Welcome to Gaia! ::

Select poll option that suits you most closely:

I am with Ben Stein who is a genius. 0.12738853503185 12.7% [ 40 ]
I am with Dawkins who is brilliant! 0.28343949044586 28.3% [ 89 ]
Darwinism is a foggy working hypothesis. 0.063694267515924 6.4% [ 20 ]
There is no academic freedom anymore. 0.14649681528662 14.6% [ 46 ]
I evolved from a cluster of cells that emerged from a pokey-ball. 0.37898089171975 37.9% [ 119 ]
Total Votes:[ 314 ]
<< < 1 2 ... 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 ... 56 57 58 > >>
Jaaten Syric
pockybot


Who is this monolithic "we" ?


People who understand science, and the scientific method, and, so it seems, these idiots' employers, as not a single one of them was fired, as Stein's movie claims.


Oh come on, regardless if anyone was fired...there's no denying that there is this very elitest holier than thou view amongst many sectors of academia, almost like thought police...that goes jihad whenever anything approaching "intelligent design" is flirted with. People act like it's on par with holocaust denial. I am diametrically opposed to the fundamentalist Sharia law, fundamentalist Christianity, etc that dictates many institutions and schools of thought in the world...

but I also see how it can go the other way. "Nope...nope! Just take your creationist filth elsewhere!"
It's like a scientist can't even muse around the mere notion of intelligent design, without being labeled a fundie creationist. I think most people reject creationism, including most the people espousing exploration of ID. Least I'd hope so.
GunsmithKitten
Quote:
I have already stated that teaching young pupils this would mess with their ability to memorize their math facts.


So you're against people messing with student's ability to learn math facts, BUT, when learning biology, you're all for throwing any notion into the mix in the name of academic "freedom" and "scientific freedom"?

Let the kids decide!

Just once....just once...let a teacher throw in teaching Taoist Alchemy and then use the EXACT SAME rhetoric Creationi....I mean...intelligent designers, quote unquote, use to proclaim that a science classroom needs to be an open forum to religious beliefs...


Let the kids decide is a bad idea. Part of the idea of learning is that there are social constants that need to be respected or else things break down. What you are saying is that we could let the kids decide 2+2=5 and that would be fine. The definition of terms is relative, and if society declared that the concepts behind 5 and 4 were to reverse labelling then 2+2 would = 5. However, in order for kids to be able to apply the concepts of mathmatics there needs to be a societal concept that children are told.

The same applies to biology. The reality is that evolution itself is not as simple as random variations that occur. That is the straw man created by religious idiots when they try to make a point, but in a biological sense it simply does not happen like that. There is a genetic and cellular relation between earth creatures that can be traced way back. You cannot communicate about science when you start saying god did it (or aliens,; or anything else for that matter). It is not an answer nor does it define a continuous process that can be observed. God could, if it existed, perhaps make random mutations and make new species pop into existence. That doesn't happen in a scientific sense.

BTW, darwin may have been the originator of the theory of evolution, but he certainly was not the most educated on it, nor has he established the modern theory. Darwin himself probably would have not been able to pass a modern day high school evolution course due to the relative lack of knowledge that was available at his time, and also due to the severe lack of observation possible during his time. Whenever an anti-intelligence person uses darwin to justify their ideas they are pretty much too ignorant to really justify their own theories.
pockybot
You'd have to do a lot of research as to what was going on in the mindset of elite academia in parts of America, England and Germany in the mid to late 19th century, as well as early 20th century.
Darwin and Malthus ideas got mutated by people and grafted..."evolved" so to speak, into what became a horrendous idea. Eugenics is one of the most evil things ever spawned in the minds of man, and no Im not saying Darwinism lead to Nazi racial eugenics. But youve got to understand the zeitgeist of some academia circles at the time.
I understand that. My alma mater's genetics professorship used to be called the Galton Chair of Eugenics. The criticism of Expelled is that the consequences of evolutionary theory — be it a necessary or sufficient condition — has no bearing on the validity of the idea. Attempting to use the horrors of the Holocaust is thoroughly dishonest. We all know that if you link X to being responsible for the Holocaust, whether true or false, people will be repulsed by X. It is a dirty propaganda tactic.

