Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Qual's For G/S Forum Topic Have Not Been Match?

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by Michael W. Pearson on December 28, 2001 18:39:53 UTC

Thank you for sharing them again.
One thing I appreciate about your qualifications is that you were also in the humanities department too.
There is no need to read further for my resume
on this post...hang up in disgust if you must.
but I am trying not to waste your time.
Maybe you'll ignore it and/or say something tacky and irrelevant

You may not demand my papers.

Your idea was that resume'=qualifications...for what? for discussing Science and God?
Have you read Galileo's Daughter?
Great insight on the credentialism in founding early science. Kepler and Brahe are shown for their big mistaken dogmas as well as their great achievements.
Who personally looked through Galileo's telescope? One of them was the Inquisitor who had burned G. Bruno (one of my recent ancestor's names) and later helped silence Galileo,
all with the clout of resume' and credentials.

Galileo comes across as rigorously simple
without appeal to credentials.
"The argument from authority is the weakest."
He tried to discuss the matters at hand on their logical merits. In doing so, he helped define modern science.

Does your resume qualify you
discuss God and Science better than anyone else?
You repeatedly guessed that I am a fundamentalist
-- your "qualifications" did not serve you on that guess. Other than that, the discussion about fundamentalism was pretty high-minded.

I haven't been very impressed by star wars either.
My little brother and Carl Sagan's writing both convinced me unmanned space vehicles were an outstanding investment, but the country went for space shuttle and space station....with some benefits, but missed opportunities.

When I was college age
I was interested in being an astronomer.
A friend mentioned that only five astronomers were hired in the U.S. that year.
There was no course in astronomy at my 2-year college at the time, and I lobbied for one. I could not muster the logistics to go anywhere else. I was working as a forklift operator and later served four years in the Air Force. While there, I obtained a few credits in astronomy by examination.

Early in the 1990s, I scored 100% on the reading logic/comprehension test to be a government writer. Follow the strange illogic might see it only in my own implied leap...but...
the Chinese-surnamed woman representing the federal human resources office sent me a letter explaining that my TOTAL combined score, due to things like school activities and experience, was 55th percentile. About that time I was paying my rent to a guy from People's Republic of China who was visiting as a post doc dentistry student at University of Washington. Why isn't that funny?
Well, I wasn't sure the federal government's local office wasn't screening out qualified non-communist honkies. They used to call this state
the Soviet of Washington, ya know. ButI am not a commie hunter and never was.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2021 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins