Thunderfoot > Ben Stein

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: five40

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: five40
Who cares? Why do people on these forums get all fussy over this crap? Can't you just move along and say "whatever"? You can prove the big bang just about as good as you can prove God. Where did all the matter for the big bang come from...who knows? Where did God come from...who knows? I just don't get it why someone is "stupid" and can longer be liked because they don't sit and agree with a bunch of theories that for all we know are wrong. Where are the Homo Habilis's that were part of our evolution? They just went up and vanished? A Homo Habilis popped out a Homo Erectus one day and all the Homo Habilis's exploded? Or if it was a slow evolution, how come there aren't some half man/half apes still coming around? Guess what...it doesn't matter so attacking/disliking someone over evolution/creation is stupid.

It's a big deal because religion doesn't belong in the science classroom. Not to mention your post demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of what evolution is.

I don't understand what evolution is? Yeah ok. Keep up THE FIGHT!!!!! Don't you get the point that the big bang can't be proven just like God can't be proven. Lets take that out of the classrooms as well since it can't be proven.

Evolution has nothing to do with the cosmology. Incidentally, the evidence points to the existence of a singularity in our distant past, some 13 to 15 billion years ago. There isn't any similar evidence that points to the existence of any gods. Trying to put them on the same evidential level is, frankly, ignorant.

 

[Mr Pepper]

Maybe we are getting on to something here. If ID is not science, and therefore not fit for the classroom. Are we so sure evolution does not fall by the same standard of scrutiny?

I would encourage those who are willing to hear reason to take a look at this article.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Mr Pepper
Maybe we are getting on to something here. If ID is not science, and therefore not fit for the classroom. Are we so sure evolution does not fall by the same standard of scrutiny?

I would encourage those who are willing to hear reason to take a look at this article.

From the article:

"The fact is that evolutionists believe in evolution because they want to. It is
their desire at all costs to explain the origin of everything without a Creator.
Evolutionism is thus intrinsically an atheistic religion."

Since evolution makes no claim whatever as to the existence or non-existence of a deity, the rest of the article isn't worth reading since the author demonstrates a clear lack of understanding on what evolution purports to explain.

 

[rbV5]

Originally posted by: Mr Pepper
Maybe we are getting on to something here. If ID is not science, and therefore not fit for the classroom. Are we so sure evolution does not fall by the same standard of scrutiny?

I would encourage those who are willing to hear reason to take a look at this article.

ID is fit for the classroom just as any religious studies, or perhaps philosophy. it doesn't belong in the Science department because it is not Science nor Science's peer.

 

[Enig101]

Originally posted by: Mr Pepper
Maybe we are getting on to something here. If ID is not science, and therefore not fit for the classroom. Are we so sure evolution does not fall by the same standard of scrutiny?

I would encourage those who are willing to hear reason to take a look at this article.

Short answer:

YES.

If evolution is not science then nothing is. The evidence is stupidly overwhelming.

 

[Mr Pepper]

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: Mr Pepper
Maybe we are getting on to something here. If ID is not science, and therefore not fit for the classroom. Are we so sure evolution does not fall by the same standard of scrutiny?

I would encourage those who are willing to hear reason to take a look at this article.

From the article:

"The fact is that evolutionists believe in evolution because they want to. It is
their desire at all costs to explain the origin of everything without a Creator.
Evolutionism is thus intrinsically an atheistic religion."

Since evolution makes no claim whatever as to the existence or non-existence of a deity, the rest of the article isn't worth reading since the author demonstrates a clear lack of understanding on what evolution purports to explain.

In that case you missed the summery of the article. Let me help you out.

"In closing this summary of the scientific case against evolution (and, therefore,
for creation), the reader is reminded again that all quotations in the article are from
doctrinaire evolutionists. No Bible references are included, and no statements by
creationists. The evolutionists themselves, to all intents and purposes have shown
that evolutionism is not science, but religious faith in atheism.,"

 

[five40]

Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt

Originally posted by: five40

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: five40
Who cares? Why do people on these forums get all fussy over this crap? Can't you just move along and say "whatever"? You can prove the big bang just about as good as you can prove God. Where did all the matter for the big bang come from...who knows? Where did God come from...who knows? I just don't get it why someone is "stupid" and can longer be liked because they don't sit and agree with a bunch of theories that for all we know are wrong. Where are the Homo Habilis's that were part of our evolution? They just went up and vanished? A Homo Habilis popped out a Homo Erectus one day and all the Homo Habilis's exploded? Or if it was a slow evolution, how come there aren't some half man/half apes still coming around? Guess what...it doesn't matter so attacking/disliking someone over evolution/creation is stupid.

