Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Natural science

2007-06-09T00:33:37Z

Dkloos: /* Bibliography */

'''Physical science''' is the branch of study dedicated to the accumulation and classification of observable facts in order to formulate general laws about the natural world, and the methods by which this study is carried out, such as the ''[[scientific method]]''.

Scientific study relies on specific, fairly well-defined classifications, collectively known as the aforementioned scientific method. In one form or another, it is the means by which all scientific research is conducted.

The best known physical sciences are [[astronomy]], [[physics]] and [[chemistry]].

== Beginnings ==

Although some early [[civilization]]s, particularly [[Ancient Greece|Greece]], developed some scholarship, it was not until the 1500s in [[Europe]] that science proper developed. This was due to the prevailing [[Christian]] world view, that taught that the creation was not itself Divine, but was the product of a consistent Creator who didn't change His creation, such as the laws of physics, on a whim.

Loren Eiseley:
{{QuoteBox|The philosophy of experimental science … began its discoveries and made use of its methods in the faith, not the knowledge, that it was dealing with a rational universe controlled by a creator who did not act upon whim nor interfere with the forces He had set in operation … . It is surely one of the curious paradoxes of history that science, which professionally has little to do with faith, owes its origins to an act of faith that the universe can be rationally interpreted, and that science today is sustained by that assumption.<ref>L. Eiseley: ''Darwin’s Century: Evolution and the Men who Discovered It'' (Anchor, NY: Doubleday, 1961), quoted in Sarfati, Jonathan, ''Refuting Evolution'', [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3830 Chapter 1].</ref>}}
Rodney Stark:
{{QuoteBox|...theological assumptions unique to Christianity explain why science was born only in Christian Europe. Contrary to the received wisdom, religion and science not only were compatible; they were inseparable.<ref>Stark, 2003, [http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i7501.html introduction].</ref>}}
Indeed, many of the early scientists, such as [[Galileo]], [[Johannes Kepler]], and Sir [[Isaac Newton]] were people who believed in the literal truth of Genesis and who based their science on their belief in a Creator.<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4985/ Scientists of the past who believed in a Creator] (Creation Ministries International).</ref>

== Types of science ==

Science can be subdivided into two categories, ''operational science'' and ''origins science''.<ref>Sarfati, Jonathan, and Matthews, Michael, ''Refuting Evolution 2'', [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3256 Chapter 1]</ref>

'''Operational science''' deals mostly with things in the present, which scientists are able to observe, measure, and test. If, for example, someone claims that water boils at 110 degrees Celsius at sea level, you can test for yourself to see if that is really true (and discover that it's not).

'''Origins science''' deals with things in the past. Scientists do not have the past to observe, measure, and test, so the conclusions of historical science must be somewhat more tentative than empirical science. If, for example, someone claims that birds evolved from dinosaurs more than 65 million years ago, it is difficult to formulate an experiment to effectively support or deny this claim. Because of this, origins science tends to function through observation of historical records, as well as extrapolating current data (which ''can'' easily be experimentally validated) into the past. In addition, it is common for theories to be tested on their adherence to the available evidence; for example, the discovery of ''Tiktaalik'' in the predicted strata for a transitional form between tetrapods and fish.<ref>http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v440/n7085/abs/nature04639.html</ref>

In some cases, such as astronomy, the distinction between the two becomes somewhat muddled; strictly speaking, current observations of most astronomical phenomena are dealing with the far-distant past, but experiments and observations are easily performed - it is common for a theoretical prediction to be compared with observed data.

Science is commonly referred to as "the devil's work" by many religious leaders who notice that many scientist's claims contradict the infallible holy scripture.
== Bibliography ==

Stark, Rodney, ''For The Glory of God: How Monotheism Led to Reformations, Science, Witch-hunts and the End of Slavery'', Princeton University Press, 2003, ISBN 978-0691114361.

Montague, Anthony, "How Liberals and Atheists Have Poisoned the Minds of America," Regents University Press, 2005.

== Notes ==

<references />

[[Category:Science]]

Same-sex marriage

2007-06-09T00:23:10Z

Dkloos: /* Reference */

'''Same-sex marriage''', also referred to as [[homosexuality|gay]] marriage or [[homosexuality|homosexual]] marriage, is the official certification of a union between two people of the same sex. Social conservatives regard it as immoral, and argue that use of the word "[[marriage]]" is a misnomer, because the [[Form of Solemnization of Matrimony|marriage services]] of Christian denominations define marriage as the union of a man and a woman,<ref>E.g. "Dearly beloved: We have come together in the presence of God to witness and bless the joining together of this man and this woman in Holy Matrimony." ''The Book of Common Prayer,'' Episcopal Church, The Church Hymnal Corporation and the Seabury Press, 1979: "The Celebration and Blessing of a Marriage," p. 423</ref> a definition which was also written into United States federal law in 1996.

Dr. James Dobson's [[Focus on the Family]] refers to the phrase ''same-sex 'marriage,''' with quotation marks around the word ''marriage,'' to call attention to the fact that marriage—civil as well as religious—is intrinsically a union between a man and a woman, and that therefore same-sex unions are "counterfeits."<ref>[http://www.family.org/socialissues/A000000464.cfm Same-Sex 'Marriage' and Civil Unions], ''Focus on the Family's'' website</ref>

Abuse of the term was unheard of a few decades ago, however these unions are now among a number of issues advocated by [[gay rights]] activists. In the United States, marriage is primarily governed by each individual state and marriage laws differ from state to state. Several states allow "civil unions" between two people of the same sex, and one, Massachusetts, currently allows it under the name "marriage." These marriages are not recognized by the Federal government.

