Go Back  Honda-Tech - Honda Forum Discussion > Community Forums > General Discussion and Debate
Reload this Page >

Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom?

Notices
General Discussion and Debate Discuss, Debate, and Converse with other Honda-Tech members in a mature, intelligent manner.
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom?

 
Old 03-16-2008, 07:23 AM
  #1  
New User
Thread Starter
 
Hamil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hoover, al, USA
Posts: 546
Default Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom?

http://www.expelledthemovie.com/playground.php

"... Educators and scientists are being ridiculed, denied tenure and even fired – for the “crime” of merely believing that there might be evidence of “design” in nature, and that perhaps life is not just the result of accidental, random chance..."

I have always liked science in its pure form of seeking truth and relying on evidence. I have been disappointed throughout my life though as I studied to see even simple hypotheses presented as fact. Such as:



which I have seen throughout my life in various forms presented as a known fact instead of a developing, and most likely a very good, theory of how the inside of the earth is constructed. It seemed as if I was being told one thing (science is very deliberate about facts and evidence) and conditioned to accept another ( that theories were as good as fact) by the way they were presented so often just as facts would be.


Much has been made of the Church's "persecution" of scientists in the early years. While many of the more famous cases of this have been greatly exaggerated (Galileo for example), there was, and seemingly always will be resistance to scientific theories and hypotheses that differ from the accepted ideas of the day. Today seems only different because of who is in control.
Hamil is offline  
Old 03-16-2008, 03:02 PM
  #2  
Oh yeah I forgot I can edit my own title! Yay!
 
Bishop Don Shizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: 626, So Cal
Posts: 13,658
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

Oh good lord, Hamil's off on another one of his "persecuted Christians" bits. What next? Are you going to cry about the plight of the straight, white male in today's diverse nation?

Your rhetoric is almost as empty as your head.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hamil &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">http://www.expelledthemovie.com/playground.php

"... Educators and scientists are being ridiculed, denied tenure and even fired – for the “crime” of merely believing that there might be evidence of “design” in nature, and that perhaps life is not just the result of accidental, random chance..."

I have always liked science in its pure form of seeking truth and relying on evidence. I have been disappointed throughout my life though as I studied to see even simple hypotheses presented as fact. Such as:



which I have seen throughout my life in various forms presented as a known fact instead of a developing, and most likely a very good, theory of how the inside of the earth is constructed. It seemed as if I was being told one thing (science is very deliberate about facts and evidence) and conditioned to accept another ( that theories were as good as fact) by the way they were presented so often just as facts would be.</TD></TR></TABLE>

You're upset because it's presented as fact and doesn't have a disclaimer somewhere in the picture? You're an idiot.
Bishop Don Shizzle is offline  
Old 03-16-2008, 04:16 PM
  #3  
New User
Thread Starter
 
Hamil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hoover, al, USA
Posts: 546
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Bishop Don Shizzle &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Oh good lord, Hamil's off on another one of his "persecuted Christians" bits. What next? Are you going to cry about the plight of the straight, white male in today's diverse nation? </TD></TR></TABLE>

Nope. Why would I? Not many people I have ever met seem to think of me as white.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Bishop Don Shizzle &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Your rhetoric is almost as empty as your head.</TD></TR></TABLE>

That seems to be a constructive and intelligent response that furthers the discussion.


<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Bishop Don Shizzle &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
You're upset because it's presented as fact and doesn't have a disclaimer somewhere in the picture? You're an idiot. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Yes I am upset; it, along with many other theories, is presented as if it were absolute fact when it is just the best guess we can come up with. I am upset that many scientists seem to have forgotten theories are not themselves fact and that many universities have forgotten that being able to question and debate anything (even scientific theories that have become religions in themselves) is essential to an environment of learning.
Hamil is offline  
Old 03-16-2008, 06:28 PM
  #4  
Screw you guys, I'm... going... home.
 
tjbizzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: lovely Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,943
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hamil &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">http://www.expelledthemovie.com/playground.php

"... Educators and scientists are being ridiculed, denied tenure and even fired – for the “crime” of merely believing that there might be evidence of “design” in nature, and that perhaps life is not just the result of accidental, random chance..."

