Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed (ID propaganda)

[ParsonCollins]

Daumier

A link to Expelled Exposed because PZ Myers told me to. Screw you Ben Stein and all your lies.

Why haven't you lauched the "******** You Ben Stein" by virtual holocaust?

[ParsonCollins]

Voija, I have a similar thread up right now, but it is tied into the public demand for a protestant President. I would be honored if you would post on my thread too.

[Redem]

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Except that Richard Dawkins is blatantly against intelligent design so I hardly see how they were misleading him at all, as, given the chance, he'd insult anyone for believing in something remotely religious.

He does advocate against any attempt to pretend that ID is a science, yes. That's not an insult though. I don't recall ever seeing him insult anyone.

As for misleading him, it's not hard to do. He refuses to participate in any creationist films, so they had to to get him on camera. Claiming that it was an exploration of the issue in a fair and balanced manner, then quote mining his interview to promote the agenda of the film makers.

[ParsonCollins]

VoijaRisa

Steampunk Patashu

RmntcArtst

What is your personal view on ID vs. Evo?

Evolution is sound science, ID isn't. ID is religious in nature, relations and in principle, evolution isn't.

Precisely. Let's also not forget to mention that the practitioners of ID/creationism are some of the biggest frauds and scam artists the world has ever seen.

Are you sure they don't honestly believe in it? This claim is a little over the top. I know how frustrating it is to have family members who insist on believing in creationism and won't even listen to an alternative opinion. I know people who won't even have an attitude of "evolution is true but God is behind it" but insist in a literal creation as per the Bible, but then admit that the earth is far older than 6,000 years.

Most Americans know geology but still stubborn stick to the most fundamentalist understand of "how God created the world."

It is easy to get angry. But anger won't make them listen. I also do disagree with you that all these people are deliberate frauds. What would be the motive behind Ben Stein making this film other than that he really and truly believes it?

[Exoth XI]

Steampunk Patashu

RmntcArtst

What is your personal view on ID vs. Evo?

Evolution is sound science, ID isn't. ID is religious in nature, relations and in principle, evolution isn't.

Check it out. Evolution totally debunked.

Patashu; are you the non-crazy pakashu?

[Blind Guardian the 2nd]

Redem

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Except that Richard Dawkins is blatantly against intelligent design so I hardly see how they were misleading him at all, as, given the chance, he'd insult anyone for believing in something remotely religious.

He does advocate against any attempt to pretend that ID is a science, yes. That's not an insult though. I don't recall ever seeing him insult anyone.

As for misleading him, it's not hard to do. He refuses to participate in any creationist films, so they had to to get him on camera. Claiming that it was an exploration of the issue in a fair and balanced manner, then quote mining his interview to promote the agenda of the film makers.

He calls religion the root of all evil. I'd call that insulting enough. Dawkins hate religion and thinks anyone who is religious is stupid, and anyone who is an atheist is intelligent. He's an arrogant p***k who should stick to zoology and leave it at that, the c**t.

Honestly, I think he deserved to be tricked. Anyone who promote "militant atheism" (his words) and refers to all atheists as "brights" needs a slap at the very least. And let's make one thing clear - I'm not a religious nut. I just can't stand Dawkins.

[Exoth XI]

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Redem

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Except that Richard Dawkins is blatantly against intelligent design so I hardly see how they were misleading him at all, as, given the chance, he'd insult anyone for believing in something remotely religious.

He does advocate against any attempt to pretend that ID is a science, yes. That's not an insult though. I don't recall ever seeing him insult anyone.

As for misleading him, it's not hard to do. He refuses to participate in any creationist films, so they had to to get him on camera. Claiming that it was an exploration of the issue in a fair and balanced manner, then quote mining his interview to promote the agenda of the film makers.

He calls religion the root of all evil. I'd call that insulting enough. Dawkins hate religion and thinks anyone who is religious is stupid, and anyone who is an atheist is intelligent. He's an arrogant p***k who should stick to zoology and leave it at that, the c**t.

Ah, not all of us atheists agree with Dawkins. I, myself, believe that stupidity is the root of all evil, and that at least 75% of the human population is stupid, if not more. The sole reason why atheism seems less evil than religion, is simply because there are fewer of them, and therefore, by default, fewer stupid people. The proportion of stupid atheists to smart ones could well be equal to the ratio of stupid creationists to smart ones.

Quote:

Honestly, I think he deserved to be tricked. Anyone who promote "militant atheism" (his words) and refers to all atheists as "brights" needs a slap at the very least. And let's make one thing clear - I'm not a religious nut. I just can't stand Dawkins.

My favorite atheists: Penn and Teller.

[Captain Verd]

Even the ad is a crock. It makes it sound like evolutionists are these evil people who can't handle their theory being questioned, and the folks who believe in ID are pointing out the ~*hard flaws*~ and being burned at the stake for it. Like, you know, asking "Where did primordial soup come from" is so totally going to get you sent to the office and make everyone BAAAAAW.

[Redem]

Blind Guardian the 2nd

He calls religion the root of all evil.

No, he doesn't. His publishers chose that title to generate more controversy, and thus more viewings.

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Dawkins hate religion and thinks anyone who is religious is stupid, and anyone who is an atheist is intelligent. He's an arrogant p***k who should stick to zoology and leave it at that, the c**t.

