Movie Review: Expelled
posted at 3:00 pm on April 18, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Send to a Friend |
printer-friendly
While at CPAC in February, I had an opportunity to attend an advance screening of the new documentary, Expelled: The Movie. Ben Stein focuses on a perceived lack of intellectual freedom afforded to those who either believe in or investigate Intelligent Design theories in the scientific community. I wrote the following review at the time; the producers may have made some changes since, but I don’t believe it would change the thrust of my review. I plan on seeing the theatrical release this weekend, and would recommend it to everyone as at least a way to discuss the values and limitations of scientific inquiry and intellectual openness in American Academia.
The bloggers at CPAC received an invitation to screen a new documentary on academic intolerance called Expelled: The Movie this evening. The documentary features Ben Stein on a quest to understand the near-hysteria caused by scientists who so much as broach the idea of intelligent design in papers or in research. It follows Stein as he interviews professors denied tenure, editors fired, and journalists shunned for touching the subject even at its most innocuous levels.
Before discussing my feelings about the film, which is still in post-production and will not go into release until April, I should explain my approach to the ID/evolution debate. I believe evolution is demonstrably proven in enough examples to say that its effect on variation in species cannot be denied. The example I used tonight in discussing this with another viewer (certainly not the only example) is antibiotic effects on bacteria. Antibiotics that kill 99% of bacteria eventually promote the survival and the expansion of the 1% that resist them, created superbacteria that require another set of antibiotics to cure, and so on.
That said, evolution does not interfere with my faith in God. God certainly could have created the universe with a design that included life. The rational laws of nature would include evolution, as well as the myriad of other rational and mathematically provable mechanisms that undergird nature. In fact, the impulse of man to discover the rational laws of nature began with the belief in a rational God, as scientists understood nature’s rationality to reveal an intelligent Creator.
I’d go deeper than that, but Dinesh D’Souza covers it nicely enough already in his book What’s So Great About Christianity, and it’s getting late enough as it is. Suffice it to say that evolution doesn’t present a threat to my worldview.
Rationally, we have to admit that some use ID as an excuse to teach the more literal form of Creationism that has been used to argue against evolution entirely, especially against teaching evolution in primary-school classrooms. That admission does not appear in Expelled, which is a glaring omission. It tends to take out of context the frustration some scientists have about ID, and its place in polarizing the debate over its use. Properly framed, ID accepts all of the science without accepting its transformation into its own belief system.
What do I mean by that? In this, the film does an excellent job of demonstrating atheism as a belief system. Atheism as represented by Richard Dawkings and others in this film gets exposed as exactly the kind of belief system they claim to despise. They can’t prove God exists — and they can’t prove God doesn’t exist. They make the common fallacy of arguing that absence of evidence amounts to evidence of absence.
But in a way, this is all secondary to the real issue of the film: academic intolerance. The debate over ID vs Darwinism sets the table for a truly disturbing look at academia. Science should be about the free debate and research of ideas and hypotheses for duplicable results and provable theorems. However, as the examples Stein and the film provide amply show, the Darwinist academic establishment will brook no dissent from the orthodoxy — and scientists have to be shown with hidden faces to speak to the issue for the film.
Amusingly, Stein asks people how the first cell came to be. None of the scientists could give him a straight answer. Dawkins himself admits he doesn’t know and that no one else does, either — but postulates that aliens could have brought life to this planet, and then postulates that another alien civilization could have brought life to that planet, and so on. He then concedes that one entity could have been the original source … but insists that entity could not possibly have been God. For this he gives absolutely no evidence at all, relegating it as a belief system somewhat akin to Scientology.
All of this is extremely effective, as are the many allusions made to the Berlin Wall during the film. The theme runs throughout, and it explicitly refers to the defensive academic establishment as having built a wall that tramples on freedom of thought and discourse. Less effective is the heavy references to the Nazis in the movie. Although emotionally affecting for some obvious reasons, the fact is that while the Nazis were mostly Darwinists (along with a lot of other things), the vast majority of Darwinists aren’t Nazis. Certainly the eugenicists in Nazi Germany were mightily influenced by Darwinism, but America had its own eugenicists, which the film points out.
