Trump’s Know-Nothing Science Budget

The GOP and evangelical Christians have a common requirement to further their toxic agendas: ignorant, objective truth denying followers. A heavy dose of racially and homophobic bigotry and a belief in conspiracy theories, of course are similarly helpful ingredients.  Hence why knowledge and scientific knowledge of almost any sort is the enemy of fundamentalists and evangelicals and the political party that they now largely control.  Evolution is denied, climate change is denied, objective facts and figures are replaced with untrue "alternate facts," etc.   Indeed, anything that challenges the political and religious orthodoxy of these people is denied and attacked.  Donald Trump, the leading purveyor of alternate facts - read lies - is aiding in the effort by proposing dangerous and potentially deadly cuts i, science funding.  A piece in the New Yorker looks at Donald Trump's dangerous budget cuts to science and medical research.  Here are excerpts: 

Donald Trump’s disregard for science has never been much of a secret. Well before he became President, he tweeted that light bulbs can cause cancer, that wind farms are unhealthy, that fracking “poses ZERO health risks,” and that Ebola “is much easier to transmit” than the government lets on. As a candidate, he regularly called global warming a hoax, repeated the false notion that vaccines can cause autism, and stated confidently that spraying hair spray in one’s apartment does not harm the ozone layer. . . . He avoids exercise, proudly fears germs, and, in Mike Pence, has chosen a Vice-President who, when pointedly asked, won’t say whether he believes in evolution.

It’s been downhill ever since. Under Trump, the United States has withdrawn from the Paris climate agreement, and the phrases “climate change” and “evidence-based” have been scrubbed from federal Web sites—in the very same year that three once-in-a-century hurricanes and two major drought-fuelled wildfires ravaged parts of the nation. . . . . the Environmental Protection Agency has banned E.P.A.-funded scientists, but not industry representatives, from serving on its advisory boards; and the Centers for Disease Control, facing steep budget cuts, will soon all but shut down a vital program that helps more than three dozen developing countries detect and control the spread of infectious diseases.

Trump’s newly proposed federal budget for 2019 continues the assault on knowledge and reason. Funding for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the U.S. Geological Survey, and the E.P.A. would each be cut by eighteen per cent or more, compared with the final 2017 budget, which was drafted by the Obama Administration and amended by Trump.

The National Institute of Mental Health would see its budget slashed by thirty per cent, despite Trump’s recent avowals that better mental-health treatment is the solution to gun violence. NASA’s budget would stay roughly the same, but a number of important Earth-science missions would be eliminated, and Trump would attempt to defund and privatize the International Space Station by 2025.

 

The few increases, to the budgets of the Energy and Interior Departments, are designed to fund fossil-fuel research, offshore drilling, and surface mining. Meanwhile, the Bureau of Land Management and the Oil Spill Research Program would be cut by at least fifteen per cent; Interior’s Land and Water Conservation Fund, which uses earnings from offshore oil and gas drilling to protect and restore federal public lands, would be cut by two-thirds; and research on clean energy would be cut by more than seventy per cent.

 

Other cuts would simply obfuscate. The 2019 proposal, like the 2018 budget, eliminates five satellite missions that study aspects of Earth’s surface and atmosphere—carbon-dioxide levels, the reflectivity of clouds and snow—specifically in order to monitor the dynamics of climate. According to Trump’s moral calculus, it is better to know nothing than to learn something that may conflict with what you think you know. Even the education departments of NASA and NOAA would be cut; should those agencies actually learn something, they’ll have a harder time sharing the information.

 

Thirteen months into his first term, key posts at numerous federal agencies remain unfilled, including the administrator positions for NASA and NOAA. The Department of the Interior lacks eleven of its seventeen senior officials, and Trump has yet to propose nominees for six of them, including the directors of the Bureau of Land Management, the National Park Service, and the Fish and Wildlife Service. Needless to say, it’s easier to ransack a store when no one is officially minding it.

 

And many of the candidates whom Trump has nominated for science-oriented roles are woefully underqualified.

 

It feels almost quaint to talk of “truth” and “facts” anymore, but, as an endeavor, science at least strives to honestly approach them. Which is why it’s all the more dispiriting that, for a full year now, Trump has operated without a Presidential science adviser—the longest the Oval Office has gone without one since the position was created, decades ago.onald 

 

[Trump] trusts no one; he can’t abide to read even his intelligence reports. Science thrives on curiosity, investigation, vigorous discourse, and flexibility of thought. Donald Trump is a party of one, interested solely in hearing the sound of his own voice, regardless of the veracity of what it has to say. For now, the interim science adviser is Michael Kratsios, the deputy assistant in the Office of Science and Technology Policy. Kratsios, who is thirty-one, worked previously as chief of staff to Peter Thiel, the Silicon Valley billionaire and Trump supporter, and has a bachelor’s degree in political science—the only kind of science, perhaps, that Trump can understand.

GOP Insanity - Ben Carson vs. Evolution

If one wants to see just how low the Republican Party has fallen, look no farther than presidential nominee candidate Ben Carson.  The once renown neurosurgeon - who some him knew him in the past have shared that they wonder if the man has had a nervous breakdown or what some other mental breakdown -  has stated that Darwin was in league with Satan when he developed the theory of evolution.  And video tape documents Carson's lunatic statements, so denial will be difficult.  At est, he can claim he did not mean what he said and was merely prostituting himself to Christofascist.  The take away? Do we really want a man who (i) is an opportunistic liar, or (ii) seemingly suffers from mental illness and/or out right insanity in the White House?  Little Green Footballs looks at Carson's troubling batshitery.  Here are highlights:

At LGF we’ve written several times about GOP presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson’s rejection of the scientific theory of evolution in favor of young Earth creationism. But here’s a video that graphically demonstrates just how regressive Carson’s anti-science beliefs are.

In this speech delivered to the Adventist News Network’s “Celebration of Creation” in November 2011, Carson shows ignorance of basic geology, attributes fake quotes to “evolutionists,” ridicules scientists, and last but not least, says Charles Darwin was influenced to come up with the theory of evolution by none other than… yes, Satan. The Horned One. His Nibs. In Carson’s words, “the Adversary.”

It’s shocking and disturbing that one of the frontrunners in the GOP campaign for president holds these kinds of Dark Ages anti-science beliefs. But while Carson’s statements may seem extreme, nearly all of the GOP candidates in this race are creationists.

In addition to everything else that’s wrong with them in 2015 (and that’s plenty), the Republicans are the party of hard core science denial.

Some quotes from the video, transcribed by Daniel W. VanArsdale:

[20:56] “… there is abundant evidence, geological evidence, that there was a worldwide flood. Go up into the Andes Mountains and see all those fossils on the top of those mountains.

