PDA

View Full Version : Templeton Science Standards


uncle ebeneezer
08-05-2010, 02:05 PM
A ways back when there was a brouhaha about Bheads allowing the Templeton Foundation to support a series of science-related diavlogs, many of the commenters here were concerned. Many others branded us as being closed-minded to religion, or being blindly allegiant to a religion of empiricism and it's dogmas. The bigger concern re: Templeton, as many tried to explain, was stuff like this (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/08/templeton_prayer_study_meets_e.php).

Ocean
08-05-2010, 02:21 PM
A ways back when there was a brouhaha about Bheads allowing the Templeton Foundation to support a series of science-related diavlogs, many of the commenters here were concerned. Many others branded us as being closed-minded to religion, or being blindly allegiant to a religion of empiricism and it's dogmas. The bigger concern re: Templeton, as many tried to explain, was stuff like this (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/08/templeton_prayer_study_meets_e.php).

Excerpt:

Conducting similar studies under controlled clinical conditions in North America would be desirable, yet neither Iris nor Global Awakening claims comparable results in industrialized countries (arguing that "anointing" and "faith" are lower where medical therapies are available)—see Supplemental Digital Content for our unsuccessful attempts to collect data in the US.


And what PZ doesn't say, but I will, is that the above proves, do you understand me clearly?, proves, that North America and the rest of the Western world have been abandoned by god, chased away by the likes of PZ and medical science! The all mighty doesn't listen to our prayers no more... just take those antibiotics instead. Sheesh!

;)

bjkeefe
08-05-2010, 04:51 PM
A ways back when there was a brouhaha about Bheads allowing the Templeton Foundation to support a series of science-related diavlogs, many of the commenters here were concerned. Many others branded us as being closed-minded to religion, or being blindly allegiant to a religion of empiricism and it's dogmas. The bigger concern re: Templeton, as many tried to explain, was stuff like this (http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/08/templeton_prayer_study_meets_e.php).

What a disgrace that someone claiming to be interested in science would be trying to pass that off as a credible study. Thanks for the link, and another shoutout to the indefatigable PZ.