July 26, 2006
Interesting Read
I just have to share this but it requires a great deal of preface. First, a reminder:
HARRISBURG, Pa. - In one of the biggest courtroom clashes between faith and evolution since the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trial, a federal judge barred a Pennsylvania public school district Tuesday from teaching “intelligent design” in biology class, saying the concept is creationism in disguise.
U.S. District Judge John E. Jones delivered a stinging attack on the Dover Area School Board, saying its first-in-the-nation decision in October 2004 to insert intelligent design into the science curriculum violates the constitutional separation of church and state.
...Jones decried the “breathtaking inanity” of the Dover policy and accused several board members of lying to conceal their true motive, which he said was to promote religion.
A six-week trial over the issue yielded “overwhelming evidence” establishing that intelligent design “is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory,” said Jones, a Republican and a churchgoer appointed to the federal bench three years ago.
Bill Harris over at Dubious Quality posted a link to a transcript from this trial which can be found here. You can definitely read the whole thing, I found it extremely interesting, even if it is by its nature relatively dry. However I just bring all this up so I can excerpt something really amusing from it.
The setup is, one person being cross examined, Michael Behe, an intelligent design proponent, is almost constantly referencing the big bang in his responses, regardless of what the question is actually about.
(Excerpt from conversation held in chambers)
THE COURT: How much more cross do you have?
MR. ROTHSCHILD: It will be inversely proportional to mentions of the Big Bang, I think.
THE COURT: So you're going to go all day.
MR. ROTHSCHILD: It could be quite a while.
(After Michael Behe resumes the stand and court continues:)
CROSS EXAMINATION ( CONTINUED)
BY MR. ROTHSCHILD:
Q. Good morning, Professor Behe.
A. Good morning, Mr. Rothschild.
Q. How are you?
A. Fine, thanks.
Q. After the Court adjourned yesterday, did you talk to anybody about your testimony?
A. I did not.
Q. I'm going to see if we can reach an agreement on something here. You agree that this is a case about biology curriculum?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. Not about physics, a physics curriculum?
A. It's not about a physics curriculum, but from my understanding, many issues that are being discussed here are particularly relevant to other issues that have come up in other disciplines of science.
Q. This is a case about what's being taught in biology class not physics class?
A. As I said, I agree that it is, but one more time, I think many things in the history of science are relevant to this, and they've happened in other disciplines as well.
Q. You've already testified you're not an expert in physics or astrophysics?
A. That's correct.
Q. And you might not know this about me, but I'm not either.
A. I'm surprised.
Q. So I'm going to propose an agreement. I won't ask you any questions about the Big Bang, and you won't answer any questions about the Big Bang. Can we agree to that, Professor Behe?
MR. MUISE: Objection, Your Honor. He's trying to limit the testimony of the witness by some sort of agreement. He's obviously testified and explained why the relationship of the Big Bang is so important. He just answered his questions to try to proffer some prior agreement to the witness that he can't reference factors of prior testimony in cross examination. That just seems inappropriate, Your Honor.
THE COURT: What's your answer?
THE WITNESS: No. , I think references to the Big Bang are extremely appropriate to making clear why I think these -- making clear my views on these issues.
BY MR. ROTHSCHILD:
Q. Fair to say, Professor --
THE COURT: There you go, Mr. Muise.
BY MR. ROTHSCHILD:
Q. Fair to say, Professor Behe, that over the last two days of testimony, you've told us everything you know about the Big Bang that's relevant to the issue of intelligent design and biology?
A. Well, I'm not sure. I would have to reserve judgment.
Q. You might have some more?
A. Perhaps.
Q. Let the record state, I tried.
***
I hope you found that as hilarious as I did. :) If you didn't, let me just remind you that I came across it after reading a lot of dry courtroom banter and may have been more receptive to it. =)
July 20, 2006
The New Car
I also saved a boat load of money on car insurance by not sticking with Geico and instead switching to Progressive. And by boatload, I mean like 400+ dollars over 6 months. Kinda crazy.
July 19, 2006
New Financial Anchor!
I got a new car on Friday. It is a 2006 Honda Civic 2 door. It is really really awesome. Of course this also means I am now poor for the next few years as I pay it off and deal with the high cost of full coverage insurance!! So if you ask me to do something and I say sorry I'm too poor, now you know why.
I'll try and get pics up by tomorrow. =)
July 12, 2006
My car sucks!
My car decided to blow out a tire on my way home from work yesterday. Hurray. I love changing to my spare donut tire on the side of the road. I've been debating getting a new car for awhile now because of all the problems I've had with it of late and this is definitely the end of the road for me.
Tomorrow I go car shopping. I'm probably going to focus on something with super high fuel economy like the Yaris.
***
The new Pirates was fantastic by the way. I loved seacreature pirates much more then undead pirates. Davey Jones was pure awesome to watch on screen.
July 07, 2006
Reality TV
So I've always been pretty arrogant in general about watching, or people who watch, reality TV shows. I would bandy about words like lowest common denominators or the like. However, I must now with great shame say that I actually enjoy the "hooks" of two new shows.
First you have Solitary:
"Solitary takes contestants to the threshold of tolerance by challenging their individual psychological and physical endurance. It's a mind game where the ultimate nemesis lives in the psyche of each contestant." This is a polite way of saying its basically a game show where you lose if you don't torture yourself as much as other people(Sleep Deprivation, Not enough food, too much food, pain, etc). I wouldn't call this show enjoyable as such. It is more like a car crash that you can't take your eyes away from. I now have no doubts that someday executions will be publically televised.
Next up is Treasure Hunters:
""Treasure Hunters" is the new, quest-oriented series that features multi-player teams to be sent on a global search to solve a puzzle -- and the first team to uncover all the clues will be given the location of a hidden treasure." Now the puzzle solving and the like itself is pretty cool, but beyond that the real "hook" for this show is the type of "teams" it involves. An example sampling of the teams at the start were Ex-CIA, AirForce, Family#1(Total backwater hicks), Family #2(Religious Zealouts who don't practice what they preach), Miss USA, Geniuses, etc. I'm sorry, but watching a smart athletic team own up on a team like the hick family is just too god damn funny.
***
I saw Superman in 3D Imax earlier in the week with Chris and Jenn. Definitely a good flick. My Nintendo DS Lite finally got its first real workout as we waited in line for the movie for an hour and a half. New Super Mario Brothers is rad.
Tonight I was *supposed* to go see the new Pirates with the whole gang, but Chris/Jenn/Rian/Beth have decided to bail on us and see an earlier showing tonight, bastards. So just going with Brian and Laura. Hopefully its good. =)