[24:34] “So we should be able to find intermediate species at any given point in time, and we should be able to find how they line up. You know Darwin said his whole theory depended on the fossil remains and he said we should be able to line up from a single cell organism to man several miles long and just walk right down the fossil trail and see how everything evolved. And he said the only reason they didn’t have the fossils was because they were not geologically sophisticated enough, but that we would be in fifty to a hundred years. Well that was a hundred and fifty years ago. We still haven’t found them. Where are they? Where are the fossil remains?

[31:03]. “Well, now what about the big bang theory? I find the big bang really quite fascinating. Now here you have all these highfaluting scientists, and they are saying there was this gigantic explosion and everything came into perfect order. [31:19] … [32:16] Well, but I mean it’s even more ridiculous than that, because our solar system, not to mention the universe outside of that, is extraordinarily well organized to the point where we can predict 70 years away when a comet is coming. Now that type of organization, to just come out of an explosion? … [32:43] And then even if you want to use their own scientific theories, you know you’ve got this mass spinning and then it explodes. In physics we have something we call angular momentum and it is preserved, so it should be preserved in any orbit of anything that is effected by gravity around a planet, which means everything has to traverse in the same direction. Well it doesn’t! There are many planets that have satellites and moons that go in the opposite directions. So that doesn’t work with angular momentum.” [33:19]

[36:49] “How are flowers able to reproduce? Pollination. How does pollination occur? Bees and other creatures. Now according to evolution, plants came along before the bees. So how did the plants reproduce? … [37:41] … according to evolutionary model, you know we really came from an ameba. And amebas, they just like split and then there’s two amebas. So it seems to me like according to evolutionary model you do things that are efficient. So rather than going out and looking for a mate you would just divide, and then there would be two of you. … [38:16] But, you know, things are supposed to work in an efficient way, so according to the evolutionary model we would be less pugilistic, we would be much more logical, we would be much more creative, we wouldn’t be going around fighting each other and cutting off people’s heads anymore. Because that stuff would be extinguished and we would have evolved into something much better. According to the creation model, in which we have an adversary, it’s very easy to explain why people act that way, it’s because they have choice and because there is an adversary out there. [38:57]

[answering a woman’s question, 45:07] “I personally believe that this theory that Darwin came up with was something that was encouraged by the adversary [Satan], and it has become what is scientifically politically correct. Amazingly, there are a significant number of scientists who do not believe it but they are afraid to say anything.”

As I have said before, I increasingly view conservative/fundamentalist religious belief as demonstrative of serious emotional and mental illness.  If that is the case, then all of the GOP candidates belong under psychiatric care.

GOP: Still the Party of Stupid

With Oklahoma Republicans seeking to block advance placement courses, especially in American history because they too accurately depict true history and don't promote the myth of "American exceptionalism" so prized by the cretins of the GOP base, once again the GOP proving that it is truly the party of stupid.  Driving the embrace of ignorance, of course, is the Christofascist/Tea Party elements of the GOP base where ignorance is worn like a badge of honor.  Sane and rational Republicans quite naturally find themselves jumping form the GOP asylum and either becoming independents or de facto Democrats.  A piece in Salon looks at the continued intellectual demise of the GOP.  Here are highlights:

It was quite amusing to see Scott Walker pilloried by certain right-wing luminaries for failing to smoothly answer when asked by a British reporter whether he believes in evolution. Not that there’s any doubt that it was a very clumsy answer:

“For me, I am going to punt on that one as well. That’s a question politicians shouldn’t be involved in one way or another. I am going to leave that up to you. I’m here to talk about trade not to pontificate about evolution.”

One might have expected the Great Whitebread Hope to be a little better prepared — or at least be politically skilled enough — not to come right out and say, “I’m going to punt on that one.” It was amateur hour, to say the least.

Walker showed that he understands the Republican base far better than the likes of George Will, who said on Fox News last week that press questions about evolution are “a standard way of trying to embarrass Republicans … We should be able to come to terms with the fact when asked about evolution you say yes. And if one syllable of one word is not enough say Paleontology. Everything says evolution is a fact. Get over it.”

The sad fact is that polling shows fewer and fewer Republicans believe in evolution.

[I]t’s not really religion that holds the GOP base together, it’s a sense of victimization. And this thesis weaves a number of important strands into a colorful if ahistorical tapestry.

It presents a bit of a problem for conservative leaders, however. As you can see from Rios’ unhappiness at George Will’s forthright support for evolution, people who actually believe in science (as it’s understood by scientists anyway) are considered traitors to the cause. And most of them are less willing than Will to buck the victimization creed. 

If a Republican politician wants to go straight to the right-wing heart on this issue he would say what presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee said with just the right amount of smug insider wingnut humor:

“If you want to believe that you and your family came from apes, that’s fine. I’ll accept that. I just don’t happen to think that I did.”

That’s the kind of statement that will elicit cheers from your GOP base and make the likes of Laura Ingraham applaud wildly. Unfortunately, it won’t carry much beyond Mencken’s loathed Bible Belt or right-wing radio.

The New Science that Has Creationists and the Christofascists Terrified

Nothing is more terrifying to the Christofascists and their creationist allies than modern science which is steadily disproving many of the pillars of the Christian story line, including the fact that Adam and Eve never existed.   For these people, having to think for themselves and not being able to smugly look down on others who aren't "saved" is a horrifying prospect.  But as science advances, their beliefs in myths and fairy tales is increasingly threatened - something that, in my view, is a good thing for humanity.  A piece in Salon looks at how new science is putting more and more pressure on Christofascist beliefs.  Here are excerpts:

The Christian right’s obsessive hatred of Darwin is a wonder to behold, but it could someday be rivaled by the hatred of someone you’ve probably never even heard of. Darwin earned their hatred because he explained the evolution of life in a way that doesn’t require the hand of God. Darwin didn’t exclude God, of course, though many creationists seem incapable of grasping this point. But he didn’t require God, either, and that was enough to drive some people mad.

Darwin also didn’t have anything to say about how life got started in the first place — which still leaves a mighty big role for God to play, for those who are so inclined. But that could be about to change, and things could get a whole lot worse for creationists because of Jeremy England, a young MIT professor who’s proposed a theory, based in thermodynamics, showing that the emergence of life was not accidental, but necessary. “[U]nder certain conditions, matter inexorably acquires the key physical attribute associated with life,” he was quoted as saying in an article in Quanta magazine early in 2014, that’s since been republished by Scientific American and, more recently, by Business Insider. In essence, he’s saying, life itself evolved out of simpler non-living systems.

The notion of an evolutionary process broader than life itself is not entirely new. Indeed, there’s evidence, recounted by Eric Havelock in “The Liberal Temper in Greek Politics,” that it was held by the pre-Socratic natural philosophers, who also first gave us the concept of the atom, among many other things. But unlike them or other earlier precursors, England has a specific, unifying, testable evolutionary mechanism in mind.