I have always liked science in its pure form of seeking truth and relying on evidence. I have been disappointed throughout my life though as I studied to see even simple hypotheses presented as fact. Such as:



which I have seen throughout my life in various forms presented as a known fact instead of a developing, and most likely a very good, theory of how the inside of the earth is constructed. It seemed as if I was being told one thing (science is very deliberate about facts and evidence) and conditioned to accept another ( that theories were as good as fact) by the way they were presented so often just as facts would be.</TD></TR></TABLE>
LMAO! All of the creationist/ID wingers are pissy because they can't get the scientific and academic communities to accept their religious beliefs as being on par with the rest of empirical science, so they got Ben Stein to help them make a movie whining about it? aaaahhhhhhhhahahahahahahaaaaa :breathes: ahahahahahahaaa oooohhhh ahaha heh :wipes eyes: ahhh. WOW! That is HI... LARIOUS! And seriously Hamil, do you honestly think that just because some of the most basic and widely accepted concepts of a mature science like earth science are presented without the caveat "this is only a theory", that that somehow means that every last minute detail of it is perfectly understood and unchangeable? Have some common sense and stop being a jackass, ok? Of COURSE the idea that the earth has a crust and an upper and lower mantle and an outer and inner core IS JUST A THEORY, but it is really really really really likely that the theory is right because it is based on literally millions of hours of observation, testing, and analysis. Are there really any biblical literalists who want to dispute any of that? None? I didn't think so.



<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hamil &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Much has been made of the Church's "persecution" of scientists in the early years. While many of the more famous cases of this have been greatly exaggerated (Galileo for example), there was, and seemingly always will be resistance to scientific theories and hypotheses that differ from the accepted ideas of the day. Today seems only different because of who is in control. </TD></TR></TABLE>
el oh el. What, exactly, has been exaggerated about Galileo being persecuted by the church? Was the exaggeration being made by an anti-christian librul hippy, or was it being made by a rapture right troll so they could have a nice easy strawman to knock down?

I really hope the Rapture Right keeps trying to push Intelligent Design onto educators and scientists as a "scientific theory" for decades to come. It'll be nice to have something so easy to smack down to make fun of them with.






Modified by tjbizzo at 9:38 AM 3/17/2008
tjbizzo is offline  
Old 03-16-2008, 07:14 PM
  #5  
New User
Thread Starter
 
Hamil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hoover, al, USA
Posts: 546
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tjbizzo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">do you honestly think that just because some of the most basic and widely accepted concepts of a mature science like earth science are presented without the caveat "this is only a theory", that that somehow means that every last minute detail of it is perfectly understood and unchangeable?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

My point is that when something is presented over and over as if it were known fact, rather than a theory (no matter how good a theory it is) it is being lazy, dishonest, or both. It would not make me think any less of the possibility that the earth has a liquid core and layers throughout if it was taught AS A THEORY. Maybe you were taught it was a theory from the beginning and I just had teachers and textbooks that were poor in that regard.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tjbizzo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Of COURSE the idea that the earth has a crust and an upper and lower mantle and an outer and inner core IS JUST A THEORY, but it is really really really really likely that the theory is right because it is based on literally millions of hours of observation, testing, and analysis. Are there really any biblical literalists who want to dispute any of that? None? I didn't think so.
</TD></TR></TABLE>

I never disputed it or suggested that it was a poor theory. I kind of like that theory actually, and feel it is an honest, best guess, based on the data we have. I was just using that theory because it is one of the ones that is most widely used in the manner I disagree with as not being scientifically honest.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tjbizzo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
el oh el. What, exactly, has been exaggerated about Galileo being persecuted by the church?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

I found a paper that reflects very well my contention about not only the Galileo subject but the contention that the scientific community is being intolerant of differing views now as it was then, and in the interest of time I would rather refer you to it than create a similar work myself:

Paper's intro-

"A review of the Galileo controversy reveals that a major reason for his difficulties was opposition from scientific colleagues, not the church. The church became involved primarily as a result of pressure from the academic community. This paper also concludes that reactions of today’s scientists to innovative ideas and unorthodox views in the area of origins indicates that not much has changed in the past three centuries. "

link to full work-

http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/...5.htm
Hamil is offline  
Old 03-16-2008, 07:22 PM
  #6  
Resident Vagabond
 
Kookz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 1,872
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hamil &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

My point is that when something is presented over and over as if it were known fact, rather than a theory (no matter how good a theory it is) it is being lazy, dishonest, or both.

</TD></TR></TABLE>So I presume that you feel the bible, then, is really just a book and that the chances of it being credible are incredibly slim?
Kookz is offline  
Old 03-16-2008, 07:40 PM
  #7  
Honda-Tech Member
 
chet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: 20% stronger
Posts: 4,441
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

this is always an interesting debate.

first, i believe 100% in evolution...and i think the fossil record confirms the theory beyond any reasonable doubt.

second, i think the responsible approach is introducing evolution as a theory and then discussing religious theories in theology classes. science is based upon tangible evidence...where as religion is based upon spirituality.

atheists just happen to be the most outspoken critics.

chet is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 06:39 AM
  #8  
Screw you guys, I'm... going... home.
 
tjbizzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: lovely Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,943
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham


(Note: I'm moving the Edit from my above post to a new post so it is more difficult for Hamil to miss. )



