Isn't this the very same NY Times that praised such "documentaries" like "Sicko" and "Fahrenheit 9/11"?

It's at least obvious to me that this new movie by Ben Stein is NOT meant to be taken as a documentary but as an opinion piece presenting a specific world view just like what is often done by Michael Moore.

If some geneticist was fired because he disagreed with some arcane portion of evolution, that's wrong. There's still lots to learn regarding the early stages and mechanisms of evolution. Also, if some behavioral scientist is a creationist, that's fine too (since it's not expected for she or he to know about evolution). But if someone's a geneticist and they say they believe in the Creation Story, then I'd have to question where they got their degree from. Scientific understanding and a literal interpretation of the Bible are at odds.

It takes more faith to believe we evolved from nothing than to believe we were created by something.

You have the option to not believe.

I believe in evolution... no not to the point that humans evolved from apes, that just doesn't make sense nor does it jive with my common sense, but evolution does happen.

There is no way someone intelligent designed ME. Everything is in the wrong size.

I think my favorite movie about evolution is still Idiocracy.

Religion is dying a slow death...but don't expect it to go quietly...

It takes more faith to believe we evolved from nothing than to believe we were created by something.

I came across this article at SciAm:
Six Things In Expelled That Ben Stein Doesn't Want You To Know linklinklink

1) Expelled quotes Charles Darwin selectively to connect his ideas to eugenics and the Holocaust.
2) Ben Stein's speech to a crowded auditorium in the film was a setup.
3) Scientists in the film thought they were being interviewed for a different movie.
4) The ID-sympathetic researcher whom the film paints as having lost his job at the Smithsonian Institution was never an employee there.
5) Science does not reject religious or "design-based" explanations because of dogmatic atheism.
6) Many evolutionary biologists are religious and many religious people accept evolution.

Evolution does not state that humans evolved from apes. It states that humans (Homo erectus, sapien, habilis, neanderthalensis, etc.) and the great apes both descended from a common ancestor.

4) Maybe that's a legit issue. Or maybe they "lost" the paperwork so that no evidence exists.

5) is a tricky situation: just because "science" may not reject religious explanations, doesn't mean that the PEOPLE working in science, and academia don't reject them.

6) if there's so many, how about listing some of their names?

Hardly "nothing". Evolution is a continuing, proven process where basically, but not exclusively, simple organisms become over the course of time more specialized or complex.

Hardly a proven process. Even Darwin himself had doubts about the theory he created (and it's still just that - a theory).

Hardly a proven process. Even Darwin himself had doubts about the theory he created (and it's still just that - a theory).

Positing the theory of intelligent design as a valid scientific hypothesis, the film frames the refusal of "big science" to agree as nothing less than an assault on free speech.

Interviewees, including the scientist Richard Sternberg, claim that questioning Darwinism led to their expulsion from the scientific fold...

Hardly a proven process. Even Darwin himself had doubts about the theory he created (and it's still just that - a theory).

In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena [...] follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition.

According to the National Academy of Sciences,

Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature that is supported by many facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena.

Interviewees, including the scientist Richard Sternberg, claim that questioning Darwinism led to their expulsion from the scientific fold...

The point being a theory, is still a guess,

regardless how great it may sound or equate on paper. And theories that are debunked would still be theories, just a higher level of theory.

Hardly a proven process. Even Darwin himself had doubts about the theory he created (and it's still just that - a theory).

[quote=Patrocles]

So will questioning gravity, or DNA, or a number of other theories. There's nothing strange about that.

I can't wait to watch this for the entertainment value though. And yes, Michael Moore worship and leftist indoctrination in the social sciences sucks too.

There needs to be levels of theory to be clear for less intelligent common folk. Science enjoys hiding behind the word theory especially with some of their more absurd guesses. Theory Level 1, level 2, level 3, level 4... etc.. The higher the level the more absurd it becomes. Humans evolving from apelike creatures would be quite high on the absurdity level, whereas the theory about gravity may be around a level 2.

The point being a theory, is still a guess, regardless how great it may sound or equate on paper. And theories that are debunked would still be theories, just a higher level of theory.