I should point out that the film has not finished production, and that changes will be made between now and its release in April. The filmmakers just completed an interview with Christopher Hitchens and will include it in the final cut. I believe other changes may be made which could address some of the criticisms I’ve written here.
Overall, though, the film presents a powerful argument not for intelligent design as much as for the freedom of scientific inquiry. If scientists get punished for challenging orthodoxy, we will not expand our learning but ossify it in concrete. Expelled: The Movie is entertaining, maddening, funny, and provocative, and well worth your time.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « 1 … 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 … 24 »
True science proves the Bible.
None of us are opposed to science but we are opposed to the anti science of evolution (and the secular humanist religion that accompanies it) that they force upon the population under the threat of complete humiliation, excommunication and even prison with anyone who dissents.
There was a global flood.
This invalidates the so called pseudo scientific geological record.
If they told you that a frog kissed a prince and turned into a man…you would think they’re crazy.
But if they told you that a frog,over the course of BILLIONS OF YEARS gradually turned into a man…you might believe them.
Either way it complete garbage.
SaintOlaf on April 18, 2008 at 7:57 PM
TheCulturalist on April 18, 2008 at 7:53 PM
Thank you. Heck, my eldest starts kindergarten in the Fall, and I’m already having to undo propaganda (global warming/climate change crap on Nick). I have a long and arduous road ahead I fear.
the goddess anna on April 18, 2008 at 7:57 PM
Fred should know the truth about this. He’s old enough to have seen it.
exception on April 18, 2008 at 7:58 PM
A waste of pulp.
ronsfi on April 18, 2008 at 7:58 PM
:)
Tzetzes on April 18, 2008 at 7:58 PM
As Ronald Reagan would say, “You ain’t seen nothing yet.”
CyberCipher on April 18, 2008 at 7:59 PM
the goddess anna,
Thanks, same here. I just like a good old fashioned mental donnybrook. :) I just have to force myself not to take anything personally, even being told I’m a servant of satan. ;)
Ack, correction above, the line should read: Evolution *hasn’t* wiped it’s brow and decided to go to sleep now that we’re here.
E1701 on April 18, 2008 at 7:59 PM
Ah, the fallacy of the undistributed middle!
Yes, man has intelligence, but that’s totally irrelevant. The economy is not ordered by anyone, it is ordered by everyone. Whether you plunk down $20 on American beer or on a Chinese necktie, you are not attempting to order the world economy, you are just attempting to satisfy your most urgent desire that $20 will buy. And no one actor—not even WalMart—individually is wealthy enough to order the world economy if they tried to. But the sum of the actions of every actor, company and individual alike, making decisions in such as a way to most benefit their own self-interest, is a harmonious system where every niche is filled and where everyone has a niche to fill.
Adam Smith spoke of an “invisible hand” guiding the marketplace. He, fortunately, had the good sense not to take the “invisible hand” concept literally.
hicsuget on April 18, 2008 at 7:59 PM
So here I stand like “a bird in the wilderness”!
So, a “WatchTower” is…?
J_Gocht on April 18, 2008 at 7:59 PM
don’t get me started on NICK… i’ve been talking about how bad that channel is since my boys were first born.
TheCulturalist on April 18, 2008 at 8:00 PM
Finally, gay marriage.
exception on April 18, 2008 at 8:01 PM
Blahblahblah. Still NO EVIDENCE.
ronsfi on April 18, 2008 at 8:01 PM
E1701 on April 18, 2008 at 7:59 PM
I’m starting to think I’m a servant to this thread. Only two hours to BSG. I’m definately a slave to the Cylon God.
Yeah, I’m out of useful things to say. Have been for a while. But SaintOlaf keeps drawing me back in, such great comments.
the goddess anna on April 18, 2008 at 8:02 PM
Proof that the dinosaurs aren’t really extinct after all.
CyberCipher on April 18, 2008 at 8:02 PM
i thought i saw a post about McC being the one older than dirt…
TheCulturalist on April 18, 2008 at 8:02 PM
For record, Saint Olaf, your bastardized understanding of science and history is giving me a migraine. I used to have an evangelical friend who used your arguments… didn’t matter how many times I destroyed his arguments with facts, because dammit, he *knew* he was right and the Bible was literal.
He was a friend, but spending too much time we him made me want to experiment with self-lobotomy.
