Have fun you crazy physicists!

I agree, the move from the specola vaticana was not publicized a lot… I must say the PR of this pope’s entourage is very good. They have exploited the failed appearance at La Sapienza in a magistral way…

Cheers,
T

I always found it interesting that such plots of land are in fact different countries.. but they do depend to a degree on the infrastructure of the country around them. I commented once last October at the Vaticano Post that I wanted to use them because the Poste Italiano was too risky for me sending my boxes (and I couldn’t at the end because the Vaticano Poste has a 2kg limit), and the Vaticano Poste clerk answered: “The Poste Italiano is also risky for us!”)

Sorry but the pope would have spoken not about death penalty but about science and religion. His prolusion has been published. No tracks about death penalty. He would have said that science shouldn’t be blind in front of the faith and religion shouldn’t be confined in a private sphere. I disagree, of course but all this is off topic with death penalty.
Marco V. (Italy)

It turns out that because of his signing the infamous letter he is risking not being confirmed to head the CNR. If this does turn out to be the case then Italy really is in deep shit! I think the 67 were wrong to start this (once the Pope was invited) but the worst thing that could happen is they they be punished for doing so! If the very VERY good Maiani does get sacked for his signing the letter then I AM CHANGING SIDES!

Mind you that I do NOT think hat someone of the Church picked up a phone and pressured for him to be sacked. It is more depressing than that. I think the idiots that make these decision are boneless morons that just play with the wind. The wind now goes that the Pope should have be respected and hence these morons, JUST TO SUCK UP, and puff up their medaless chests think it is best to sack Maiani. Simply disgusting

I fear I am profoundly fed up with Italy and italians (stuffo)

Jeff

It surprises me that the biology-blogs haven’t gotten wind of this story. Since the Templeton Foundation is looking more and more like the Discovery Institute for theoretical physics, I’d really like to hear what the biology community has to say about this recent clash between faith and science: the Catholic Church vs theoretical physics.

Now that you have reread Cini’s letter, perhaps this time you would explain precisely which of Cini’s arguments confuse you.

Also, please don’t confuse ignorant with dumb. Ignorant means lacking knowledge whereas dumb means inherently lacking the ability to process knowledge.

The psychological sticking plaster that is religion is very powerful, and I don’t despise those who have been unable to shake off their childhood brainwashing. The fact that plenty of highly educated people are able to compartmentalize their brains in such a way as to function as highly rational individuals while remaining extremely devout, is testimony to its insidious power.

I don’t know what it is that doesn’t work, I just checked the link above and it works fine for me? Let me see… there is a brief summary here

http://www.xenophilia.com/blog/?p=7094

Maybe the link on their site works for you.

Hi Tony:

Thanks for that. I don’t quite share Dawkins optimism though. In fact, I am not even sure how whether it is optimistic to believe we will just find the TOE and finito. Best,

B.

Jeff

p.s. If you think fairytales are the problem then I warmy suggest you never forget that giant tales have been told and are still taught by people that are vigoroulsy anti-religious. Being anti-religious is not the way to avoid being doped by some fairy tale.

p.s. By the way the average poor worker is smarter than what you think. And indeed we all have to cope with personal extinction. How one copes with that is personal and feel sorry for those that despise others for clinging on to some notion of God. I hope you keep your cool when you are about to kick the bucket. I also hope you don’t suffer too much when you will realize that your favorite secular anti-religious fairlytales turn out to be ridiculed.

“Universities were set up to initially to apply reason to help Christians further clarify the nature of truth as revealed in their scriptures. It was a purifying force that, in the early stages helped support monotheism while retaining and developing the riches of Greek philosophy.
Nowadays, universities spend their time on secular pursuits such as the natural sciences and humanities, and even philosophy is in danger of becoming completely separated from theology, pursuing reason for its own sake. All this has brought mankind great benefits but maybe that won’t last. Universities need to rediscover their roots and apply reason to understanding the spiritual nature of man.”

Unfortunately for Benedict, universities invested very heavily in theology in the past and ended up with the Scholastics, so they are likely to stick with what works. This is why his argument is rambling and confused, he explains how universities have achieved their modern success – by turning their backs on religion, and tells them that is probably a mistake!. Nice one, Benedict.

By contrast, I found Cini’s letter to be honest and written from the heart. Not at all confused.

I also note that nowhere did the Pope speak of the death penalty, as his Vatican spin-doctors had claimed, but, as predicted, attacked, in his usual smooth and slick style, the secular values at the heart of modern universities.

If I were you Goffredo, I wouldn’t bother reading his speech again. Remember that you never need more than a quarter of your brain for religion, because it’s designed to short-circuit the reasoning part of your brain so you’ll be more docile and socially compliant. Think of it as a bunch of fairytales designed to placate those who psychologically can’t cope with personal extinction and to keep poor ignorant workers from asking why they are poor and ignorant. All the fancy stuff added by Benedict is just there to give an illusion of intellectual respectability.

We all have better things to do.

I also read the letter by Cini to the head of the University in which he complains about inviting the Pope, letter that sparked all this off. In my opinion Cini’s letter is angry, hysterical, and makes several banal remarks. I not sure I understand it. But that is probably because Cini is confused. I will not reread it as I have other things to do.

Of course these are my opinions.

what the pope would really speak about can only be guessed, since the written speech was distributed only after his decision to not go -and the chance to change or edit the text has been there.
In any case, whatever his expertise is, it does not matter. You seem to just not get it: the pope has a tribune from which he speaks -far too often for my taste. And a powerful radio. Why does Radio Maria never invites scientists to speak in favor of stem cell research, abortion rights, and the like ?

The university is no place for somebody who hinders research and scientific progress of mankind. Not even a pope.

Cheers,
T.

Of course, going outside one’s area of expertise never stopped Cini…

Cini’s attempt to apply quantum theory to evolution and economics resembles the wackos of Roswell more than the mathematics of quantum mechanics.