It doesn’t mean we should expect life everywhere in the universe — lack of a decent atmosphere or being too far from the sun still makes most of our solar system inhospitable for life with or without England’s perspective. But it does mean that “under certain conditions” where life is possible — as it is here on Earth, obviously — it is also quite probable, if not, ultimately, inevitable. Indeed, life on Earth could well have developed multiple times independently of each other, or all at once, or both. The first truly living organism could have had hundreds, perhaps thousands of siblings, all born not from a single physical parent, but from a physical system, literally pregnant with the possibility of producing life. And similar multiple births of life could have happened repeatedly at different points in time.

Giordano Bruno, who was burnt at the stake for heresy in 1600, was perhaps the first to take Copernicanism to its logical extension, speculating that stars were other suns, circled by other worlds, populated by beings like ourselves. His extreme minority view in his own time now looks better than ever, thanks to England.

If England’s theory works out, it will obviously be an epochal scientific advance. But on a lighter note, it will also be a fitting rebuke to pseudo-scientific creationists, who have long mistakenly claimed that thermodynamics disproves evolution (here, for example), the exact opposite of what England’s work is designed to show — that thermodynamics drives evolution, starting even before life itself first appears, with a physics-based logic that applies equally to living and non-living matter.

England appears to have assembled a collection of analytical tools, along with a sophisticated multidisciplinary theoretical approach, which promises to do much more than simply propound a theory, but to generate a whole new research agenda giving detailed meaning to that theoretical conjecture. And that research agenda is already starting to produce results. (See his research group home page for more.) It’s the development of this sort of detailed body of specific mutually interrelated results that will distinguish England’s articulation of his theory from other earlier formulations that have not yet been translated into successful theory-testing research agendas.

Creationists often cast themselves as humble servants of God, and paint scientists as arrogant, know-it-all rebels against him. But, unsurprisingly, they’ve got it all backwards, once again. England’s work reminds us that it’s scientists’ willingness to admit our own ignorance and confront it head on — rather than papering over it — that unlocks the great storehouse of wonders we live in and gives us our most challenging, satisfying quests.

Pope Francis Admits He Believes in Evolution and the Big Bang

As noted in an earlier post, Pope Francis has horrified the ranks of the Protestant evangelicals who continue to insist that the Bible is the inerrant word of God and that the earth is some 6,000 years old and that so-called creationism explains how the earth and universe came into being.   Francis' heresy? He stated that the Bible and evolution and the Big Bang theory are not mutually exclusive and that they can co-exist.  While Francis' statements are not shocking to most Catholics - Catholics in general have no problem believing in evolution - they are 180 degrees opposite of Christofascists like Tony Perkins, Mike Huckabee and numerous other "leaders" of ignorance embracing denominations and hate groups.  Salon looks at Francis' common sense statements (which one would hope would lead him to accept modern medical and mental health knowledge as well, including that on sexual orientation).  Here are some excerpts:

In an exciting declaration, Pope Francis I stated that God should not seen as a “magician with a magic wand,” while unveiling a statue of his predecessor Pope Benedict XVI at the Pontifical Academy of Sciences. Pope Francis also stated that evolution and the Big Bang theory are both true and not incompatible with the church’s views on the origins of the universe and life.

“When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so,” Francis said, according to the Independent. Francis continued by stating that God “created human beings and let them develop according to the internal laws that he gave to each one so they would reach their fulfillment.”

“The Big Bang, which today we hold to be the origin of the world, does not contradict the intervention of the divine creator but, rather, requires it,” Francis explained. ”Evolution in nature is not inconsistent with the notion of creation, because evolution requires the creation of beings that evolve.”

While the pope’s understanding of the origins of life still requires a divine force (rather than a scientific one), his views are a leap forward for the Catholic Church. 

The theory, broadly accepted by the majority of scientists, is still under attack by Young Earth Creationists, and it is taught alongside the pseudo-science of creationism in American schools. Some mainstream politicians even try to distance themselves from the term “evolution.”

If we are lucky, this development, along with above average Catholic support for gay rights and same sex marriage will further sabotage Republicans to court Catholics and far right evangelicals with the same pandering and self-prostitution.   Should Francis ultimately prevail in modernizing the Roman Catholic Church, one of the big losers will be the Republican Party.  The winners, of course, will be the hundreds of millions of Catholics no longer being harmed by the Church's 13th century "natural law" and rejection of modern knowledge.

Minnesota Congressional Nominee for Congress to Block Teaching of Evolution

If you want to see just how severe the swamp fever afflicting the Republican Party has become look no farther than Aaron Miller (pictured above), the Minnesota Republican Party’s nominee for the 1st Congressional District, who stated this week that he wanted to run for Congress "because learning about evolution made his daughter cry, and he wanted to make sure that schools were not forced to teach it."  Frighteningly, Miller makes Michele Bachmann look at least somewhat sane.  The GOP's race to embrace ignorance truly seems to know few limits.  Meanwhile, I cannot help but asking myself what the hell is in the water in Minnesota?  The Raw Story has details.  Here are excerpts:

Aaron Miller, the Minnesota Republican Party’s nominee for the 1st Congressional District, said this week that he wanted to win because learning about evolution made his daughter cry, and he wanted to make sure that schools were not forced to teach it. 

The Mankato Free Press reported last month that Miller told a story to a Republican county convention about how his daughter became “very upset because she had to learn about evolution at school.”

Miller claimed that even the teacher expressed agreement with the daughter, but said that the evolution lesson was a requirement. The candidate refused to provide any other details at the time.

“There’s a war on our values by the government,” he insisted. “We should decide what is taught in our schools, not Washington, D.C.”

Over the weekend, Miller was officially named the Republican nominee, and he took the opportunity to repeat the anti-evolution story.

“He also called for more religious freedoms,” the Free Press noted. “He repeated his story about his daughter returning home from school in tears because evolution was being taught in her class. He said the teacher admitted to not believing in the scientific theory to his daughter but told her that the government forced him to teach the lesson.”  Again, he declined to provide the details necessary for reporters to verify the story.

The candidate later said that the federal government should not have a role in school curriculum.

Not surprisingly, Miller is backed by the Tea Party.  I increasingly think that a prerequisite for Tea Party membership is a lobotomy.

Virginia GOP Senator Pushing Denial of Evolution

As I have lamented before, there was once a time when the Republican Party once respected and upheld knowledge, learning and logic.  Those days are long gone and now one cannot help but wonder where the GOP finds the lunatics it puts in office or whether it sends would be candidates off somewhere to either give them a lobotomy or perform some sort of "Stepford Wife" transformation of them into the ignorance embracing morons that the seem to become in most instances.  A case in point is Virginia Republican Senator, Stephen Martin (Chesterfield), pictured at left, who not being content with making himself and Virginia look ridiculous by his comment referring to pregnant women as "hosts" is now peddling denial of evolution.  Blue Virginia looks at Martin's latest batshitery:

Yes, the same Virginia Republican Senator, Stephen Martin, who became a national laughing stock for his comments calling women "the child's host (some refer to them as mothers)," and generally raging against pro-choice advocates (as "very sick people"), is back at it again on his Facebook page (note to Senator Martin: stay off of social media!!!).