E1701 on April 18, 2008 at 8:03 PM
So, a “WatchTower” is…?
J_Gocht on April 18, 2008 at 7:59 PM
Something that princes stand on to keep the view.
the goddess anna on April 18, 2008 at 8:03 PM
Yeah, guys, didn’t you ever watch the show?
Tzetzes on April 18, 2008 at 8:03 PM
sorry… BSG?
TheCulturalist on April 18, 2008 at 8:03 PM
Verily, you are correct sir. ;) Was in a hurry and that crass phrase was all I could think of! How about, I think he’s…awesome. :)
Were you members from the same college? Cool! What years did you attend?
inviolet on April 18, 2008 at 8:04 PM
Homosexuality killed the dinosaurs?
My collie says:
CyberCipher on April 18, 2008 at 8:04 PM
Battlestar Galactica. Scifi Fridays at 10pm.
the goddess anna on April 18, 2008 at 8:05 PM
Oh, thx
TheCulturalist on April 18, 2008 at 8:05 PM
Here’s where I disagree. It observable that most all other animals live their lives by a certain code. My question is why does a similar code not apply to humans as well? Many animals live their lives because of a code, humans seem to live their lives in difference of a code. What is the code animals live by and what is the code humans live in difference of? I do believe science is able to tell us a certain way to live, at least in order to continue surviving as we have for the past 3 million years.
I think this is reactionary. Kids learn about intelligent design and evolution regardless of schools teachings. Sure, they won’t learn it completely if they don’t have any interest, but I forget most everything said about evolution in my high school biology class and most I’ve learned from it came from college geology courses and research online. If kids want to learn about something they’ll learn about it. I agree that I’d like my kids to know just about everything :), but actively teaching the i.d. because they don’t teach it in schools wouldn’t fit the bill, so long as they know the position is out there and what they stand for (but that might’ve been what you were describing).
Let me get your position straight because it sounds like it’s changing. You believe that man has dominion over animals to the extent of hunting them for sport to the brink of extinction, yes or no? If yes, don’t you see how this belief system conflicts with the survival of mankind?
Ah, I get it, you want to see the changes NOW! Sorry, Veruca, it doesn’t work that way.
Nonfactor on April 18, 2008 at 8:06 PM
BSG = Battlestar Galactica. Frackin’ A.
I was more partial to Stargate SG-1 myself.
E1701 on April 18, 2008 at 8:06 PM
I might actually go to the theater to see this one. I haven’t been since the Blair Witch movie.
NTWR on April 18, 2008 at 8:07 PM
Both sides are unreasonable in their expectations of the other side as far as explaining things to the satisfaction of those who disagree with them.
The God side demands we have faith, which makes sense, but when the Science side demands we have faith it does not make sense.
When people want to present as fact that people and lady bugs have a common ancestor way back yonder and then start talking about hundreds of billions of surviving mutations over hundreds of billions of years, UNLESS aliens landed and started the whole thing — I believe there is a need for a greater faith on the Science side than even the God side demands.
I also believe in God, so now I can be summarily dismissed as delusional, :-)
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:07 PM
For all that is unholy, please no spoilers in the thread.
exception on April 18, 2008 at 8:08 PM
More of StOlaughs “Hoaxes”
You won’t even have to read Oly.
http://evolutiondiary.com/2008/02/22/621/
ronsfi on April 18, 2008 at 8:08 PM
Thanks for the review. I’ll at least watch the video.
Mojave Mark on April 18, 2008 at 8:08 PM
I never followed either one. the old BGS, but not the new one. for me, Friday evening is Brit Com night on PBS
TheCulturalist on April 18, 2008 at 8:10 PM
http://evolutiondiary.com/2008/04/17/elephant-had-aquatic-ancestor/
ronsfi on April 18, 2008 at 8:10 PM
Nonfactor on April 18, 2008 at 8:06 PM
I don’t think it’s reactionary. I just want my children to be more well-rounded than the drones schools pump out nowadays. I left high school 8 years ago, but I am still interested in subjects that I learned about back then. My husband and I hope to impart that love of learning into our kids.
