Ah yes, Scientific American. The Bush-hating, global-warming loving "progressive" advocacy magazine.

Scientists in the film thought they were being interviewed for a different movie.

It's hard to have half a shred of respect for someone who stoops to such unethical and immature behavior.

Charles, do you want people to have aneurysms? :D

Here we go again.

What I posted when this article was first linked several days ago...

1: It is a well known fact that Hitler and the scientists and philosophers that propped up his ideas were inspired by Darwin. You might blame Stein for not completing that quote, but by the same tokeen, you must blame Hitler for knowing the second part and pursuing the first part ruthlessly. Hitler + Darwin = Holocaust. Perhaps Christian anti-semitism contributed to it (although the German church at this time was fairly toothless), but that is the formula based on almost every shred of evidence. Suggested reading: Form Darwin To Hitler

2: So what?

3: Once again, so what? We know about the controversy, but the interviewees were what the movie was about but not what side it takes, they all signed waivers (if they said something that they didn't want broadcast, they could have refused to sign), and by all accounts they said nothing in the movie that they hadn't already said in other interviews or in print. It's like tricking the Pope into saying he believes in God.

4: And the slander against Dr. Sternberg continues. Check out the [Link: [Link: www.souder.house.gov...]...]
There was indeed compelling evidence that Sternberg was discriminated against (not because he believed in ID, but because he allowed an ID article to be published since he felt the ideas in it deserved hearing).

5: Incorrect. ID itself is an umbrella, but many of it's hypothesis can be tested. for instance Behe outlines how Irreducable Complexity can be falsified, as does Gonzales with his Privaledged Planet hypothesis. But there is a science establishment ("Big Science") hostile to certain ideas, such as they idea that natural forces working alone are enough to account for the origins, complexity and diversity of life on earth. Science is functionally materialistic, which is fine until you try to find explanations for things beyond materialistic explanation such as the function of the mind, the big bang, origins of specified complexity (such as DNA) and more. Trying to pigeon-hole an unworkable explanation because it is the best naturalistic explanation is not good science.

6: Once again, so what? The movie isn't about religious people who accept evolution, it is about the persecution of scientists (both religious or not) who question it.

Sorry, this article is useless.

Point #5 sums it up quite nicely for me.

I think Stein jumped the Michael Moore shark with the way he did Expelled. Arguing science with emotion was a bad idea.

There are a lot of links in this piece. It isn't just "one article." But you have to ... you know .. read it to discover that.

Politics(McCain) and Religion (ID). Charles, we need an abortion thread to complete Trifecta!

Ben Stein is a big disappointment. The speechwriter for Nixon and Ford turned minor film and TV celebrity has now become another anti-intellectual, anti-science reactionary. I can appreciate his performance in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" as much as anyone, but even that little Hollywood teenage-angst number was about questioning stupidity. Now ole' Ben has joined the ranks of the stupid.

Give it a rest. Evolution is among the most affirmed and validated of any scientific theories. It's got more experimental support than the General Theory of Relativity. But since it deals with living things and, gasp, human beings, rather than energy and matter and gravity and time and space, very abstract concepts, it's controversial.

It's time for literalists of any religio-ideological bent to accept reason. Without reason, what are we? Animals? Islamists? You fill in the blank.

re: #9 brickthruplateglasswindow

Politics(McCain) and Religion (ID). Charles, we need an abortion thread to complete Trifecta!

So what about them Lakers eh?

*scuffs floor with shoe*

sigh

Buzzsawmonkey - are you around ?

Oh, please!

I take it you have never dealt with salesmen in your life, bosphorus? And never lied either to get what you needed or to get *away*? Bearing in mind that most people blow telemarketers off with one excuse or another...

For the record: I do not condone such behaviour. But he may have needed to do it the way he did, because most scientists know which side their bread is buttered on.

Also for the record: I am a creationist of the Young Earth persuasion. Let's see how many comments this post will attract with people decrying such models as wrongheaded, stupid, unscientific, etc etc etc...

Ok, ok. More reading. KT posted the 15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense on the other thread, but look there's more!

Ah yes, Scientific American. Growing up, this was a great magazine full of high end and very scientific language. One of my favorite articles was an analysis of crossbow technology that I read in high school. Unfortunately, with the dumbing down of America, they reduced themselves to the level of Discover and New Scientist.

Since I didn't go to MIT, I don't get their good magazines, but it is unfortunate and bad for America they reduced their reading level before science/engineering graduate.

I did see the movie and practically had to muzzle my dad to keep him from yelling BULLSHIT in the theatre. It was a hit piece down to the last detail.

god created evolution, get over it

The Darwin quote is pretty egregious. Worthy of Mikey Moore. C'mon, creationists, You have to admit that's pretty damn dishonest.

6) But the fact is, two of the leading evolutionary biologists described how studying evolution led them to atheism. They asserted that it logically follows, and both hoped that religion would gradually disappear.

None of that follows in any way from science or logic. Stein was not asserting that all evolutionary biologists are atheists, as the author of 6) contends. He was showcasing the intolerance and un-reason that exists in the academic community, which is a valid goal.

re: #1 Globular Cluster

Ah yes, Scientific American. The Bush-hating, global-warming loving "progressive" advocacy magazine.

That's about right. I remember when they used to actually report on real science, not this fluff-sci PC political crap.

Its a sad day when I have to get my science off the internet...(Of course, when you have student/corporate access to all the top journals for free, this is pretty easy.)

re: #14 buzzsawmonkey

Yes. What up?

I don't want to impose, but Little Winger finished up his research paper on anti-semitism. He will present it to his class at the Lutheran college tomorrow and he wanted to make sure he was clear and precise and accurate.

If I turned my nic blue would you send me an email and I could send it to you to take a look? If you don't have time I understand. Ten pages.

It seems like almost every time I come to this place I get a stick pocked in my eye! Bye Bye!

re: #12 mama winger

sigh

Buzzsawmonkey - are you around ?

The Bible Say's come to me as little children... I 'm planning on it! There is no one on this planet that has more knowledges than there creator!

re: #23 buzzsawmonkey

I'll try. Glad to. I'm tearing my hair out over a court questionnaire, so this would probably be a welcome relief.

If you could just skim it to make sure he hasn't hit a wrong note. No need for anything in depth. thanks a bunch, sweetie

The Moon's recession and age.

This is a good article from a scientific creationist website.

It kind of blows holes in the theory of 'billions of years'.

Two in a day, eh?

Charles, I did read it when it was first posted. I see no reason to re-read it unless something has changed.

Of course a mag in the pocket of "Big Science" is going to slag the movie. You'd just think that they could do a better job, or at least a job less easily refuted.

Well the Catholic Church has no problem with evolution.

Here is a joke:

Some scientists created life in the lab, & they thought they would tell God that He was no longer needed.

Look, God, they said, we can make life in the lab, you can go home now.

Well show me, said God.

Ok, said the scientists, first we start with some dirt.

And they reached down, and picked up some dirt.

Wait! said God. "Make your own dirt."

re: #24 THELAZYC

It seems like almost every time I come to this place I get a stick pocked in my eye! Bye Bye!

Maybe you need some cheap sun glasses.

re: #24 THELAZYC

It seems like almost every time I come to this place I get a stick pocked in my eye! Bye Bye!

You should evolve some sort of ocular armor for that.

I guess I'm a bit mystified as to why the Lizardmaster insists on keeping this one alive. IMHO, it's yielding what is becoming counter-productive quibbling amongst otherwise agreeable Lizard pals. And I think it has fostered more than a few regrettable exchanges. Oh well, it's not my sandbox, as we like to say. Carry on, but please excuse me if I sit this one out.

Well, I'll play the Judas goat and accept the opprobrium from both sides. With regards to macro evolution I remain agnostic, never having seen an instance of it. Having worked with bacteria, however, I do know that micro evolution exists, since certain organisms have developed resistance to certain antibiotics.

Beyond that, I simply do not know.

re: #24 THELAZYC

It seems like almost every time I come to this place I get a stick pocked in my eye! Bye Bye!

