Ben Stein "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed"

[Wookie]

What's ID?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by photon

Not to mention that if someone really did overturn evolution with a new theory, they'd win a Nobel prize at the very least.

Yeah, that's the thing. If anyone were actually able to disprove evolution he or she would become the most famous person in the world. Whoever published it would get rich.

That's pretty good motivation to overturn the theory but nobody has yet stepped up. The idea (that this movie appears to put forth) that "science" just doesn't want to do it doesn't make sense.

It's like me saying "I could win the Stanley Cup and date Scarlett Johannsson but I choose not too because I don't want to rock the boat" and it's actually true.

[Alpha_Q]

It's nice to see people discuss the Old Testament. At least some people have actually read the damn book. For me, every verse was another hammer-blow to the nails that pinned me to the cross of my atheism. I don't see how anyone can read that and take any part of it seriously, especially women. Either the bible is wrong, or, if its right, god is a total malevolent, immature, childish simpleton. The ultimate dead-beat dad, and just an out and out a-hole.

ID should NOT be taught in the public school system in any shape or form. There is more than enough intelligent evidence for the Theory of Evolution, and thinkng that it had to have been initiated by a higher intellignce is an insult to nature.
Organized religion is nothing more than an anchor that is holding human society and civilization back from how great it can be.
If you need spiritualism in your life, if you can't find faith in the good that exists in mankind, then keep it in your own home, keep it in your own church, and don't try to lay your mythology on those who don't want it. (Sorry, get a lot of LDS's at my door, and they never want to stay long for some reason. Maybe it's the coffee.)

[Canada 02]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Exactly right. Now read both chapters again and see how contradictory the two different creation stories are. Here's an example to get you started:

In Genesis 1:24-25, all the other animals were created before humans, both male and female (Genesis 1:26-27).

But in Genesis 2:7, God first created man (Adam), then all the other animals which Adam named in kind (Genesis 2:19-20), then finally he created woman (Eve) from Adam's rib (Genesis 2:21-23)

OK. My intent wasn't to argue scripture. As a scientist, evolution is indisputable

[jammies]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

It's like me saying "I could win the Stanley Cup and date Scarlett Johannsson but I choose not too because I don't want to rock the boat" and it's actually true.

Can I be in your posse and just kind of live off the scraps? You know, date Scarlett's friends, eat nachos and play video games while I'm "watching" your house for you on those long road trips, and the like?

But first - stop slacking and get on this pronto!

[Textcritic]

Originally Posted by Alpha_Q

It's nice to see people discuss the Old Testament. At least some people have actually read the damn book. For me, every verse was another hammer-blow to the nails that pinned me to the cross of my atheism. I don't see how anyone can read that and take any part of it seriously, especially women. Either the bible is wrong, or, if its right, god is a total malevolent, immature, childish simpleton. The ultimate dead-beat dad, and just an out and out a-hole...

Pretty simplistic depiction of the Old Testament from my perspective. I don't deny that there are a large variety of texts in which the God, YHWH, El, or whoever carries with him the typical megalomaniacal stamp of ancient Canaanite deity. But there are many other facets of the god(s) of the Hebrew Bible. The problem with the Old Testament is that it is neither completely right or wrong. In it's pages god is both malevolent and benign, and the reason for this is that it is not a simple book composed by a simple person (or people) in one or even a few settings. the Bible is a collection of varied pieces of ancient literature that bears witness to the development of a religion from polythiestic Canaanite folk beliefs and practices to a monotheistic temple cult, to a variety of community confessions. Painting with broad strokes in biblical literature will always fail to appraise all of its subjects and themes with accuracy.

[jammies]

Originally Posted by Wookie

What's ID?

Intelligent Design - you know, the theory that God is like some divine dog-breeder. Woof!

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by Textcritic

Pretty simplistic depiction of the Old Testament from my perspective. I don't deny that there are a large variety of texts in which the God, YHWH, El, or whoever carries with him the typical megalomaniacal stamp of ancient Canaanite deity. But there are many other facets of the god(s) of the Hebrew Bible. The problem with the Old Testament is that it is neither completely right or wrong. In it's pages god is both malevolent and benign, and the reason for this is that it is not a simple book composed by a simple person (or people) in one or even a few settings. the Bible is a collection of varied pieces of ancient literature that bears witness to the development of a religion from polythiestic Canaanite folk beliefs and practices to a monotheistic temple cult, to a variety of community confessions. Painting with broad strokes in biblical literature will always fail to appraise all of its subjects and themes with accuracy.

The problem is that 90% of believers seem to subscribe to that simplistic broad-stroked version of the OT if not the entire bible. They take it as a integral, contiguous, consistent, universal, and timeless guide to the be-all-end-all way that the world has always been and should always be...instead of what it really is, a vastly edited and compiled collected book of ancient texts written for various purposes, times, and cultures...put together in a certain order and way by dark-ages papal councils millenia later for their own purposes (political, philosophical, or even arbitrary), times, and cultures.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

The problem is that 90% of believers seem to subscribe to that simplistic broad-stroked version of the OT if not the entire bible. They take it as a integral, contiguous, consistent, universal, and timeless guide to the be-all-end-all way that the world has always been and should always be...instead of what it really is, a vastly edited and compiled collected book of ancient texts written for various purposes, times, and cultures...put together in a certain order and way by dark-ages papal councils millenia later for their own purposes (political, philosophical, or even arbitrary), times, and cultures.