Then again, our kids are being raised by bonafide geeks/nerds. My daughter is big into learning other languages at age 5 (I’m a former linguist), and the twins seem to be following in her footsteps. I’m working under the assumption they will always be willing to learn more than they are being taught in school. I have no reason to believe otherwise.
the goddess anna on April 18, 2008 at 8:10 PM
No, you don’t have to believe any science at all.
exception on April 18, 2008 at 8:10 PM
You say, “True science proves the Bible.” I assume you would also agree with the contrapositive, “All science that disproves the Bible is false science.” It seems as though your preferred arbiter of scientific truth lies not in verifiability or repeatability or falsifiability or demonstrability, but in whether or not a claim can be shoehorned into conformance with the text of the Bible. It would appear, St. Olaf, that what you call “true science” is not science at all.
hicsuget on April 18, 2008 at 8:12 PM
Others of us have a different perspective. I don’t take everything in the Bible literally. There is a lot of it that I don’t understand. But that’s not what bothers me about the Bible. The thing that bothers me is the parts that I DO understand.
My collie says:
Don’t bring Calvinism into this collie. Can’t you see that were busy with gay, cigarette smoking dinosaurs?
CyberCipher on April 18, 2008 at 8:13 PM
r2b…
What’s a “WatchTower”…?
Thx, aga !
J_Gocht on April 18, 2008 at 8:13 PM
Not at all. There is room for scientific inquiry and belief. There is room in academic for the study of philosophy and theology. However, supernatural explanations aren’t relevant in biology class.
dedalus on April 18, 2008 at 8:14 PM
I was more partial to Stargate SG-1 myself.
E1701 on April 18, 2008 at 8:06 PM
I miss SG-1 something FIERCE! And I hate spoilers, exception. Ruined last season for me. Good to know I’m not alone here.
OMC, my husband is home!
the goddess anna on April 18, 2008 at 8:14 PM
Me, 2005-2007, so I never actually ran into him! (Have eaten several time at the Eagle & Child though, meetingplace of the Inklings.) I was at Univ for postgraduate work; he was there as an undergraduate. (We’ve also had a few other notables, such as inter alios Percy Bysshe Shelley, Aubrey de Sélincourt, Stephen Hawking, Clement Atlee, a bunch of Irish poets and of course the great William Jones. Oh yeah, and Bill Clinton.)
(Oh, and we had Robert Hooke as well, who discovered the cell. But don’t tell Olaf we had a scientist there!)
Tzetzes on April 18, 2008 at 8:14 PM
chart of the evolution of the dog:
1.chihuahua
2.affenpincher
3.mini dachsund
4.pomeranian
5.pug
6.french bulldog
7.cairn terrier
8.english setter
9.german shepherd
10.great dane
You can clearly see that over BILLIONS of years the chihuahua gradually evolved into the great dane.
SaintOlaf on April 18, 2008 at 8:15 PM
No, no…My position hasn’t changed at all, maybe I’m just not making it clear. Yes, sometimes man hunts purely for sport…but what does that have to do with God granting man dominion over the beasts of the Earth? And we could hunt certain species to extinction, but man will survive.
Like I said…with dominion, comes responsibility too. God gave man an Earth filled with animals to use, to have as pets, to hunt, to feed us, to work for us, etc.
It’s just that some humans shirk the responsibility part.
JetBoy on April 18, 2008 at 8:16 PM
Okay, I’m officially leaving now. I was hoping to stick around and do my part to achieve 1000 posts, but my husband is home.
This means I can finally have a shower in peace (before my show). Which is waaaaay more important than this debate.
the goddess anna on April 18, 2008 at 8:17 PM
Gee, what a surprise only to options, we can’t raise them as feed, or enjoyment? We can’t hunt them and still manage them?
And your question is why we can’t live by a similar code then animals?
Because of exactly the way you posted. Animals are instinctive, no real cognitive thought…you on the other hand presented only two possible alternatives, not to learn but to trap your fellow man and destroy his argument.
That is why, by your example, religion is a gift to us. To try to temper your way of dealing with subjects you don’t agree with.
In other words, you see no real difference between animals and man, and faithful people perceive man as having a soul, and animals not…interesting you can’t see that, also defining.
right2bright on April 18, 2008 at 8:18 PM
Chaka! That was Clint Howard wasn’t it?
ROFL
ronsfi on April 18, 2008 at 8:18 PM
My collie says:
Stupid dog. That’s pure speculation on your part.