Humans evolving from apes still looks pretty absurd.

Where is this stated?

Well if the creationists/ID folks admit that evolution does NOT say humans evolved from apes, but rather that at some time in the past a species (the "missing link") branched off in 2 different directions - one eventually becoming apes & monkeys, the other eventually becoming hominids - then their whole argument runs out of what little steam it had to begin with.

Pushing ID (aka Creationism) won't get you very far in the scientific community since when it encounters something it can't explain, it says "God did it".

Well, if a mutation into a simpler organism conveyed some survival advantage wouldn't that still be considered evolution?

I don't think evolution necessarily has to be in the direction of higher complexity, but rather a higher likelihood of survival.

The problem I have with most creationism/ID advocates is that they're unwilling to hold themselves to the same standard that they demand the evolutionists adhere to. Or, to put it another way, they refuse to allow evolutionists to say "well, we just have faith that evolution is how it happened."

We probably won't change back into bacteria.

Is Intelligent Design just a scientific version of Creationism? Not necessarily

Is Intelligent Design just a scientific version of Creationism? Not necessarily.

The problem I have with most creationism/ID advocates is that they're unwilling to hold themselves to the same standard that they demand the evolutionists adhere to. Or, to put it another way, they refuse to allow evolutionists to say "well, we just have faith that evolution is how it happened." I WISH I had the faith necessary to believe in creation or ID - last weekend I was watching The Ten Commandments and couldn't help but be amazed at a people who still had faith in God after 400 years of bondage. But I don't, so I have to believe in what science shows me is the way things happened.

That's not true at all. Your "god" is Time. My god is God. I have no problem you saying you have faith in Time. Given enough time, in this case billions and billions of years, your Time will create life from inorganic materials, carbon, oxygen, water, etcc...

My God simply created it. I've never hidden the fact that I believe in a God and intelligent design.

Life as we know it is similar in many respects. Apes are like dogs and dogs are like humans and humans are like snakes, etcc... we all move and breath in similar fashion, we breath oxygen, we need to eat, and we need to poop. This is a design that I believe God created.

I'm not a literal believer however. I don't believe Adam and Eve are representative of two human beings. In fact, if you read Genesis when God sent Cain (Adam and Eve's son) on his way, the Bible says that "Cain knew his wife". What??? Where did his wife come from? It makes no mention of God creating anyone other than Adam and Eve and they having two sons, Cain and Abel.

My belief being that Genesis is God telling us in the simplest way possible for the people of that time period to understand the beginnings of time. I'm not so sure they could comprehend eons and eons of time, so to make it simpler, 7 days.

I have two basic questions about your post.
1. Why should we believe that the bible creation story is the one true creation story? Why don't we assume the American native, Hindu, etc. creation story?

How about Marduk killing Tiamet and creating the world out of her body...

Well, that's no more and no less of a believable assertion than someone walking on water or making wine from water.

I have two basic questions about your post.
1. Why should we believe that the bible creation story is the one true creation story? Why don't we assume the American native, Hindu, etc. creation story?

2. How can an ID proponent claim that bible creation story bible is true, but then you can discard certain parts of the bible creation story? And how do you decide to toss out certain parts of the bible creation story?

Thanks!

Well, that's no more and no less of a believable assertion than someone walking on water or making wine from water.

ELVIS!
Everybody in outer space looks like Elvis.
Cause Elvis is a perfect being.
We are all moving in perfect peace and harmony towards Elvisness

Soon all will become Elvis.
Everything everywhere will be Elvis.
Why do you think they call it evolution anyway?
It's really Elvislution!
Elvislution!

And to further raise the validity of your questions... What about the millions and millions of humans who existed during the early times who had never heard the Hebrew/Judaic doctrine of religion? What about the Chinese people thousands of years ago? What about the Japanese Samurai? What about the American Indian? What about the African tribes who existed during the time of Christ? A tremendous question indeed.

I abhor any religious view which is exclusive, in other words, says only these people will "make it".

So, just what does the Christian Bible say about this? The answers are in there.

The Bible says that God "winked" at these other religions. Apostle Paul also mentions the fact that the Greeks worshipped the one true God without even knowing it, the marked a statue, "To The Unknown God".

