Debate – astrology is science, or not?

Some real science heavyweights are about to debate what is science and what is not:

What is science and what are its boundaries? What is it at the origin of scientific knowledge? What sparks scientific research? What is reason? What is the relationship between reason and faith? What are the agendas that move the two sides in the evolution vs. creation conflict? How much of it is science and how much is politics? What is at stake?

These are some of the questions that Crossroads New York Cultural Center will ask to a panel of distinguished experts…

All well and good, you might think. But get a load of the three “distinguished experts” they have assembled:

Dr. Michael BEHE, professor of Biological Sciences at Lehigh University and a key witness at the Dover Intelligent Design trial, will debate with Dr. Michael HANBY, Associate director of the Institute of Faith and Learning at Baylor University and with Monsignor Lorenzo ALBACETE, theologian, author and columnist.

(My bold.)

So let’s get this straight. Michael Behe, major Intelligent Design proponent and key witness to have ID taught as science, will debate with a director of an institute of credulity and superstition, er I mean faith, and a theologian, over what is science. I wonder what lively debate and disagreements will ensure between these three geniuses. Hardly seems likely there will be much controversy. Although perhaps they will settle once and for all the burning question of whether astrology is science or not. We know Behe thinks it is. I wonder what the other two will say. Can’t wait.

Hat tip to Red State Rabble.

Comments

[Mike Huben]

Crossroads is a Catholic organization.

This is perhaps indicative of the Roman Catholic Church starting to support Intelligent Design instead of evolution. ID, by design, is vague enough to allow almost any god-centered organization to embrace it and reject philosophical materialism.

[Mike Huben]

I put together a big-picture overview of ID a few days ago for the faculty at Boston Latin School. Many readers here should know this stuff, but there might be some new things to newer folks.

Intelligent Design Overview For US Science Teachers

If there's anything important I've left out, please let me know.

[The Bad Homeopath]

Don't worry, astrology is next on my list of Bad... exposés.
Although I doubt it'll make a blind bit of difference - if you want to believe in fluff, then you'll find a way to ignore the real world.

[BronzeDog]

Skimmed over your stuff earlier, BH. Good stuff. Be sure to get some sort of certification card so that you can whip it out if you end up arguing about it in meatspace. Same for the astrology stuff.

[mouse]

I've always found astrology a fun hobby but we all know there's know scientific proof it has any validity. This I just find disturbing. Good on you for un-covering these fluff balls for the bogus dorks they are.

[cyrusgeo]

What's there to debate? Astrology is but a parlour game...

[Morgan-LynnLamberth]

As a schyzotypal, fortunately, I do not embrace the supernatural or the paranormal or other nonsense as my fellow schyzotypals do! I find one has to be rather gullible t o embrace those notions.How would life be if there were a god? Reduction in eviL? A desinged world rather than one that natural selection, the anti-chance agency, produces . A beginning of existence when it i s committing the fallacy of composistion to do so? Do pschics ever use psychic ability or is it just luck or detective ability when they a few times get things right against the million s of times they are just in the way and wrong?What astroger has ever got it right ? H ow come the Amazing Randi and others can imitate the paranoramalists? Why do psychics ever lie if they are so good?Parlour games are alright . Why not more interest in science and less in mumbo-jumbo?

[pv]

Not only is there no scientific proof of the validity of astrology, there is plenty of scientific proof that has no validity - except as a money spinner for those fraudulent individuals known as astrologers. Look at a 3d model of the universe; the scale of the universe; the distances between stars, galaxies etc.; the inverse square law of gravity... None of these things was appreciated by the Egyptian astronomer Ptolomy, on whose maps modern astrology relies. They all demonstrate that astrology is nonsense. But the real wonders of our existence and the universe are far too great, and far too exciting, for the tiny imaginations of believers in the supernatural - astrology, religion, creationism...

[pv]

"there is plenty of scientific proof that has no validity",
should read,
"there is plenty of scientific proof that it has no validity"!

[Skeptico]

Agreed. New readers to this blog should read the astrology challenge and What do you mean, “test” astrology?

[BronzeDog]

Might as well repeat this once again: I have more respect (less disrespect?) for astrologers than I do for IDers. At least astrologers put forth predictions. They're wrong, but at least they step up to the plate.

[BronzeDog]

Oh, and Skeptico: A guy using your name has commented on Bad Homeopath's thing.

[G. Tingey]

Neither of the debaters is a scientist, and neither of them does science.
It's a dialogue of the deaf (and blind and stupid)

[Big Al]

I'm sorry. We Scorpios don't believe in astrology. That's a typical Scorpio trait. I'd so love to believe in it, and I would, if it weren't for that the position of that pesky unconnected collection of parsec-distant stars when I was born!

Damn those stars, and the moon and the sun, and the asteroids, and the interstellar dust (that surely has to account for something!).

I'd give anything to be credulous and wide-eyed, but this damn Scorpio blood has made me a skeptic.