Ben Stein vs. Sputtering Atheists

[Chairboy]

A quick note, the repeated assertion that evolution suggests that humans came from monkeys isn't true.  Scientists believe that monkeys and humans share a common genetic ancestor.  This doesn't mean we're descended from monkeys, that'd be like saying Joe is his daughter's son.

[AKIron]

A quick note, the repeated assertion that evolution suggests that humans came from monkeys isn't true.  Scientists believe that monkeys and humans share a common genetic ancestor.  This doesn't mean we're descended from monkeys, that'd be like saying Joe is his daughter's son.

That'd be no stranger than saying something came from nothing of it's own volition.

[lazs2]

noted.. I admit that I used the term for sensationalism.. still.. the theory suggest a missing link where the monkeys and the men were once the same but went off in different directions..  some proof is needed before I believe that.

just like fred flinstones pet didn't make the gas in my tank.

lazs

[Hap]

Back to the movie.  When it comes this way or when it comes out on DVD, I'm looking forward to watching it.  Anyone else?

Did look at a review from April 20th http://www.reuters.com/article/reviewsNews/idUSN2036189120080421 in which the author says the movie is bad.  Aww, you know, he didn't like it, this that and the other thing.

The reviewer states The film's main thesis is that scientists and educators are being persecuted, in some cases fired from their positions, because they had the effrontery to challenge their institutions' scientific orientation toward the theory of evolution.

If the coupling of images and music be badly done or wrongly done, reviewer's assessment, there's no peep from the reviewer whether or not the film's thesis be so or not.

Will have to watch it I guess then see if the claims match up to what is so.

[moot]

That'd be no stranger than saying something came from nothing of it's own volition.

Which is less strange than pretending to detect and decrypt a signal your instrument is insensitive to.

Hap, a lot of people will watch it if someone refutes the accusations of screwing with interview material.  Otherwise it's like taking history lessons from propaganda reels.

[Lumpy]

That'd be no stranger than saying something came from nothing of it's own volition.

And what is that?

[VWE]

I like the fact that evolution can explain everything for the simple reason that it is a framework that includes all explanations, whether true or false, real or imaginary. Yes, it can explain the relationship between any set of fossils. It can also explain the relationship between orcs and elves. Fiction has amazing explanatory powers!

[AKIron]

Which is less strange than pretending to detect and decrypt a signal your instrument is insensitive to.

Hap, a lot of people will watch it if someone refutes the accusations of screwing with interview material.  Otherwise it's like taking history lessons from propaganda reels.

Sounds pretty judgemental to me. If I can't do it then no one can. Is that what you're saying?

[AKIron]

And what is that?

The theory of Evolution without intelligent design or influence.

[moot]

I'm reading other stuff for next semester, so I don't have time to read all of these thoroughly.. But just in case some of you guys are after pitting all the theories and hypothesies against one another and seeing which one comes out on top, here's a list of some rights and wrongs about the theory of evolution:
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/dn13620-evolution-24-myths-and-misconceptions.html


Iron first of all I'll be as judgemental as possible.. The only way not to be judgemental is to know nothing.  Being anything less than as judgemental as possible is foolish.
What I meant by that post is that saying anything about the supernatural couldn't be tested, and so, is indistinguishable from something false about something supernatural - whether that's only one iota off from the truth or entirely false.  You can't "penetrate the ways of god", you can't know what god's mind is, you can't make any sort of statement about the supernatural with any certainty, because there's nothing to back you up.  The supernatural is taken only on faith, not reason.

If there was some supernatural fingerprint on the universe that we could detect, it'd be something less than infinite that'd have left it. If it's not infinite, it's no more godly than the mechanics of nature that we've figured out so far.  You can't perceive the supernatural, and if you can, there's no way to understand it or make concrete, specific predictions about it.

[RTHolmes]

The film's main thesis is that scientists and educators are being persecuted, in some cases fired from their positions, because they had the effrontery to challenge their institutions' scientific orientation toward the theory of evolution.

sounds reasonable to me. if a med school lecturer insisted on teaching the importance of green vs yellow bile and the use of leeches I would expect them to be fired, and then struck off.

I've only started looking into this recently because, incredibly, there is some fundamentalist christian organisation lobbying parliament to include this pseudoscience BS in science curricula in the UK.

[Lumpy]

The theory of Evolution without intelligent design or influence.

Life didn't come from "nothing". Given that the building blocks of life exists, and given near infinite time, the "accidental" self-creation of life is inevitable.

[SkyRock]

noted.. I admit that I used the term for sensationalism.. still.. the theory suggest a missing link where the monkeys and the men were once the same but went off in different directions..  some proof is needed before I believe that.

just like fred flinstones pet didn't make the gas in my tank.

lazs

jsut because a puzzle piece is missing doesnt mean we can't tell what the picture is.  Humans are smart that way!  

[Donzo]

jsut because a puzzle piece is missing doesnt mean we can't tell what the picture is.  Humans are smart that way!  

What else proves what the picture is?

[SkyRock]

What else proves what the picture is?

what proves what "real" is?