This time, he's denying evolution, citing an article on an "intelligent design" site. According to this website's about section, "intelligent design (ID) offers a promising scientific alternative to materialistic theories of biological and cosmological evolution - an alternative that is finding increasing theoretical and empirical support." Of course, that is complete and utter bull****, but there are actually people who believe it (#education system FAIL).

Anyway, it seems somehow appropriate that the guy who views women as no more than a baby's "host" would also deny one of the most important, crucial, and well-evidenced scientific theories in human history. Even more amazing is that this guy is a State Senator, although it's certainly not surprising that he's a member of the Republican Party (Abraham Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, and many others thrashing around in their graves just thinking about what's become of their once-fine party...). 

I continue to be amazed at the apparent form of mental illness that afflicts the Christofascists and sadly too many in the GOP that  causes them to be terrified of modernity, actually thinking for themselves, and cling to the Old Testament which was written by unknown, ignorant herders more than 2500 years ago.  It is truly a form of sickness and mental illness. 

Kepler Telescope Reveals 715 New Planets

In addition to refusing to accept that the Earth is more than 6,000 years old or believing that evolution is true, the Christofascists believe that the Bible - written by ignorant nomads/herders in the case of the Old Testament and unknown authors in the case of the New Testament - is the final word for the entire universe. This latter belief requires, of course, that there be no other intelligent and/or humanoid life in the universe.  As with many other Christofascist beliefs, science is steadily threatening this tenant of the Christofascists' fantasy alternate universe.  A case in point? The discovery of 715 new planets that are located in the habitable zone of there respective solar systems.  Here are highlights from a new NASA press release:

NASA's Kepler mission announced Wednesday the discovery of 715 new planets. These newly-verified worlds orbit 305 stars, revealing multiple-planet systems much like our own solar system.

Nearly 95 percent of these planets are smaller than Neptune, which is almost four times the size of Earth. This discovery marks a significant increase in the number of known small-sized planets more akin to Earth than previously identified exoplanets, which are planets outside our solar system.

"The Kepler team continues to amaze and excite us with their planet hunting results," said John Grunsfeld, associate administrator for NASA's Science Mission Directorate in Washington. "That these new planets and solar systems look somewhat like our own, portends a great future when we have the James Webb Space Telescope in space to characterize the new worlds.”

Since the discovery of the first planets outside our solar system roughly two decades ago, verification has been a laborious planet-by-planet process. Now, scientists have a statistical technique that can be applied to many planets at once when they are found in systems that harbor more than one planet around the same star.

To verify this bounty of planets, a research team co-led by Jack Lissauer, planetary scientist at NASA's Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, Calif., analyzed stars with more than one potential planet, all of which were detected in the first two years of Kepler's observations -- May 2009 to March 2011.

Four of these new planets are less than 2.5 times the size of Earth and orbit in their sun's habitable zone, defined as the range of distance from a star where the surface temperature of an orbiting planet may be suitable for life-giving liquid water.

One of these new habitable zone planets, called Kepler-296f, orbits a star half the size and 5 percent as bright as our sun. Kepler-296f is twice the size of Earth, but scientists do not know whether the planet is a gaseous world, with a thick hydrogen-helium envelope, or it is a water world surrounded by a deep ocean.

This latest discovery brings the confirmed count of planets outside our solar system to nearly 1,700. As we continue to reach toward the stars, each discovery brings us one step closer to a more accurate understanding of our place in the galaxy.

 One thing is probably certain - the Bible does NOT provide an accurate understanding of our place in the Milky Wat galaxy much less the vastly larger universe.

GOP Bill: Let Virginia Schools Teach Kids That Climate Change And Evolution Are Untrue

Virginia Del. Richard Bell (R) - ignorant ass

While more and more Virginians are embracing modernity and modern knowledge, keys to competing in a rapidly changing global economy, the Virginia GOP is racing in the opposite direction and seeking to dumb down and handicap Virginia students.  How eles can one describe a bill introduced in the Virginia General Assembly by Neanderthal Delegate Richard “Dickie” Bell that would allow schools to teach that evolution and climate change are untrue.  Why not just make lobotomies mandatory for public school students?  The ignorance and backwardness that is now being espoused by the Virginia GOP is frightening and it's all backed by religious extremists who are terrified of anything that challenges their religious belief fantasy world.  Think Progress looks at this latest GOP batshitery in Virginia:

A new bill, up for consideration this year in the Virginia General Assembly, would give Virginia’s public school teachers permission to teach about the “scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses” of “scientific theories” like evolution and global climate change. The bill is part of a national trend of legislative proposals, led by creationist organizations like the Discovery Institute and climate-change deniers such as the Heartland Institute.

Virginia State Delegate Richard “Dickie” Bell (R) pre-filed House Bill 207 over the holidays for consideration by the House of Delegates when it reconvenes this week. His proposal would require Virginia elementary and secondary schools to teach about “scientific controversies” in science classes. It would require:

The Board [of Education] and each local school board, division superintendent, and school board employee shall create an environment in public elementary and secondary schools that encourages students to explore scientific questions, learn about scientific evidence, develop critical thinking skills, and respond appropriately and respectfully to differences of opinion about scientific controversies in science classes.

More significantly, it creates a right for teachers to teach kids to be skeptical of “scientific theories” — even when overwhelming scientific consensus exists:

Neither the Board nor any local school board, division superintendent, or school board employee shall prohibit any public elementary or secondary school teacher from helping students understand, analyze, critique, and review in an objective manner the scientific strengths and scientific weaknesses of existing scientific theories covered in science classes

In his 2011 re-election campaign, he boasted of the endorsement of noted climate-change-denier Ken Cuccinelli II (R).

Groups like the Discovery Institute and Heartland Institute have pushed schools nationally to adopt curricula that embraces skepticism of science. The former’s “Teach the Controversy” campaign has encouraged educators to include in their lectures the “non-scientific problems” creationists and intelligent-design proponents claim to have identified in the theory of evolution. A federal court held in 2005 that teaching intelligent-design in public schools is unconstitutional.

The populous [Hampton Roads] area, along the Atlantic coast, is already experiencing growing problems from rising sea levels. The National Journal reported last February that, “the economic impact of these forces will be profound; some estimates run as high as $25 billion.”

But the General Assembly has done little to address climate change in recent years. In 2012, Bell’s colleague, Del. Chris Stolle (R) called “sea level rise” a “left-wing term” and excised any mention of it from a state report on coastal flooding.

The Christofascists and GOP are an increasing clear and present danger to the future of America.  These people need to be stopped. 

