The Big Bang Theory a Fairy Tale? So says presidential candidate Ben Carson....

[gleem]

So says Ben Carson.

an entertaining commentary on His beiefs

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/ben-carsons-scientific-ignorance?intcid=mod-most-popular more authoritative critique

While He seems to have a live and let live philosophy i.e. I believe what I want to and you believe what you want to, if He were president could He in good conscience allocate government funds for "fairy tales" as He believes the Big Bang Theory is. With the growing ranks of fundamentalists might He have enough support to reduce funding for scientific investigations via the NSF budget. Might we see representatives of our community sitting before a congressional committee defending their research. Or more importantly Is he undermining our nations faith in science. With an ever strained federal budget will His beliefs still be able to influence NSF funding?

 

[Bystander]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Proxmire

 

[gleem]

Is history repeating? Proxmire was instrumental with senator Richard Bryant in cancelling NASA's SETI program and who also terminated NASA's High Resolution Microwave Survey Program in 1994. Could the James Webb space telescope (due to be deployed in 2018) be in danger particularly since it is to provide data for the study of the origins of the universe.which is currently "controversial" ?

 

[Bystander]

If NSF survived Proxmire, it'll survive just about any political climate, just as Russia (not the USSR) survived Lysenko and Beria.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

I'm still amazed at how such an accomplished neurosurgeon can cling to such anti-science views.

 

[Doc Al]

I'm still amazed at how such an accomplished neurosurgeon can cling to such anti-science views.

I find it quite scary.

 

[gleem]

If NSF survived Proxmire, it'll survive just about any political climate, just as Russia (not the USSR) survived Lysenko and Beria.

The NSF per se will survive I'm sure but some programs could be significantly affected. Proxmire was an aberration in that most people appreciated the work of NASA and is was fascinated by it. They could understand what it was doing and probably vicariously traveled with the astronauts on their missions and marveled at the Hubble's images of our universe. Evolution and the Big Bang Theory are contrary to many peoples belief.so they are not predisposed to supporting means of extending our knowledge in those areas. With a scientifically challenged president and support in congress (and note that Ted Cruz, an creationist, is Chairman of the Subcommittee on Science and Space) it is not a far reach to worry about what could happen. Rubio is also on that committee

 

[russ_watters]

I find it quite scary.

And bizarre. Aren't STEMs supposed to trust each other more because they understand each other better than the general public does? I don't get it.

 

[mheslep]

... undermining our nations faith in science.

Respect for perhaps, surely not faith in?

 

[Astronuc]

So says Ben Carson.

an entertaining commentary on His beiefs

http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/ben-carsons-scientific-ignorance?intcid=mod-most-popular more authoritative critique

While He seems to have a live and let live philosophy i.e. I believe what I want to and you believe what you want to, if He were president could He in good conscience allocate government funds for "fairy tales" as He believes the Big Bang Theory is. With the growing ranks of fundamentalists might He have enough support to reduce funding for scientific investigations via the NSF budget. Might we see representatives of our community sitting before a congressional committee defending their research. Or more importantly Is he undermining our nations faith in science. With an ever strained federal budget will His beliefs still be able to influence NSF funding?

Yikes - bad scifi.

 

[Geofleur]

And here I was thinking that physics was safe from that sort of thing!

 

[phinds]

And bizarre. Aren't STEMs supposed to trust each other more because they understand each other better than the general public does? I don't get it.

Religious faith conquers all.

 

[256bits]

With the growing ranks of fundamentalists might He have enough support

That's just it. You speak what your audience is begging to hear, and they go away liking you better.
At what point though does one begin to believe their own rhetoric, which is dangerous.
I suppose if as president he would have to do some insane things like you mentioned so he doesn't appear as a "fake".

 

[Monsterboy]

And bizarre. Aren't STEMs supposed to trust each other more because they understand each other better than the general public does?

Not really, for example there are mathematicians who think that the theory of evolution is wrong etc, there is a saying "Nothing is as stupid as an educated man who is taken off the thing he is educated in." ... Something like that.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

And bizarre. Aren't STEMs supposed to trust each other more because they understand each other better than the general public does? I don't get it.

He's a surgeon, not a researcher. I've worked in labs within hospitals and alongside doctors and surgeons trying their hand at research (MScs are a great way to climb the medical career apparently). I was shocked at how bad a lot of them were at basic research. I put the disconnect down to medicine being a very intense field that is the product of science but in joining that field one doesn't necessarily gain a great understanding of science, not even the biological sciences.

This is a generalisation of course and I'm sure there are plenty of doctors who have a good understanding of what research is all about. But it's important to remember that medicine is not medical science and the practitioners of either field have very different skill- and mindsets.

 

[Tosh5457]

Hilarious

 

[Hornbein]

He says Darwin was influenced by the Devil. That is TOO weird.

 

[phinds]

He says Darwin was influenced by the Devil. That is TOO weird.

Actually that sort of thing is quite common for fundamentalists in the US. I have a nephew who is scholastically brilliant and a very nice fellow, outstanding family man, with a PhD in math and a solid 4.0 throughout Electrical Engineering undergraduate school and he believes that Evolution is nonsense. Religious faith trumps logic every time.

 

[Tolklein]

Reminds of this conversation https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/tyson-dawkins-conversation.833070/
or
if you're lazy.

Around 7:30 minutes they hypothesis about a medical practitioner, excellent within their profession, but, in this case believes that babies come from storks. They pose the question, would you still make use of this doctor’s services?