Edit: I forgot to add some more fun stuff...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...lowed
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is a controversial documentary film[1] 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.[2][3] Starring Ben Stein, the film is due to be released on April 18, 2008.[4]

The film promotes intelligent design — the idea that there is evidence of a supernatural intelligence in biological processes, a form of creationism.[5][6][7][8] The Discovery Institute which is at the center of promoting intelligent design, claims that it is a serious scientific research approach, and not creationism.[9][10] However, Stein claims that the film presents evidence that scientists do not have the freedom to work within the framework of believing there is a God.[11] What a reviewer describes as four or five examples of ordinary academic back-biting[12] are presented in the film. It alleges that they are evidence of widespread persecution of educators and scientists who promote intelligent design, and of a conspiracy to keep God out of the nation’s laboratories and classrooms.[2][3] Promotion of religion in American public schools violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and in the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial a United States federal court ruled that intelligent design is a religious view and not science, and so cannot be presented in science classes.[12][13]

The film blames the theory of evolution for a range of things the film portrays as societal ills, from Communism to Planned Parenthood, while failing to define or explain either evolution or its supposed alternative, intelligent design.[12] The evidence that this scientific theory is responsible for social problems does not exist.[14] Within the scientific community the theory of evolution is accepted by scientific consensus[15] and intelligent design is not considered to be valid science,[16][17][18] but is viewed as creationism.[19]

Although not yet released, the film is being promoted by Christian media[20] and by organizations affiliated with the Discovery Institute, the hub and source of the intelligent design movement.[21][22][23] As part of the Discovery Institute intelligent design campaigns claiming discrimination one of the institute's websites, Intelligent Design the Future, makes the claim that Expelled "reveals the stark truth: Darwinists have been conspiring to keep design out of classrooms, out of journals, and out of public discourse."[22] However, the Discovery Institute has been critical of some of the statements made in promotion of the film, such as American television personality and social commentator Bill O'Reilly equating intelligent design with creationism.[9]...

...

Claims presented in the film
The film alleges "that freedom of thought and freedom of inquiry have been expelled from publicly-funded high schools, universities and research institutions." It is claimed to show that educators and scientists who see evidence of a supernatural intelligence in biological processes have been unfairly ridiculed, presenting cases such as an application to be granted tenure being refused and a biology teacher having to leave the university, and describes this as due to a scientific conspiracy to keep God out of the nation’s laboratories and classrooms. The trailer shows Ben Stein stating that his intention is to unmask "people out there who want to keep science in a little box where it can’t possibly touch God."[2][3]

The press release for the film alleges that Stein discovers "an elitist scientific establishment that has traded in its skepticism for dogma" and allows no dissent from what it calls "Charles Darwin’s theory of random mutation and natural selection."[3] However, at this time, intelligent design is not a credible scientific challenge to the modern theory of evolution for explaining the complexity and diversity of life on earth. Contrary to charges that evolution is equivalent to atheism (or associated with atheism) by many promoters of intelligent design and creationism,[31] scientists commonly hold religious faiths,[2] while using the methodological naturalism of the scientific method, which looks to nature to answer questions about nature and ignores supernatural explanations which are by definition "not within the scope or abilities of science."[2] Although evolution is unequivocally accepted by the scientific community,[15][32] it is not because it is dogma, but because of the overwhelming evidence for evolution. The science community rejects intelligent design not because it is associated with God, but because it is not scientific[17] and instead is pseudoscience.[19] and therefore the overwhelming majority of the scientific community views intelligent design not as valid science,[33] but as creationism.[19] This position was upheld by the outcome of the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial, when a United States federal court ruled that intelligent design is not science, that it "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents",[34] and that claims by proponents have been "refuted in peer-reviewed research papers and has been rejected by the scientific community at large."[35]

The film implies that Darwin's theory of evolution was responsible for the Holocaust,[12][36][37] a part of an ongoing Discovery Institute campaign,[38] and a frequently-used[39][40] and oft-discredited creationist charge.[41][42] Stein has repeatedly claimed that evolution is responsible for the Holocaust in interviews promoting the film[43][44] and on his blog on the film's website.[45]

The film has been criticized for adding fuel to a media-driven manufactured controversy, demonizing "Big Science" and claiming nonexistent scientific credibility for intelligent design to lend plausibility to the argument that evolution is a matter of faith, rather than a large set of observations and data showing that evolution occurs, and a scientific theory explaining why evolution occurs.[46] ... </TD></TR></TABLE> That is just a few quotes but reading the whole thing is worth at least a few guffaws, especially the reviews and some of the promotional stuff.

http://www.expelledexposed.com/ Another good one. It has reviews and news coverage of Exposed. Much entertainment to be found there.