The Descent of Evangelical Christians into Abject Ignorance

This blog has looked before at the correlation between the belief in Bible inerrancy and low levels of education with evangelicals routinely being revealed as the least educated overall and the most believing in the Bible as inerrant fact.   As the evangelical Christians - those I call the Christofascists - have taken over the Republican Party we now see only 43% of self-identifying Republicans believing in evolution.  The sane and educated people have simply left the GOP, a party that once valued science and knowledge.  But even among Evangelicals there is an exodus of the younger educated factions who go to college, receive an education and come to see the religious faith in which the have been raised/brainwashed as unacceptable.  A Piece in The Daily Beast authored by a professor at an evangelical college looks at the downward spiral among evangelicals.  Here are excerpts:

According to a December 2013 Pew poll, among white evangelical Protestants, a demographic that includes many Republican members of Congress and governors, almost 64 percent reject the idea that humans have evolved.

The connection between acceptance of evolution and political affiliation has grown stronger over the past three years, exacerbating the polarization now plaguing Congress. Among Democrats, acceptance of evolution increased by 3 percent, to 67 percent, while among Republicans it decreased from 54 percent to 43 percent.

The trajectory is not encouraging, especially as it runs in parallel with a steady increase in the evidence for evolution—evidence now piled so high that not even one evolutionary biologist at any of America’s research universities rejects the theory. Evolution is as widely accepted in biology departments as gravity is in physics departments.

So how is it that 64 percent of America’s “white evangelical evangelical Protestants,” an unusually powerful and wealthy demographic, remains so strongly opposed to evolution?

I am a white evangelical Protestant, or at least I was until persuaded to leave a couple of years ago. Raised in a parsonage, I grew up in that tradition and, after earning a Ph.D. in physics, I taught science, including evolution, at an evangelical college, one of approximately 160 similar—and accredited—institutions in the Council of Christian Colleges and Universities (CCCU). Most evangelical colleges teach evolution, albeit quietly, carefully, and often tentatively, although there are exceptions. 

In an ideal world these efforts should slowly trickle onto Main Street, where they would inform ordinary evangelicals, including those who run for Congress. In time, Darwin’s dangerous idea should become widely accepted, just as Christians gradually gave credence to Galileo’s dangerous idea about the motion of the earth.  But that is not what is happening.

For a quarter century I taught scientific theories of origins—evolution and the Big Bang Theory—under a cloud of suspicion that waxed and waned but never totally disappeared. With few exceptions, my mostly evangelical students accepted these ideas. I took informal polls indicating that most of the 50 percent of my students who rejected evolution at the beginning of my course accepted it by the end. My colleagues at other evangelical colleges report similar experiences. We were hopeful that these evangelical students would become leaders of their faith communities and gradually persuade their fellow evangelicals that evolution was not a lie from hell—which was what many of them had been taught in Sunday school. But instead scientifically informed young evangelicals became so alienated from their home churches that they walked away, taking their enlightenment with them.

An alarming study by the Barna group looked at the mass exodus of 20-somethings from evangelicalism and discovered that one of the major sources of discontent was the perception that “Christianity was antagonistic to science.” Anti-evolution, and general suspicion of science, has become such a significant part of the evangelical identity that many people feel compelled to choose one or the other. Many of my most talented former students no longer attend any church, and some have completely abandoned their faith traditions.

[S]ome professors, alarmed by the persistent gap between the evangelical community and the findings of science—the gap that drives their students out of their churches—have naively presumed to educate their larger faith communities by writing books and articles in support of scientific theories of origins such as evolution and the Big Bang. Their quiet whispers thus become loud proclamations. Influential leaders read their books and are horrified to discover that a faculty member at “their” college is spreading “lies from the pit of hell” and destroying the faith of the students. Campaigns of various sorts are mounted and pressure exerted on the college leadership to remove that dangerous professor.

Productive scholarship that would be highly valued at other institutions became instead a major liability. Administrators complained that I was too controversial and creating public relations problems . . . 

I spent countless hours in the office of a succession of college presidents, explaining why Christians needed to make peace with evolution, no matter how painful. I was forced to communicate and even meet with hostile external constituents to defend well-established science against people who knew nothing about it beyond the challenges it posed to their interpretation of the Bible. One such watchdog group, the Reformed Nazarenes, rejoiced when I finally left the college.


My story is far from unique. Indeed, it’s almost typical. Understandably, only a handful of evangelical scholars have published books and articles in defense of evolution, but many of them have been forced to resign as a result.

It is no surprise that American Christofascists are focusing so much effort on Africa.  To thrive, their poisonous religious beliefs require (i) an ignorant, uneducated audience, or (ii) simple minded individuals who due to their own psychological issues are terrified to think or question hogwash that has been spoon fed to them.   It is frightening that such mental midgets now hold so much sway over the GOP which seems engaged in a race towards utter ignorance.

Indoctrinating GOP Religious Warriors

I've already looked at the troubling increase in the percentage of Republicans who do not accept the theory of evolution.  As noted, much of the increase may be the result of the rise of the Christofascists within the GOP and the current flight of moderates and sane individuals from the GOP - e.g., all of my family has fled the GOP.  But there has been a troubling pandering to the ignorance embracing element of the GOP by those who should have known better.  The motivation? Short term gain by mobilizing the ignorant and religious extremists.  The longer term result has been, as noted, the exodus from sane and educated people from the party and the now ongoing civil war for the soul of the GOP.  A piece in the New York Times looks at the growing ignorance of the GOP and the use of religion to win allegiance to the party.  Here are excerpts:

In 2009, the gap between the share of Republicans and Democrats who believed in evolution was just 10 percentage points, 54 percent and 64 percent, respectively. 

Last year, that gap widened to a whopping 24 points because as the percentage of Democrats who believed in evolution inched up to 67 percent, the percentage of Republicans believing so plummeted to 43 percent. Now, more Republicans believe that “humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time” than believe in evolution.  

This sad news comes via a survey released this week by the Pew Research Center’s Religion & Public Life Project. 

In fact, this isn’t only sad; it’s embarrassing.  I don’t personally have a problem with religious faith, even in the extreme, as long as it doesn’t supersede science and it’s not used to impose outdated mores on others. 

But I believe that something else is also at play here, something more cynical. I believe this is a natural result of a long-running ploy by Republican party leaders to play on the most base convictions of conservative voters in order to solidify their support. Convince people that they’re fighting a religious war for religious freedom, a war in which passion and devotion are one’s weapons against doubt and confusion, and you make loyal soldiers. 

There has been anti-science propagandizing running unchecked on the right for years, from anti-gay-equality misinformation to climate change denials. 

When you look at white evangelical Protestants, the evolution denialism gets even worse. Only 27 percent of that group believes in evolution.  . . . .  while white evangelical Protestants make up only 18 percent of the population overall, they “make up 43 percent of Republicans who fall into the category of staunch conservatives.” 