But the one thing that is very consistent in Humans. We all have a conscience, and a desire to seek something higher. Whether it be the African tribesman or the Japanses Samurai or the American Indian, they all "knew" there was something higher than theirselves.

So.

1) I am not a proponent that the Bible creation story is literal. At the same time however, it is amazing how real it relates the history of the universe, almot in the same fashion that science has discovered today. Those thousands of years ago when those words were first penned, they had no knowledge of how the universe was created, that the Earth was a small entity in something much larger, yet even so, Genesis states, God created the Earth and it WAS VOID AND WITHOUT FORM. Just stop and think about that for a moment... and then think about where the Bible also mentions that a "Thousand years to God is but one day, and one day a thousand years". It is emphasizing the fact that Time stands still for a Divine Being who is everywhere at the same time. A billion years to this Divine Being is but a twinkle of an eye. There is no time with God. So how is it the universe can seemingly be 15,000,000,000 years old or more? I believe it cause the Bible insinuates it.

2) Because the Bible contains a multitude of analogies and parables. In fact, Jesus spoke almost entirely in parables, at least what is recorded. Revelations is one huge parable.

Many many years ago, belief in a god was prevelant because people had no other answers for the questions about the universe and life. The irony of science, at least for myself, is that the more science discovers about how the universe ticks and the complexities of even the smallest form pof bacterial life, the more I believe in a master Creator. In essence, the wonderful discoveries of science have done more to bolster my belief in an Almighty than it has to reduce it.

I see that a second-year student "industrial design" could have designed a smarter body than we humans - or just about any other animal - currently have - hardly the work of a deity.

Well, that's no more and no less of a believable assertion than someone walking on water or making wine from water.

How can you say that? The human body is an amazing machine. A second year industrial design student can barely understand the body, much less design and build a superior one.

- extremely susceptible to bacteria
- extremely susceptible to viruses
- inefficient wrt nutrients
- most important organs without redundancy
- the most important organ relies on two very much unprotected arteries
- the arteries around the second-most important organ are prone to degradation
- reproduction, while fun practicing, renders the female unusable for a prolonged period around birth
- and the offspring needs a full fifth of his average natural life to become mature.

Do I need to continue?

Edit - the brain itself is a pretty neat thing, but if a deity can design a brain then totally foxtrot uniform the rest I certainly wouldn't call it "intelligent design" and more something like "cobbled together". Or evoluted.

That's not true at all. Your "god" is Time. My god is God. I have no problem you saying you have faith in Time. Given enough time, in this case billions and billions of years, your Time will create life from inorganic materials, carbon, oxygen, water, etcc...

May I remind you again, God created an Earth that was VOID AND WITHOUT FORM. Strange that an almighty, perfect, God would create such a mess? Imagine an hostile earth, volcanoes, violent.. wow.

But science teaches that only in recent history as "new" disoveries...

Time has no purpose other than that which we give to it. That doesn't sound like much of a god to me. It doesn't matter to me whether we're the only life in the universe, or if life forms on every rocky planet with an atmosphere and liquid water orbiting in the habitable zone around its particular star.

Or is lightning still a sign of an angry god?

And to further raise the validity of your questions... What about the millions and millions of humans who existed during the early times who had never heard the Hebrew/Judaic doctrine of religion? What about the Chinese people thousands of years ago? What about the Japanese Samurai? What about the American Indian? What about the African tribes who existed during the time of Christ? A tremendous question indeed.

I abhor any religious view which is exclusive, in other words, says only these people will "make it".

So, just what does the Christian Bible say about this? The answers are in there.

The Bible says that God "winked" at these other religions. Winking means he let it pass. Apostle Paul also mentions the fact that the Greeks worshipped the one true God without even knowing it, they marked a statue, "To The Unknown God". How many other peoples were also worshipping God in their own way? One only can imagine.

But the one thing that is very consistent in Humans. We all have a conscience, and a desire to seek something higher. Whether it be the African tribesman or the Japanses Samurai or the American Indian, they all "knew" there was something higher than theirselves.

So.