pockybot
Regardless, I find it funny that this movie exposes the thought crime of merely wondering if there's a designer/designers on some of life...usually the left wing is all about freedom of expression
It is not a crime. It is simply not science. Unless you can convince why Intelligent Design should be regarded as a scientific pursuit — when it has been found lacking is scientific and legal circles — then the claim that it has been suppressed by "Big Science" simply does not stand up to scrutiny. If it does not propose scientific tests then it will not success in obtaining scientific grant money. Regardless, there has been money available for "origins" research by the likes the Templeton Foundation. The money is there, ID supporters are not doing the work. The "martyrs" in the film were not removed from their positions because they had ID leanings, that is just the political spin. The actual causes for their dismissal have been raised numerous times.

For Christ's sake, I posted a two hour rebuttal of the claims of ID and an overview of the Dover trial by Professor Ken Miller. He is an outspoken critic of creationism and ID as science. He also believes in a designer because he is Catholic but that is a religious position of his and not scientific. If people are fired — they were not fired for this reason but lets assume it for sake of argument — for ID then they are being fired for bad science, they are not being fired for daring to believe that the universe requires a creator. Otherwise there are a lot of religious scientists who should start preparing resumes.

Incidentally, pocky, why do you think the producers of Expelled chose not to interview Professor Miller? He's written a book on religion and science and would surely be in a great position to talk about design? Why did they ignore him?
pockybot
vipr230

No, you're simply ignorant. And frankly, it's getting tiresome, why don't you do a bit of real research before you actually make up your mind? You're the kinda person who could watch Fahrenheit 9/11 or Loose Change or even the Moon Landing hoax videos and think they represent reality. Just because you see it doesn't mean what you're being told is real. (As a conspiracy nut I'd imagine you of all people should be especially skeptical of videos like that, but for enjoying Expelled, clearly I'm wrong).


LOL! You just said I'm appealing to false claims, now you're making up claims about me.
Wait a second, Fahrenheit 9/11, Loose Change, Zeitgeist etc are all very ANTI right wing documentaries...so wait, how could I like a "right wing" documentary like Expelled?


Read my words, appeal to consequences, not false claims. And I'm not actually all that sure, to be frank, you just seem like a conspiracy nut who'd attach onto any conspiracy you see. Still I could be wrong, so I'm setting up a straw man, unless you really do believe any conspiracy you see. Tell me, did Harvey Oswald act alone?

pockybot
I can think of a documentary that's full of bullshit propaganda: "An Inconvenient Truth".


... >.> Yeah, because clearly global warming's a total lie. And you're not a conspiracy nut?

pockybot
also, moon landing hoax videos? Come on now kiddo. Don't try and mix that garbage with documentary films that pose honest questions.


Like expelled? I'm sorry, expelled is just as poorly constructed, it lies about people "losing their jobs" because they "question darwinism" and fails to support it's own narrow viewpoint. It's very much like a moon landing hoax claim.

pockybot
"As a conspiracy nut". Tell me, what is it that makes me a "conspiracy nut". You sound more like a confused liberal, kid.


To me, anyone who simply believes that there's a massive conspiracy against a group, such as ID advocates, would qualify as a "conspiracy nut". You took this film at its word, and believe ID advocates are being targeted for no reason, as such, you qualify.
pockybot
vipr230


*tries to hold back rage*

Ok... ok...
*breaths*
Right, I'll try to say this as calmly as possible, appeal to consequences is NOT a valid attack on the validity of evolution as a whole, NOR does the idea of eugenics actually fit with the theory of evolution as it would fundamentally reduce genetic diversity. The film links the two unfairly to create a false attack on the theory as a whole.

However, saying "maybe there's a designer" is fine, saying "maybe we should seriously consider the prospect of a designer without a tiny tiny tiny shred of empirical evidence" is not fine. Forget "the left" and "the right" wings, freedom of expression has nothing to do with it, science isn't "I get to say whatever I want and not support myself but expect to be taken seriously" it's "I need to have evidence to back up what I say if I want to be taken seriously". This film shows how ID is attempting to skirt that and UNFAIRLY avoid the entire "provide evidence" bit. ID advocates want to be taken seriously BEFORE they actually present a case to defend their point of view. That's like me actually expecting to be taken seriously by saying "THE MOON IS MADE OF AMERICAN CHEESE, NEPTUNE IS THE SIZE OF MY PINKY, AND THE SKY IS ORANGE!"