Such insightful brilliance! You really should post more often.

re: #34 Cartman

Or in this case catbox.

re: #5 Johnny 100 Pesos

Good points!

re: #21 NoSpam

That's about right. I remember when they used to actually report on real science, not this fluff-sci PC political crap.

Its a sad day when I have to get my science off the internet...(Of course, when you have student/corporate access to all the top journals for free, this is pretty easy.)

Two issues ago they had a feature on what vegetation would look like on other worlds. Oooh! Kewl! Every issue has stuff like that. How many times can those idiots offer up a piece on "Water on Mars! There might be life! Let's spend $10B sticking some guys up there!"

The other problem I have with ID being a science is because I do believe in G_d and that he created us. He made a scientific link from him to creation unprovable. For this expressed purpose, because if you need more than faith the point he is making is lost.

Thats why they call it a leap.

re: #20 Globular Cluster

6) [Stein] was showcasing the intolerance and un-reason that exists in the academic community, which is a valid goal.

Yeah, but he could have done a much better job of it...I work in research and I know just what a bunch of petty, vindictive herd animals scientists can be sometimes (especially the phd's for some reason) If he had done an in-depth investigation into scientific fraud for grant money, theft of research, forging/fudging of data *cough* globalwarming *cough*, ingrained hostility of new (legitimate) theories, etc. he could have brought home that point without stirring up the whole ID mess.

re: #35 ContraJihadi

Having worked with bacteria....

What do you do with bacteria?

re: #34 Cartman

Well said. I mean, seriously Charles.

re: #39 Globular Cluster

I also think that Scientific American used to be a much better magazine.

re: #33 Killgore Trout

You should evolve some sort of ocular armor for that.

But we're tool users, we don't need no steenking evolution, just some safety goggles. (OSHA approved, of course)

Wonder is this will be another 2,500-response night of evil name calling and other general BS like we had a week or so ago?

re: #29 LanceKates

Two in a day, eh?

/no one's forcing you to read them

re: #24 THELAZYC

It seems like almost every time I come to this place I get a stick pocked in my eye! Bye Bye!

Okay, who's going around pocking people in the eye?

re: #44 Ojoe

I also think that Scientific American used to be a much better magazine.

Science is starting to suck.Global warming made it stink more people!

re: #28 ReverseTaqiyya

The Moon's recession and age.

This is a good article from a scientific creationist website.

It kind of blows holes in the theory of 'billions of years'.

it kind of just blows holes in the credibility of whoever wrote it actually.

"Middle class tax cut!"
Barack Obama

^{Deja vu all over again!}

re: #42 Killgore Trout

Having worked with bacteria....

I've called some of my co-workers that before...

re: #10 Purple Prose

Ben Stein is a big disappointment. The speechwriter for Nixon and Ford turned minor film and TV celebrity has now become another anti-intellectual, anti-science reactionary. I can appreciate his performance in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" as much as anyone, but even that little Hollywood teenage-angst number was about questioning stupidity. Now ole' Ben has joined the ranks of the stupid.

Give it a rest. Evolution is among the most affirmed and validated of any scientific theories. It's got more experimental support than the General Theory of Relativity. But since it deals with living things and, gasp, human beings, rather than energy and matter and gravity and time and space, very abstract concepts, it's controversial.

It's time for literalists of any religio-ideological bent to accept reason. Without reason, what are we? Animals? Islamists? You fill in the blank.

May I ask, what is the point of yet another thread like this? If the purpose is to tell those of us who accept God *theories* as opposed to your holy grail of *scientific theories* that we are not welcome here anymore, you're doing a fine job.

You believe your ancestors were amoeba. This you call reason?

It is called the THEORY of Evolution, after all....

re: #42 Killgore Trout

What do you do with bacteria?

I am retired now, but I worked in a public health microbiology lab. I personally was involved in just the routine diagnostic work, but others were doing some research and everybody discussed the findings regarding drug-resistance, since that had implications for public health.

re: #18 Wetfun

works for me.

re: #50 SpaceJesus

it kind of just blows holes in the credibility of whoever wrote it actually.

Why?

I have no problem with creationism not being not in science classes. I do have a problem with evolution being taught as fact.

re: #28 ReverseTaqiyya

The Moon's recession and age.

This is a good article from a scientific creationist website.

It kind of blows holes in the theory of 'billions of years'.

"Over the approximately 6,000 years since the creation of the universe,..."

Come F-ing on. I have towels that are twenty-years old. Extrapolating from that, I estimate the universe is a lot older than 6,000 years.

re: #46 6pat6

I'm going to bed early !

Tower cam is plain looking tonight too:
Mt. Wilson Towercam, dusk on the San Gabriel Mountains. (plain).

re: #39 Globular Cluster

My point exactly.

As much as I love hard scifi pretending to be real science, I'd much rather hear about some real science.

Yep, science sucks.

That's a really good outlook to have.

re: #46 6pat6

Wonder is this will be another 2,500-response night of evil name calling and other general BS like we had a week or so ago?

I know you are, but what am I?

Another ID/Creationist thread... yay.

This debate is interesting, but I don't think attacking Ben Stein is worth the effort on any level. Right or wrong in the end it only helps promote leftist culture. I'd like to think it promotes Truth, but eh I doubt it. Spend energy on more important things.

"really don't mind if you sit this one out ..."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toHlMD50eYY

re: #58 HelloDare

Come F-ing on. I have towels that are twenty-years old. Extrapolating from that, I estimate the universe is a lot older than 6,000 years.

How so?

re: #17 flushing_kenny

Ah yes, Scientific American. Growing up, this was a great magazine full of high end and very scientific language. One of my favorite articles was an analysis of crossbow technology that I read in high school. Unfortunately, with the dumbing down of America, they reduced themselves to the level of Discover and New Scientist.

Since I didn't go to MIT, I don't get their good magazines, but it is unfortunate and bad for America they reduced their reading level before science/engineering graduate.

I did see the movie and practically had to muzzle my dad to keep him from yelling BULLSHIT in the theatre. It was a hit piece down to the last detail.

MIT now has their courseware online for free, you might like it:

[Link: ocw.mit.edu...]

re: #54 ContraJihadi
Cool.

I think that it is good that Charles is posting on this topic. I believe it is similar to the Gates of Vienna fiasco (no, I'm not saying all creationists are fascist bigots) in that if you are going to consider someone an ally, then make sure that they're not duplicating behavior that we'd criticize our enemies for (i.e. Mike Moore, Morgan Spurlock). Ben Stein was someone that seemed like a stand-up guy; then this stunt ripped straight from the leftist playbook.

If you need to lie to convince others of your position, then your position sucks, period.

re: #54 ContraJihadi

I am retired now, but I worked in a public health microbiology lab. I personally was involved in just the routine diagnostic work, but others were doing some research and everybody discussed the findings regarding drug-resistance, since that had implications for public health.

Not to quibble, but isn't that more adaptation than evolution? Or does the bacteria change genetic structure or otherwise become a new organism>

re: #61 Charles

You tell 'em.

LOL

G'night.

Pass the popcorn and keep it civil.

re: #57 goddessoftheclassroom

I have no problem with creationism not being not in science classes. I do have a problem with evolution being taught as fact.

Her lies the rub Evolution is also just a theory and also takes a certain leap of faith.

re: #53 Grammy Cracker

I

t is called the THEORY of Evolution, after all....

EXACTLY! Where is the "documentation" of, say, fossils and such that prove ape-to-Man, for example? They are not there! Evolution is purely an unproven theory that the "scientific world" tries to pass off as indisputable fact. It's that easy.

Of this I am sure: Eddy Arnold entered Hillbilly Heaven today.

I'm too lazy to read all this stuff...

Does God exist or not?

re: #72 Racer X

civil popcorn

re: #44 Ojoe

I also think that Scientific American used to be a much better magazine.

it was. now it's moved to a pc feel good slant on many of the articles.
national geographic is kind of global warmingy too

Holy bacon-and-cheese-macaroni! LGF never stops spinning! It's a perpetual motion machine! :)

I love these posts, if only for the massive comment counts. But there really should be a nice, definitive one.