1) I am not a proponent that the Bible creation story is literal. At the same time however, it is amazing how real it relates the history of the universe, almot in the same fashion that science has discovered today. Those thousands of years ago when those words were first penned, they had no knowledge of how the universe was created, that the Earth was a small entity in something much larger, yet even so, Genesis states, God created the Earth and it WAS VOID AND WITHOUT FORM. Just stop and think about that for a moment... and then think about where the Bible also mentions that a "Thousand years to God is but one day, and one day a thousand years". It is emphasizing the fact that Time stands still for a Divine Being who is everywhere at the same time. A billion years to this Divine Being is but a twinkle of an eye. There is no time with God. So how is it the universe can seemingly be 15,000,000,000 years old or more? I believe it cause the Bible insinuates it.

2) Because the Bible contains a multitude of analogies and parables. In fact, Jesus spoke almost entirely in parables, at least what is recorded. Revelations is one huge parable.

In the grand scheme of things, this is not important to my personal salvation and my belief in Christ. Whether I believe in Adam as a true single human, or whether he represents a a generation of peoples is not important and does not affect my personal belief in Christ.

Many many years ago, belief in a god was prevelant because people had no other answers for the questions about the universe and life. The irony of science, at least for myself, is that the more science discovers about how the universe ticks and the complexities of even the smallest form pof bacterial life, the more I believe in a master Creator. In essence, the wonderful discoveries of science have done more to bolster my belief in an Almighty than it has to reduce it.

But *that* was the intention. God created the foundations of science so that the more we discover, the more we draw closer to Him. Man did not create science, God did, and we are only starting to learn how to use it.

Well Legend, you are now taking the subject a completely new direction where you want to argue that God doen't exist because of the "crappy" design of life... Interesting.

May I remind you again, God created an Earth that was VOID AND WITHOUT FORM. Strange that an almighty, perfect, God would create such a mess? Imagine an hostile earth, volcanoes, violent.. wow. At least that is my interpretation of void and without form. Void meaning no life whatsoever. Amazing these words were penned thousands of years ago. But science teaches that only in recent history as "new" disoveries...

If you want to talk about how crappy a design life is, please start a new thread. And let's leave God out of it. I'm sure it'll be an interesting discussion.

God created the foundations of science so that the more we discover, the more we draw closer to Him. Man did not create science, God did, and we are only starting to learn how to use it.

- extremely susceptible to bacteria
- extremely susceptible to viruses
- inefficient wrt nutrients
- most important organs without redundancy
- the most important organ relies on two very much unprotected arteries
- the arteries around the second-most important organ are prone to degradation
- reproduction, while fun practicing, renders the female unusable for a prolonged period around birth
- and the offspring needs a full fifth of his average natural life to become mature.

Do I need to continue?

Evolution and Intelligent Design (I hate that label, btw) aren't mutually exclusive. One can believe that species adapt and evolve and believe in God.

The answer is one of faith, which is outside of the realm of science.

It's very easy to state the body's weaknesses, but it's a much different story to be able to perfect those flaws in biological terms. Genetic biologists are nowhere near the ability to do anything of the sort.

...on cross-examination, Professor Behe was questioned concerning his 1996 claim that science would never find an evolutionary explanation for the immune system. He was presented with fifty-eight peer-reviewed publications, nine books, and several immunology textbook chapters about the evolution of the immune system; however, he simply insisted that this was still not sufficient evidence of evolution, and that it was not "good enough." (23:19 (Behe))." (Page 78)

Rilex, you're correct - I used "Intelligent Design" as a description of my beliefs rather than that of strict Creationists. I put Creationists in the same category as every other Fundamentalist group. At least they're not violent.

I used "Intelligent Design" as a description of my beliefs rather than that of strict Creationists. I put Creationists in the same category as every other Fundamentalist group.

And to further raise the validity of your questions... What about the millions and millions of humans who existed during the early times who had never heard the Hebrew/Judaic doctrine of religion? What about the Chinese people thousands of years ago? What about the Japanese Samurai? What about the American Indian? What about the African tribes who existed during the time of Christ? A tremendous question indeed.

I abhor any religious view which is exclusive, in other words, says only these people will "make it".

