Many people (myself included) would have expected that Einstein would have been awarded the Nobel Prize for his revolutionary theory of relativity. (He did win the prize, but not for relativity.) This link has something interesting to say about it. "After years of sifting through letters and diaries of the Scandinavian archives, science historian Robert Marc Friedman says it was an intentional snub fueled by the biases of the day—a prejudice against pacifists, Jews, and, most of all, theoretical physics."
Now, there are many people, when arguing for evolution that trot out the conversation-stopper "Well, then, disprove evolution any you can win a Nobel Prize!" Even assuming that large-scale evolution is false (possible) and that it can somehow be demonstrated to be so (rather unlikely) today's prejudices would likely preclude any recognition. Indeed, I would expect that anybody who proposed an experiment in an effort to show large-scale evolution to be false would be met with "zero funding."
Now, none of this is to suggest that creationists make good arguments. If any have, I have not seen it. No, my point is that I see a lot of closed minds and dishonest tactics on all sides of just about any issue.
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
A lot of people say that the US was founded as a "christian nation" (leaving the Treaty of Tripoli aside, for the moment.) Yet, when certain unpleasant actions committed in the name of christianity are pointed out (e.g. the Inquisition) these same people will say that those who committed the actions "were not real christians." Well, it doesn't work. Slavery and wife-beating were endorsed by this country for many decades from its foundation. How could this nation possibly have been a christian nation if no one was "a real christian"?