It's a big deal because religion doesn't belong in the science classroom. Not to mention your post demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of what evolution is.

I don't understand what evolution is? Yeah ok. Keep up THE FIGHT!!!!! Don't you get the point that the big bang can't be proven just like God can't be proven. Lets take that out of the classrooms as well since it can't be proven.

Evolution has nothing to do with the cosmology. Incidentally, the evidence points to the existence of a singularity in our distant past, some 13 to 15 billion years ago. There isn't any similar evidence that points to the existence of any gods. Trying to put them on the same evidential level is, frankly, ignorant.

And where did the singularity come from? Why think 9 steps when there is still 10 steps?

 

[Enig101]

Originally posted by: Mr Pepper

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: Mr Pepper
Maybe we are getting on to something here. If ID is not science, and therefore not fit for the classroom. Are we so sure evolution does not fall by the same standard of scrutiny?

I would encourage those who are willing to hear reason to take a look at this article.

From the article:

"The fact is that evolutionists believe in evolution because they want to. It is
their desire at all costs to explain the origin of everything without a Creator.
Evolutionism is thus intrinsically an atheistic religion."

Since evolution makes no claim whatever as to the existence or non-existence of a deity, the rest of the article isn't worth reading since the author demonstrates a clear lack of understanding on what evolution purports to explain.

In that case you missed the summery of the article. Let me help you out.

"In closing this summary of the scientific case against evolution (and, therefore,
for creation), the reader is reminded again that all quotations in the article are from
doctrinaire evolutionists. No Bible references are included, and no statements by
creationists. The evolutionists themselves, to all intents and purposes have shown
that evolutionism is not science, but religious faith in atheism.,"

I would like to point out that reading the first page almost every statement is false, an opinion, or assumed. None of them are backed up at all. We are supposed to take their word for it?

I could take it bit by bit, but really I don't feel like it. If you want to believe that evolution is flawed, I don't think I can convince you otherwise, except to say that I encourage you to actually learn about it.

 

[Enig101]

Originally posted by: five40
And where did the singularity come from? Why think 9 steps when there is still 10 steps?

It is irrelevant. The fact is the evidence shows that the singularity was there, and thus there was a "Big Bang".

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: five40

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: five40
Who cares? Why do people on these forums get all fussy over this crap? Can't you just move along and say "whatever"? You can prove the big bang just about as good as you can prove God. Where did all the matter for the big bang come from...who knows? Where did God come from...who knows? I just don't get it why someone is "stupid" and can longer be liked because they don't sit and agree with a bunch of theories that for all we know are wrong. Where are the Homo Habilis's that were part of our evolution? They just went up and vanished? A Homo Habilis popped out a Homo Erectus one day and all the Homo Habilis's exploded? Or if it was a slow evolution, how come there aren't some half man/half apes still coming around? Guess what...it doesn't matter so attacking/disliking someone over evolution/creation is stupid.

It's a big deal because religion doesn't belong in the science classroom. Not to mention your post demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of what evolution is.

I don't understand what evolution is? Yeah ok. Keep up THE FIGHT!!!!! Don't you get the point that the big bang can't be proven just like God can't be proven. Lets take that out of the classrooms as well since it can't be proven.

First, you demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of any of the underlying principles in evolution in your little tirade up there. Second, you mistake the Big Bang for evolution. It isn't. Third, your statement that the Big Bang can't be proven like God can't be proven is completely preposterous. The Big Bang is a scientific theory. God is not. Evidence for the Big Bang exists (cosmic background radiation, the rate at which galaxies are moving apart, and the research done at particle accelerators, to name a few). There is no evidence that God exists.

