tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post5484219096682523907..comments2024-03-28T11:33:16.271-05:00Comments on Adventus: You got your chocolate in my peanut butter!Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post-36733919129176514922014-07-15T04:40:52.921-05:002014-07-15T04:40:52.921-05:00Thou shalt not have syncretisms, you apostates to ...Thou shalt not have syncretisms, you apostates to All-Holy BigScience!<br /><br />Anyone remember "The Dancing Wu Li Masters"? It dealt w/ Eastern (particularly Taoist) concepts in astrophysics ~40 years ago! [The Dawkins crowd would blow that up, just like the Taliban did to the Bahmiyan Buddhas... :-( ]JCFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14516376500318551838noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post-40541759400875511042014-07-14T20:38:01.102-05:002014-07-14T20:38:01.102-05:00thank you, aberichthank you, aberichRmjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06811456254443706479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post-56395231652670311212014-07-14T18:42:48.862-05:002014-07-14T18:42:48.862-05:00When involved in a discussion of cutting-edge astr...<i>When involved in a discussion of cutting-edge astrophysics, introducing Hindu or Buddhist cosmologies makes as much sense as introducing Creationism when discussing evolution. It isn't science, so it belongs elsewhere. </i><br /><br /><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eightfold_Way_(physics)" rel="nofollow">Murray Gell-Mann would beg to differ</a>alberichhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03852752646926946626noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post-70846711445137512092014-07-14T18:22:46.997-05:002014-07-14T18:22:46.997-05:00What jim said.What jim said.Rmjhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06811456254443706479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9479398.post-36186551208450113172014-07-14T17:44:19.831-05:002014-07-14T17:44:19.831-05:00it amuses me, in a sort of dark way, that the scie...it amuses me, in a sort of dark way, that the scientific and religious fundamentalists both make a point out of leaving the messy human beings out of their equations- and then blaming those same messy human beings when those equations don't quite work out as predicted. we would all do better to be more consistently aware of our own potentials for being wrong- but it seems we lose that awareness in inverse proportion to our certaintyjim, some guy in iowahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16737929189283553013noreply@blogger.com