| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
marymargaret
Royal Citizen
Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Posts: 345
Local time: 7:28 AM
Location: in a daze
|
 Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:40 pm Post subject: Vatican interested in astroparticles |
  |
|
Is this their attempt to reinforce the biblical myth of creation?
| The Catholic Spirit wrote: | The head of the Vatican Observatory, Jesuit Father Jose Funes, said during the book presentation that he hopes Gabriele Gionti, a young Vatican astronomer who will be ordained in June, will be involved in the CERN collaboration.
Gionti has a doctorate in physics and specializes in quantum gravity, and he is finishing his theology studies at the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences in Berkeley, Calif.
Father Funes told Catholic News Service that scientists at CERN are interested in "astroparticles -- the first particles in the universe. And at the moment we don't have anyone on our staff prepared to follow these studies. So maybe Gabriele Gionti has the background and the interest in collaborating on these topics."
The plan for a Vatican-CERN exchange was borne out of a visit, organized in part by Amaldi, of a Vatican delegation to the CERN facilities in July. The delegation included Father Funes and Cardinal Giovanni Lajolo, president of the commission governing Vatican City.
Amaldi, who worked as a particle physicist at CERN, told CNS that even though CERN scientists study subatomic particles and Vatican astronomers study large celestial objects and enormous galaxies, "there are theoretical similarities" in their research on the origin of the universe, stars and planets. |
Link to article:
http://thecatholicspirit.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2947&Itemid=33
Title edited 2/09/10 @ 1:27pm for clarity.
_________________
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. – Steven Weinberg
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? – Epicurus
Last edited by marymargaret on Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:29 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
SpecterOpacus
Forum Masturbator
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 2409
Local time: 7:28 AM
Location: Tallahassee, FL
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Vatican's been interested in physics for quite a while, so it makes sense.
Also: Angels and Demons.
_________________
| mobilefleet wrote: | | The evidence of getting yellow butter and white milk from a brown cow that eats green grass. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SalsaShark
Cheesecake Dick
Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Posts: 6320
Local time: 7:28 AM
Location: Waterloo ON
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:55 pm Post subject: Re: Vatican Observatory to collaborate on studies concerning |
|
|
| marymargaret wrote: | | Is this their attempt to reinforce the biblical myth of creation? |
No. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Minimalist
Forum Master
Joined: 24 May 2009
Posts: 2022
Local time: 5:28 AM
Location: Arizona
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps he is there to bless the equipment...or smear oil on it....or drive out any loose demons?
_________________
The Christian church, in its attitude toward science, shows the mind of a more or less enlightened man of the Thirteenth Century. It no longer believes that the earth is flat, but it is still convinced that prayer can cure after medicine fails.
-- H. L. Mencken |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marymargaret
Royal Citizen
Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Posts: 345
Local time: 7:28 AM
Location: in a daze
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 10:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The church hasn't had the best record for promoting scientific theory- Copernicus and Galileo are two cases that come to mind.
| Galileo vs the Catholic Church wrote: | In 1992 Pope John Paul II officially conceded that the Earth was not stationary - it revolved around the sun - but was this the end of the story??
The disagreement between Galileo and the Catholic church began back in the 17th century when Galileo began offering observations that supported Copernicus’s theory that the planet Earth was revolving around the sun rather then the sun revolving around the Earth.
The church maintained that the scriptures indicated that the Earth was stationary. Everyone knew the Earth was stationary, it was an accepted fact. For thousands of years it had been accepted that the heavenly bodies all revolved around the stationary Earth.
And then Copernicus came along and published his book with these heretical ideas on astronomy that stated that the Earth was revolving around the sun. Copernicus was so fearful of the consequenses of his revolutionary theory that he waited until he was on his death bed before he published his book.
His ideas were so radical that the church didn’t feel too threatened - that is until Galileo built his telescope and began discovering moons revolving around Jupiter and the different phases of Venus as it revolved around the sun. This finally got the inquisitor’s attention - these observations were in direct contrast to the scriptures - something had to be done, the scriptures could not be wrong - these heretical theories had to be stopped. |
http://novan.com/galileo.htm
I'm not trying to bash the Vatican, I just have a mistrust of mixing religion with science. I suspect that they may be concerned about their religion's survival if science makes more discoveries.