Pew found that most staunch conservatives were regular viewers of Fox News, preferring the network to any other news source.  Fox has helped to ingrain the idea that Republicanism and religiosity are embattled and oppressed, fighting for survival against the forces of secular extremists. 

But Fox is not alone. The Christians-on-the-defensive stance was front and center in the 2012 Republican presidential primaries.

Last year, the Liberty Institute and the Family Research Council released an updated, 189-page version of a book called “Undeniable: The Survey of Hostility to Religion in America.” 

This is a tactic to keep the Republican rank-and-file riled up, to divert their attention from areas of common sense and the common good. After all, infidels are deserving of your enmity, not your empathy.

One-third of Americans - And A Majority of Republicans - Reject Evolution

There was a time when the Republican Party embraced knowledge and intellect and held scientific knowledge in high regard.  Now, the Party seems to be in a race to see how dumb and ignorant its base can become.  It is no coincidence, however, that these growing embrace of ignorance directly correlates to the rise of the Christofascists in the GOP.  Greed, racism, homophobia and the rejection of modernity and knowledge are now the principal traits of Republicans.  Oh, they can try to blow a smoke screen by claiming that the support fiscal conservatism, but that dog doesn't hunt given the reality that it has been GOP administrations, particularly that of the brainless Chimperator George W. Bush, that have blown the nation's budget time and time again. Here are highlights from Reuters that looks at the frightening number of Americans who embrace idiocy and ignorance:

One-third of Americans reject the idea of evolution and Republicans have grown more skeptical about it, according to a poll released on Monday.


Sixty percent of Americans say that "humans and other living things have evolved over time," the telephone survey by the Pew Research Center's Religion and Public Life Project showed (Click here for the full survey).

But 33 percent reject the idea of evolution, saying that "humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time," Pew said in a statement.

Although this percentage remained steady since 2009, the last time Pew asked the question, there was a growing partisan gap on whether humans evolved.

"The gap is coming from the Republicans, where fewer are now saying that humans have evolved over time," said Cary Funk, a Pew senior researcher who conducted the analysis.

The poll showed 43 percent of Republicans and 67 percent of Democrats say humans have evolved over time, compared with 54 percent and 64 percent respectively four years ago.

Among religious groups, white evangelical Protestants topped the list of those rejecting evolution, with 64 percent of those polled saying they believe humans have existed in their present form since the beginning of time.

Other modern nations must shudder at these figures.  Meanwhile, our enemies must be elated.  The irony is that the far right and Christofascists blather on and on about the enemies of America within the nation yet it is they themselves who will be the downfall of the nation.

The Rising Anti-Science Party

Everything from advances in longevity to declines in infant mortality stem ultimately from increases in scientific knowledge.  Scientific advances have been a boon for mankind.  At the same time, however, science has been bursting more and more bubbles for the deeply religious fundamentalists who seek to desperately cling to stories authored numerous millennium ago by ignorant men motivated by fear and superstition or a need to feel superior over other surrounding cultures.  For fundamentalist Christians, perhaps the biggest blow has been the human genome project which has confirmed that the Adam and Eve of Genesis never existed as historical persons.  The result?  The entire Christian story line collapses.  Rather than have their simple minded beliefs undermined, these people are part of a growing tide of those engaged in a flat out denial of scientific truths.  Denial is the only thing that keeps their house of cards world view from collapsing.  And most of these people now make up the base of the Republican Party.  Here in Virginia, GOP gubernatorial candidate is an avid science denier. A piece in Huffington Post looks at the phenomenon and the efforts by some to counter it.  Here are excerpts:

New atheism refers to a set of ideas presented in a series of bestselling books that appeared between 2004 and 2007. Today it remains a strong but minority view among atheists. Basically, new atheists differ from the old atheists by being more willing to challenge religious beliefs that contradict science and reason, and engage in intellectual, moral, and political disputes with even moderate believers.

[N]ew atheists don't want to see creationism in the schools any more than the old atheists did. But they don't regard this as such an overarching problem that we should ignore the even greater damage that is done to society by the irrational, magical thinking associated with religion, which penetrates all areas of human life. Creationism is not the cause but the effect of such thinking.

Most working scientists and scientific organizations, notably the National Academy of Sciences, are accommodationist. They carefully avoid confronting religion for fear of losing public support for science. But let me tell you something. They're losing it anyway. Spurred on by the antiscience of the religious right, political support for science is lower now than at any time in memory. 

Once America was the foremost nation in science. Today the most important discoveries are being made elsewhere. Few fresh science PhDs in the U.S. have much hope of getting a post-doctoral appointment and virtually none of making a career in the academic world.

In the meantime, our schools are producing a generation of science illiterates. The US is 29th among developed nations on a list that ranks the science literacy of 15-year olds.

Where does all this hostility to science come in?  I think the answer is clear. The hostility is not directed toward the practical applications of science, as in medicine and technology, but with the challenges that basic science brings to the religious views held by the majority of Americans. Unfortunately most Americans do not seem to realize that basic scientific research is the foundation of the welcome applications.

Let's take a look at some of the conflicts between science and religion that have an important impact on society. Of course, evolution is the most familiar; so let me cover that first. In a survey of 33 countries in Europe plus Japan, only Muslim Turkey had a lower belief in evolution than the United States.

Evangelicals and fundamentalists see evolution as a threat to their belief in the inerrancy of scripture, which indeed it is. No compromise is possible here. However, the Catholic Church and moderate Protestant churches say they accept evolution.  But that is simply not true.

The second big combat zone is climate change. There can be no factual disputing that the carbon dioxide level in the atmosphere is far above what is expected naturally and is caused by the burning of fossil fuels. And the simplest physics tells us that this will lead to global warming by the greenhouse effect. 

Yet we still hear people saying that the whole global warming thing is a hoax, cooked up (no pun intended) by unscrupulous scientists in order to get more government funding. What have scientists actually done to deserve such mistrust? Nothing but present facts that conflict with the "deeply held belief" of many Christians that God would never allow such a thing.

In 2009, John Shimkus, Republican of Illinois, and a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives, argued that climate change is a myth because God told Noah he would never again destroy Earth by flood (Gen 8:21-22). He is seen on video as saying, "The earth will end only when God declares it's time to be over. Man will not destroy this earth. This earth will not be destroyed by a flood. . . . I do believe God's word is infallible, unchanging, perfect."

Now, it's not a surprise that the fossil-fuel barons and the politicians they support financially are behind all this global warming denial propaganda. . . . .  Perhaps it is not surprising that oil and coal companies would resort to dishonest tactics to protect its investments--the cutthroat business world being what it is. What is surprising is how many ordinary people fall for their lies.

Here again, few scientists and accommodationist atheists are willing to publicly acknowledge the role of religion. But the facts speak for themselves. A recent poll showed that only 31 percent of evangelicals believe there is any global warming at all, while 58 percent of those unaffiliated with any church not only believe Earth is warming but agree it is the result of human activity. 