Lastly: Hamil, why is that ID is only proposed by conservative christians? If it were as scientifically based as you and others claim, then wouldn't it find a willing audience in people of other religions too? Hmmm, I wonder. Good luck answering that question.

tjbizzo is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 07:02 AM
  #9  
Junior Member
 
Mark sans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 428
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

This again? Ben Stein is such a hack to begin with, this doesn't really surprise me.

Mark sans is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 09:55 AM
  #10  
Honda-Tech Member
 
thaseint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ∞
Posts: 175
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

So by this logic we should also introduce gravity as a theory and have ancient science courses to introduce alternatives? Classical chemistry? Alchemy courses? Witch Detection 101? Medieval Medicine 1402?

There are very few things that are considered 'universal' or ‘law’ and the term 'theory' is often used to discredit science. The problem is that the majority of those who use the term against the science community have little to no scientific background and really don't understand that the term 'theory' is used for both fact and items that have been replicated thousands of times with little variance in result. The variance or likelihood that things may not apply if tested in a different setting (ie: what happens to gravity in a black hole?) is what keeps it from being considered a 'law'.

From a scientific standpoint, religion cannot be considered a theory because it cannot be tested for fallibility. At best it could only be considered a hypothesis and even at that it fails based on its own inherent inability to be tested, lack of evidence and intangible arguments.

In the science community the term most ID'ers are likely confusing 'theory' with is the word 'hypothetical'. The notion of God is nothing that could be tested in a lab, mathematics or by evidence, therefore has no place as an 'alternative' in a scientific setting and is nothing that could even be remotely considered 'scientific'.

Now if you want to create religious based science classes, that's fine, just don't start moaning if the person who graduated with a degree in "Archaic Chemistry" or "Classical Biology" gets laughed at by HR departments or research institutions. You’d probably have a hard time even finding a self-respective professor who would be willing to cover the idea of religion with regards to science.

Let's face it...there isn't a human being on the planet that isn't aware of religion. Religion should be an individual and family responsibility...not academia. People are more than welcome to introduce religious ideas in a science class; but don't be surprised if that person gets laughed out of the room. If a scientist was to publish a paper that suggested that suggests even half of what religion offers up, there wouldn't be a single scientific mind that would take them seriously.
thaseint is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 10:31 AM
  #11  
Junior Member
 
Jedimiah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: The Satellite of Love, TX
Posts: 977
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Mark sans &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">This again? Ben Stein is such a hack to begin with, this doesn't really surprise me.

</TD></TR></TABLE>

LMFAO

You know there is a creationist's museum in KY that shows a dinosaur and a saddle, you know the way they used to have when we rode them. LOL
Jedimiah is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 10:37 AM
  #12  
New User
Thread Starter
 
Hamil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hoover, al, USA
Posts: 546
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Kookz &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">So I presume that you feel the bible, then, is really just a book and that the chances of it being credible are incredibly slim?</TD></TR></TABLE>

I think the Bible is not a scientific work as it relates to "proving" anything in a scientific manner. I never suggested anything like that.

As far as it being an ancient work of literature, by literary standards it's chances of being credible are very good.

Nice straw man argument with no basis for it though. I love this zero tolerance thing this forum has going so let me participate:

So I presume you think the Bible is an authoritative work and that Jesus is God.
Hamil is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 10:38 AM
  #13  
New User
Thread Starter
 
Hamil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hoover, al, USA
Posts: 546
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tjbizzo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Quote, originally posted by tjbizzo »

el oh el. What, exactly, has been exaggerated about Galileo being persecuted by the church?

</TD></TR></TABLE>

I found a paper that reflects very well my contention about not only the Galileo subject but the contention that the scientific community is being intolerant of differing views now as it was then, and in the interest of time I would rather refer you to it than create a similar work myself:

Paper's intro-

"A review of the Galileo controversy reveals that a major reason for his difficulties was opposition from scientific colleagues, not the church. The church became involved primarily as a result of pressure from the academic community. This paper also concludes that reactions of today’s scientists to innovative ideas and unorthodox views in the area of origins indicates that not much has changed in the past three centuries. "

link to full work-

http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/...5.htm
Hamil is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 11:04 AM
  #14  
New User
Thread Starter
 
Hamil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hoover, al, USA
Posts: 546
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by thaseint &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
There are very few things that are considered 'universal' or ‘law’ and the term 'theory' is often used to discredit science. The problem is that the majority of those who use the term against the science community have little to no scientific background and really don't understand that the term 'theory' is used for both fact and items that have been replicated thousands of times with little variance in result. The variance or likelihood that things may not apply if tested in a different setting (ie: what happens to gravity in a black hole?) is what keeps it from being considered a 'law'.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Maybe I missed it but I have yet to see any theory of the origin of life or evolution (of course macro) be replicated any number of times without variance in result.