Aww, look at the liberal getting all huffy and puffy.

I know, I know...Im just evil for questioning things.

"Darwinism is gospel"
"global warming is real and all our fault, its gonna kill us all"
"Islamic terrorists are after us"
"jet fuel can bring down a tall building"

Man, and I thought the conservatives get their panties in a bunch when challenged.


You see, what you fail to understand is I'd act the EXACT same way if you questioned gravity, the theory of relativity, cell theory, atomic theory, etc, etc. "Questioning" without a shred of evidence is as absurd as, I quote

me
THE MOON IS MADE OF AMERICAN CHEESE, NEPTUNE IS THE SIZE OF MY PINKY, AND THE SKY IS ORANGE!


They're exactly tantamount, you're questioning something as simple as the color of the sky.
pockybot
I LOVED Expelled. Saw it opening day.

It goes into a lot of the Eugenics, Nazi social Darwinism and elite mechanisms of control that End Game: Blueprint for Global Enslavement gets into
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=endgame+blueprint&sitesearch=

Darwinism and social Darwinism is creepy, thats for sure

And what about the origin of the "abortion movement" in America they talk about...makes sense the elite would place abortions in mostly black areas. Killing Jews, killing blacks; this documentary shows how the elite rulers of the world have been using eugenics to oppress people for ages

But hey, Im just a "right wing Christian fundie" for liking this movie smile


If the elite were succesfully using eugenics to define the species it would lay considerable evidence for the fact evolution is the way things worked. Science is neutral, what is done with it is not. What you are talking about is fear mongering in the hopes of undermining modern scientific advances. Even if all these bad things were happening using eugenics it is completely irrelevant to the point of the movie that ID is the way things are. If there were an intelligent designer with a superior intellect, and perhaps a perfect intellect in the case of god, they would have put in a way to stop such ideas from being used to warp their species.

All of that is is propaganda to get people to start screaming against evolution because of missplaced blame. Physics can be used to make a nuclear bomb, better weaponry, and kill a shitload of people. It can also be used to make medicine better, power our homes, and transport our goods. Just like that the study of biology can be used to do eugenics, make biological weapons, and poison food supplies. It could also be used to cure disease, grow better food sources, and make modern medicine better.

if you have a problem with the way it is being used education is better than burning the witch. Better educated people are more capable of seeing the effects of misuse of science. People who think it is all magic live in fear and pray to an absent god to save them from evil.
Jaaten Syric's avatar

Liberal Zealot

pockybot


Oh come on, regardless if anyone was fired...there's no denying that there is this very elitest holier than thou view amongst many sectors of academia, almost like thought police...that goes jihad whenever anything approaching "intelligent design" is flirted with.


Maybe because, it's not science, it's an overt attempt to force religion into the classroom, and literally no research has ever been done on it, even when money and a publishing venue were offered by a 'friendly' institution seeking to reconcile science and religion (the Templeton Foundation)? Just a guess there.

Quote:
People act like it's on par with holocaust denial. I am diametrically opposed to the fundamentalist Sharia law, fundamentalist Christianity, etc that dictates many institutions and schools of thought in the world...

but I also see how it can go the other way. "Nope...nope! Just take your creationist filth elsewhere!"


IDiots have had over twenty years to prove their claim has any scientific merit, including opportunities for substantial research grants which were not taken up. Science rightly rejects ID because ID has never shown how it is in any way useful, let alone scientific. Then we have the comments from the movement;s founders saying that ID isn't science, but philosophy (and how they're trying to win the battle by making it into an Evo v God rather than a scientific inquiry where they know they'll be thrashed...) Hell, Behe came out and said during the Dover trial, that for ID to be considered science, the very definition of the word needs to be changed, and that he (and other creationists called on to give testimony) would not have pushed for the inclusion of other infantile 'theories' into schools despite the fact that they were better supported than ID. It's a sham and until they give the scientific community damn good evidence to show that it isn't the same mass of meaningless, fundamentally unscientific bullshit as before, they can't complain when they're not taken seriously.

