Interview with Brother Guy Consolmagno PhD Astronomer

Brother Guy Consolmagno is a PhD Astronomer at the Vatican Observatory.
Here is a link to the interview.

For folks who are interested in the current topic of Intelligent
Design/Creationism vs. Evolution this is pretty interesting coming from
a
professional astronomer who is also a cleric.

Ooops!...
Here is the link:

http://www.truthbook.com/15173.cfm

P. Edward Murray wrote:
http://www.truthbook.com/15173.cfm

Interesting interview indeed. I don't agree with many of the things
he says, but he is an articulate speaker. I expect nothing less from
him, of course.

--
Brian Tung
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt

Brian Thank you.

With all the talk about Intelligent Design/Creationism vs Evolution
here in
Pennsylvania, I think it's a good reference for those of us that are
not particularly happy with those who want to thrust their viewpoint
into our schools.

When adults can't even tell you what a calendar is based on one
realizes that our educational system isn't doing it's job.

Now if we let these folks muck it up more, it's going to be harder and
harder to graduate kids who are up to the task of becoming reasoning
adults.

He's also the author of Brother Astronomer, an autobiographical account
of his research and life, and co-author of Turn Left at Orion, one of
the best beginning observing guides.

Larry Stedman
Vestal

P. Edward Murray wrote:

http://www.truthbook.com/15173.cfm



An interesting and thought-provoking interview. His statement:

"Because here's the other side: to be a scientist you have to have two
fundamental assumptions, so fundamental you don't even think about it.
You assume that the universe makes sense, that there really is an
objective reality; there really is a logic to this; it's not just chaos;
there really are laws to be found. We're so used to that assumption, you
don't realize it. A lot of cultures don't have that."

IMO highlights the basis for science since the Renaissance. Some
scientists, including Steven Hawking, are now questioning these
assumptions - implying there may be no fixed set of physical laws that
govern reality. Are these scientists losing their "faith"?

There have to be some fixed laws. If not then how does anything work?
The whole basis for science is that the Universe is understandable.

P. Edward Murray wrote:
There have to be some fixed laws. If not then how does anything work?
The whole basis for science is that the Universe is understandable.



That is their point -- the laws and constants we observe now may not
have applied in the past and will likely change in the future. The Grand
Scheme of science which explains all may only be an illusion. That's not
to say we haven't done useful work or made valid discoveries (the
periodic table, bottled draft beer, mathematics, etc.), but the ultimate
goal in physics of a theory which unifies observed forces and explains
their origin may not be knowable.