Nobody doubts natural selection, I should hope. But when 'evolution' is spoken of, it usually means the 'appearance of new species/organs/traits from existing ones through mutation or some other methodology'

Allow me to clarify: When evolutionists of *any* stripe can provide evidence that random undirected natural processes can do the following...

1. Create building blocks for life (i.e. amino acids) in the conditions posited to exist during the early life of Sol 3 WITHOUT both right-handed and left-handed in the same area...

2. Assemble these building blocks into the genetic structure of the simplest self-sustaining microbe (and nope, not virus)...

2a. Assemble RNA and DNA codec structures...

2b. Code for reproduction, food intake, homeostasis, error correction mechanisms, respiration, waste disposal...

3. Create life from non-life...

4. Evolve changes from asexual reproduction to sexual reproduction...

4a. And evolve from uni-cellular to multi-cellular organisms (with tissue and organ specialisation)...

5. Evolve endoskeleton from exoskeleton...

6. Evolve wings from feet...

... (we can skip all the intervening steps, as they are relatively unimportant)

X-1. Demonstrate a method of evolving NEW genetic structures that has not been imported from an external source, is not generally detrimental, and complies with irreducible complexity requirements...

X. Evolve so much that it split off a completely new species that CANNOT interbreed with its parent or sibling species within the genus...

Then I will admit this model has validity. Concrete, viable validity. Otherwise, forget it, chumps, you have not proven a single thing. Because ALL of these issues MUST be explained by ANY 'origin of life' model.

re: #75 Q-Burn

Of this I am sure: Eddy Arnold entered Hillbilly Heaven today.

Yes he did. RIP Eddy. You had a velvet voice.

re: #76 oh_dude

I'm too lazy to read all this stuff...

Does God exist or not?

Yes he does. He dabbles in Darwinian evolution.

re: #41 NoSpam

Yeah, but he could have done a much better job of it...I work in research and I know just what a bunch of petty, vindictive herd animals scientists can be sometimes (especially the phd's for some reason) If he had done an in-depth investigation into scientific fraud for grant money, theft of research, forging/fudging of data *cough* globalwarming *cough*, ingrained hostility of new (legitimate) theories, etc. he could have brought home that point without stirring up the whole ID mess.

I agree, ID is not the best place to start if one wishes to showcase hypocrisy and banality in Academia. If I had been Stein I would picked other issues. And yeah, the film is not without problems. He didn't need to hammer his points with flashbacks to the 50s, instead, he should have asked more involved questions.

That being said, I don't think Stein is "anti-Science" (I certainly accept evolution and avidly read science books). I think the point of the film was free-speech and academic freedom, and many who accuse Stein of Michael Moore-ism are at least equally guilty when they mischaracterize his points, especially regarding the Nazis.

re: #76 oh_dude

I'm too lazy to read all this stuff...

Does God exist or not?

Yes. He does. I win. Let's talk about music now. :)

why bring this up when it is just going to divide this rather close knit community and not even come close to changing anyone's mind.

re: #76 oh_dude

Yes.

re: #61 Charles

Yep, science sucks.

That's a really good outlook to have.

No, vacuum sucks ...

"Publish or perish" in academia has become "Publish liberal talking points or perish".

I refuse to believe the scientific troofs about evolution and global warming.

Has a post (not a comment) ever ended up with a negative ding score?

re: #78 nyc redneck

national geographic is kind of global warmingy too

My teenaged son quit subscribing to that for that very reason.

re: #80 mama winger

Yes he did. RIP Eddy. You had a velvet voice.

One of my favorite Christmas memories of childhood is listening to Eddie Arnold's Christmas album and decorating the tree.

My dad bought CD copies of that album for my brother and me when we went out on our own.

Sniff.

re: #86 turn

No, vacuum sucks ...

And nature abhors a vacuum.

re: #76 oh_dude

I'm too lazy to read all this stuff...

Does God exist or not?

LOL!

Short, sweet, right to the point.

re: #93 goddessoftheclassroom

One of my favorite Christmas memories of childhood is listening to Eddie Arnold's Christmas album and decorating the tree.

My dad bought CD copies of that album for my brother and me when we went out on our own.

Sniff.

One of the classics.

re: #64 KingKenrod

This debate is interesting, but I don't think attacking Ben Stein is worth the effort on any level. Right or wrong in the end it only helps promote leftist culture. I'd like to think it promotes Truth, but eh I doubt it. Spend energy on more important things.

I really suspect this is the core of the issue. Ben Stein deserves to be thrown to the curb just like the Left should have done to Mikey Moore long ago. But the Left decided that even if Mikey's lying, he's lying for a good cause. They applaud him and regurgitate his stupid talking points until they believe them. They don't care how stupid they appear or how wrong they are.

I think it's more important to keep ourselves intellectually honest. The movie is factually inaccurate, even ID supporters aren't defending the the accuracy of the film. It's indefensible.

re: #79 gkong3

I was going to ding you up for that.

/until you threw in chumps

re: #28 ReverseTaqiyya

The Moon's recession and age.

This is a good article from a scientific creationist website.

It kind of blows holes in the theory of 'billions of years'.

Umm, no, I'm afraid that it doesn't.

Talk.Origins - Lunar Recession

Talk.Origins - response on Lunar Recession
(search for 'recession' on that page)

re: #72 Racer X

Pass the popcorn and keep it civil.

Screw pop-corn. I've a big bowl of ice cream and a jug of Hershey's Syrup.

Often times the most convincing argument is a really weak counter argument.

For those getting emotional on both sides, take some time for reflection. It is probably rooted in either a deep ignorance in your own side's argument, or a deep ignorance in the side you're arguing against.

As these conversations quickly boil down to name calling and charicaturization, I'm suspecting it's a heavy spoonful of both.

re: #88 adamvonwillis

Maybe you should post a few of the much more terrible things the evil Pat Robertson has said instead of the less evil rantings of Mr. Wright.

Oh crap, I need more popcorn now.

re: #1 Globular Cluster

Ah yes, Scientific American. The Bush-hating, global-warming loving "progressive" advocacy magazine.

I gave you an upding and I seriously didn't mean to do that.

re: #74 6pat6

I

EXACTLY! Where is the "documentation" of, say, fossils and such that prove ape-to-Man, for example? They are not there! Evolution is purely an unproven theory that the "scientific world" tries to pass off as indisputable fact. It's that easy.

So the problem with people going "where is this missing link you promised?" Is that there really *isn't* one. Not in the sense most people are looking for.

Micro evolution is cumulative over millions of years. Cumulative micro evolution gives us macro evolution, aka species change. There is no half-man/half-ape (e.g. Dr. Zaius), there's a long series of progressively more humanoid apes of which only some examples survive to this day.

re: #88 adamvonwillis

post a few of the much more terrible things the evil Pat Robertson has said instead of the less evil rantings of Mr. Wright.

Say what? Have you actually listened to either man speak? Robertson certainly has his problems, but he has been right more times than not. Hugo Chavez, anyone? Wright is simply a racist Anglophobe that can't deal with the fact he's a FREE American.

re: #69 Dan G.

I think that it is good that Charles is posting on this topic. I believe it is similar to the Gates of Vienna fiasco (no, I'm not saying all creationists are fascist bigots) in that if you are going to consider someone an ally, then make sure that they're not duplicating behavior that we'd criticize our enemies for (i.e. Mike Moore, Morgan Spurlock). Ben Stein was someone that seemed like a stand-up guy; then this stunt ripped straight from the leftist playbook.

If you need to lie to convince others of your position, then your position sucks, period.

Is that a round-about way of saying that the only allies worth having are those who don't believe God made it all?

re: #94 x-ray

And nature abhors a vacuum.

which results in an increase in entropy

re: #97 Killgore Trout

I really suspect this is the core of the issue. Ben Stein deserves to be thrown to the curb just like the Left should have done to Mikey Moore long ago. But the Left decided that even if Mikey's lying, he's lying for a good cause. They applaud him and regurgitate his stupid talking points until they believe them. They don't care how stupid they appear or how wrong they are.