I'll say it again, religious dogma does not belong in the science classroom. What belongs there are facts, like evolution. The reason there is an argument about this is because a bunch of Christians think it's a good idea to teach their story of how we got here next to scientific fact. We should leave it in the storybooks - right to the thousands of other creation stories that exist. The closest the Christian story of creation should get to a textbook is here: http://www.amazon.com/Beginnin...&qid=1208550067&sr=8-1

 

[NikolaeVarius]

Originally posted by: five40

Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt

Originally posted by: five40

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: five40
Who cares? Why do people on these forums get all fussy over this crap? Can't you just move along and say "whatever"? You can prove the big bang just about as good as you can prove God. Where did all the matter for the big bang come from...who knows? Where did God come from...who knows? I just don't get it why someone is "stupid" and can longer be liked because they don't sit and agree with a bunch of theories that for all we know are wrong. Where are the Homo Habilis's that were part of our evolution? They just went up and vanished? A Homo Habilis popped out a Homo Erectus one day and all the Homo Habilis's exploded? Or if it was a slow evolution, how come there aren't some half man/half apes still coming around? Guess what...it doesn't matter so attacking/disliking someone over evolution/creation is stupid.

It's a big deal because religion doesn't belong in the science classroom. Not to mention your post demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of what evolution is.

I don't understand what evolution is? Yeah ok. Keep up THE FIGHT!!!!! Don't you get the point that the big bang can't be proven just like God can't be proven. Lets take that out of the classrooms as well since it can't be proven.

Evolution has nothing to do with the cosmology. Incidentally, the evidence points to the existence of a singularity in our distant past, some 13 to 15 billion years ago. There isn't any similar evidence that points to the existence of any gods. Trying to put them on the same evidential level is, frankly, ignorant.

And where did the singularity come from? Why think 9 steps when there is still 10 steps?

Why does there NEED to be a beginning? What if the universe is a cycle of Big Bangs and Big crunches with no beginning?

 

[five40]

Science simply sees our world around us as "the facts" and then attempts to draw conclusions that support "the facts". Observation and discovery evolve our conclusions...again based on "the facts". In your ignorance you can claim that the Big Bang cannot be proven, or ask where a "possible" direct human ancestor that existed millions of years ago is "today", but the fact is, Science attempts to explain those things using observation and discovery, and someday may very well be able to "prove" the Big Bang theory (or disprove), and provide a very accurate timeline of events that culminated in the evolution of todays humans from our direct and perhaps indirect ancestors rather than from the "hand of God" or other "magical" "explanations"

http://www.big-bang-theory.com/

"Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity. Where did it come from? We don't know. Why did it appear? We don't know."

What we know is as true as flying spaghetti monsters. What's the point of being such a zealot when we really don't know?

 

[five40]

Originally posted by: tenshodo13

Originally posted by: five40

Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt

Originally posted by: five40

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: five40
Who cares? Why do people on these forums get all fussy over this crap? Can't you just move along and say "whatever"? You can prove the big bang just about as good as you can prove God. Where did all the matter for the big bang come from...who knows? Where did God come from...who knows? I just don't get it why someone is "stupid" and can longer be liked because they don't sit and agree with a bunch of theories that for all we know are wrong. Where are the Homo Habilis's that were part of our evolution? They just went up and vanished? A Homo Habilis popped out a Homo Erectus one day and all the Homo Habilis's exploded? Or if it was a slow evolution, how come there aren't some half man/half apes still coming around? Guess what...it doesn't matter so attacking/disliking someone over evolution/creation is stupid.

It's a big deal because religion doesn't belong in the science classroom. Not to mention your post demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of what evolution is.

I don't understand what evolution is? Yeah ok. Keep up THE FIGHT!!!!! Don't you get the point that the big bang can't be proven just like God can't be proven. Lets take that out of the classrooms as well since it can't be proven.

Evolution has nothing to do with the cosmology. Incidentally, the evidence points to the existence of a singularity in our distant past, some 13 to 15 billion years ago. There isn't any similar evidence that points to the existence of any gods. Trying to put them on the same evidential level is, frankly, ignorant.

And where did the singularity come from? Why think 9 steps when there is still 10 steps?

Why does there NEED to be a beginning? What if the universe is a cycle of Big Bangs and Big crunches with no beginning?

There has to be a beginning. That same logic can then be applied to gods. gods don't have beginnings/ends. How can you be scientific about things and just say "lets just ignore the beginning"?

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Originally posted by: five40

Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt
Evolution has nothing to do with the cosmology. Incidentally, the evidence points to the existence of a singularity in our distant past, some 13 to 15 billion years ago. There isn't any similar evidence that points to the existence of any gods. Trying to put them on the same evidential level is, frankly, ignorant.

And where did the singularity come from? Why think 9 steps when there is still 10 steps?

