- Bloomberg: Climate-Change Scientist Cleared in Closing of U.S. Data-Altering Inquiry
The National Science Foundation has completed its inquiry into UVA/Penn State climatologist Michael Mann. They have entirely exonerated him, finding no evidence of any wrongdoing whatsoever. That's the same result as Penn State's investigation, the NOAA's inspector general's investigation (which was done at the request of Sen. Inhofe), and the UK's investigation. 100% of investigations agree: "Climategate" was bullshit.
- NPR: Evangelicals Question The Existence Of Adam And Eve
Evangelical Christian biologists are facing facts: Adam and Eve are impossible.
- Reuters: How to get $12 billion of gold to Venezuela
Blogger Felix Salmon ponders the problem of how Hugo Chávez intends to move 211 tons of gold from Europe to Venezuela. Though lots of people (and countries) own gold as a part of a diversified investment portfolio, only survivalist nuts actually have the gold physically. It's been nearly a century since gold in this quantity has been moved across national borders, for good reasons.
Published by Waldo Jaquith
Waldo Jaquith (JAKE-with) is an open government technologist who lives near Charlottesville, VA, USA. more »
View more posts
Forget Somali pirates. Who’s up for outfitting a privateer and waiting for Mr. Chavez’s gold?
Gold is at record high rates. Who in their right mind would think of buying at this time? This can’t end well.
Here’s the real evangelical perspective and response to above NPR.
I’m still a little puzzled about who it is that Cain and Abel got married to, exactly.
Also the part about Adam living to be 900 years old is, scientifically, at least a little specious.
Do you really think of “the evangelical perspective” as a monolith for which there can only be one “right” perspective?
James, you might also puzzle over the double creation of Adam and Eve. First, in Genesis 1, he creates them:
Great, got it. And then, confusingly, he does it again in Genesis 2:
Erm. What? What became of the first Adam? And Eve? Why are they treated like brand-new characters? Presumably it’s a simple editing error. And now a bunch of people try to take it literally. Like Cain moving to Nod and getting married.
Just wait till you get to the part where Jesus is raised from the dead.
actually, that article that Hans linked to had a pretty good quote in it; although ironically the article itself was actually incensed by it, this excerpt from Karl Giberson made a lot of sense to me:
“The Bible is not a book. It is a library — dozens of very different books bound together. The assumption that identifying one part as fiction undermines the factual character of another part is ludicrous. It would be like going into an actual physical library and saying “Well, if all these books about Harry Potter are fictional, then how do I know these other books about Abraham Lincoln are factual? How can Lincoln be real if Potter is not?” And then “Aha! I have got you! So much for your library.””
… not that I think much of it is actually factually correct, but it is important to remember that the Bible had dozens of authors and was assembled over the course of hundreds of years, in a time before we made clear deliniations between concepts like History, Science, and Religion.
Hey, at least put a “spoiler alert” on these comments. I’m still reading the book, for crying out loud! :)
“Just wait till you get to the part where Jesus is raised from the dead.”
Understood metaphorically …such symbolic burial and “resurrection” were not atypical of Middle Eastern mystery cults … the raised from the dead part is much easier to swallow than the “he lived 900 years” part.
I’d like to see Mann get all litigious on people who tore up his name.
Perhaps, but I don’t understand why you’d hold to a literal interpretation of Adam’s age in Genesis 5 (despite precedent to the contrary) and then choose to interpret the Gospel accounts of Christ’s death metaphorically. There’s a much stronger case to be made that the former is using literary license.
Jon: That would imply that there’s MORE evidence that someone was actually raised from the dead than that someone lived 900 years. I don’t think there’s any evidence that either actually happened. Taking a literal intepretation of either is irrational.
Oh, but there unquestionably is. There’s a single statement in the Pentateuch referencing Adam’s age, whereas there are a handful of written accounts describing the narrative of Christ’s resurrection, and in fair detail.
(Unless you mean physical, run-this-through-the-labs evidence, in which case I think you’re setting a standard that most of human history fails to meet.)
To clarify, I’m not saying the historical record proves Christ’s resurrection, but there is irrefutably more evidence of the resurrection than of Adam’s age.
Comments are closed.