Not to mention if they actually did research they'd see most of the bible was old news when it was created, and that it steals from ancient religions.

But I'm sure its just coincidence that the story of the death, ressurection, son of god, crucifixion, etc.. is just common in a whole host of other god stories from before the time of the bible.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Hack&Lube

The problem is that 90% of believers seem to subscribe to that simplistic broad-stroked version of the OT if not the entire bible. They take it as a integral, contiguous, consistent, universal, and timeless guide to the be-all-end-all way that the world has always been and should always be...instead of what it really is, a vastly edited and compiled collected book of ancient texts written for various purposes, times, and cultures...put together in a certain order and way by dark-ages papal councils millenia later for their own purposes (political, philosophical, or even arbitrary), times, and cultures.

I don't even think you'd be able to pick out 90% of "believers" as probably close to that number aren't that devout.

BTW, I notice that this has become a thread about Christians, when the person who has made this film is in fact Jewish.

[Thor]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I don't even think you'd be able to pick out 90% of "believers" as probably close to that number aren't that devout.

BTW, I notice that this has become a thread about Christians, when the person who has made this film is in fact Jewish.

I think that when most of us resident atheists here talk its about the 3 main monotheistic religions.

[MarchHare]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I don't even think you'd be able to pick out 90% of "believers" as probably close to that number aren't that devout.

BTW, I notice that this has become a thread about Christians, when the person who has made this film is in fact Jewish.

Conversations about the Old Testament apply equally to both Christians and Jews (at least the first five books, and since we're mainly discussing the creation myth in Genesis here...).

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by Kipper is King

You hit the nail on the head. Even in the Catholic university I go to, the point is made in philosophy classes that there is a difference between knowledge and faith.

That's what makes debates like this so difficult.

this is what bugs us non-religious folk the most. religion is based purely on faith, that proof is not required to believe in an ultimate creator. but science is based on knowledge, nothing is ever accepted as fact or even a theory without solid proof to back it up. so why does the religious right feel it neccessary to dress up their faith and try to fool people into thinking it's a science? because that's exactly what they're trying to do with intelligent design, when in reality that line of thinking goes completely against the foundations for their entire belief system

you can't have it both ways, the scientific community doesn't work like that

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by MarchHare

Conversations about the Old Testament apply equally to both Christians and Jews (at least the first five books, and since we're mainly discussing the creation myth in Genesis here...).

Sure, but not the references to Jesus.

I just noticed a few people automatically taking this opportunity to make quips about Christianity when it really has not much to do with ID theories.

[photon]

Well not much to do with ID except that it was created by Christianity for the sole purpose of counteracting the threat of evolution in the education system. According to some of the founders of ID anyway.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by photon

Well not much to do with ID except that it was created by Christianity for the sole purpose of counteracting the threat of evolution in the education system. According to some of the founders of ID anyway.

Christians didn't invent ID any more than they invented the idea of a god. The idea is as old as religon itself.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Sure, but not the references to Jesus.

I just noticed a few people automatically taking this opportunity to make quips about Christianity when it really has not much to do with ID theories.

If I may paraphrase a famous quote...

Not all Christians are Intelligent Designists, but all Intelligent Designists are Christians.

You may not think Christianity has much to do with ID theories but its proponents definitely do.

Muslims, Sikhs, Buddhists and atheists aren't pushing this theory, and the only Jew doing it, far as I know, is Ben Stein. It is a Christian pursuit.

[photon]

Heh, an amusing thing tonight with Expelled..

PZ Myers (a VERY outspoken atheist, as well as a developmental biologist and professor and such) went with his family and a guest to attend a showing of the movie tonight. The showing was free, the invitations said "no ticket required".

They're in line and a cop or guard comes and pulls PZ out of line, telling him that the movie's producer has explicitly instructed that PZ wasn't allowed to attend the free viewing. The free viewing to the movie that PZ actually appears in (an interview they got under false pretenses, but don't ask where liars go). However his family and his guest are allowed to continue in.

His guest?

Richard Dawkins!!

Epic Fail.

A forum post from someone there: http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin...00#entry101110

[Hack&Lube]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Christians didn't invent ID any more than they invented the idea of a god. The idea is as old as religon itself.

The concept of a creation myth is not what we are debating. We are debating the modern teleological intelligent design argument, stemming from the late 20th and 21st century movements sometimes associated with young-earth creationists actively seeking to change the basis of science and invalidate evolution as a reactionary measure against a tide of science that to some, seem incompatible with the tenets of their rigid beliefs...and then the efforts of that movement to first remove evolution from school curriculums entirely and then later to positioning intelligent design as an equal and valid theory that must be taught alongside evolution as an alternative.

[photon]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

Christians didn't invent ID any more than they invented the idea of a god. The idea is as old as religon itself.

They didn't invent the idea that God created everything, but they created the current Intelligent Design movement and used it to try and inject religion into the science class. The current use of the term started in 1987 in response to the courts disallowing creationism in science class. A creationist textbook search and replaced all instances of the term creationism with intelligent design, and creationists with design proponents.

When we're talking about ID with respect to current issues and this movie, that's what it is.