I think it's more important to keep ourselves intellectually honest. The movie is factually inaccurate, even ID supporters aren't defending the the accuracy of the film. It's indefensible.

It was my understanding (I have NOT seen the movie yet) that Ben Stein just provided the narration...so why is everyone slamming him as if the whole enterprise was his creation...ooops, pardon the pun.

re: #105 6pat6

Well... he is an oppressed African-American.
/

re: #102 Racer X
Not really, he got sticked already. Save the popcorn.

This big, bad, refutation to Expelled doesn't address the scientific issues Stein's interviewees in support of ID were raising. It does nothing but attack the cinematography, quibble over the definition of Stein's choice of word "worked" (Sternberg was not employed at the Smithsonian, he was merely a research assistant), and cry foul that Dawkins thought he was being interviewed for a documentary called Crossroads when in reality he was being interviewed for a documentary called Expelled.

Like the philistine masses of society completely dissociated from the scientific profession--yet among the first to comment upon it-- this refutation is lacking in substance.

I am rather shocked Charles finds it so profoundly poignant.

/wags index finger

re: #49 beachkatie

Science is starting to suck.Global warming made it stink more people!

Trofim Lysenko, Paul Ehrlich, Al Gore and many others have made it all too easy to discount good science.

They have also made it too easier for baffle-gab and flum-diddle to be passed off as real science.

Not good.

re: #103 marjoriemoon

I gave you an upding and I seriously didn't mean to do that.

I feel your pain.

Can't we talk about Islamic science for a little bit?

Tabari I:234 "Allah thus sent Gabriel to drag his wing three times over the face of the moon, which at the time was a sun. He effaced its luminosity and left the light in it. This is what Allah means: [in Qur'an 17:12] 'We have blotted out the sign of the night, and We have made the sign of the day something to see by.' The blackness you can see as lines on the moon is a trace of the blotting."

re: #107 turn

which results in an increase in entropy

And an implosion is just as violent as an explosion.

re: #61 Charles

Yep, science sucks.

That's a really good outlook to have.

I don't think science sucks. It does however suck as a substitute for religion. Just as religion sucks as a substitute for science.

I don't see how people get to the intersection that validating science is an indictment against religion, or that lending credence to faith is somehow dismissive of science?

What depresses me is that I expected better from Ben Stein. The trailer was great; It gave the impression that maybe there was something legitimate to ID that I hadn't heard of, and that while Ben might not have agreed with the people in the film, he was doing the First Amendment thing and standing up for other's rights to be heard.

Evidently I thought wrong.

re: #18 Wetfun

god created evolution, get over it

Heh. :)

There are something like two dozen different critical measurements of atomic properties that, were they to be shifted a decimal this way or that, would turn the universe to goo, or a Great Big Nothing with nobody in it to enjoy it.

If you want to feel close to G-d, go outside at night, look up, and repeat after me:

"It took sixteen billion years of work to put me here in this moment."

Then go back inside and give Thanks.

re: #108 Grammy Cracker

Yes, the movie was a product of the Disco Institute. But Ben has become the spokesman for their anti-science crusade. I say screw him. Fact check and expose him, why shouldn't we?

re: #115 x-ray

Hicccup ... Damn near imploded on that one :.)

re: #106 MandyManners

Is that a round-about way of saying that the only allies worth having are those who don't believe God made it all?

No, I'd say that's a very direct way of saying that liars (even "liars for God") can only discredit your cause.

#106

Read again, there is nothing "round about" what I said, I explicitly stated my position. The last sentence sums it up succinctly.

Are you saying that Mike and Morgan's techniques are O.K., just so long as someone you agree with uses them?

Listen. I am a creationist. I believe in a Creator. I don't much care about the mechanisms He used. I believe He created me and everyone on earth for a purpose. I believe He gave us inalienable rights and responsibilities. I believe I am accountable to Him. This is the basis for my life and my politics. This belief enriches me.

If the fact that I believe in a good and just Creator diminishes me in anyone's eyes, so be it. Here I stand.

And that's about all I've got to say about that.

Why does this keep coming back to the Matrix. Where's my red pill? /

re: #112 Syrah

Trofim Lysenko, Paul Ehrlich, Al Gore and many others have made it all too easy to discount good science.

They have also made it too easier for baffle-gab and flum-diddle to be passed off as real science.

Not good.

Well said. Science has always had its foibles, and one should not get disillusioned just because some of it is junk. In the 19th C the rage was phrenology and wildly flawed theories of Race. Science prunes its errors, but sometimes it takes many, many years.

re: #111 the Daily Kos Om Islaam

Absolutely.

re: #111 the Daily Kos Om Islaam

Was that sarcasm? I can't even tell anymore.

re: #70 goddessoftheclassroom

Not to quibble, but isn't that more adaptation than evolution? Or does the bacteria change genetic structure or otherwise become a new organism>

You know, goddess, this was a few years ago, and I did not pay close attention to the details of the transmutations, just to the fact that public health strategies were affected. It is my understanding that over time changes in adaptation are related to changes in genetic structure, but I cannot claim any certainty about this.

As with macro evolution, so even here, when challenged, I tend toward agnosticism; but I have come to the conclusion that whatever the factual truth about whether species might have evolved, the explanatory hypothesis, random mutation, is unprovable. More importantly, I believe that the human soul is spirit, and so its full truth, especially its moral standing, cannot be explained by physical theories.

The links in the main article are very good but its preaching to the choir here. You can't change minds that don't want to. I admire determination but it's starting to seem futile.

re: #94 x-ray

And nature abhors a vacuum.

i thought chihuahuas abhorred a vacuum.

re: #124 lawhawk

That made no sense. Which is why I was LMAO.

re: #114 ReverseTaqiyya

Can't we talk about Islamic science for a little bit?

Tabari I:234 "Allah thus sent Gabriel to drag his wing three times over the face of the moon, which at the time was a sun. He effaced its luminosity and left the light in it. This is what Allah means: [in Qur'an 17:12] 'We have blotted out the sign of the night, and We have made the sign of the day something to see by.' The blackness you can see as lines on the moon is a trace of the blotting."

Do you want CAIR campaigning to have that taught in public schools?

You got refuted on the moon thing btw.

re: #131 nyc redneck

I thought chihuahuas abhorred a vacuum.

they do!

This is sick:

In the state of Idaho:

It's an unbelievable story that has an entire community in shock.

Several sources confirm a 10-year-old girl from St. Anthony gave birth to a little girl on Saturday at Madison Memorial Hospital in Rexburg.

The girl was allegedly raped by 37-year-old Guadalupe Gutierrez-Juarez. Gutierrez-Juaraz is an illegal immigrant who is in the Fremont County Jail on rape charges.

Gutierrez-Juarez was arrested April 29th after medical personnel alerted police that a pregnant child had come in for treatment. That child is now one of the youngest mothers in Idaho.

The hat tip goes to Dirty Harry who also points out:

Idaho lawmakers have killed a measure for the second time this year that would crack down on employers who knowingly hire illegal immigrants.

If we had the system of government depicted in Heinlein's STARSHIP TROOPERS the walking piece of excrement responsible for this act would have been hanged for kidnapping and rape.

Unfortunately the system of government seen in that novel was established after the total collapse of civil society.

_

re: #119 buzzsawmonkey

Mama: can't open the file. Try sending it in Word, or in .pdf form--or if you have a fax lying around gathering dust, use the fax number on the signature in the email I sent you.

Oh crap Buzz. I don't know how to do ANY of that ! LOL!

It's okay. I think he treated the subject well. If I catch up with him this weekend I will see if he can send it to you just for kicks. :)

I'm not quite sure why we're discussing this one again. But whatever.

Point number two (of the six by Scientific American) is pretty typical movie stuff. Points number five and six are debatable, or at least subjective.

But points one, three and four are devastating, and reveal the film to be dishonest. Not necessarily the premise -- another, better film might have made for better discussion -- but the presentation itself.

re: #133 Thanos

Do you want CAIR campaigning to have that taught in public schools?

You got refuted on the moon thing btw.

I don't think so.

re: #73 x-ray

Her lies the rub Evolution is also just a theory and also takes a certain leap of faith.