== Background ==
In 1996 Congress recognized the likelihood that gay rights advocates would soon seek changes in some states. It was concerned about the possibility of test cases reaching the Supreme Court, and of the court conceivably ruling that a state—even though it prohibits gay marriage itself—must honor gay marriages performed in another state. The Defense of Marriage act, which was passed and signed by President Clinton, prevents this possibility, and also prevents the Federal Government from recognizing marriage as anything other than a union between a man and a woman.

In 1999 a Vermont court ruled that under its constitution, it was not required to allow "same-sex marriage" but was required to make provisions to grant same-sex couples legal rights identical to those provided by marriage. Vermont responded by creating "civil unions," which are legally distinct from marriages but convey the same rights. As of 2007, California, Connecticut, New Jersey, and Maine also provide civil unions or domestic partnerships. Beginning in 2008, the states of Washington, Oregon, and New Hampshire will also provide same-sex unions. Hawaii provides certain benifits to same sex couples. <ref>[http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/connecticut/ny-bc-ct--civilunions-optio0531may31,0,341613.story?coll=ny-region-apconnecticut Newsday]</ref> In 2003 the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that under Massachusetts' constitution, same-sex couples could not be denied Massachusetts marriage licenses, making Massachusetts the sole state to issue same-sex marriage licenses.<ref>Because of an established Massachusetts law, Massachusetts same-sex marriages are all-but-limited to Massachusetts residents. The law says that an out-of-state couple cannot be married if their marriage would not be recognized in their home state. The same-sex marriages are not recognized under federal law or in most other states.</ref>

The religious ceremony of marriage is governed by each denomination and is unaffected by laws passed by civil authority. Same-sex marriage is forbidden in Orthodox Judaism, Catholicism, and most mainstream Protestant denominations. Thus, even in Massachusetts, it would be close to impossible for a same-sex couple to find a Catholic priest willing to marry them in a church, or an Orthodox rabbi willing to marry them in a temple.

Public attitude toward same-sex marriage parallels attitude toward homosexuality. In general, it is opposed by social conservatives and outside of this group, support is split down the middle leaning to opposition.<ref>[http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Relationships/same_sex_marriage_poll_040121.html Same Sex Marriage Poll from ABC News]</ref>

== Issues ==
James Dobson of ''Focus on the Family'' suggests that the motivation of those advocating same-sex marriage is not to secure the benefits of marriage for gay couples, but to destroy the institution of marriage itself:
:...most gays and lesbians do not want to marry each other. That would entangle them in all sorts of legal constraints. Who needs a lifetime commitment to one person? The intention here is to destroy marriage altogether. With marriage as we know it gone, everyone would enjoy all the legal benefits of marriage (custody rights, tax-free inheritance, joint ownership of property, health care and spousal citizenship, etc.,) without limiting the number of partners or their gender. Nor would "couples" be bound to each other in the eyes of the law. This is clearly where the movement is headed.<ref>[http://www.focusonthefamily.com/docstudy/newsletters/A000000771.cfm Marriage on the Ropes], Dr. James Dobson, retrieved from ''Focus on the Family'', 15 May 2007. </ref>

== Line-Drawing & [[Gay Rights]] ==
Opponents of same-sex marriage suggest that allowing same-sex marriage will place society on a "slippery slope" towards allowing bigamy, incest, and other moral "wrongs." The argument rests on the idea that the only legal or moral "line" preventing same-sex marriage is morality, which is also the only "line" preventing acceptance of bigamy ''et all''.

Gay rights workers suggest that such argumentation downplays the danger, though, of the evils at the bottom of the slippery slope, and society's interest in preventing these evils. The state has a compelling interest in preventing bigamous relationships, which are (1) a burden on state funding, since marriage triggers social benefits and (2) have a higher incidence of spousal abuse. These "lines" are not predicated on morality, but on facts. Similarly, incest is an evil that society has a factual interest in preventing, since incestual relationships often (1) entail abuse, and (2) result in unhealthy offspring. Since there are non-moral reasons to reject both of these "horribles", gay rights workers insist that acceptance of same-sex marriage (by abrogation of a legitimate state interest in preserving "morality") does not entail acceptance of bigamy or incest.

Conservative opposition the gay-marriage continues a long tradition of conservative opposition the extension of rights to all of society. An argument similar to the one currently used to oppose gay marriage (that it would lead to a "slippery slope" that would force the country to recognize institutions such as polygamy) was used to oppose the extension of voting rights to blacks and women. This logic has stood the test of time and is evidenced by the many problems caused by the franchisement of blacks and women.
==Reference==
<references/>

[[Category:Law|Same-Sex marriage]]

An Inconvenient Truth

2007-06-04T12:21:00Z

Dkloos: /* See also */

'''"An Inconvenient Truth"''' is a documentary about [[global warming]] by former Vice President [[Al Gore]]. It is an entirely one-sided account which gives all the left's arguments in favor of supporting the sort of "[[greenhouse gas]]" reductions required by the [[Kyoto Protocol]].

The film ignores the evidence that atmospheric temperature is cyclical in nature and has gone up and down hundreds of times in the last million years (see [[climate cycles]]).

==See also==

*[[Runaway greenhouse effect]]
*[[Anthropogenic global warming theory]]

The film does not ignore evidence that global heating and cooling is cyclical. Gore addresses this issue, often cited by critics of the global warming theory, and explains that our world is currently entering temperatures and following trends that would put it higher than the ranges of the normal heating and cooling cycles.