Welcome to Gaia! ::

http://www.gaiaonline.com/forum/extended-discussion/i-saw-the-film-expelled-today-and-it-was-interesting/t.39975235_1/

I've seen Redem around this thread tonight, and I've officially ceased commenting in it. I'm sticking around to read further comments, though. After a number of people presented the OP and the other IDiots in the thread with facts and good places to start looking for sources to back them up, she refused to acknowledge in particular the NCSE's expelledexposed.com, because it's a dot com site. No matter that it's run by reputable sources.

What took the cake was her baiting me. I left the thread with a rather exasperated summary of my feelings and she proceeded to bait me in an attempt to get a response after I declared my exit from the thread.



When did I bully? Other than never, unless she's referring to my complete astonishment that she and other IDiots can still cling to their ideas when we're presenting them with a refutation of virtually all of their claims. But it's typical to feel that way when presented with a number of people who easily refute the claims you foolishly continue to cling onto. I never quote mined her. Every time I replied to her throughout the thread, I quoted her entire text except for the last bit about the dot com thing. Every statement of hers that I addressed meant the same thing, in or out of the context of her posts. AAAAAnd finally, her precious movie is nothing but secondhand information, and bad information at that. The information I and everyone else talked about comes from legitimate scientific sources - textbooks, scholarly articles, classes taught by competent biology teachers... how is this any more secondhand than Ben Stein? XD


An edit for you all: My original intent with this thread kind of got buried underneath the train wreck that is that other thread... so to clarify:

Basically, what I wanna know is exactly what I asked her throughout the thread - is she (well, not just her, really, but all of the ID sympathizers who argue in an identical manner) TRYING to be this way or can she not help it for whatever reason? She claims to have some sort of grounding in science, and says that she holds an anthropology degree. If her claims are true, then I can assume that she's a reasonably intelligent person and as such, why would such a person cling to falsehoods found in a poorly made documentary in the face of a mountain of evidence being given to her in that very thread?

Why? Look how flimsy their beliefs are. With a complete and utter lack of scientific backing, a celebrity endorsement is a worthy substitute...It works for presidential elections, doesn't it? Just throw in a "Accept ID or the terrorists win," and you've immediately won over the few republicans that weren't under your banner, already.

What's really burning me about Noora is that she refers to everything EXCEPT Expelled as a "secondary source" as if that damn movie full of lies is NOT! XD And how she keeps insisting that ID is something it's not... she even brought someone from the Discovery Institute to her house to discuss it, hoping she'd get a different answer than what we told her ID is?! And after threatening everyone and their brother to report them for "disrespect" she makes snide comments about Protestants, Mormons, and atheists all over the place.

It's kind of funny, in a rather infuriating way.

What I really mean to get at is that I'm confused as to how she came up with the idea that ID has something to do with cells themselves being intelligent. I'm fairly sure the movie and the DI's website are probably pretty clear that they are referring to an outside designer most likely of a divine nature. o.O;

The Wedge document seems pretty clearly delineated to me, and she wouldn't even read the whole thing, even though it was published by the DI. XD