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by thaseint &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
From a scientific standpoint, religion cannot be considered a theory because it cannot be tested for fallibility. At best it could only be considered a hypothesis and even at that it fails based on its own inherent inability to be tested, lack of evidence and intangible arguments.</TD></TR></TABLE>

I don't disagree with you here, nor have I suggested otherwise.


The problem I see is that the scientific community seems to be ruling out scientific possibilities without properly testing them solely on them being endorsed by a religion or proposed by a scientist who is a member of a religion. It shouldn't matter who proposes a theory it should be given the same consideration based on science.

The fly in the ointment is money. While scientists would like to believe they live in a world where they can be objective regardless of who is funding them or how they get funded it just seldom works that way.

Just as it was in the middle ages, and has always been, the group in the majority is not willing that there be an open discourse.
Hamil is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 11:30 AM
  #15  
Screw you guys, I'm... going... home.
 
tjbizzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: lovely Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,943
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hamil &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">I found a paper that reflects very well my contention about not only the Galileo subject but the contention that the scientific community is being intolerant of differing views now as it was then, and in the interest of time I would rather refer you to it than create a similar work myself:

Paper's intro-

"A review of the Galileo controversy reveals that a major reason for his difficulties was opposition from scientific colleagues, not the church. The church became involved primarily as a result of pressure from the academic community. This paper also concludes that reactions of today’s scientists to innovative ideas and unorthodox views in the area of origins indicates that not much has changed in the past three centuries. "

link to full work-

http://www.adam.com.au/bstett/...5.htm</TD></TR></TABLE>
Um, why are you answering the exact same question a second time with the exact same answer? How about if you answer the last question I asked you in my SECOND post? Again, good luck with that.

And Hamil, I get it! No really, I do. You think that unless EVERYTHING that science discusses is prefaced by the statement "This is only a theory, but... " then it must be stating it as an immutable universal FACT. Fine, whatever. I think such an opinion is idiotic, but it's your right to have it.

tjbizzo is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 12:41 PM
  #16  
Honda-Tech Member
 
thaseint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ∞
Posts: 175
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

Originally Posted by Hamil

Maybe I missed it but I have yet to see any theory of the origin of life or evolution (of course macro) be replicated any number of times without variance in result.
It’s all around you and in fact evolution can actually be observed in the lab. You can exam DNA that suggests evolutionary lineages between species. Also various proteins or DNA markers indicate that there are in fact common lineages. The mechanisms of various proteins or biochemical reactions are VERY similar and if not similar they have vestigial portions of code or structure that show commonality. These sorts of items can be seen even in the fossil record, various bacteria that have been around for millions of years and in every form of life on earth. You can find some of the same code and proteins in mice that you find in you...hence why the mouse model is used in the majority of testing.

Evolution is VERY slow and the majority of it happens on a subtle timeline. Let me give you a perfect example of evolution happening on a macro scale. The human eye…how long do you think an animal would last with bad vision? Not very long…hence without corrected vision we would have been at a huge disadvantage. The reason why myopic humans still exists is due to the fact that we remained on top and the formation of societies that allowed afflicted individuals to flourish despite disabilities. Have you ever wondered why you don’t see many large cats with bad vision? Let’s take a lion for instance…if a lion was born with bad vision, guess what? He’s probably going to have a lot of trouble capturing food and/or finding a mate, thus he would likely die before he had a chance to breed. Supposing humans had no way of correcting their vision, we did not form societies and we relied on hunting for food…you might not see a whole lot of humans with bad vision and if you did they wouldn’t survive for very long. This is of course a very overly simplified illustration and there is a lot more that goes into this; but it gives you an idea of how evolution can be seen.

You may argue then that why don't we see anything between apes and humans? The answer is simple really...they don't exist and exist only in fossil record. Why? Because various elements were weeded out overtime due to pressures of the environment. There was really no need to continue generations of a variant species that were at a disadvantage, as for obvious reasons those who could speak were more sexually appealing (or necessary). The ability to walk up right is a good example of where apes and humans diverged. By allowing for the proper development of vocal structure due to the unrestricting of the neck and development of muscle to support the neck in an upright potion, which ultimately led to complex invention and society. Therefore humanoid like apes were at a disadvantage when it was more advantageous for species to have the ability to speak. Of course another oversimplified example; but gives you the gist of what is at the heart of evolution.

The meat of evolution is NOT about proving the origins of life; but rather than change of life over time. Scientists have hypothesized and in fact, a great deal of research has gone into explaining how life came to be; but just saying an omnipotent being created life leaves no room for argument or consistent repeatability. That is NOT science and has no place in explaining the origins of life.

If you’d like to know more…do some real research on your own. The process of evolution is VERY fascinating and there is a wealth of information out there that might be able to educate you on the subject.


Originally Posted by Hamil
I don't disagree with you here, nor have I suggested otherwise.