_________________
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. – Steven Weinberg
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? – Epicurus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mongoose
Intern
Joined: 28 Jan 2010
Posts: 58
Local time: 7:28 AM
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 08, 2010 10:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Considering that the Pope is most interested in explaining inane phenomena such as "what was the star in the east" and using astronomy to determine prayer rhythm, I would agree that this is a little fishy. Everything else the Vatican discovered was used to further the "glory of God" rather than honest scientific inquiry. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neoatheist
Freedmind
Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 1498
Local time: 7:28 AM
Location: Austin, Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think that religion and science are mutually exclusive so there is probably no good that can come from this. Has anyone else seen the movie "Religulous"? The guy from the Vatican actually seemed to be the most rational person that they interviewed. That was rather surprising to say the least.
_________________
If you use the bible as your moral compass, chances are you're lost. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jerok
Visitor
Joined: 09 Oct 2009
Posts: 16
Local time: 7:28 AM
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| marymargaret wrote: | The church hasn't had the best record for promoting scientific theory- Copernicus and Galileo are two cases that come to mind.
| Galileo vs the Catholic Church wrote: | In 1992 Pope John Paul II officially conceded that the Earth was not stationary - it revolved around the sun - but was this the end of the story??
The disagreement between Galileo and the Catholic church began back in the 17th century when Galileo began offering observations that supported Copernicus’s theory that the planet Earth was revolving around the sun rather then the sun revolving around the Earth.
The church maintained that the scriptures indicated that the Earth was stationary. Everyone knew the Earth was stationary, it was an accepted fact. For thousands of years it had been accepted that the heavenly bodies all revolved around the stationary Earth.
And then Copernicus came along and published his book with these heretical ideas on astronomy that stated that the Earth was revolving around the sun. Copernicus was so fearful of the consequenses of his revolutionary theory that he waited until he was on his death bed before he published his book.
His ideas were so radical that the church didn’t feel too threatened - that is until Galileo built his telescope and began discovering moons revolving around Jupiter and the different phases of Venus as it revolved around the sun. This finally got the inquisitor’s attention - these observations were in direct contrast to the scriptures - something had to be done, the scriptures could not be wrong - these heretical theories had to be stopped. |
http://novan.com/galileo.htm
I'm not trying to bash the Vatican, I just have a mistrust of mixing religion with science. I suspect that they may be concerned about their religion's survival if science makes more discoveries. |
Actually the reason the Vatican didn't approve of Galileo is because he didn't want to teach his findings as a theory - he wanted it as a fact. He was so convinced he was right (and he was) but he didn't have sufficient proof. For instance, he said the Earth was moving but scientists noticed there was absolutely no stellar parallax. This was huge against Galileo and it wasn't until the last couple centuries where telescopes were strong enough to detect the very slight stellar parallax.
So Galileo ignored this evidence and still taught it was a fact - and the Vatican tried to compromise and let him teach it was a theory in addition to the stationary Earth but he didn't, so they said enough was enough and stopped him from teaching altogether.
Certainly wasn't the best moment in the Church's history, but it wasn't as horrible as everyone thought. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jerok
Visitor
Joined: 09 Oct 2009
Posts: 16
Local time: 7:28 AM
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Neoatheist wrote: | | I think that religion and science are mutually exclusive so there is probably no good that can come from this. Has anyone else seen the movie "Religulous"? The guy from the Vatican actually seemed to be the most rational person that they interviewed. That was rather surprising to say the least. |
You seem to be ignoring the fact that the Monks from the Catholic Church basically started Western Science as we know it, the Catholic Church was a big proponent in the creation of the university system and encouraged lots of debate. The Bible says 'All things are ordered by measure and number and weight' and the Monks took this to heart. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SalsaShark
Cheesecake Dick
Joined: 07 Aug 2006
Posts: 6320
Local time: 7:28 AM
Location: Waterloo ON
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
You're making a category error, Jerok. Theories is the entire body of knowledge, include the hypotheses, the data collected, and the facts; whereas facts are individual pieces of knowledge. Saying he wanted to teach his findings as a fact while the church wanted him to teach it as a theory doesn't make any sense, it's like me saying "I want to teach you that 2+2=4" and you coming along and saying "No, you can't do that, you can't teach 2+2=4, you have to teach arithmetic."
_________________
"Thanks to denial, I'm immortal."