Where did God come from?

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Enig101

Originally posted by: Mr Pepper

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: Mr Pepper
Maybe we are getting on to something here. If ID is not science, and therefore not fit for the classroom. Are we so sure evolution does not fall by the same standard of scrutiny?

I would encourage those who are willing to hear reason to take a look at this article.

From the article:

"The fact is that evolutionists believe in evolution because they want to. It is
their desire at all costs to explain the origin of everything without a Creator.
Evolutionism is thus intrinsically an atheistic religion."

Since evolution makes no claim whatever as to the existence or non-existence of a deity, the rest of the article isn't worth reading since the author demonstrates a clear lack of understanding on what evolution purports to explain.

In that case you missed the summery of the article. Let me help you out.

"In closing this summary of the scientific case against evolution (and, therefore,
for creation), the reader is reminded again that all quotations in the article are from
doctrinaire evolutionists. No Bible references are included, and no statements by
creationists. The evolutionists themselves, to all intents and purposes have shown
that evolutionism is not science, but religious faith in atheism.,"

I would like to point out that reading the first page almost every statement is false, an opinion, or assumed. None of them are backed up at all. We are supposed to take their word for it?

I could take it bit by bit, but really I don't feel like it. If you want to believe that evolution is flawed, I don't think I can convince you otherwise, except to say that I encourage you to actually learn about it.

Wait, you won't debate an article written by the Founder and President Emeritus of the Institute for Creation Research? You coward!

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: five40

Originally posted by: tenshodo13

Originally posted by: five40

Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt

Originally posted by: five40

Originally posted by: BlinderBomber

Originally posted by: five40
Who cares? Why do people on these forums get all fussy over this crap? Can't you just move along and say "whatever"? You can prove the big bang just about as good as you can prove God. Where did all the matter for the big bang come from...who knows? Where did God come from...who knows? I just don't get it why someone is "stupid" and can longer be liked because they don't sit and agree with a bunch of theories that for all we know are wrong. Where are the Homo Habilis's that were part of our evolution? They just went up and vanished? A Homo Habilis popped out a Homo Erectus one day and all the Homo Habilis's exploded? Or if it was a slow evolution, how come there aren't some half man/half apes still coming around? Guess what...it doesn't matter so attacking/disliking someone over evolution/creation is stupid.

It's a big deal because religion doesn't belong in the science classroom. Not to mention your post demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of what evolution is.

I don't understand what evolution is? Yeah ok. Keep up THE FIGHT!!!!! Don't you get the point that the big bang can't be proven just like God can't be proven. Lets take that out of the classrooms as well since it can't be proven.

Evolution has nothing to do with the cosmology. Incidentally, the evidence points to the existence of a singularity in our distant past, some 13 to 15 billion years ago. There isn't any similar evidence that points to the existence of any gods. Trying to put them on the same evidential level is, frankly, ignorant.

And where did the singularity come from? Why think 9 steps when there is still 10 steps?

Why does there NEED to be a beginning? What if the universe is a cycle of Big Bangs and Big crunches with no beginning?

There has to be a beginning. That same logic can then be applied to gods. gods don't have beginnings/ends. How can you be scientific about things and just say "lets just ignore the beginning"?

They aren't ignoring it. That singularity would contain everything in our universe. Everything. That includes all the matter, all the 'emptiness', and all the laws that govern our existence (physics). There is NO WAY for science to comprehend what is beyond that singularity because it is literally outside of our existence.

For you to jump in right now, though, and say "it must be god" would be pretty fallacious, unless you want to redefine god as the unknown.

edit: and there does not HAVE to be a beginning. There doesn't HAVE to be anything beyond our universe. There might be, and there might have been something else that singularity existed in, but there doesn't have to be anything.

Think about it this way - when the universe dies (which it looks like it will eventually), it won't go out in some glorious fireball of death. It will simply stop. Everything will be black. There will be no light and no energy left. Then, for the rest of eternity, the universe will simply exist with nothing happening in its confines.

That's some ending.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: five40
"Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity. Where did it come from? We don't know. Why did it appear? We don't know."

What we know is as true as flying spaghetti monsters. What's the point of being such a zealot when we really don't know?

your argument seems to boil down to:

Science cannot explain everything about the creation of the universe, therefore the god hypothesis is just as good an explanation as anything science can come up with.

Is that a fair summary?