So the question here then, even though Dr Carson is a good surgeon, would you want him to operate on you, given his odd personal beliefs have nothing to do with his capabilities as a professional, would you prejudice him purely on his beliefs?

 

[phinds]

So the question here then, even though Dr Carson is a good surgeon, would you want him to operate on you, given his odd personal beliefs have nothing to do with his capabilities as a professional, would you prejudice him purely on his beliefs?

No, that's not the question at all. The question is would you like to have him be President of the US with the power to make decisions about allocation of federal funding for education, science research, and all kind of things where his ridiculous personal beliefs WOULD get in the way of making good decisions.

 

[axmls]

I'm still amazed at how such an accomplished neurosurgeon can cling to such anti-science views.

You would think, given that a physicist would recognize Carson as an expert in neurosurgery (who knows what he's talking about when he speaks about brains), that he similarly would recognize that physicists know what they're talking about in the realm of cosmology.

You would think.

 

[phinds]

You would think, given that a physicist would recognize Carson as an expert in neurosurgery (who knows what he's talking about when he speaks about brains), that he similarly would recognize that physicists know what they're talking about in the realm of cosmology.

You would think.

Not if you knew fundamentalists well you wouldn't. They come in all known professions, as far as I know, and their ability to just believe what they want without reference to anything but each other and the bible is astounding even when they ARE experts in a technical field.

 

[Geofleur]

A long time ago, I saw a study that correlated smoking among doctors with how far their specialties were from cardio-pulmonary. I always remember that when trying to evaluate work that is not in my own area of expertise. It's human nature to downplay the work of others, unfortunately.

 

[axmls]

Not if you knew fundamentalists well you wouldn't. They come in all known professions, as far as I know, and their ability to just believe what they want without reference to anything but each other and the bible is astounding even when they ARE experts in a technical field.

Oh trust me. I live in the Deep South. I know fundamentalists. I'm talking the kind of Deep South where expressing a belief in evolution will get you weird looks from other students in a public high school.

Of course, that's somewhat better now in college, but it's still the South.

 

[Hornbein]

Not if you knew fundamentalists well you wouldn't. They come in all known professions, as far as I know, and their ability to just believe what they want without reference to anything but each other and the bible is astounding even when they ARE experts in a technical field.

Actually, they read whatever they want into the Bible. They say that what they like is literal, and what they don't like is metaphorical. Pretty useless game, if you ask me.

There are all sorts of clear commands in the Bible that they pay no attention to. I suspect that most of them have never read the book.

But this doesn't astound me anymore. Now I believe that the great majority of people espouse whatever they feel like believing and care not a fig about evidence one way or the other.

 

[Monsterboy]

Religious faith Trumps logic every time.

Looks like nobody knows what Trump thinks about evolution.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/15/earth-donald-trump-evolution-republican

 

[russ_watters]

Religion is an easy explanation for many anti-science views, but for others where religion doesn't play a role, what explains it? Is any strongly held belief equivalent to a religious belief?

 

[phinds]

Religion is an easy explanation for many anti-science views, but for others where religion doesn't play a role, what explains it? Is any strongly held belief equivalent to a religious belief?

I think to some degree, yes. For example, I read somewhere recently (sorry, no citation) about an experiment that was performed on a number of Kerry supporters and a number of Bush supporters some time back where they were hooked to some kind of brain monitoring equipment and subjected to various statements, video clips, whatever, supporting one candidate or the other. The upshot of it all was that for each of them, when what they were being presented with supported their positions, the pleasure areas of the brain lit up similarly to what is seen in drug addicts who just got a fix. People LIKE to believe that they have made the right choices and will often defend them beyond what is logical.

 

[mheslep]

Some of the environmental groups seem to qualify.

 

[phinds]

Some of the environmental groups seem to qualify.

I think the fringe elements of pretty much every group qualifies, it's just that in religious groups almost everyone seems to qualify.

 

[mheslep]

I think the fringe elements of pretty much every group qualifies, it's just that in religious groups almost everyone seems to qualify.

In the U.S., about 84% of the population identifies as a member of a religious group and among the remaining unaffiliated, 68% of them believe in a deity. I suspect your analysis of the views of those millions is ... incomplete. Start with geneticist Francis Collins, leader of Human Genome Project.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Collins
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Collins#Christianity
http://www.pewforum.org/2012/12/18/global-religious-landscape-exec/

 

[gleem]

Religion is an easy explanation for many anti-science views, but for others where religion doesn't play a role, what explains it?

I think the commonality of both is rejections based on a form of intellectual derision, religion because it is perceived as a mockery of a firmly held belief and the others because they feel belittled that they do not understand science. Another is that often there are both positive and negative aspect to new knowledge and some people emphasize the negative. e.g. vaccinations.

 

[Ryan_m_b]

The anti-vaxxer movement is a good example of a dangerous anti-science group that isn't religious. IMO there are certain mindsets that aren't rational that can occur in any person/group but they are more intrinsic to religious belief.

 

[Athanatsius]

I rather doubt that Carson would venture to intrude into trying to cut funding for the sciences he is not trained in. But I think that we do have to admit that there is a lot of speculation and that there are "fudge factors" attached to the Big Bang theory, so he could eventually be regarded right about that. If history is any indication, the big bang theory will probably eventually be replaced by something new.

 

[gleem]

I rather doubt that Carson would venture to intrude into trying to cut funding for the sciences he is not trained

It is not really about the methodology of the theory that is in question but the purpose of the research which according to Carson we already have the answer.