Faith would not be such a negative force in society if it were just about religion. However, the magical thinking that becomes deeply ingrained whenever blind faith rules over facts warps all areas of life. It produces a frame of mind in which concepts are formulated with deep passion but without the slightest attention paid to the evidence that bears on the concept.

From its very beginning in prehistory, religion has been a tool used by those in power to retain that power and keep the masses in line. This continues today as religious groups are manipulated to work against believers' own best interests in health and economic well being by casting doubt on well-established scientific findings. This would not be possible except for the diametrically opposed world-views of science and religion.

I have an urgent plea to scientists and all thinking people. . . . That goal is the replacement of foolish faith and its vanities with something more sublime--knowledge and understanding that is securely based on observable reality.

I agree with the author.  Religion - especially fundamentalist religion of all faiths - is an increasing blight on humanity.  It needs to be defeated and absolutely no deference given to religious based ignorance and denial.  House of cards faith systems need to be demolished along with the hate and bigotry that seem to be always tied to them.

The Real Cause of America's Decline

Click on chart to enlarge

The GOP and the far right lament what they describe as America's decline in terms of its place in the world and in terms of economic dominance.  What they fail to recognize is that it is their open embrace of ignorance and religious based idiocy that are perhaps one of the biggest threats to the nation.  While most of the rest of the world is embracing science and knowledge, the GOP and the Christianists want America guided by the writings of ignorant wandering herders from 2000+ years ago.  Here are highlights from a new Gallup survey that show the frightening level of ignorance that is far too widespread in this country:

Forty-six percent of Americans believe in the creationist view that God created humans in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years. The prevalence of this creationist view of the origin of humans is essentially unchanged from 30 years ago, when Gallup first asked the question. About a third of Americans believe that humans evolved, but with God's guidance; 15% say humans evolved, but that God had no part in the process.

What's equally frightening is that Republicans in states around the nation want creationism taught in schools as if it were a form of science.  Sometimes I feel that we are engaged in a form of national suicide.   We might as well have government mandated lobotomies for all if creationism and its Neanderthal like advocates aren't pushed back to the religious nutcase fringe in our country.

Just Say No: No Science, No Sex, No Gay People

The increasing lunacy taking place in Tennessee symbolizes what is happening the the Republican Party across the nation as the open embrace of ignorance and anti-gay bigotry - and I'd add racism - become the pillars of the Party's platform.  Given what seems to be a continued exodus of rational people from the GOP (not that there are that many left to begin with) one has to wonder where it will end.  One also has to wonder what companies and businesses will want to relocate to states that are so increasingly out of the mainstream.  A column in the New York Times looks at the phenomenon.  Here are highlights:

Wishing doesn’t make it so, but don’t tell that to the Tennessee Legislature. It seems determined to lead the nation in yearning for an era when Genesis was the last word on science, when there were no gay people and nobody engaged in non-marital sex, so there were no teenage pregnancies and no unwanted children.

There was no such time, of course. But that doesn’t seem to deter the Republican majority, which has brought us such modern wonders as a bill to protect teachers who preach the “scientific weaknesses” of “biological evolution, the chemical origins of life, global warming and human cloning,” and a bill that would prohibit elementary and middle school teachers from mentioning the existence of homosexuality.

And now they have sent a bill to Gov. Bill Haslam that would bar sex-ed teachers in public schools from promoting “gateway” sexual activity. . . . This bill is a disaster in the making: It relies on the definition of sexual activity in state law, which includes any contact with even the clothed inner thigh of another person. Critics say it’s so vaguely written that if a teacher doesn’t stop a student from sitting in another person’s lap, he could face punishment.

But don’t get the wrong idea. Tennessee’s Republican legislators know the government can only do so much to enforce morality. Last year, they revised an anti-bullying law so as to exempt anyone who voices a religiously motivated belief.

Sure, said Rep. Jeremy Faison, a few teenagers committed suicide after getting bullied about their sexuality, but “they committed suicide because they were not instilled the proper principles of where their self-esteem came from at home.”  We can’t continue to legislate everything,” he said.

Adam and Eve - Where's Christianity Without The Fall?

While the professional Christian crowd continues to endeavor to whip up anti-LGBT hate and other types of hatred - of course, lining their pockets with money in the process - they seem to be ignoring the biggest threat of all to their house of cards belief system: the fact that the literal story of Adam and Eve in the Bible is false. As noted before, science now tells us that they never existed and that, therefore, there was no "Fall" and exile from the Garden of Eden. And if this is the case, there was no need for a messiah to die and secure forgiveness for Adam and Eve's descendants. Bob Felton at Civil Commotion describes the quandary for the inerrant Bible crowd as follows:

The problem is straightforward:

1. No Adam and Eve, then …

2. No Fall, then …

3. No Original Sin, so …

4. Jesus doesn’t ‘save’ and Christianity has nothing on offer but a not-very-special ethical system.

So far, most of the Bible beaters seem to want to merely ignore the clear import of this problem. One such is Albert Mohler at the Southern Baptist Convention. But the Catholic Church isn't immune from the huge problem that the central salvation story of the Bible and Christianity has a foundation less secure than a house built upon sand. A piece in Commonweal looks at the dilemma before the Catholic Church. Ignoring this threat to the bedrock of Catholic dogma doesn't make the problem go away. Here are some article highlights:

For the past few months, many evangelicals and Baptists and other conservative Christians in the Protestant stream have been debating — and generally pushing back against — the science showing that the human race could not literally have descended from two progenitors, Adam and Eve.

The Catholic Church indeed of all the Christian churches faces a particular quandary. The Council of Trent is quite explicit on the topic. Catholics are required to believe not only that Adam is the single father of the human race, but that Original Sin is passed on by physical generation from him to the entire human race. It’s not something symbolic or allegorical (although it is regarded as ultimately mysterious). The First Vatican Council reiterated the doctrine, as did Pope Pius XII in his 1950 encyclical Humani Generis

Catholic apologists who point to Pope John Paul II’s 1996 address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences as evidence of the Church’s acceptance of evolution often fail to notice that the late Pope completely passed over the question of monogenism, and indeed never did discuss the problem that genetics poses to the doctrine.

Indeed, evidence against a literal Adam and Eve is pretty conclusive. . . . while the Vatican maintains its silence on the challenge of genomics, Catholics in general are either encouraged to fall back on the denialism of Evangelical leaders like Albert Mohler, or to keep their mouths shut. Catholics tend not to keep their mouths shut, and shouldn’t, nor should they have to adopt views like Al Mohler’s.

With roughly one third of those raised as Catholics having left the Church in the USA alone, the hierarchy's refusal to address this huge problem will likely only hasten the exodus (that is, if the sex abuse scandal alone isn't reason enough).