So, just what does the Christian Bible say about this? The answers are in there.

The Bible says that God "winked" at these other religions. Winking means he let it pass. Apostle Paul also mentions the fact that the Greeks worshipped the one true God without even knowing it, they marked a statue, "To The Unknown God". How many other peoples were also worshipping God in their own way? One only can imagine.

But the one thing that is very consistent in Humans. We all have a conscience, and a desire to seek something higher. Whether it be the African tribesman or the Japanses Samurai or the American Indian, they all "knew" there was something higher than theirselves.

So.

1) I am not a proponent that the Bible creation story is literal. At the same time however, it is amazing how real it relates the history of the universe, almot in the same fashion that science has discovered today. Those thousands of years ago when those words were first penned, they had no knowledge of how the universe was created, that the Earth was a small entity in something much larger, yet even so, Genesis states, God created the Earth and it WAS VOID AND WITHOUT FORM. Just stop and think about that for a moment... and then think about where the Bible also mentions that a "Thousand years to God is but one day, and one day a thousand years". It is emphasizing the fact that Time stands still for a Divine Being who is everywhere at the same time. A billion years to this Divine Being is but a twinkle of an eye. There is no time with God. So how is it the universe can seemingly be 15,000,000,000 years old or more? I believe it cause the Bible insinuates it.

2) Because the Bible contains a multitude of analogies and parables. In fact, Jesus spoke almost entirely in parables, at least what is recorded. Revelations is one huge parable.

In the grand scheme of things, this is not important to my personal salvation and my belief in Christ. Whether I believe in Adam as a true single human, or whether he represents a a generation of peoples is not important and does not affect my personal belief in Christ.

Many many years ago, belief in a god was prevelant because people had no other answers for the questions about the universe and life. The irony of science, at least for myself, is that the more science discovers about how the universe ticks and the complexities of even the smallest form pof bacterial life, the more I believe in a master Creator. In essence, the wonderful discoveries of science have done more to bolster my belief in an Almighty than it has to reduce it.

But *that* was the intention. God created the foundations of science so that the more we discover, the more we draw closer to Him. Man did not create science, God did, and we are only starting to learn how to use it.

who the hell is Ben Stein and why is my pizza burnt!?

So of everyone who has posted in this thread so far, who has actually seen the movie?

So of everyone who has posted in this thread so far, who has actually seen the movie?

Legend, I am flabbergasted that you look at the wonder of nature (and the human body) and can only find faults with it.

Considering the nasty little thing called Entropy, the whole system is quite amazing.

The odd thing is that of all the human organs, the brain is the least efficient in many respects. We do an awful lot of approximation and guessing in our heads, with easy to demonstrate errors (optical illusions are the easiest demonstrations).

How efficiently the brain manages cognative thought isn't a weakness, however, or proof of poor design - the fact that we have cognative thought at all (let alone the amount) far outstrips the inefficiency.

We're built, like all species, to have a finite size and, with it, life span. Approximately 120 years seems to be the maximum under ideal conditions. But none of us live under ideal conditions or treat our bodies in an ideal manner.

Joints ache because our bodies can't take time out to replace cartiledge in the joints - it would render the joint unuseable during replacement. And the blood vessels that would be required to remove old cartiledge while building new just won't work due to compression on joints. It's not "bad design;" it's a design decision that makes sense - even if it means the part will wear out eventually.

My genetic tree has a nice perk of quick bone healing. Not X-Men fast or anything, but faster than most people. It is what probably saved me from hip replacement surgery, as the neck of the femur healed in four weeks rather than six or eight, reducing the chances of necrosis. The downside is that arthritis and rhumatism is also a genetic trait. My index fingers began rotating inwards when I was in my 20's....by the time I'm in my eighties grabbing a walking cane will be painful, and making a full fist most likely impossible. Assuming that I don't opt for surgical correction, that is.

Poor design? I don't think so. Downside to a benefit.

Rilex, you're correct - I used "Intelligent Design" as a description of my beliefs rather than that of strict Creationists. I put Creationists in the same category as every other Fundamentalist group. At least they're not violent.