The problem I see is that the scientific community seems to be ruling out scientific possibilities without properly testing them solely on them being endorsed by a religion or proposed by a scientist who is a member of a religion. It shouldn't matter who proposes a theory it should be given the same consideration based on science.

The fly in the ointment is money. While scientists would like to believe they live in a world where they can be objective regardless of who is funding them or how they get funded it just seldom works that way.

Just as it was in the middle ages, and has always been, the group in the majority is not willing that there be an open discourse.
The problem is that there is NO evidence or testability of a God or creator. Like I said, a theory can be tested. How can you test something that is 'infallible' and unquestionable? Go ahead and prove me wrong that Santa or the Easter bunny does not exist. Religion has no place in science because it cannot be tested under ANY circumstances. We may be able to find fossil evidence of things or people that were in the Bible, Quran or any other holy text; but that only proves history, not the underlying premise of the holy texts that suggest the presence of an omnipotent being.

ID proponents are more than free to perform whatever research they want and considering they just opened that ID museum...I'm sure there are people out there who would be willing to fund their research. In fact I know there is research out there; but the problem is that nearly anything an ID 'scientist' has put forward has been debunked and lacks the proper follow-through of the scientific method to provide any merit to the results. Repeatability is key to any scientific theory and since I have yet to read of any valid research out there that has been both peer reviewed or retested to provide anything but the contrary, I as a scientist have no choice but to disbelieve.

Also don't kid yourself, there are A LOT of researchers that identify with a religion, I actually work and have worked with plenty of them.
thaseint is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 04:35 PM
  #17  
New User
Thread Starter
 
Hamil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hoover, al, USA
Posts: 546
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham


Originally Posted by thaseint
Evolution is VERY slow and the majority of it happens on a subtle timeline. Let me give you a perfect example of evolution happening on a macro scale. The human eye…how long do you think an animal would last with bad vision? Not very long…hence without corrected vision we would have been at a huge disadvantage. The reason why myopic humans still exists is due to the fact that we remained on top and the formation of societies that allowed afflicted individuals to flourish despite disabilities. Have you ever wondered why you don’t see many large cats with bad vision? Let’s take a lion for instance…if a lion was born with bad vision, guess what? He’s probably going to have a lot of trouble capturing food and/or finding a mate, thus he would likely die before he had a chance to breed. Supposing humans had no way of correcting their vision, we did not form societies and we relied on hunting for food…you might not see a whole lot of humans with bad vision and if you did they wouldn’t survive for very long. This is of course a very overly simplified illustration and there is a lot more that goes into this; but it gives you an idea of how evolution can be seen.
No pun intended on the how evolution can be "seen" right?

Seriously is it not also possible that there were 2 genetically perfect people and as we have bred our code gets errors in it (like bad vision)? Is that not another (overly simplified and shortened) illustration to explain the same thing?

Originally Posted by thaseint
The meat of evolution is NOT about proving the origins of life; but rather than change of life over time. Scientists have hypothesized and in fact, a great deal of research has gone into explaining how life came to be; but just saying an omnipotent being created life leaves no room for argument or consistent repeatability. That is NOT science and has no place in explaining the origins of life.
Then neither does saying it just exploded out of nothing or lightning and primordial soup made it. There has been no consistent repeatability there either. I don't fairly expect science to be able to explain much of the past, in fact, I believe too much has been made of doing so, but I do expect a little more responsibility and restraint when teaching many things that are simply not known (like those bacteria you believe have been around for millions of years) but are just our best guesses.

Originally Posted by thaseint
Also don't kid yourself, there are A LOT of researchers that identify with a religion, I actually work and have worked with plenty of them.
I know there are, my point was that it seems when they stray from the accepted they come under more intense scrutiny because of their association with religion. Which, I believe, is the point of the movie.

Originally Posted by thaseint
I as a scientist have no choice but to disbelieve.
I respect that, really.


Originally Posted by thaseint
If you’d like to know more…do some real research on your own. The process of evolution is VERY fascinating and there is a wealth of information out there that might be able to educate you on the subject.
What I don't like is the insinuation that because I (or others) do not believe evolution is how we have the animal diversity we do we are somehow not educated enough, or we are just being confused by religion. I am not saying you are doing that, you have been rather good in this discussion and I appreciate that, but it does happen a lot.

I have read up on this subject, and while many others have scoffed at my layman's research (mainly because I have not come to the same conclusion they do) I really have read many things on evolution, some very compelling and fascinating. I just do not think the case has been made to my satisfaction. That's really it when it comes down to it. I can weigh for myself what I believe and what I do not. I do not think any less of you because you do believe evolution is a good theory. That is where we have to get to before any real progress on open and honest discussion can be made. I think there are many people who are not willing to examine this from both sides who otherwise would be if there was less of the arrogant "I own the truth and you are a retard" from both camps.