Quote:
It's like a scientist can't even muse around the mere notion of intelligent design, without being labeled a fundie creationist.


Bullshit, and you know it pocky.

Quote:
I think most people reject creationism, including most the people espousing exploration of ID. Least I'd hope so.


Tell me you've actually read the wedge document and the text of Dover...
tererun
GunsmithKitten
Quote:
I have already stated that teaching young pupils this would mess with their ability to memorize their math facts.


So you're against people messing with student's ability to learn math facts, BUT, when learning biology, you're all for throwing any notion into the mix in the name of academic "freedom" and "scientific freedom"?

Let the kids decide!

Just once....just once...let a teacher throw in teaching Taoist Alchemy and then use the EXACT SAME rhetoric Creationi....I mean...intelligent designers, quote unquote, use to proclaim that a science classroom needs to be an open forum to religious beliefs...


Let the kids decide is a bad idea. Part of the idea of learning is that there are social constants that need to be respected or else things break down. What you are saying is that we could let the kids decide 2+2=5 and that would be fine. The definition of terms is relative, and if society declared that the concepts behind 5 and 4 were to reverse labelling then 2+2 would = 5. However, in order for kids to be able to apply the concepts of mathmatics there needs to be a societal concept that children are told.

The same applies to biology. The reality is that evolution itself is not as simple as random variations that occur. That is the straw man created by religious idiots when they try to make a point, but in a biological sense it simply does not happen like that. There is a genetic and cellular relation between earth creatures that can be traced way back. You cannot communicate about science when you start saying god did it (or aliens,; or anything else for that matter). It is not an answer nor does it define a continuous process that can be observed. God could, if it existed, perhaps make random mutations and make new species pop into existence. That doesn't happen in a scientific sense.

BTW, darwin may have been the originator of the theory of evolution, but he certainly was not the most educated on it, nor has he established the modern theory. Darwin himself probably would have not been able to pass a modern day high school evolution course due to the relative lack of knowledge that was available at his time, and also due to the severe lack of observation possible during his time. Whenever an anti-intelligence person uses darwin to justify their ideas they are pretty much too ignorant to really justify their own theories.


Yes indeed Tererun. I don't know why GunsmithKitten keeps trying to make it seem as if I am advocating this be taught in public schools for I have stated more than once that I am against it. Especially if ID is proposing a non-naturalistic theory. The only way ID could work for science is if it is looking for a naturally occuring intelligence within the cells themselves. For example, if scientists were to somehow discover that viruses could infect people with behavior ... sorry for going mad scientist on you here ... but if there was evidence that information that directly affected behavior could be transmitted virally, then that might be evidence of internal information and self design. I concede I am not a scientist. I just thought of this when I was reading about a disease that people have where they suddenly have a new behavior that didn't have before and that behavior is detrimental to them and they would like to stop it but somehow cannot.

I am thinking of the case of psychogenic excoriation. The person, usually in adolescence or adulthood beings scratching away at their own skin. I hypothesized that perhaps the sores are contagious and that there is something unknown about this disease and the reason people cannot seem to stop picking at themselves. It is like the something in the sores is affecting their behavior and causing them to pick, perhaps as a way to help spread the infection.

Intelligent Design that is only about "God of the Gaps" or gonk "God did it HIS way" could never work as it is non-naturalistic and there would be an endless excuse for not trying another theory.
pockybot
Jaaten Syric
pockybot


Who is this monolithic "we" ?


People who understand science, and the scientific method, and, so it seems, these idiots' employers, as not a single one of them was fired, as Stein's movie claims.


Oh come on, regardless if anyone was fired...there's no denying that there is this very elitest holier than thou view amongst many sectors of academia, almost like thought police...that goes jihad whenever anything approaching "intelligent design" is flirted with. People act like it's on par with holocaust denial. I am diametrically opposed to the fundamentalist Sharia law, fundamentalist Christianity, etc that dictates many institutions and schools of thought in the world...

but I also see how it can go the other way. "Nope...nope! Just take your creationist filth elsewhere!"
It's like a scientist can't even muse around the mere notion of intelligent design, without being labeled a fundie creationist. I think most people reject creationism, including most the people espousing exploration of ID. Least I'd hope so.