You are evidently unfamiliar with the colliqual meaning of "theory" vs. the scientific meaning of "Theory". They are not the same.

re: #127 Killgore Trout

It was anything but sarcasm.

re: #53 Grammy Cracker

May I ask, what is the point of yet another thread like this? If the purpose is to tell those of us who accept God *theories* as opposed to your holy grail of *scientific theories* that we are not welcome here anymore, you're doing a fine job.

You believe your ancestors were amoeba. This you call reason?

It is called the THEORY of Evolution, after all....

I appreciate your concern, but we must look at the genomes (complete DNA sequences) of all organisms sequenced. We have a complete and open book of what the genetic information of a large number of organisms looks like, and the relationships hold up. Just as you and your brother or sister share a certain amount of genetic information, almost all of it the same, chimpanzees are almost the same. If you get to mice, it's still very similar but not as much. They are also mammals that gestate their young in the womb.

Very recently, the Playpus genome has been published. This is a mammal that lays eggs. It is a mammal but more different from us than marsupials. Lo and behold, it's genome sequence is like mammals but has certain elements that make it more like a reptile. It, along with the Echidna, is the most distantly related to us of all mammals, and the DNA sequence bears this out.

Then if you look at other genomes sequenced, you see the same common-sense relationship: the more we are like another organism, the more our DNA resembles it, the more distant we are, the less so. But in all cases, there are relationships of the most basic genes.

So... What do you conclude? Either God is playing a joke on us or the relationships are real.

Francis Collins, who is Head of the Human Genome Project, is an evangelical Christian. He sees no contradiction. He says, to paraphrase, if God wanted to generate diversity, what a marvelous mechanism He chose in evolution/natural selection.

You have to accept to the facts or else reject all reason. There is no contradiction unless you are literalist: the Earth is less than 6,000 years old and Allah created it.

Reason and Christianity and any other religion are not contradictory. Reason and experimental fact are what they are. So either God is reasonable or not. I think God is reasonable, and so the scientific facts He left behind reflect his own way of getting things going.

re: #123 mama winger

i really respect you and i really respect your beliefs.

I've got to get to sleep. Take care, Lizards.

re: #135 The Other Les

But, the illegal has rights, and his must be respected...

...and all that crap! Just hang the bastard on the border, and let that be a sign, a warning to stay on their side of the non-existent fence.

re: #143 nyc redneck

i really respect you and i really respect your beliefs.

{nyc}

Thanks sweetie. I appreciate that.

re: #131 nyc redneck

i thought chihuahuas abhorred a vacuum.

Chihuahuas are the canaries in the coal mind.

re: #123 mama winger

Position appreciated.

By the same token would someone who believes in, say evolution, be diminished in your eyes?

Just asking ...

oh no, I was going to sit this one out ..

re: #144 goddessoftheclassroom

I've got to get to sleep. Take care, Lizards.

Goodnight GotC. Sleep well.

re: #141 the Daily Kos Om Islaam

Interesting. You didn't find any substance to the claim about editing the Darwin quote to invert its original meaning?

re: #114 ReverseTaqiyya

Can't we talk about Islamic science for a little bit?

Tabari I:234 "Allah thus sent Gabriel to drag his wing three times over the face of the moon, which at the time was a sun. He effaced its luminosity and left the light in it. This is what Allah means: [in Qur'an 17:12] 'We have blotted out the sign of the night, and We have made the sign of the day something to see by.' The blackness you can see as lines on the moon is a trace of the blotting."

what the french toast

re: #104 NoSpam

Micro evolution is cumulative over millions of years. Cumulative micro evolution gives us macro evolution, aka species change. There is no half-man/half-ape (e.g. Dr. Zaius), there's a long series of progressively more humanoid apes of which only some examples survive to this day.

Then there should be evidence a long fossil record of all the incremental, intermediary critters. Any paleontologists out there?

/we have fossil evidence of T-Rex and we have fossil evidence of birds, they're unquestionably related, but how one gradually, over millions of years, became the other is a total mystery

re: #115 x-ray

And an implosion is just as violent as an explosion.

One of the most powerful types of explosion in the universe is triggered by an implosion (Type II supernovae).

Opiliofact™

re: #142 Purple Prose

Very recently, the Playpus genome has been published. This is a mammal that lays eggs. It is a mammal but more different from us than marsupials. Lo and behold, it's genome sequence is like mammals but has certain elements that make it more like a reptile. It, along with the Echidna, is the most distantly related to us of all mammals, and the DNA sequence bears this out.

Then if you look at other genomes sequenced, you see the same common-sense relationship: the more we are like another organism, the more our DNA resembles it, the more distant we are, the less so. But in all cases, there are relationships of the most basic genes.

So... What do you conclude? Either God is playing a joke on us or the relationships are real.

Much like beer, the platypus is proof that G-d love us and wants us to have a laugh once in a while.

Isn't there a verse in the OT about God putting something in the earth to confound man?

re: #148 turn

Position appreciated.

By the same token would someone who believes in, say evolution, be diminished in your eyes?

Just asking ...

oh no, I was going to sit this one out ..

No. I would have to say, though in all honesty, I would feel that anyone going thru life without an acknowledgment of the miraculous would be living a diminished life.

re: #125 Globular Cluster

Well said. Science has always had its foibles, and one should not get disillusioned just because some of it is junk. In the 19th C the rage was phrenology and wildly flawed theories of Race. Science prunes its errors, but sometimes it takes many, many years.

I was rereading Heart of Darkness recently. There is a reference to phrenology in the early part of the story, where Marlow is being examined by the company doctor. That part of the story reads very strangely.

#152

Fossilization is a rare event; there aren't any "shoulds" in terms of the existance of fossils. The "critter" has to fall into the right gunk, not get eaten/swept away/pulverized by ages of sand blasting/etc etc etc....

re: #124 lawhawk

Why does this keep coming back to the Matrix. Where's my red pill? /

It is part of the Architect's design.

If you want to build a car, use the scientific method
If you want to build spiritual awareness, use religion

I wouldn't buy a car built by ID scientists
I wouldn't buy into a religion built on science

re: #139 ReverseTaqiyya

I don't think so.

Ok Here's some more links
[Link: www.talkorigins.org...]

re: #160 gman

If you want to build a car, use the scientific method
If you want to build spiritual awareness, use religion

I wouldn't buy a car built by ID scientists
I wouldn't buy into a religion built on science

But before you build a car, don't you have to design it first?

PARIS (AFP) - Arguably the oddest beast in Nature's menagerie, the platypus looks as it if were assembled from spare parts left over after the animal kingdom was otherwise complete.

Now scientists know why. According to a study released Wednesday, the egg-laying critter is a genetic potpourri -- part bird, part reptile and part lactating mammal.

The task of laying bare the platypus genome of 2.2 billion base pairs spread across 18,500 genes has taken several years, but will do far more than satisfy the curiosity of just biologists, say the researchers.

"The platypus genome is extremely important, because it is the missing link in our understanding of how we and other mammals first evolved," explained Oxford University's Chris Ponting, one of the study's architects.

"This is our ticket back in time to when all mammals laid eggs while suckling their young on milk."

SNIP

#162

The words "Sissy Fight" come to mind.

re: #117 Pawn of the Oppressor

What depresses me is that I expected better from Ben Stein. The trailer was great; It gave the impression that maybe there was something legitimate to ID that I hadn't heard of, and that while Ben might not have agreed with the people in the film, he was doing the First Amendment thing and standing up for other's rights to be heard.

Evidently I thought wrong.
Then tell your child there is a begining and ..end for every thing on this planet. then tell them there is no end of the universe.Mom ,why is there a end to every thing here and not in the universe?

Heh. :)

There are something like two dozen different critical measurements of atomic properties that, were they to be shifted a decimal this way or that, would turn the universe to goo, or a Great Big Nothing with nobody in it to enjoy it.

If you want to feel close to G-d, go outside at night, look up, and repeat after me:

"It took sixteen billion years of work to put me here in this moment."

Then go back inside and give Thanks.

