Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (42906)	4/20/1999 12:28:00 AM
From: Neocon	Respond to of 67261

TP-- I use this as a point of insertion because it is a break in the flow. Assuming you still lurk, I have a limited amount on the conference from the Post: "We're as much in the dark as we ever were," Sandra Faber, an astronomer at the University of California at Santa Cruz, said of such questions as whether a Creator exists and whether time and matter predates the known universe. And what existed before primordial soup? "Nothing," Kolb said(Edward Kolb, a cosmologist from the Fermi National Accelerator). "Or if you prefer a vacuum." For the universe to come into being, he explained,"nothing is something. Nothing has energy. Nothing can change." Such conundrums have caused many scientists who are atheists or agnostics---- some of whom spoke at the conference---- to reassess their thinking on religion, said Jim Miller, senior program associate with the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which organized the event. Miller said such scientists often have rejected a faith they deemed too dogmatic. They don't believe in a personal Creator God who answers prayers", yet their work has "opened them up to the existential possibilities" of religious- based answers to unexplainable questions of the cosmos. Joel Primack, a professor at the University of California at Santa Cruz and a leading theorist on "dark matter" and the origins of galaxies, said in an interview that he is one who does not believe in a"personal God". Yet he considers himself religious and says it has something to do with the "uncanny" feeling he gets when research proves his theories were right and " shows the world is intelligible".... (I think that summarizes the coverage adequately. By the way, it was the Religion page that covered the event.)