If you can prove intelligent design using scientific method and reproduceable experiments then you can make it science. The fact is no one has been able to do it yet. Once intelligent design could stand up to the scrutiny given to the theory of evolution and still be a possibility it can be called a valid theory. Just because someone thought up the idea doesn't make the idea scientific in any way shape or form. There is a definitaive process that a hypothesis has to go through in order to become a theory. This works contrary to conspiracies because anyone can make and test a hypothesis. The scientific elite are constantly proven wrong, and that is because science is always looking to prove things wrong. Science is never about acceptance, but certain things have been tested enough to gain acceptance for the present time so that new ideas can be developed on top of them.

In essence ID works completely against the ideas of science making existence a matter of will on the part of some other being. The only sort of science that could study that would be psychology and that really isn't a science. In that case the laws of physics would only be reliant on whether or not the creator of them was feeling like having them today. How could you make any science on those ideas? Scientists don't define the universe, the universe defines science. Try to remember that. It isn't elitist to laugh at the retard who tries to jam a square peg into a round hole and wonders why everyone else isn't doing it.
mrsculedhel

Yes indeed Tererun. I don't know why GunsmithKitten keeps trying to make it seem as if I am advocating this be taught in public schools for I have stated more than once that I am against it. Especially if ID is proposing a non-naturalistic theory. The only way ID could work for science is if it is looking for a naturally occuring intelligence within the cells themselves. For example, if scientists were to somehow discover that viruses could infect people with behavior ... sorry for going mad scientist on you here ... but if there was evidence that information that directly affected behavior could be transmitted virally, then that might be evidence of internal information and self design. I concede I am not a scientist. I just thought of this when I was reading about a disease that people have where they suddenly have a new behavior that didn't have before and that behavior is detrimental to them and they would like to stop it but somehow cannot.


This... makes no sense. Honestly. However ID does only work on a supernatural level, there is no testable falsifiable hypothesis you can provide, this movie is an attempt to skirt the scientific method.

Quote:
I am thinking of the case of psychogenic excoriation. The person, usually in adolescence or adulthood beings scratching away at their own skin. I hypothesized that perhaps the sores are contagious and that there is something unknown about this disease and the reason people cannot seem to stop picking at themselves. It is like the something in the sores is affecting their behavior and causing them to pick, perhaps as a way to help spread the infection.


And what does that have to do with evolution or ID? However, I'm pretty sure it's just nerves being irritated by the body's natural attempts to remove the infection.

Quote:
Intelligent Design that is only about "God of the Gaps" or gonk "God did it HIS way" could never work as it is non-naturalistic and there would be an endless excuse for not trying another theory.


That's all ID is and ever can be, you still can't present a testable falsifiable hypothesis in favor of ID without at some level going back to a god.
vipr230


Read my words, appeal to consequences, not false claims. And I'm not actually all that sure, to be frank, you just seem like a conspiracy nut who'd attach onto any conspiracy you see. Still I could be wrong, so I'm setting up a straw man, unless you really do believe any conspiracy you see. Tell me, did Harvey Oswald act alone?


Well I apologize if I made it sound like I believe that Darwin was some Nazi, that had secret plans to eradicate non whites. I definately see how Darwinism and Malthusian beliefs got trojan'd into some pretty scary ideologies. No, I'm not into "conspiracy theories". I'm into applied rigorous intuition and not afraid to look behind the wizard's curtain. Of course I don't believe the official story of JFK's assassination, 9/11, etc nor do I have answers.

vipr230

... >.> Yeah, because clearly global warming's a total lie. And you're not a conspiracy nut?
.


So, Expelled...Loose Change...Fahrenheit=bad. An Inconvenient Truth=good? Just checking.


vipr230

Like expelled? I'm sorry, expelled is just as poorly constructed, it lies about people "losing their jobs" because they "question darwinism" and fails to support it's own narrow viewpoint. It's very much like a moon landing hoax claim.