 

[jonks]

Well, the liberal elitist evolutionary media have weighed in on Stein's epic...and found it rotten to the core. There's your proof buddy!

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/..._intelligence_allowed/

From the NY Times review:
?Expelled? is rated PG (Parental guidance suggested). It has smoking guns and drunken logic.

 

[Enig101]

To get back "on topic" as it were.

Mr Pepper, by a curious coincidence, this article was just posted on New Scientist (a well known scientific news magazine): Evolution: 24 Myths and Misconceptions.

You may find it interesting, I don't know. They also link to several other locations on the web which have facts about evolutionary theory. The truth is that almost all scientists support it; scientists from multiple fields even. The reason it has so much support is because of the wealth of evidence.

There are all sorts of findings and experiments that could have falsified evolution. In the century-and-a-half since Darwin published his theory, not one has.

 

[five40]

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: five40
"Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity. Where did it come from? We don't know. Why did it appear? We don't know."

What we know is as true as flying spaghetti monsters. What's the point of being such a zealot when we really don't know?

your argument seems to boil down to:

Science cannot explain everything about the creation of the universe, therefore the god hypothesis is just as good an explanation as anything science can come up with.

Is that a fair summary?

More or less yes. Scientist can't prove that matter just appeared out of no where and theologists can't prove God appeared out of no where. I don't see the point of getting all puffed and mad over something that might never be proven. The whole "Let's hate Ben Stein because he thinks different" is what is really stupid to me.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: five40

Originally posted by: sirjonk
your argument seems to boil down to:

Science cannot explain everything about the creation of the universe, therefore the god hypothesis is just as good an explanation as anything science can come up with.

Is that a fair summary?

More or less yes.

Ok, I set it up. If anyone wants to run with it go ahead.

 

[rbV5]

Originally posted by: five40

Science simply sees our world around us as "the facts" and then attempts to draw conclusions that support "the facts". Observation and discovery evolve our conclusions...again based on "the facts". In your ignorance you can claim that the Big Bang cannot be proven, or ask where a "possible" direct human ancestor that existed millions of years ago is "today", but the fact is, Science attempts to explain those things using observation and discovery, and someday may very well be able to "prove" the Big Bang theory (or disprove), and provide a very accurate timeline of events that culminated in the evolution of todays humans from our direct and perhaps indirect ancestors rather than from the "hand of God" or other "magical" "explanations"

http://www.big-bang-theory.com/

"Our universe is thought to have begun as an infinitesimally small, infinitely hot, infinitely dense, something - a singularity. Where did it come from? We don't know. Why did it appear? We don't know."

What we know is as true as flying spaghetti monsters. What's the point of being such a zealot when we really don't know?

zealot? I support scientific research, observation and discovery. I also support the idea that the Big Bang Theory is supported by observable facts and discovery and that it will be refined going forward with further discovery and observation.

What we know of God = what we know of flying spaghetti monsters.

What we know of the Big Bang Theory is correlated by the observable physical properties of our universe. Only a zealot would present the Big Bang Theory as scientific fact, or promote it as such as to lower Science's credibility down to the level of Religion's "Faith". I've done no such thing.

Again, Religion and Science are not peers in the search for truth.

 

[five40]

What we know of God = what we know of flying spaghetti monsters. = what we know of singularities and where they came from

Yes I fully support scientific research, observation and discovery as well, however I don't support calling Ben Stein an idiot for saying evolution could be wrong.

 

[Enig101]

Originally posted by: five40

What we know of God = what we know of flying spaghetti monsters. = what we know of singularities and where they came from

Yes I fully support scientific research, observation and discovery as well, however I don't support calling Ben Stein an idiot for saying evolution could be wrong.

An analogy would be saying that you don't support calling someone an idiot because they say gravity could be wrong. Technically, they could be right, but there is no basis for their statement.

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Enig101

Originally posted by: five40

What we know of God = what we know of flying spaghetti monsters. = what we know of singularities and where they came from

Yes I fully support scientific research, observation and discovery as well, however I don't support calling Ben Stein an idiot for saying evolution could be wrong.

An analogy would be saying that you don't support calling someone an idiot because they say gravity could be wrong. Technically, they could be right, but there is no basis for their statement.

Stein's movie actually makes the argument that the atheism inherent in evolutionary theory leads to abortion and nazism. So, yeah, he's an idiot.