Hamil is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 04:39 PM
  #18  
Resident Vagabond
 
Kookz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 1,872
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hamil &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I think the Bible is not a scientific work as it relates to "proving" anything in a scientific manner. I never suggested anything like that.

As far as it being an ancient work of literature, by literary standards it's chances of being credible are very good.

Nice straw man argument with no basis for it though. I love this zero tolerance thing this forum has going so let me participate:

So I presume you think the Bible is an authoritative work and that Jesus is God. </TD></TR></TABLE>You're right, perhaps that was a bit of a strawman. However, someone who feels that evolution is not presented with enough emphasis on "theory" and yet believes in an ancient holy book is simply irrational.

I think the Bible is an ancient book, and that is all.
Kookz is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 05:34 PM
  #19  
Screw you guys, I'm... going... home.
 
tjbizzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: lovely Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,943
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tjbizzo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Lastly: Hamil, why is that ID is only proposed by conservative christians? If it were as scientifically based as you and others claim, then wouldn't it find a willing audience in people of other religions too? Hmmm, I wonder. Good luck answering that question. </TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tjbizzo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote"> How about if you answer the last question I asked you in my SECOND post? Again, good luck with that. </TD></TR></TABLE>
Still.... wait.... ing! Take more time if you need to, I'm sure it's a difficult question to answer.

tjbizzo is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 05:55 PM
  #20  
New User
Thread Starter
 
Hamil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hoover, al, USA
Posts: 546
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tjbizzo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">\
Lastly: Hamil, why is that ID is only proposed by conservative christians?
</TD></TR></TABLE>

It's not; I didn't have to do too much research to know that there are non-Christians, even agnostics who believe the earth was designed by an Intelligent being. As smart as you are I'm sure you can find them also. That question either reveals your ignorance about those who propose it or your laziness not to research enough to know that it is false.

Hamil is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 07:18 PM
  #21  
86%
 
GoodEyeSniper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: the Desolation of Smaug
Posts: 2,200
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

Do you have red, dry eyes?
GoodEyeSniper is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 07:48 PM
  #22  
Screw you guys, I'm... going... home.
 
tjbizzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: lovely Raleigh, NC
Posts: 2,943
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Hamil &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">It's not; I didn't have to do too much research to know that there are non-Christians, even agnostics who believe the earth was designed by an Intelligent being. As smart as you are I'm sure you can find them also. That question either reveals your ignorance about those who propose it or your laziness not to research enough to know that it is false.

</TD></TR></TABLE>
Oh, I'm sure they exist to *some* extent, just not in any significant numbers. THAT was my point. Non-christians do exist among Intelligent Design proponents, in the same way that needles exist in haystacks, or perhaps in the way that African American women exist among congressional Republicans. You know they're there, but they're hard to find.

tjbizzo is offline  
Old 03-17-2008, 10:06 PM
  #23  
Oh yeah I forgot I can edit my own title! Yay!
 
Bishop Don Shizzle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: 626, So Cal
Posts: 13,658
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by tjbizzo &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Oh, I'm sure they exist to *some* extent, just not in any significant numbers. THAT was my point. Non-christians do exist among Intelligent Design proponents, in the same way that needles exist in haystacks, or perhaps in the way that African American women exist among congressional Republicans. You know they're there, but they're hard to find.

</TD></TR></TABLE>

His whole rant centers on the fact that science isn't presented as theory and more so as fact these days, which ties in with his need to get ID (something you can hardly consider scientific) accepted as a legitimate scientific theory. It's BS from start to finish.
Bishop Don Shizzle is offline  
Old 03-18-2008, 03:52 AM
  #24  
Honda-Tech Member
 
Duckz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Bagram Air Field
Posts: 4,593
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

intelligent design is a shoddy cover for creationism and can not be taught in public school because it is a religious doctrine and not based on science, see Kitzmiller v Dover Area School District (where a bush appointed judge made the ruling).

and who are these great minds that are being repressed? in order to make the convoluted conclusions that ID does you have to dismiss the entire scientific method... no **** your paper isn't getting published in Nature! We had an ID biology professor who's contract was not renewed at GMU, not because she was a religious nut but because she was an abusive professor and failed BIOLOGY students who challenged her on evolution.
Duckz is offline  
Old 03-19-2008, 09:38 AM
  #25  
Honda-Tech Member
 
thaseint's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ∞
Posts: 175
Default Re: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom? (Ham

Originally Posted by Hamil
No pun intended on the how evolution can be "seen" right?