Proof of these claims, please. He's never stated anything of the kind to my knowledge.

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Honestly, I think he deserved to be tricked. Anyone who promote "militant atheism" (his words) and refers to all atheists as "brights" needs a slap at the very least. And let's make one thing clear - I'm not a religious nut. I just can't stand Dawkins.

Sounds like what you can't stand is the religious nut's version of him, rather than the man himself.

[A Confused Iguana]

Blind Guardian the 2nd

He calls religion the root of all evil. I'd call that insulting enough.

He was against that title for his documentary.

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Dawkins hate religion and thinks anyone who is religious is stupid, and anyone who is an atheist is intelligent. He's an arrogant p***k who should stick to zoology and leave it at that, the c**t.

Richard Dawkins does not hate religion, I think he is bemused by it. His issue is not with the religion but in the mentality of people who actively believe in everlasting super-being that is capable of interceding when petitioned to do so. Not all religions promote this, not all religions meet his ire. You do not understand his arguments do you? While he is patronising to the core, he rallies against what he perceives to be anti-rational thought and any harm it is doing to the world.

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Honestly, I think he deserved to be tricked. Anyone who promote "militant atheism" (his words) and refers to all atheists as "brights" needs a slap at the very least.

I hope you are aware of the Brights movement, all atheists who reject mysticism are automatically aligned with said movement. As for "militant atheism" is that a self-imposed label or one placed upon him by his detractors? Dawkins is principally agnostic atheist but one who is utterly convinced that the evidence makes his position correct and evangelical in tone. There are a plethora of evangelical theists, what is so bad about the "Four Horsemen" of atheism?

[GunsmithKitten]

Even Ben can't get his story straight.

On one talk show appearence, he claims he's NOT out to teach creationism as a science.

Then when he get's confronted with the fact that, as a non-falsifiable HYPOTHESIS, creationism is not science, he turns around and says "Well, I've never advocated teaching it in science class, just that people shouldn't be punished for a personal opinion about it. Maybe we're wrong. Maybe we creationists are just stupid..."

[Shokushu]

ParsonCollins

VoijaRisa

Steampunk Patashu

RmntcArtst

What is your personal view on ID vs. Evo?

Evolution is sound science, ID isn't. ID is religious in nature, relations and in principle, evolution isn't.

Precisely. Let's also not forget to mention that the practitioners of ID/creationism are some of the biggest frauds and scam artists the world has ever seen.

Are you sure they don't honestly believe in it? This claim is a little over the top. I know how frustrating it is to have family members who insist on believing in creationism and won't even listen to an alternative opinion. I know people who won't even have an attitude of "evolution is true but God is behind it" but insist in a literal creation as per the Bible, but then admit that the earth is far older than 6,000 years.

Most Americans know geology but still stubborn stick to the most fundamentalist understand of "how God created the world."

It is easy to get angry. But anger won't make them listen. I also do disagree with you that all these people are deliberate frauds. What would be the motive behind Ben Stein making this film other than that he really and truly believes it?

Their claim is over the top and they probably adamantly believe that evolution can't work but it's far beyond obvious that they repeatedly use underhanded tactics to try and get their agenda undue support.

I think the Kitzmiller vs Dover School District case about whether it was constitutional to put ID in science classrooms had a lot of golden examples of this. Off the top of my head:

When the opposition subpoenaed the publishing company for earlier versions of the ID book intended for the course they found it to be virtually identical word for word except that creationism and creator were replaced with intelligent design and designer (even in the definition of creation science/intelligent design.) The change came right after congress ruled that teaching creation science in the classroom was unconstitutional.

The man who provided the funding for the group first said that he did not know where the money came from but then when confronted with the check for it with his own signature on it he said that he asked for donations and passed hats around in Churches so he didn't know specifically who the money had come from. I think the judge told him not to insult everyone's intelligence by saying that he thought "I don't know" was the same as "I solicited it."

You can see a dozen more examples by looking up the case.

[Blind Guardian the 2nd]

Redem

Blind Guardian the 2nd

He calls religion the root of all evil.

No, he doesn't. His publishers chose that title to generate more controversy, and thus more viewings.

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Dawkins hate religion and thinks anyone who is religious is stupid, and anyone who is an atheist is intelligent. He's an arrogant p***k who should stick to zoology and leave it at that, the c**t.

Proof of these claims, please. He's never stated anything of the kind to my knowledge.

Blind Guardian the 2nd

Honestly, I think he deserved to be tricked. Anyone who promote "militant atheism" (his words) and refers to all atheists as "brights" needs a slap at the very least. And let's make one thing clear - I'm not a religious nut. I just can't stand Dawkins.

Sounds like what you can't stand is the religious nut's version of him, rather than the man himself.

His publishers? No, sorry, The Root of All Evil was a television series written and presented by Richard Dawkins.

Have you read the God Delusion? His arrogant approach to religion is presented pretty clearly in that.

As someone interested in human biology I've run across Dawkins a few times in book form, and any book he's written that's not about animal biology or human anatomy is a complete waste of time, because he thinks that zoology qualifies him to talk about other subjects as a monolith of knowledge. I dislike him because of the crap he comes up with, crap that most of the public believe because they don't know better.

[With Motion]

Very comprehensive post. you clearly did your research. Well done surprised