The claims people make about Expelled I feel are bogus. They say it's Christian propaganda, when the film actually has a more Jewish bend to it. They say it's right wing fundie propaganda, when throughout the film they laugh and make fun of people like Falwell, Pat Robertson, etc.

"ExpelledExposed" claims that every single person interviewed lied about academia higher ups not being happy with their ID flirting/ID beliefs. And that's not dishonest?

vipr230

To me, anyone who simply believes that there's a massive conspiracy against a group, such as ID advocates, would qualify as a "conspiracy nut". You took this film at its word, and believe ID advocates are being targeted for no reason, as such, you qualify.


There's lot's of mass conspiracies...but silencing ID isnt so much a conspiracy as just intellectual elitism(IMHO)
pockybot
vipr230


Read my words, appeal to consequences, not false claims. And I'm not actually all that sure, to be frank, you just seem like a conspiracy nut who'd attach onto any conspiracy you see. Still I could be wrong, so I'm setting up a straw man, unless you really do believe any conspiracy you see. Tell me, did Harvey Oswald act alone?


Well I apologize if I made it sound like I believe that Darwin was some Nazi, that had secret plans to eradicate non whites. I definately see how Darwinism and Malthusian beliefs got trojan'd into some pretty scary ideologies. No, I'm not into "conspiracy theories". I'm into applied rigorous intuition and not afraid to look behind the wizard's curtain. Of course I don't believe the official story of JFK's assassination, 9/11, etc nor do I have answers.
But you admit that those rather horrid things don't invalidate the theory of Evolution itself? Just checking.

Quote:
vipr230

... >.> Yeah, because clearly global warming's a total lie. And you're not a conspiracy nut?
.


So, Expelled...Loose Change...Fahrenheit=bad. An Inconvenient Truth=good? Just checking.
Don't trust any movie at face value. Go do the research yourself. Check scholarly sources.


Quote:
vipr230

Like expelled? I'm sorry, expelled is just as poorly constructed, it lies about people "losing their jobs" because they "question darwinism" and fails to support it's own narrow viewpoint. It's very much like a moon landing hoax claim.


The claims people make about Expelled I feel are bogus. They say it's Christian propaganda, when the film actually has a more Jewish bend to it. They say it's right wing fundie propaganda, when throughout the film they laugh and make fun of people like Falwell, Pat Robertson, etc.

"ExpelledExposed" claims that every single person interviewed lied about academia higher ups not being happy with their ID flirting/ID beliefs. And that's not dishonest?
It's dishonest of the movie makers to not mention the other little things there. It is dishonest of you to take the movie at face value, and then look at any criticism as if it is part of some sort of conspiracy. Do the research, look up those cases.

Quote:
vipr230

To me, anyone who simply believes that there's a massive conspiracy against a group, such as ID advocates, would qualify as a "conspiracy nut". You took this film at its word, and believe ID advocates are being targeted for no reason, as such, you qualify.


There's lot's of mass conspiracies...but silencing ID isnt so much a conspiracy as just intellectual elitism(IMHO)
Keeping ID out of the science classroom is elitism? How is ID testable? How is ID falsifiable? If it isn't both, then it is not science and as such doesn't belong in a science class room. Do you have a problem with that?
Iguana
Incidentally, pocky, why do you think the producers of Expelled chose not to interview Professor Miller? He's written a book on religion and science and would surely be in a great position to talk about design? Why did they ignore him?
Why did they ignore him, Iguana? That's a good question. What is the answer?
pockybot
vipr230


Read my words, appeal to consequences, not false claims. And I'm not actually all that sure, to be frank, you just seem like a conspiracy nut who'd attach onto any conspiracy you see. Still I could be wrong, so I'm setting up a straw man, unless you really do believe any conspiracy you see. Tell me, did Harvey Oswald act alone?


Well I apologize if I made it sound like I believe that Darwin was some Nazi, that had secret plans to eradicate non whites. I definately see how Darwinism and Malthusian beliefs got trojan'd into some pretty scary ideologies. No, I'm not into "conspiracy theories". I'm into applied rigorous intuition and not afraid to look behind the wizard's curtain. Of course I don't believe the official story of JFK's assassination, 9/11, etc nor do I have answers.