CyberCipher on April 18, 2008 at 8:19 PM
ronsfi on April 18, 2008 at 8:21 PM
I’m off to evolve into a less sober life form.
ronsfi on April 18, 2008 at 8:22 PM
Gotta’ go now. Keep the thread going people. I want to resume about five hours from now.
My collie says:
CyberCipher on April 18, 2008 at 8:23 PM
Nonfactor,
The code you speak of there is instinct. Animals have no higher morality… as much as we anthropomorphize them, even our dear beloved pet cats and dogs (and bunnies, and orangutans, and anchovies… sorry, channeling Monty Python for a moment there), live on instinct. Their response to these instincts varies, but essentially even those animals we will swear up and down understand us and love us are looking out for three things: Reproduction, Survival, Me. The order they prioritize these things varies, as do their particular instincts (which is why wild and even domesticated animals can be dangerous unpredictable), but that’s basically what it amounts to.
Humans have the same basic goals, but on top of instincts, we have intelligence, learned behaviors, and from those, civilization. We can override our instincts (indeed, much of law and religion is preoccupied with self-control over these instincts). For example, at the most basic level, reproduction is a goal - one of us males sees an attractive female, our instincts scream “breed!” Our laws, intelligence and civilization tells us to go court the young woman, rather than bopping her on the head and dragging her back to our caves to have our way with her. Why? Intelligence tells us that order promotes survival, and society promotes order. At the same time, we can override our personal survival for another.
Religion was the earliest means of codifying these non-instinctive reactions. Remember, the Bible says, “no greater love is there than that a man lays down his life for his brother.” Intelligence has actually *overriden* survival instinct. After religion came written laws and codes. But they cooexist, because laws codify *temporal* punishment for misbehavior, while religion assigns metaphysical punishment. Philosophy fills in the cracks between “obey because you will be punished if you don’t” and “obey because you believe it is the right thing to do.” I’m afraid I’m not very Hobbesian in that respect.
Now not being religious myself, I derive morals from a personal philosophy I have developed in the course of my life. But as we are all aware, not all personal philosophies are equal - religion provides parity. So some people have their own moral codes, others have religious moral codes, and still others are moral out of threat - and quite a few hold opposing moralities, or reject the concept entirely. But all of it is veneer over instinct.
E1701 on April 18, 2008 at 8:23 PM
I wear only Kirk uniforms, with approved tear-away front panel to impress all the scantily-clad alien chicks when I get into a round of fisticuffs. :D
E1701 on April 18, 2008 at 8:26 PM
Dawkins: “If you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution that person is ignorant, stupid or insane.”
I think Dawkins is right about that.
I also think the only kind of religion that is at all threatened by Dawkins’ statement is the stupid kind that thinks it can do science. With friends like that, religion needs no enemies.
The parallel case is the stupid kind of science that thinks it has standing to make moral claims.
A plague on both; they deserve each other.
Byron on April 18, 2008 at 8:26 PM
Believing in gravity takes no faith, but believing that you and I share ancestors with the ladybugs and grasshoppers takes a whole lotta faith. Faith in Science.
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:26 PM
I’ve got nothing to say and haven’t read or posted before past page one. I’m just trying to help get this up to 1000.
ninjapirate on April 18, 2008 at 8:29 PM
…and if that’s wrong, maybe some aliens started the whole thing. Now that takes suspension of disbelief, uh, er, I mean,,, faith in Science.
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:29 PM
How familiar are you really with gravity? General Relativity? People did not believe in gravity for most of history. The implications of gravity are far weirder than modern synthesis.
exception on April 18, 2008 at 8:29 PM
ninjapirate, if you think this will get to 1000, you have more faith than me.
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:30 PM
Then why did you call people you have never met satanists? Doesn’t that make you serving Satan…and you never answered my call for you to ask forgiveness…if you read the bible you would know that is called for, NOW!
Unless you feel calling someone you have never met despicable names a Godly thing.
