-satans-snares-and-horse-dung/#comment-15002</link>
		<dc:creator>Niklaus Pfirsig</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Nov 2007 23:12:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dangerousintersection.org/?p=1785#comment-15002</guid>
		<description>It reminds me of of the stiry "Sail On! Sail On!" by Philip Jose Farmer, in which "Friar Sparks" describes the theology behind the ships radio.
 "a thousand cherubim line up and shake hands". Unfortunately, he is on one of Christopher Columbus' ships and they sail off the edge of the world. :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It reminds me of of the stiry &#8220;Sail On! Sail On!&#8221; by Philip Jose Farmer, in which &#8220;Friar Sparks&#8221; describes the theology behind the ships radio.<br />
 &#8220;a thousand cherubim line up and shake hands&#8221;. Unfortunately, he is on one of Christopher Columbus&#8217; ships and they sail off the edge of the world. <img src='http://dangerousintersection.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Dynamic Page Served (once) in 0.456 seconds -->