BTW, I like Scientific American, its pretty accessible for a non- professional. Great, now I'm behind another 100 comments!

I duno Tomas Aquinas had some good theories on the subject, some of the many things that make you go Hmmm.

re: #131 nyc redneck

i thought chihuahuas abhorred a vacuum.

/cats love vacuums

re: #161 Thanos

Ok Here's some more links
[Link: www.talkorigins.org...]

I've read those links and I find them very dogmatic, un-scientific, and frankly quite arrogant.

For example, from your site:

The definition of "Creation Science":
An effort by the arrogantly ignorant, to indoctrinate the intellectually gullible, in the mythology of the patently absurd.

This isn't science but just name calling.

Sorry.

re: #169 buzzsawmonkey

The Edsel was not an example of intelligent design.

Actually, it was, just poor intelligence.

re: #156 mama winger

No. I would have to say, though in all honesty, I would feel that anyone going thru life without an acknowledgment of the miraculous would be living a diminished life.

so you're saying those of us who believe in observable facts can't appreciate things on the same level as someone who believes in the supernatural?

Are these ID threads started to thin the heard Charles ?

re: #156 mama winger

Agreed Ma'am, the whole blinking world is miraculous.
I don't care about people believing in evolution. I see it's merits myself. I do think though that there are a number of scientists who want to use evolution and darwinism as a club to beat up christians. ( No muslims of course, Waaay to dangerous) What amazes me is how angry the atheist mindset is. Not content to not believe themselves, they have to actively work to destroy the faith of others....
Why?

Why can't ANYONE just mind their own fuching business?

re: #169 buzzsawmonkey

The Edsel was not an example of intelligent design.

Neither was the Citroen 2CV, but they sold the crap out of them for 40+ years!

re: #158 Dan G.

#152

Fossilization is a rare event; there aren't any "shoulds" in terms of the existance of fossils. The "critter" has to fall into the right gunk, not get eaten/swept away/pulverized by ages of sand blasting/etc etc etc....

That's a pretty big gap between T-Rex and birds.

/you'd think there's be something in there

re: #118 Killgore Trout

Yes, the movie was a product of the Disco Institute. But Ben has become the spokesman for their anti-science crusade. I say screw him. Fact check and expose him, why shouldn't we?

I didn't meant to suggest you shouldn't, Killgore...it just seemed as if he was being blamed for the production of the film, when I understood he was more marginally involved.

I still don't see belief in the creation of man by God as anti-science. I love science. I love God. (and God loves Killgore Trout!) They do not have to be mutually exclusive.

re: #169 buzzsawmonkey

LOL!

On a thread like this where I could offend all, I think it's wise to layout my starting point.

I am a scientist (not degreed but I love logic and work in a scientific field)
I am just a man (with all the weakness that implies)
I believe in G_d because it gives me comfort.
I believe in science because it gives me comfort I can understand.

re: #152 Killian Bundy

Then there should be evidence a long fossil record of all the incremental, intermediary critters. Any paleontologists out there?

/we have fossil evidence of T-Rex and we have fossil evidence of birds, they're unquestionably related, but how one gradually, over millions of years, became the other is a total mystery

There is a long fossil record of incremental, intermediate critters. There are whole museums full of them.

Talk.Origins - Reptiles to Birds

Talk.Origins - Apes to Humans

"New Dinosaur Discovered: T. Rex Cousin Had Feathers"
[Link: news.nationalgeographic.com...]

re: #171 ReverseTaqiyya

I've read those links and I find them very dogmatic, un-scientific, and frankly quite arrogant.

For example, from your site:

The definition of "Creation Science":
An effort by the arrogantly ignorant, to indoctrinate the intellectually gullible, in the mythology of the patently absurd.

This isn't science but just name calling.

Sorry.

But facts are facts, ignore the arrogance, focus on the facts.

Here's your sea salt thing:
[Link: www.talkorigins.org...]

Also try following some of links rather than reading the discussions, it's just a forum. The important part are the pointers to papers, proofs, articles and tables. Then you can draw your own conclusions based on facts. That's usually a good process for me.

re: #173 SpaceJesus

so you're saying those of us who believe in observable facts can't appreciate things on the same level as someone who believes in the supernatural?

That's not what I said at all.

re: #163 ReverseTaqiyya

But before you build a car, don't you have to design it first?

I would hope designers know the basics of aerodynamics and structural engineering before they get to aesthetics.

re: #177 6pat6

Neither was the Citroen 2CV, but they sold the crap out of them for 40+ years!

With an ads like this one, who can resist?
/

re: #140 Pawn of the Oppressor

There has been a proof of the evolution of man from ape. I must have missed that one.

re: #187 gman

I would hope designers know the basics of aerodynamics and structural engineering before they get to aesthetics.

Ha. Not a chance.

#178

Feel free to start digging! Theres a whole lot dirt to sift...

re: #179 buzzsawmonkey

Hey buzz - I tried that email thingy again. Probably goofed it up again too. :)

#189

How hard were you looking for/reading about such evidence?

re: #154 Pawn of the Oppressor

Much like beer, the platypus is proof that G-d love us and wants us to have a laugh once in a while.

Exactly!

There have been beautiful looking concept cars that were absolute pigs in the wind tunnel.

re: #190 Mich-again
That's not how design works. The architect draws sketches of his beautiful building with sweeping arches and fabulous atriums, then he send the sketch to the structural engineer and says, "make it work" I worked many a construction project that had architectural elements removed because they were impractical or just way too bloody expensive to engineer.

Speaking of T-REX.

Blood cells found from T-REX?

I thought they died out 65 million years ago? How can there be any tissue or blood cells left after that amount of time? (unless of course they're not millions of years old)

re: #176 sojerofgod

Why can't ANYONE just mind their own fuching business?

re: #195 Mich-again

There have been beautiful looking concept cars that were absolute pigs in the wind tunnel.

I had a Mustang convertible once. Beautiful car. Couldn't steer on snow worth crap.

re: #199 Q-Burn

Why can't ANYONE just mind their own fuching business?

Will you marry me?

re: #150 Killgore Trout

No, I do not. The sparse passages of Darwin which were cut in no way negate the passages which were already said. They provide no context. They are merely an addendum which, in essence, is Darwin remarking, "Wow, I know that the rest of the animal world has evolved so diversely and splendidly by neglecting its weak and ill. Why are humans different. This is what we do in the civilized world [which was too much of a collective Knuckle-dragger to see the wonders I imagined on the Galapagos]."

Stein specifically iterated in the film that he is not accusing Darwin of committing the Holocaut.

re: #200 mama winger

I had a Mustang convertible once. Beautiful car. Couldn't steer on snow worth crap.

Did you put on snow tires? ;-)

re: #138 Cognito

I'm not quite sure why we're discussing this one again. But whatever.

Point number two (of the six by Scientific American) is pretty typical movie stuff. Points number five and six are debatable, or at least subjective.

But points one, three and four are devastating, and reveal the film to be dishonest. Not necessarily the premise -- another, better film might have made for better discussion -- but the presentation itself.

I agree. Neo-Lysenkoism is a far better subject for the poitns he was trying to make.

Relevant link:

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

#197

OR..... They were incased in a non-proteolytic/nucleolytic environment a' la amber, tar, etc... Things don't decompose magically, they're destroyed by very specific things (enzymes, heat, light, etc...). If sheltered (and especially if dried (look up "lyophylization")) biomolecules are very stable.

re: #167 snowcrash

BTW, I like Scientific American, its pretty accessible for a non- professional. Great, now I'm behind another 100 comments!

But 30 years ago, it wasn't. No offense intended, but they've dumbed it down.

re: #156 mama winger

Isn't the concept or belief of life undergoing evolution equally as miraculous though?

I wouldn't characterize the life of people who seek to understand a physical explanation of the beginning of life nor the evolution of life as having lived a diminished one as a result.

(I know I'm not going to score any debate points here with you, but none the less the two views should at least share equal appreciation)

re: #203 Globular Cluster

Did you put on snow tires? ;-)

It was the rear wheel drive. I think. At least that's what they told me. I had to sell it - I live in Wisconsin.