I await your public announcement of forgiveness, unless you are blinded by your pride…is pride a sin? I think so…I await your humble request for forgiveness…a mark of a true man of God.
right2bright on April 18, 2008 at 8:30 PM
I have nothing to add to this thread that hasnt already probably been said here or on many of Allah’s read meat christian posts a million times over the past few years. I just wanted to be part of a 600+ post thread! Woot Woot!
gator70 on April 18, 2008 at 8:31 PM
I’m so glad. Now that Expelled is going to be exposed to a mainstrem audience, we can finally get rid of the satanic cult of evolution/secular humanism once and for all!
Now everyone will clearly see(and inquire about)the extent that the satanist will go, to stop any and all dissent from their, state run religion of secular humanism and their non scientific theory of evolution.
What blows my mind is how some of you can see that the satanists at national geographic have been covering up evidence and promoting lies for nearly a century, but still say…”but,but evolution is still real right?”
That is the sound of your illusions coming crashing down…and you realizing that God actually is real and you are going to have to face Him in all of your unholiness.
SaintOlaf on April 18, 2008 at 8:31 PM
Great minds think alike!
gator70 on April 18, 2008 at 8:31 PM
Yabba. Dabba. Doo.
exception on April 18, 2008 at 8:32 PM
So the thread you want to pursue is my familiarity with Gravity?
How about your great x 10 to the 23rd power grandfather being a ladybug’s same ancestor. How familiar am I with that?
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:33 PM
Always.
exception on April 18, 2008 at 8:33 PM
Awesome! What are our tactics going to be?
RushBaby on April 18, 2008 at 8:34 PM
My belief or lack of belief has absolutely zero impact on the truth.
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:35 PM
You said “DUDE” LOL
THis is the greatest Thread ever!
(Well, Any thread where I get to quote DEVO has to be good!
-Wasteland Man.
WastelandMan on April 18, 2008 at 8:35 PM
RushBaby, The cleansing bath of holy nuclear fire, I suspect, based on his previous statements.
Whiskey, Tango, Foxtrot.
E1701 on April 18, 2008 at 8:35 PM
I do know atoms were taught as fact as being similar to billiard balls when the science books were thrown out and atoms were correctly presented as consisting mostly of air. I can’t wait til the next breakthrough discovery causes what we now take as a given to be laughed at just as we snicker at previous generations for their foolishness.
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:38 PM
Whaaa???
exception on April 18, 2008 at 8:40 PM
I’m out. I can feel my IQ going down. I better watch some Sponge Bob to pump it back up.
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:40 PM
RushBaby,
Just what I said…expose the “scientists” as they truly are…propagators of the worst kind of censorship.
SaintOlaf on April 18, 2008 at 8:41 PM
you know the space between the nucleus and the orbiting electrons.
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:41 PM
instead of completely solid pieces of mass…,
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:42 PM
…is air. Cool.
exception on April 18, 2008 at 8:42 PM
jack_in_the_box,
It doesn’t really require faith - just understanding. That’s the biggest problem with evolutionary theory… the simplified version tossed off in schools and in the media creates exactly this kind of backlash. Ignorance is the only enemy here. The religious conclusions you draw are your own.
But is the idea of sharing a common ancestor (granted, about 2.5 billion years ago) with a ladybug *that* difficult? After all, at the most basic level, we are fundamentally collections of cells operating as a fiendishly complex system we call “us.” A ladybug is also a fiendishly complex collection of cells operating as a system… only a system geared towards pollinating flowers, rather than one geared towards building civilization and arguing on the internet. A certain degree of commonality is hardly surprising.
Just so long as you remember the unbelievably vast scale of time and divergence between that ladybug and yourself. And next to chemosynthetic life three miles beneath the ocean, that ladybug is practically our close cousin.
Personally, I find the concept that the sheer profusion and raw tenacity of life arose on its own far more incredible and miraculous than that a deity simply “made” things the way they are.
