The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Expelled - Ben Stein has the crazies?
AJAlkaline40
__BANNED USERS regular
__BANNED USERS regular
"Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is a controversial documentary film which claims that educators and scientists are being persecuted for their belief that there is evidence of “design†in nature. It claims that “Big Science" allows no dissent from the scientific theory of evolution, and blames the theory for a range of alleged societal ills. Starring Ben Stein, the film is due to be released on April 18, 2008."
Wikipedia Article.
Also, something rather hilarious I saw on Fark.
I couldn't find any ongoing discussions about it, so I thought I would start one up.
I'm very surprised to learn that Intelligent Design is still being taken seriously by some people, I had thought that it died out not too long ago. Also, apparently Myers voluntarily did an interview for the film, which makes it all the more disturbing that he was completely barred from viewing it.
Wikipedia Article.
Also, something rather hilarious I saw on Fark.
I couldn't find any ongoing discussions about it, so I thought I would start one up.
I'm very surprised to learn that Intelligent Design is still being taken seriously by some people, I had thought that it died out not too long ago. Also, apparently Myers voluntarily did an interview for the film, which makes it all the more disturbing that he was completely barred from viewing it.
AJAlkaline40 on
0
This discussion has been closed.
Posts
Gaah. How do these people manage to get an education in the first place?
Also, the 'life is amazing' or whatever it was called thread made me believe that evolution of life is just so much cooler than intelligent design I can't believe people still think it's true, or should be taught whatever it is they're trying to do.
I'm not at all surprised at ID's tenacity. It's playing for people who aren't scientists, rather than actual biologists.
You'd think they'd be rejoicing at accomplishing their goal because, apparently, evolution is not being taught in the classroom.
I hope you meant voracity.
He probably thought he could win some of Ben Stein's money by proving to him that the theory of evolution is as factual as the theory of gravity.
I wonder how the edit job will look and what it'll make him come across as.
>.>
Meant "tenacity".
Damn these cities.
Share their grant money?
I dare Mathis to give me an application for intelligent design "theory" that would be deserving of a university grant.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
I don't know, "proving God"? I'm sure that has plenty of applications in supporting the campaigns of GOP candidates and bolstering church enrollment.
1) It's unfalsifiable.
2) It's untestable.
3) It does not make any predictions.
Yes, I am aware those three are all different variations of what could be summed up as one point, but it's important to point it out like that to show what a scientific theory does, and what ID does not.
Rock Band DLC | GW:OttW - arrcd | WLD - Thortar
I think local control of schools kind of fucks it up really badly though. I mean, as long as education is such a political mess compounded by ignorant local politicians, this is going to be a problem at the root.
Colleges aren't really where the problem is, and they're fortunately where a lot of the science is done. The problem is the people going into the colleges from public and private schools, and they're woefully unprepared.
Richard Dawkins is not going to fix that. He seems to have an almost Troskyite agenda.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
He was getting jealous of the Scientologists getting all the attention.
In what way? Insofar as he advocates perpetual opposition to religion?
He's not really the one I'd expect to "fix it" as he's only a scientist. I mean, he's an influential public figure too, but saying that "Richard Dawkins isn't going to fix education" is like saying that "Angelina Jolie isn't going to fix the U.N."
They're not fixers, they're advocates.
This isn't a recent thing, you realize.
I completely agree. It's just that wishing doesn't make it so and I'm not optimistic that a hard core anti-religion position is going to accomplish more than a stealthy and less ambitious attempt to educate the masses.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
Anyone who might be tempted to make the argument that Expelled might have a point about the suppression of unpopular ideas or any other redeeming feature whatsoever should read that article. There is nothing the least bit worthwhile about this movie. It is vile. Utterly vile.
BTW: While you are there check out the debunking of the "moon landing was a hoax" nutjobs
I'm assuming that that is the same article I read at bad astronomy. The irony is pretty delicious.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
There have been several this week as more information becomes available. This is the most recent and most thorough by far.
Indeed.
I think I'll be seeing this movie with my old biology and physics professors from college. Many guffaws will be had, especially when we go all MST3K on it.
There a bit of irony there as well. I think this movie will be seen by more Darwinians than Creationists.
― Marcus Aurelius
Path of Exile: themightypuck
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
I don't know, I think it's nice that there's a pretty vocal anti-religion group out there. It legitimizes the position of "no religion", and gives people pause before they make assumptions that everyone's one of the faithful. It's also an easy source of anti-dogma arguments for the casual observer. I certainly take umbrage with a few of the positions that are advocated (I don't like the staking out of the"atheist" position, I don't like the singular focus on religion), but ultimately, it's more information in the public eye on a reasonable position.
I don't see how that's not ultimately helpful. Fundamentalists have (and have had, and will continue to have) misconceptions about science whether scientists advocate anti-religion positions or not. I see the negative impact on those already beyond the pale as being negligible compared to the impact on those who are genuinely curious yet uneducated, which I think is the demographic to be concerned about in this context.
What's wrong with the term "Darwinian"?
I dunno, what do you call people who accept the theory of gravity? I'd rather fit in that group, I bet it has a cooler name, like Newtonians.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/irony
#5:
?
Because describing somebody that understands that evolution is a fact as a "Darwinist" or "Darwinian" is like, to bring up that classic example, somebody that understands that gravity is a fact a "Newtonian."
I mean, Newtonian physics and Darwinian evolution are real things, but one doesn't follow natural laws by choice.
Because one of the tactics used by the makers of this film is to try and inexorably link the science of evolution, which has progressed enormously in the last century+, with a single historical figure. This allows them to attack that figure instead of the science (which they can't).
Oh.
But, the use of the term is largely accurate, isn't it? I mean, he wasn't completely correct in everything and he didn't have everything nailed down, but "evolution by natural selection" is pretty much how that shit works according to any reasonable appraisal, and he pretty much came up with it first, so, okay.
And it's not like Darwin is hard to defend or anything. As far as I can tell, he was pretty much a prince of a dude.