MythTickle by Justin Thompson for April 02, 2012

use those wings and fly

Justin, Justin, Justin… what are we going to do with you?! This may stand as the biggest mistake you’ve ever made in the history of your cartoonist career. You’re writing as if you haven’t the faintest idea about who believes what and why (and so far, you have at least one reader who seems about as clueless), whether there is any validity to any of those claims, or who is actually raising the skepticism and why.Well, part of my profession day-to-day is finding out who believes what and why about such things, when necessary. People aren’t all of a piece on any one of these issues and lumping the people and the issues together like this (even through the lips of such a total airhead as Boody) is almost criminal. I’m honestly shocked that you would stoop so low.It would take an essay to go through Boody’s allegations but I’ll just limit myself to two. Most people who are accused of objecting to “science” aren’t objecting to anything of the kind. They object, and rightly so, to the philosophical stances of scientism and naturalism being put forward as if they were one and the same thing, or else logically demanded by, the discipline of natural science. The truth is quite otherwise and always has been . Natural science points to intelligent design and special creation via Occam’s Razor, although not 6,000 years ago (something the Bible doesn’t say either, in fact – but you have to know Biblical Hebrew very well to demonstrate why the mistranslations exist).The other thing I’ll mention here has to do with radiometric dating. There are good scientific reasons to be skeptical of it and there are die-hard evolutionists as well as creationists who are so accordingly. But have you ever heard of “confirmation bias”? It’s a very real concern in the scientific community and it happens to be rampant when it comes to anything challenging the predominant worldview of scientism/naturalism/evolutionism. Even evolutionists can’t get contrarian evidence published save on rare occasions and they’re criticized even when they do.

he really mythed his footing – guess he did fall for a myth

I don’t read comics because I’m hoping to come across a dissertation.

I’m with you Celecca.Loving this storyline, Justin but it looks like it may be a bumpy ride…..

science is science.religion is religion.they are not compatible.one is based on faith,the other is based on observation.you can not have faith in a chemical reaction.you can not observe god.trying to insert faith into the science of repeated observation of nature and analytical deduction is like using a ouija board as an abacus.it wont work.there.now i will get off of my soapbox.and i will not get back on. (at least no today.)

Actually, for what it’s worth, recent public opinion surveys indicate that people who identify themselves as “conservative” do, in fact, tend to distrust science in general, and scientists and intellectuals in particular. This tendency is stronger for those self-identified conservatives with relatively less education and income..No, I’m not making a political statement — only reporting. Make of it what you like.

I think Brody hit the nail on the head. Thanks Justin.

Ya know, I was just fine ignoring the whole set of comments run until I read mytickle’s rather mean spirited rejoinder. If that’s the artist’s response to someone who criticizes him, I don’t need to support this strip. Plonk, off my read list. Bye.

bye…

I think it’s fantastic that a single comic strip can open the doors to debate this way. I think I’ll limit my comment to the actual comic itself. Well done, Justin! Can’t wait to see where this is going! :)

I went to a comic strip and a great big, long, boring, off-topic, mostly-wrong discussion broke out. And it didn’t change anyone’s mind.

I do think having this kind of dialogue in the strip does leave you wide open to attacks like this… surely you didn’t think at least some people wouldn’t be offended by it, even if the last panel is meant to balance things out. Is this the original dialogue that setup the storyline the first time around or has it been updated?

Lemmings

i understand that no one is going to see this, but i am going to say it anyway._there is no room on science for faith.if you can find a meeting place in you were science an your personal faith can coexist, fine. that is a wonderfull thing for you. but that is not what i was saying.in the scientific process of investigation, faith does not work.repeated observation, and critical analysis of FACT are the hallmark of science. rejecting fact becouse it does not fit your faith is not science. its rhetoric.all since is based on fact. if you don’t like the fact, it doesn’t make it any less a fact.your faith in deities and an afterlife, and your personal relationship with god, are part of you, and not subject to the scrutiny of scientific observation.faith has no place in science, just as science has no bearing on faith.

I bugs me when someone’s on my side and still only half right.