The Evangelical Rejection of Reason

Being in Europe it is interesting to look at the USA from a distance of 3,000+ mile away. A number of things are striking, including the phenomenon of Americans taking themselves far too seriously given the USA's very short lifetime as a nation. The other thing noticeably different is the lack of Christianist and Evangelical fanaticism that seem to be so wide spread in America and within the Republican Party in particular. Logic, reason, learning from others, and, of course, actually living in accordance with Christ's Gospel message are missing from the far right's actions and beliefs. An op-ed in the New York Times looks at the rejection of reason that plagues Evangelical Christians and the boot licking allies in the GOP. Here are some highlights:

THE Republican presidential field has become a showcase of evangelical anti-intellectualism. Herman Cain, Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann deny that climate change is real and caused by humans. Mr. Perry and Mrs. Bachmann dismiss evolution as an unproven theory. The two candidates who espouse the greatest support for science, Mitt Romney and Jon M. Huntsman Jr., happen to be Mormons, a faith regarded with mistrust by many Christians.

The rejection of science seems to be part of a politically monolithic red-state fundamentalism, textbook evidence of an unyielding ignorance on the part of the religious. As one fundamentalist slogan puts it, “The Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it.”

Evangelicalism at its best seeks a biblically grounded expression of Christianity that is intellectually engaged, humble and forward-looking. In contrast, fundamentalism is literalistic, overconfident and reactionary.

Fundamentalism appeals to evangelicals who have become convinced that their country has been overrun by a vast secular conspiracy; denial is the simplest and most attractive response to change. They have been scarred by the elimination of prayer in schools; the removal of nativity scenes from public places; the increasing legitimacy of abortion and homosexuality; the persistence of pornography and drug abuse; and acceptance of other religions and of atheism.

In response, many evangelicals created what amounts to a “parallel culture,” nurtured by church, Sunday school, summer camps and colleges, as well as publishing houses, broadcasting networks, music festivals and counseling groups. Among evangelical leaders, Ken Ham, David Barton and James C. Dobson have been particularly effective orchestrators — and beneficiaries — of this subculture.

[I]n fact their rejection of knowledge amounts to what the evangelical historian Mark A. Noll, in his 1994 book, “The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind,” described as an “intellectual disaster.” He called on evangelicals to repent for their neglect of the mind, decrying the abandonment of the intellectual heritage of the Protestant Reformation. “The scandal of the evangelical mind,” he wrote, “is that there is not much of an evangelical mind.”

New Report: Young People Leaving Church for Science

As reported by Religion Dispatches, a new Barna Group report discloses more bad news for the generally hate filled, self-enriching professional Christian class: young people are increasingly exiting their churches because of the anti-intellectualism and anti-science that is so pervasive amongst the self-congratulatory pious ones. The display of rank bigotry and intolerance that permeated the "Values Voter Summit" will no doubt help fuel the already negative view of religion in the minds of even more young people. Not that in many ways might not be a good thing - hatred of others, bigotry and the utter lack of compassion which are the main attributes of conservative Christianity are not positive influences in the world. Here are some highlights from the new report:

The group’s findings are summarized in six bullet points, including: overprotective churches, shallow theology, and hostility to doubt. All quite predictable. Nothing to see here. I read on.

And there it was: “Churches come across as antagonistic toward science.”

Accompanying this, are these sub-points with which a substantial number of interviewees agreed:
•“Christians are too confident they know all the answers”;
•“churches are out of step with the scientific world we live in”;
•“Christianity is anti-science”; and
•“[I am] turned off by the creation-versus-evolution debate.”

The study report which can be found here goes on to further detail the growing disconnect between churches - especially conservative ones - from today's young people:

The research project was comprised of eight national studies, including interviews with teenagers, young adults, parents, youth pastors, and senior pastors. The study of young adults focused on those who were regular churchgoers Christian church during their teen years and explored their reasons for disconnection from church life after age 15.

No single reason dominated the break-up between church and young adults. Instead, a variety of reasons emerged. Overall, the research uncovered six significant themes why nearly three out of every five young Christians (59%) disconnect either permanently or for an extended period of time from church life after age 15.

[M]uch of their experience of Christianity feels stifling, fear-based and risk-averse. One-quarter of 18- to 29-year-olds said “Christians demonize everything outside of the church” (23% indicated this “completely” or “mostly” describes their experience).

One of the reasons young adults feel disconnected from church or from faith is the tension they feel between Christianity and science. The most common of the perceptions in this arena is “Christians are too confident they know all the answers” (35%). Three out of ten young adults with a Christian background feel that “churches are out of step with the scientific world we live in” (29%). Another one-quarter embrace the perception that “Christianity is anti-science” (25%). And nearly the same proportion (23%) said they have “been turned off by the creation-versus-evolution debate.”

The study suggests some leaders ignore the concerns and issues of teens and twentysomethings because they feel that the disconnection will end when young adults are older and have their own children. Yet, this response misses the dramatic technological, social and spiritual changes that have occurred over the last 25 years and ignores the significant present-day challenges these young adults are facing.

Huntsman: GOP Cannot Become the "Anti-science" Party

Given that he's the only GOP presidential contender who is brave/honest enough to say that he believes in evolution and science, Jon Huntsman likely has a snow ball's chance in Hell of winning any primary contests where the GOP electorate is dominated by ignorance embracing Christianists. But it's refreshing that Huntsman will nonetheless speak the truth on this issue. It's also ironic that it's a Mormon who now is the standard bearer for rationality and science in a political party that has gone increasingly insane as if it were infected with a form of rabies. Politico has a story that looks at Huntsman's break from the party of ignorance of denial of scientific knowledge:

Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s denial of global warming poses a “serious problem” for Republicans trying to take back the White House in 2012, presidential rival Jon Huntsman says.

“The minute that the Republican Party becomes the party – the anti-science party, we have a huge problem. We lose a whole lot of people who would otherwise allow us to win the election in 2012,” the former Utah governor said in an interview aired Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.”

“When we take a position that isn't willing to embrace evolution, when we take a position that basically runs counter to what 98 of 100 climate scientists have said, with the National Academy of Science has said about what is causing climate change and man's contribution to it,” he said, “I think we find ourselves on the wrong side of science, and, therefore, in a losing position.”

Huntsman’s latest comments furthered his efforts to portray himself as the centrist alternative to tea party favorites like Perry and Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.).

“Right now, this country is crying out for a sensible middle ground. This is a center-right country. I am a center-right candidate,” Huntsman said. “Right now, we've got people on the fringes. President Obama is too far to the left. We've got people on the Republican side who are too far to the right and we have zero substance.”

When asked if Perry could defeat President Barack Obama should he win the nomination, Huntsman replied: "I think when you find yourself at an extreme end of the Republican Party, you make yourself unelectable."

At this point, Huntsman is the only GOP candidate that I can see myself even possible voting for. He needs to be flushed out more on his stance on LGBT issues before I can decide if I could hold my nose and vote for him rather that the Follower-in-Chief. The nation needs a leader and Obama has failed miserably in that capacity.