We do an awful lot of approximation and guessing in our heads, with easy to demonstrate errors (optical illusions are the easiest demonstrations).

Athiests seem to be cynical and down on everything, one huge Bad Day of a life where nothing matters and everything is just crap.

I sometimes wonder if athiests love their children or simply experience a bonding instinct instilled in them by genetics and training that, easily enough, can be demonstrated in both the laboratory and in field trials.

Emotion is nothing more than chemical reactions, if that is what you want to boil it down to.

Unfortunately, there is no evidence for any supernatural input into biology. Though it is possible an intelligent creator started the whole thing.

Keyword: seem.



Yes, but I don't want to boil it down to that. Again, it seems that athiests can't enjoy things for what they are, but have to strip everything down to chemical reactions.

I wonder if athiests talk themselves out of a good mood by reminding themselves that being in a good mood is just a fallacy of chemicals.

Do athiests believe in inspiration?

Humans are humans regardless of belief. I don't need to know god to know love or beauty. I can enjoy the wonders of this life for what they are without the need to assign some purpose to it. Theists love to paint atheists as bitter, amoral wretches but it just ain't so.

The only difference between an atheist and a theist is that an atheist won't set you on fire for disagreeing with him...

Apparently you missed the whole Soviet Union thing...

I recall reading some discussion on the web long ago on opinions that religious belief should be considered a mental health issue,

God on the other hand crushes the world, inflicts famine and plague, commands obedience at the penalty of death and damnation, judges with no mercy- until he strings his own son up like a slab of meat. Yeah, just think what he'd do to me then.

Would you die for your son?

When someone speaks of God strapping his Son on the cross like a slab of meat, I see someone who misinterprets the meaning of the sacrifice.

Would you die for your son? Would you take his place in a firing squad? Would you take the blame for an infraction your Jewish friend made in Auschwitz, which ultimately would lead to your own death by gas chamber? Would you jump on a grenade to save your buddies on the front lines? On and on, examples of self sacrifice are endless... Real people did these things, real people died for their friends and family, real people sacrificed theirselves for a loved one.

Jesus stated no greater love there is than a man who lays down his life for another. God the Father did not sacrifice his Son like a slab of meat, rather, Jesus willingly laid down his life for us, his fellow men as an example of how great God loves us.

Remember, Jesus is God. Jesus was God in the form of man.

Ah- so! You can crucify a god. For even God can be crucified. Truthfully, pray, even mortals can accomplish that.

Actually the cognitive dissonance required for this is extraordinary, or else Jesus was schizophrenic. It follows that God fathered himself, prayed to himself, spoke to himself, argued with himself, and even spoke of himself in the third person. Jesus on the Cross wailed, "Father, why have you forsaken me," (Mathew 27:46)- which is a unilateral if not bizarre conversation in its own right. Worthy of the even the most obscure mystery cult, but you either believe this, or you don't.

The mystery of what God is, is far beyond our comprehension. Jesus himself stated that he was here before the creation of the universe, inducing outcries of hatred and blasphemy from the Pharisees (Jewish Priests and scholars).

God the Father, the creator, the designer, the master.
Jesus the Son, God as man, to show mankind an example of absolute love and kindness, as well as sacrifice.
God the Holy Spirit, the comforter after Jesus left the Earth, the intercessor to hear our prayers.
The Holy Trinity, all three in one.

You simply cannot comprehend this great mystery. If you could, then he wouldn't be God would he? But you are most certainly correct, you either believe this or you don't. It requires faith. My definition of faith is believing in spite of the questions.

For you atheist types.

Romans chapter 1

1:19 Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

1:21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.

But you state below that Jesus = God, which has unfathomable implications.

You can crucify a god. For even God can be crucified. Truthfully, pray, even mortals can accomplish that.

Actually the cognitive dissonance required for this is extraordinary, or else Jesus was schizophrenic. It follows that God fathered himself, prayed to himself, spoke to himself, argued with himself, and even spoke of himself in the third person. Jesus on the Cross wailed, "Father, why have you forsaken me," (Mathew 27:46)- which is a unilateral if not bizarre conversation in its own right.

Worthy of the even the most obscure mystery cult, but you either believe this, or you don't.