Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Mike

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

Recommended Posts

Thanks for the lesson Rachel, btw, I do believe in evolution, natural selection, have studied about the changes that have taken place over millions of years. I also see design to nature and believe (as many fine scientists do also) that we should not abandon our continued search for more evidence, or even consider hypotheses that are not fully developed of comprehended yet, they laughed and mocked a lot of discoveries in the past, that today are new standards.

All I am pointing out in this post (back to the topic) is it's "refreshing" to have Mr. Stein raise awareness with a film of this subject.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact that the subject of "lack of design or designer" needs to be defended is the most interesting to me.

This thread should have been left dead and unresponsive if their is not a shred of doubt to the scientific certainty ID is a farce and a myth. eh?

Some people are afraid to even consider it. That's the bottom line.

Think about it. It's a compelling concept. And if it warrants no merit it will die in discussion with a echo of silence in any place including a school science class. Why can't this theory in it's (so-called) ultimate weakness be summarily tested, challenged and then discarded.

No, fellow member. The burden of proof is on the side of the few who want to introduce "intelligent design" into science. Right now, it is not science. They have to prove that it is science by having experiments and testing many many times - and getting the same result. What you propose is to conduct an experiment that yields no results and, therefore, it proves the non-existence of your "designer." That's not how science works. If you want to disprove someone or something, you have to have the concept already established from past hypotheses and observations that have been made.

Example: The Bohr model of the atom was a hypothesised model for atoms. They already knew atoms existed. Experiments showed the Bohr model wasn't quite right. Now, what if... what if things were made of totally different components? What if atoms didn't exist? Why would anyone waste time trying to prove atoms didn't exist? Why would I waste time trying to prove unicorns and dragons don't (and didn't) exist? Extend this line of thought all the way to the concepts of "designer" and "design" :beatnik:

Intelligent design is pure, unadulterated bunk. It is pants. I don't say this because I'm "afraid" that there might be a God/god/gods/creator. I'm not afraid of that at all (why should our "creator" inspire fear unless it's a powerful tyrant and a brute?). What I'm really afraid of is that this junk will be taught as "science" in a science class. I wouldn't object if it was taught in a writing class as science fiction or, perhaps, philosophy (although, even then, I'd consider it an insult to the memory of Socrates and Descartes).

Edited by Guest
Mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the fact that this exact same conversation amongst the exact same people took place about 3 years ago... If I remember correctly we kept going backwards and forwards and eventually just abandoned the subject. Although back then I don't think you accepted intelligent design, it was all about creation. Maybe in a few years time evolution will convince you as well??

As a scientist I probably should feel obligated to explain evolution. The simplest example of evolution happening within our lifespan is that of bacteria. Ever heard of MRSA? that's evolution, you start with staphylococcus aureus, you treat it with antibiotics but only kill about 99% of the colony, then the 1% evolves resistance and multiplies. you try treating it with another antibiotic and the same thing happens. SO we have MRSA, VRSA etc.

Obviously someone is now going to say that bacteria aren't the same as humans but it is the simplest example of evolution that anyone can understand.

and that's the end of the biology lesson.

As far as evolution goes, I think some nay-sayers want more evidence of speciation. It would be more far-reaching if the S. aureus had branched off into different species (which would make S. aureus the "common ancestor"). Is the MRSA a totally different species or was it more of an adaptive trait in order to deal with a harsher environment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's just a film. I'm glad it's being released, hope it makes TONS of money (esp. from the skeptics)

lol... only if it's as funny as This Is Spinal Tap. Otherwise, I'll download it off torrents for free ;) although it's probably not worth the bandwidth or disk space... or time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't think it's considered a different species, it has some evolution in its DNA sequence making it resistant to methicillin

I think that's the crux of the evolution debate. At least, for anyone who has actually done some thinking about it beyond trying to debunk it on the basis of the vernacular definition of "theory" versus the scientific definition. People want more evidence of branching off into different species.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you WILL watch it. That's good enough for me.

Funny how whenever this subject matter comes up certain people really get concerned.

Being afraid that "discussing", yes, SIMPLY discussing the "possibility" of design (i.e. intelligent order in design) of things as a catalyst to teaching "God" or "religion" in the science class is like comparing the assumption that charging a mother with infanticide will some how erode away abortion rights. HOW ABSURD IS THAT?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HahAhAHhA. You notice how you're also the only person who brings it up in the first place? Well, I'm sure you could also discuss the possibility of faeries and unicorns in a science class. It's harmless... as long as you're not wasting everyone else's time and resources, and disrupting the teaching of real science.

Actually, I don't know if I have the time to watch something I don't like. I have 500 movies in my netflix queue. Only God could make it possible for me to watch aaaaaall those movies by the time this movie is out :beatnik: Strangely enough, I'll watch "The Fairly Odd Parents" in which Ben Stein does the voice of a pixie - it's a much better performance. Highly recommend it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And, tell me you have seen him in Ferris Bueller's Day Off, of course you have. That's why I simply had to begin this thread with the framing of his most famous character.

Peace,

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I, for my part, wouldn't be afraid to discuss the issue

what I'm afraid of is that there's the possibility I have to discuss it with religious fundamentalists who give "facts" like the banana one

:laughing: :doh:

but on the other hand I know a couple students of theology, and I've had the pleasure (which it was) to talk with them about certain stuff :)

(Intelligent Design/Creationism wasn't a part of it though)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind having a theology class as part of public school curriculum (IF there is money for it). With the way the current administration has squandered all our money in fruitless projects that only benefit the president's friends and colleagues, I wouldn't vote to have it in any public school. I'd rather spend whatever little we have on buying more microscopes, spectrophotometers, and having more field trips to the zoo and aquariums.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me thinks thou does protest too much.

I love the fact that just the mere mention of this subject touches off such emotions of defense!

Gives the subject even more clarity of revelation...indeed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...