I cried.

Comment #5 sums it up nicely. This article is one big "so what?"

re: #203 Globular Cluster

omg, snow tires on a mustang?!?

Sacrilege!

re: #123 mama winger

And, if one, as I do, starts from that point, all the rest can be looked at with wonder, checked against one's starting point, and not ruffle a feather. :)

re: #200 mama winger

I had a Mustang convertible once. Beautiful car. Couldn't steer on snow worth crap.

was that a '68?

Yawn- lets talk about the terrorist head honcho supposedly captured in Iraq and how this may undermine the demorats. I'd say waterboard him and get info to save our troops- but we really don't do that stuff as a policy - to the surprise of the lefty loons-more than 3 times or so-- so more of our guys will get hurt to save that liberal induced tarnished image. So what's on the menu at Gitmo tonite? Baloney global warming lies hasn't cut back on their food budget I bet. Let's do more posts on the Global lying- Algore is at it again with the Burma incident. Attack him- not Steiny! Save the big ammo for the lefty liars! It's like when I read about the Germans in the waning days of WW2 ferociously attacking the allies instead of slacking up on us and going headlong into the Ruskies. Bad tactics- with East Germany as a result and all. I- and many others are saying -choose the targets better. Especially since this one has been carpet bombed already. Yeah yeah Steiny messed up- yawn- next.

re: #211 sojerofgod

omg, snow tires on a mustang?!?

Sacrilege!

And on a convertible, no less!

re: #200 mama winger

I had a Mustang convertible once. Beautiful car. Couldn't steer on snow worth crap.

My buddy had a Mustand GT that couldn't even make it up his driveway if there was any snow on it.

This is why I like Charles. Going against the grain in the name of reason. He has a point: either you apply reason in everything or nothing. You are either reasonable or unreasonable. Simple as that. Thank, Charles!

re: #186 mama winger

That's not what I said at all.

"acknowledgement of the miraculous" = belief in the supernatural.

"diminished life" = (in this context) less appreciation for life.

where did the unstoppable logic machine that is spacejesus go wrong? unless by "diminished life" you mean my lifespan will somehow be cut short because I don't believe in the supernatural?

re: #208 turn

Isn't the concept or belief of life undergoing evolution equally as miraculous though?

I wouldn't characterize the life of people who seek to understand a physical explanation of the beginning of life nor the evolution of life as having lived a diminished one as a result.

(I know I'm not going to score any debate points here with you, but none the less the two views should at least share equal appreciation)

I guess what I mean is, I've known people who have no appreciation for things they cannot measure or see or touch. Who view the world in a way that excludes the irrational. It's those people I am referring to.

re: #213 nyc redneck

was that a '68?

No - a '96. I loved that car. sniff

Science may be defined as systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation by the material human mind. What is matter? Matter is a concept of substance shaped by the limitations of the human mind. Truly, matter is an illusion created by a swirl of electrons in empty space. There can be no intelligence in matter, because physical man it is an illusion. Man (the idea), being created in the image and likeness of God, cannot be material. He must therefore be spiritual. That is the science of mind.

re: #214 buzzsawmonkey

It came through fine. Check your email.

Okay.

I was raised in a strict Catholic household. Lost my faith many years ago. Although I straddle the fence between atheism/ agnosticism, I admire those people who retain their faith (as long as it's not faith in the 50-year-old pederast). Wish I could get mine back. I think it's unfortunate that evolution can put a strain on people's faith, but it is science (though available evidence might not yet make it airtight). ID is not science. It is NOT INCOMPATIBLE with evolution; but it is not science.

God created Man.

Mr. Colt made them equal.

re: #11 Racer X

So what about them Lakers eh?

Now yer talkin!

re: #220 mama winger

Smell!

Dang it mama you left out smell!

Now their lives are diminished because they cannot acknowlege the stink of their own sanctimony!

re: #152 Killian Bundy

Then there should be evidence a long fossil record of all the incremental, intermediary critters. Any paleontologists out there?

/we have fossil evidence of T-Rex and we have fossil evidence of birds, they're unquestionably related, but how one gradually, over millions of years, became the other is a total mystery

T-rex didn't become a chicken. The ancestors of the birds are the small, aerodynamic raptors.

re: #201 mama winger

Shhhhhh! My wife thinks you're dead..

re: #215 LEGION

. I'd say waterboard him and get info to save our troops-

I say that and forget about Gitmo
He needs to be in an Alabama or South Georgia Jail
He can room with Bubba
A we can tell Bubba he was messing around with his sister and Mother
LOL

re: #197 ReverseTaqiyya

Speaking of T-REX.

Blood cells found from T-REX?

I thought they died out 65 million years ago? How can there be any tissue or blood cells left after that amount of time? (unless of course they're not millions of years old)

That is just more Creationist distortion of science:

Talk.Origins - T-Rex flesh and blood

No. I'm not going to see it!
*sticks out tongue*

re: #212 Ma Sands

And, if one, as I do, starts from that point, all the rest can be looked at with wonder, checked against one's starting point, and not ruffle a feather. :)

Hi Ma. :)

Hi friends. We are not arguing tonight are we? I have been having problems with me laptop all freakin' day...finally get it running...and...sigh.

re: #217 Mich-again

My buddy had a Mustand GT that couldn't even make it up his driveway if there was any snow on it.

Had a Trans-Am in Colorado. Man, I loved that hot rod. Loved it so much I put studded snows on all four and deflated the tires. Crawled that bitch for several months a year, but damn well worth it when the sun was out!

re: #224 Bacchus's daddy

Give creationontheweb a look. You might just be suprised at the amount of quality scientists there and how science and Christianity go hand in hand, as they have done for hundreds of years.

re: #196 sojerofgod

That's not how design works. The architect draws sketches of his beautiful building with sweeping arches and fabulous atriums, then he send the sketch to the structural engineer and says, "make it work" I worked many a construction project that had architectural elements removed because they were impractical or just way too bloody expensive to engineer.

So, they have absolutely no idea about ergonomics, aerodynamics, and structure?

OK

re: #19 Killgore Trout

The Darwin quote is pretty egregious. Worthy of Mikey Moore. C'mon, creationists, You have to admit that's pretty damn dishonest.

WHy are you still using creation for ID?

You being dishonest?

well, good night all you believers, partial believers and non-believers.
if i get the taters and onions planted tomorrow, that could make a believer out of me.

re: #229 Q-Burn

Shhhhhh! My wife thinks you're dead..

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA !

(I won't tell )

:)

My favorite image of Ben Stein as a "teacher" is him standing in front of the class saying Buehler..Buehler...Buehler... in that deadpan voice.

re: #239 nyc redneck

well, good night all you believers, partial believers and non-believers.
if i get the taters and onions planted tomorrow, that could make a believer out of me.

Goodnight nyc! sleep tight :)

re: #53 Grammy Cracker

dear Grammy your confusing the common "man on the street" use of the word theory with the scientific one. When scientists use the word theory, it has a different meaning to normal everyday use. a theory is not a guess. It's a well-documented explanation of observations. Also don't think that because its just a theory it's not proven and when it does it becomes a law.
laws are used to describe Observations and a theory to explain them.
that said this is an old topic
here is an article from 05 by a man who is much smarter then me.
By Christopher Hitchens:
Equal time for Evolutionists!

The piece came back to me after I finished reading Jacob Weisberg's sarcastic demolition of the idea of "equal time," or "teaching the controversy," in respect to the new mania for "intelligent design" as a counter to evolution. In the formal sense, he was quite right. We do not and we should not teach rubbish and superstition alongside science. "Intelligent design" is not even a theory. It is more like a mentality. It admits of no verification or falsity and does not deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as a series of hypotheses and experiments that have served us well in analyzing the fossil record, the record of molecular biology, and—through the unraveling of the DNA strings—our kinship with other species. And this is to say nothing of the possibility of medical advances that may astonish us in our own lifetimes. To put astrology on the same blackboard as the Hubble telescope would be an approximate analogy. I was sent, this week, an article on "Intelligent Falling," wherein certain advocates of "intelligent design" said that gravity was not a natural law because it did not explain matters such as angel flight or the fall of Satan from heaven, the latter of which was mandated rather than gravitational. As is so often the case with pieces that appear in the Onion, I honestly could not decide whether this was a clever hoax or not—the arguments were almost exactly as stupid as the real thing.

re: #207 Opilio
O, Ive dumbed myself down. Just don't have the patience for scientific reading unless its a work related journal. I am sure you are right.

re: #197 ReverseTaqiyya

Speaking of T-REX.