Seriously is it not also possible that there were 2 genetically perfect people and as we have bred our code gets errors in it (like bad vision)? Is that not another (overly simplified and shortened) illustration to explain the same thing?
Absolutely and our DNA can have issues with coding that create abnormalities. In fact that is how some 'selection' occurs. With diversity comes neutrality, disaster or survival. The majority of mutations found in DNA do not result in anything. In fact most every form of life on the planet has some degree of mutation; however it is often never expressed or insignificant in terms of survival. Also don't consider all mutations bad, a very small percent of mutations are actually good. It's just the bad mutations that garner our attention, as they are most obvious since they often involve death. Positive mutations on the other hand are VERY rare, less likely to occur due to the nature of protein folding that would lead to x-benefit and in reality would be hard to determine as they are likely to become muted in nature.

In nature the notion of 'perfection' does not exist as the environment for which an organism lives only dictates ‘perfection’. Last year I read a good book on sex and evolution-- "The Red Queen: Sex and the Evolution of Human Nature". This book better explains the idea of necessity of diversity of organisms and I'd highly recommend it as a good read.


Originally Posted by Hamil
Then neither does saying it just exploded out of nothing or lightning and primordial soup made it. There has been no consistent repeatability there either. I don't fairly expect science to be able to explain much of the past, in fact, I believe too much has been made of doing so, but I do expect a little more responsibility and restraint when teaching many things that are simply not known (like those bacteria you believe have been around for millions of years) but are just our best guesses.
Again...evolution is not about explaining the origins of life...there are plenty of hypotheses out there that claim to have an answer. Evolution is about explaining the changes in life over time. The likelihood that an omnipotent being defies the laws of even hypothetical physics and thus could not be considered a valid hypothesis, as it cannot even be tested. At the very least the scientific hypothesis such as the primordial soup theory has the ability to be tested in a lab or at least theoretically.

The idea of 'creationism' cannot be scientifically tested, as you cannot prove a negative. Again this goes back to the premise that I would like someone to prove that the Easter bunny does not exist. It can't be done because there is nothing to start from other than traditional stories or one's idea of a bunny that lays eggs. The idea is scientifically flawed on the basis that no analytical research can be done.

Originally Posted by Hamil
What I don't like is the insinuation that because I (or others) do not believe evolution is how we have the animal diversity we do we are somehow not educated enough, or we are just being confused by religion. I am not saying you are doing that, you have been rather good in this discussion and I appreciate that, but it does happen a lot.
You are certainly free to believe as you wish; however like my previous paragraph, proving or presenting a scientific hypothesis for the existence of an omnipotent being is flawed in the sense that it can only be debated on a philosophical level, rather than a scientific level.

This is much like Descartes who first proposed the "Brain in a vat" idea (an idea that was, centuries later, applied in the movie The Matrix). You cannot examine because you cannot test and there is no way to apply the scientific method to attempt and reach a conclusion of a philosophical debate. So why not teach the "Brain in a vat" idea? In my mind it is just as 'rationale' as the concept of God...in fact it doesn't stray to far as we are to assume that someone is tending to the brains (ie: an omnipotent being).


Originally Posted by Hamil
I have read up on this subject, and while many others have scoffed at my layman's research (mainly because I have not come to the same conclusion they do) I really have read many things on evolution, some very compelling and fascinating. I just do not think the case has been made to my satisfaction. That's really it when it comes down to it. I can weigh for myself what I believe and what I do not. I do not think any less of you because you do believe evolution is a good theory. That is where we have to get to before any real progress on open and honest discussion can be made. I think there are many people who are not willing to examine this from both sides who otherwise would be if there was less of the arrogant "I own the truth and you are a retard" from both camps.
You are free to present any scientific material you wish to the debate. The problem is that I (or any other scientific mind) have yet to read any real scientific material on the subject because the concept of God is purely philosophical. I have read plenty of philosophy books or papers that propose all sorts of ideas that explain what is real, what is life and metaphysics.

It's not about scientists having something against religion or getting funding from some crazy left wing conspiracy organization; but rather the peer review process of scientific research. And if a scientists was to try and propose a theory on the basis of philosophical grounds they would be laughed at...not because it doesn't fit the 'mold'; but rather because there is no way to prove something exists when there is no hard evidence linking an omnipotent being to the creation of the universe or life itself.

If there were anywhere where the idea of God should be debated it would be in a Philosophy class...not a science class. During undergraduate I took 3 philosophy courses and all of them covered the idea of an omnipotent being as the creator of the universe. As a scientist I had no problem with this as there was no claim to theory or even hypothesis; but rather only idea.

The last thing we want to do is bridge the gap between science and philosophy. This is something that would put is back in the Middle Ages mindset. While the two can be used interchangeably to a very small degree to explain human rights and what is considered humane with respect to legal matters (ie: human subject research), you could not present philosophical ideas as scientific ideas, since the two are completely different realms of thinking.


Modified by thaseint at 2:01 PM 3/19/2008
thaseint is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: Expelled! New Movie by Ben Stein coming out soon. Are Atheists’ hijacking academic freedom?


Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.