Still, an appeal to false consequences is rather poor logic for ever attacking a theory. And I'm going to ignore your other conspiracy theories, not suitable for this thread.

pockybot
vipr230

... >.> Yeah, because clearly global warming's a total lie. And you're not a conspiracy nut?
.


So, Expelled...Loose Change...Fahrenheit=bad. An Inconvenient Truth=good? Just checking.


No, I'm well aware of inaccuracies in Inconvenient Truth, such as the snows of Kilimanjaro aren't disappearing because of global warming. However overall it's not pure propaganda, global warming really is going on, even if Al made a movie that blatantly overstated its case. However expelled overstated its case for events that aren't going on, considering that overall virtually ALL scientists don't reject common descent, and even the cases cited weren't "fired" for their ID beliefs, Expelled was bad. Loose change, well that's as conspiracy theory as you get, I find it akin to JFK theories. And Fahrenheit was poorly done propaganda, I've got a problem when Moore begins asking senators if their kids are in the war when they have no kids. That was done the same was as Expelled, except that I don't support the war, so I still agree with the overall message of Moore's work, however the piece was still poorly done overall.

pockybot
vipr230

Like expelled? I'm sorry, expelled is just as poorly constructed, it lies about people "losing their jobs" because they "question darwinism" and fails to support it's own narrow viewpoint. It's very much like a moon landing hoax claim.


The claims people make about Expelled I feel are bogus. They say it's Christian propaganda, when the film actually has a more Jewish bend to it. They say it's right wing fundie propaganda, when throughout the film they laugh and make fun of people like Falwell, Pat Robertson, etc.


... I don't know many who say it's Christian propaganda, it's just creationist propaganda. I'd imagine it'd seem Jewish because Ben Stein IS Jewish. Jews, Muslims, and Christians are all equally capable of being creationists. However, the claims that the movie makes, such as people being fired for belief in ID, are bogus.

pockybot
"ExpelledExposed" claims that every single person interviewed lied about academia higher ups not being happy with their ID flirting/ID beliefs. And that's not dishonest?


... uhh, what? If you went around screaming the sky is orange I wouldn't be happy with your beliefs, and if you're in a position of academia I wouldn't find too much trouble finding reason to fire you, however even the cases presented in the movie they weren't fired for their beliefs in ID.

pockybot
vipr230

To me, anyone who simply believes that there's a massive conspiracy against a group, such as ID advocates, would qualify as a "conspiracy nut". You took this film at its word, and believe ID advocates are being targeted for no reason, as such, you qualify.


There's lot's of mass conspiracies...but silencing ID isnt so much a conspiracy as just intellectual elitism(IMHO)



... "silencing ID"? We "silence" ID as much as we silence flat earthism and moon cheeseism. People claiming ID can't provide a testable falsifiable hypothesis, let alone evidence to back themselves up, how is saying "you have no evidence, your point is thus invalid" intellectual elitism? You consider believing the world to be round to be intellectual elitism? The flat earth society deserves serious consideration?
Jaaten Syric's avatar

Liberal Zealot

mrsculedhel
Iguana
Incidentally, pocky, why do you think the producers of Expelled chose not to interview Professor Miller? He's written a book on religion and science and would surely be in a great position to talk about design? Why did they ignore him?
Why did they ignore him, Iguana? That's a good question. What is the answer?


My guess would be, for exactly the same reason they chose to exclude Francis Collins, Simon Conway Morris, or even good 'ol Jimmy Carter: Stein's much more interested in driving an imaginary wedge between religious (particularly theistic) belief, and science. While he might not come out and say it, it seems to me that there's a very clear implication in the film; 'These guys here are atheists, and they got there by ACCEPTING EVOLUTION ZOMG!/ These guys flatly reject ID because it doesn't figure into their world-view, remember kids, they're atheists.' Its just another attempt yo get the viewer to put rationality on hold and accept what Stein's handing out, because god help us if they admit the even devout evangelical Christians can be 'evolutionists'...

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games