Blood cells found from T-REX?

I thought they died out 65 million years ago? How can there be any tissue or blood cells left after that amount of time? (unless of course they're not millions of years old)

Are you trying to change the subject again? I thought we were talking moon recession... Here's another good paper on the topic

[Link: xxx.lanl.gov...]

How old do you think the earth is RT?

re: #224 Bacchus's daddy

I was raised in a strict Catholic household. Lost my faith many years ago. Although I straddle the fence between atheism/ agnosticism, I admire those people who retain their faith (as long as it's not faith in the 50-year-old pederast). Wish I could get mine back. I think it's unfortunate that evolution can put a strain on people's faith, but it is science (though available evidence might not yet make it airtight). ID is not science. It is NOT INCOMPATIBLE with evolution; but it is not science.

So does that mean you had not supernatural thing happen in your life time?

re: #236 ReverseTaqiyya

Give creationontheweb a look. You might just be suprised at the amount of quality scientists there and how science and Christianity go hand in hand, as they have done for hundreds of years.

I am (not really) surprised by how much distortion of science is there. Does Christianity really go hand-in-hand with distortion and outright lies?

re: #231 Freddybear

Here's an interesting article on that discovery, and how Mary Schweitzer, the scientist working on the discovery, feels about it's relation to her faith:

"Further discoveries in the past year have shown that the discovery of soft tissue in B. rex wasn’t just a fluke. Schweitzer and Wittmeyer have now found probable blood vessels, bone-building cells and connective tissue in another T. rex, in a theropod from Argentina and in a 300,000-year-old woolly mammoth fossil. Schweitzer’s work is “showing us we really don’t understand decay,” Holtz says. “There’s a lot of really basic stuff in nature that people just make assumptions about.”

Young-earth creationists also see Schweitzer’s work as revolutionary, but in an entirely different way. They first seized upon Schweitzer’s work after she wrote an article for the popular science magazine Earth in 1997 about possible red blood cells in her dinosaur specimens. Creation magazine claimed that Schweitzer’s research was “powerful testimony against the whole idea of dinosaurs living millions of years ago. It speaks volumes for the Bible’s account of a recent creation.”

This drives Schweitzer crazy. Geologists have established that the Hell Creek Formation, where B. rex was found, is 68 million years old, and so are the bones buried in it. She’s horrified that some Christians accuse her of hiding the true meaning of her data. “They treat you really bad,” she says. “They twist your words and they manipulate your data.” For her, science and religion represent two different ways of looking at the world; invoking the hand of God to explain natural phenomena breaks the rules of science. After all, she says, what God asks is faith, not evidence. “If you have all this evidence and proof positive that God exists, you don’t need faith. I think he kind of designed it so that we’d never be able to prove his existence. And I think that’s really cool.”

[Link: www.smithsonianmag.com...]

re: #225 experiencedtraveller

God created Man.

Mr. Colt made them equal.

AMEN! I am informed that it is now time for this backward Midwestern white woman, who clings to her guns and her God, to go to bed. I sincerely hope that isn't too stupid and unscientific for some of y'all.

/see you on the morning threads...and BE KIND TO ONE ANOTHER. Please!

Do I have to spell it out for you people? Evolution is WRONG.

1) Al Qur'an is the absolute truth.
2) Anything conflicting with al Qur'an is prima facie false.
3) Neo-Darwinist evolution conflicts with al Qur'an.
4) Therefore, evolution is prima facie false.

What DON'T you understand?

re: #231 Freddybear

That is just more Creationist distortion of science:

Talk.Origins - T-Rex flesh and blood

Lol, i read that 'rebuttal' and I had to laugh!

They argue with phrases such as 'seen with the naked eye' when in fact a microscope had to be used to see the red blood cells.

LOL! Some rebuttal.

re: #239 nyc redneck

well, good night all you believers, partial believers and non-believers.
if i get the taters and onions planted tomorrow, that could make a believer out of me.

Sweetdreams to ya!

re: #243 loup-garou

Also don't think that because its just a theory it's not proven..

hUh? Theories remain theories until they are proven.

re: #44 Ojoe

I also think that Scientific American used to be a much better magazine.

Sure, but it was accessible then, too, only more informative!

Actually, I think they've un-dumbed it just a bit recently, made the articles a bit more substantive.

Scientists map the genome of the platypus

The platypus is classed as a mammal because it has fur and feeds its young with milk. It flaps a beaver-like tail. But it also has bird and reptile features — a duck-like bill and webbed feet, and lives mostly underwater. Males have venom-filled spurs on their heels.

"At first glance, the platypus appears as if it was the result of an evolutionary accident," said Francis S. Collins, director of the U.S. National Human Genome Research Institute, which funded the study.

"But as weird as this animal looks, its genome sequence is priceless for understanding how mammalian biological processes evolved," Collins said in a statement.

/have fun

In a distant galaxy, a star orbiting a massive central black hole strays too close to the insatiable giant and is torn apart. But before it can be devoured, the star lets out one last scream in a flare of light that slowly echoes across the galaxy. Astronomers on Earth pick up this faint call and use it to map the nucleus of the galaxy from which it emanated.

This scenario is no bit of science fiction %uFFFD%uFFFD" a team of astronomers discovered one of these rare and dramatic events while combing through the Sloan Digital Sky Survey last December. Their observations are detailed in the May issue of Astrophysical Journal Letters.

The team is still monitoring the "light echo," and for the first time, one of these events can be observed in great detail, allowing astronomers "to probe different regions of the galaxy," said study leader Stefanie Komossa of the Max Planck Institute for extraterrestrial Physics.

SNIP

re: #237 gman
Some of the architects i have known cared only about impressing their friends, and clients, and winning awards at the local conventions. Especially when they were working on new schools for the city. you should see some of them, the front door on one has an atrium with a 30 foot tall ceiling made of glass panels! in a fricking middle school!

re: #253 Mich-again

hUh? Theories remain theories until they are proven.

So, where are we with that theory of relativity thing?

re: #250 Abdullah al-Libi

Who's sock might you be?

re: #247 Freddybear

I am (not really) surprised by how much distortion of science is there. Does Christianity really go hand-in-hand with distortion and outright lies?

Is it 'distortion of science' because you don't agree with it or because their methodology is flawed?

re: #228 NoSpam

T-rex didn't become a chicken. The ancestors of the birds are the small, aerodynamic raptors.

/Chickens, T. rex birds of a feather

re: #24 THELAZYC

It seems like almost every time I come to this place I get a stick pocked in my eye! Bye Bye!

Well, if you can;t handle a little stick-pocking, then you're in the wrong place.

re: #234 fat bastard vegetarian

Hi friends. We are not arguing tonight are we? I have been having problems with me laptop all freakin' day...finally get it running...and...sigh.

I have been self-deleting like mad. Why do you ask?

/

re: #259 MandyManners

Who's sock might you be?

I just found that with your help Mandy Manners!Sock!

re: #253 Mich-again
when used in general. however scientifically the word "theory" has a completely different meaning.

re: #224 Bacchus's daddy

I was raised in a strict Catholic household. Lost my faith many years ago. Although I straddle the fence between atheism/ agnosticism, I admire those people who retain their faith (as long as it's not faith in the 50-year-old pederast). Wish I could get mine back. I think it's unfortunate that evolution can put a strain on people's faith, but it is science (though available evidence might not yet make it airtight). ID is not science. It is NOT INCOMPATIBLE with evolution; but it is not science.

It's people who let us down, and give us reasons to doubt, not God.

re: #253 Mich-again

hUh? Theories remain theories until they are proven.

Theories remain theories period.