-Philip J Fry |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SpecterOpacus
Forum Masturbator
Joined: 23 Feb 2005
Posts: 2409
Local time: 7:28 AM
Location: Tallahassee, FL
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jerok wrote: | | Neoatheist wrote: | | I think that religion and science are mutually exclusive so there is probably no good that can come from this. Has anyone else seen the movie "Religulous"? The guy from the Vatican actually seemed to be the most rational person that they interviewed. That was rather surprising to say the least. |
You seem to be ignoring the fact that the Monks from the Catholic Church basically started Western Science as we know it, the Catholic Church was a big proponent in the creation of the university system and encouraged lots of debate. The Bible says 'All things are ordered by measure and number and weight' and the Monks took this to heart. |
>>Jesuit astronomers.
_________________
| mobilefleet wrote: | | The evidence of getting yellow butter and white milk from a brown cow that eats green grass. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jutter
Netherspawn
Joined: 26 Jul 2003
Posts: 8243
Local time: 1:28 PM
Location: Den Helder, the Netherlands
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with Mongoose, that ultimately it's likely to be yet another launchpad for Catholicism. Still, all cynicism aside, I prefer to see a man of the cloth taking a keen interest in quantum gravity, to a fullblown mysologist who'd rather burn every book on the subject.
Ps. @ marymargaret
As you can tell the title of your thread was too large to fit. You might want to change it to something shorter like: "Vatican interested in astroparticles?" (a simple matter of editing your opening post)
_________________
~Simus rationales~
The Official God FAQ
No religion for me thank you very much; I'm full of shit enough as it is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jerok
Visitor
Joined: 09 Oct 2009
Posts: 16
Local time: 7:28 AM
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 09, 2010 2:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SalsaShark wrote: | | You're making a category error, Jerok. Theories is the entire body of knowledge, include the hypotheses, the data collected, and the facts; whereas facts are individual pieces of knowledge. Saying he wanted to teach his findings as a fact while the church wanted him to teach it as a theory doesn't make any sense, it's like me saying "I want to teach you that 2+2=4" and you coming along and saying "No, you can't do that, you can't teach 2+2=4, you have to teach arithmetic." |
Okay, then how should I say it... he should have taught it as another hypothesis, I guess. But he wanted to make it a proven fact too soon when there was still irrefutable evidence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marymargaret
Royal Citizen
Joined: 06 Jan 2010
Posts: 345
Local time: 7:28 AM
Location: in a daze
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Neoatheist wrote: | | I think that religion and science are mutually exclusive so there is probably no good that can come from this. Has anyone else seen the movie "Religulous"? The guy from the Vatican actually seemed to be the most rational person that they interviewed. That was rather surprising to say the least. |
I did see "Religulous" and I was impressed with him, too.
| Jerok wrote: | | You seem to be ignoring the fact that the Monks from the Catholic Church basically started Western Science as we know it, the Catholic Church was a big proponent in the creation of the university system and encouraged lots of debate. The Bible says 'All things are ordered by measure and number and weight' and the Monks took this to heart. |
I remember reading about Gregor Mendel:
| Answers.com wrote: |
* Born: 22 July 1822
* Birthplace: Hyncice, Moravia (now Czech Republic)
* Died: 6 January 1884
* Best Known As: The founding father of modern genetics
A monk with a scientific streak, Mendel made botanical discoveries which became the basis of modern genetics. His careful cross-breeding of thousands of pea plants led Mendel to key insights, now called Mendel's Laws of Heredity, about how inherited traits are passed on from generation to generation. |
I'm not denying the contributions made by individuals in the Catholic Church to civilization. The distinction that I would make is the individual vs. the organization itself. An individual can be motivated by an intense desire for knowledge, passion for their work, their desire to help mankind, or intellectual curiosity. Organizations can be more interested in controlling the information or repressing it to protect it's self interest. I have a cynical view of religion, that's true - so I'll wait and see.
_________________
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion. – Steven Weinberg
Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? – Epicurus |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Aupmanyav
Forum Leader
Joined: 06 Aug 2008
Posts: 830
Local time: 7:28 AM
Location: New Delhi
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 10, 2010 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Neoatheist wrote: | | I think that religion and science are mutually exclusive so there is probably no good that can come from this. |
Do not generalize. Strains of 'advaita' hinduism go completely with science. There is no God in it.
_________________
"Brahma Satyam Jagan-mithya" (Brahman is the truth, the observed is an illusion)
"Sarve Khalu Idam Brahma" (All this here is Brahman) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