E1701 on April 18, 2008 at 8:43 PM
I’m putting each sentence in a different comment to add to the total number of comments. Also I like reading shorter comments instead of having to skim comments like E1701 made at 8.23. ya killin’ me
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:43 PM
But you raise a good point. None of those things were real scientific theory. Electrons don’t orbit. But they make up these simple wrong versions for school because the real science is to weird. Same for evolution. But physics is way weirder.
exception on April 18, 2008 at 8:44 PM
exception, I’d add to that… but I’m truly at a loss. I’m burning my brain out explaining evolutionary theory… going into particle physics is just too much for me tonight. ;)
E1701 on April 18, 2008 at 8:45 PM
It’s the one drop rule. One drop. You’re a Lady Bug!
ronsfi on April 18, 2008 at 8:46 PM
This
Weight of Glory on April 18, 2008 at 8:46 PM
is
Weight of Glory on April 18, 2008 at 8:46 PM
so
Weight of Glory on April 18, 2008 at 8:47 PM
E1701,
Yet if you found a nickel out in the yard, no one would dare suggest that it just randomly happened, when the blade of grass the nickel lies next to is infinitely more complex and is STILL taught as FACT that a set of incredibly hard to believe OR explain coincidences took place for it to exist.
The God side is up front with its need for me to have faith.
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:47 PM
I dunno…how effective is mere exposure, when our goal is getting rid of a satanic cult?
RushBaby on April 18, 2008 at 8:47 PM
we
Weight of Glory on April 18, 2008 at 8:47 PM
get
Weight of Glory on April 18, 2008 at 8:47 PM
But it is a very difficult idea. Modern synthesis is not trivial or intuitive.
exception on April 18, 2008 at 8:47 PM
to 1000
Weight of Glory on April 18, 2008 at 8:47 PM
Weight of Glory…no cheating…;-)
JetBoy on April 18, 2008 at 8:48 PM
And doing well.
exception on April 18, 2008 at 8:48 PM
Scientists get to decide what is good science. Get over it, Stein.
RightOFLeft on April 18, 2008 at 8:49 PM
First off, evolution is non scientific.
Yet it is force fed to the world as fact.
Second it is a fact that they have consistently and systematically persecuted,not published,denied tenure and intimidated all dissenting scientists.
85% of kids who grew up in Christian families and go to public schools, end up leaving Christianity by 12th grade!
When asked about why they became atheist…they say because “science” disproves the Bible.
Is there still any question as to whether the non scientific state religion of evolution is satanist or not?
SaintOlaf on April 18, 2008 at 8:49 PM
Heh! Nothing is better than a Friday night on HA…because I’m married with two kids, and have thus forsaken my life.
Weight of Glory on April 18, 2008 at 8:50 PM
That’s the downside of science, exception. I think Terry Pratchett referred to it as “lies to children.” What we understand through science so far is just a faint glimpse of the truth… but the goal is to keep looking.
The problem is, while we keep looking, we need to explain what we *do* know, and if you don’t have a doctorate in the relevant field, you aren’t going to except by oversimplification. My earlier saying that clay could provide the structure for organic molecules to become complex enough to be considered “alive” is a wild dumbing-down of the actual theory… but I don’t have the knowledge or vocabulary to explain the real theory. So lies to children. But in teaching these simplified ideas, people get the idea that that’s all there is to the real thing… they see the territory as the map, in linguistic-speak.
Likewise, the model of an atom as a micro-solar system was a convenient analogy, but turned out to be not only wrong, but created almost entirely the wrong idea. Even the modern model of the fuzzy ball of electron shells is a visualization of concepts that can only be truly expressed in higher-level math.
That’s the wall we’re hitting here.
E1701 on April 18, 2008 at 8:51 PM
Only if it is presented as received truth and left at that. Which is the case in typical unserious teaching.
exception on April 18, 2008 at 8:51 PM
I know, I know, but the orbit word was easiest to explain to the entity not knowing atoms were made up mostly of air.
The more complex the problem becomes the more faith needed to believe it all happened by chance or by alien intervention.
Each solution uncovers a billion unanswered questions, requiring even more faith to believe
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:51 PM
I’m not asking, you have me convinced! Hey, when you said that
I knew I had found a new leader! Just tell me what we need to do. Heck with complaining on the internet, what are our actions!?!
RushBaby on April 18, 2008 at 8:54 PM
Kind of like math.
Let me get this straight.
Science is Faith.
Your Faith is Science.
Dinosaurs were saved by Noah.
Dragons are real.
National Geographic is a Satanic Cult.
I don’t think you love God as much as you hate people.
ronsfi on April 18, 2008 at 8:55 PM
kid: all that happened by chance.
authority figure: yep.
jack_in_the_box on April 18, 2008 at 8:55 PM
Comment pages: « 1 … 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 … 24 »