Anyone seen/heard of Ben Stein's new movie Expelled on the Evolution vs Creationism debate? I believe it may be released locally in the next week or two. I think I'd like to go see the movie, but am not sure. I don't see many flicks. The last time I went to a theater was to see Babe about a year after it was out!

(I used to go to Home School but I kept getting suspended, so I had to quit and go to public school instead).

No - haven't heard of it.

How are you Geo?

I'm good, but not at the movies. Don't have the bucks or the time and besides, they closed the Vogue in Louisville. Super bummer! It's still there, though. The Marquee's still up and I was by there just the other day enroute to a shoe store. It's now a store.

Expelled hasn't been advertised very heavily. I did hear one spot on the radio for it. I think it was on a Christian radio station. I think it's being marketed to Christians and such. I saw flyers for it at my church the last couple of weeks.

How are YOU doing?

Pretty good. Almost done with school - then I can fix that goat pen!

Take them goats to see Babe. They'd dig it!

Anyone see Expelled ?
What did you think of it ?

I haven't seen it yet, but I'm willing to bet it biased.

There problem with catch-phrase "Intelligent Design" is that is isn't well-defined.

A lot of people just use it as a disguise for 'Biblical Creationism'.

In the context of an educational system there really is no evidence for "Intelligent Design" other than the simple idea that things appear to be too complex to have happened by pure happenstance.

But even that's a matter of subjective opinion.

Moreover, from a purely intellectual point of view, the argument for "Intelligent Design" doesn't hold water.

In other words, the argument goes like this,...

The world is to complex to have just happened by happenstance therefore it must have had an intelligent designer.

But wait a minute!,...

Where is this leading?

If the world is to complex that it must have had an intelligent designer, then clearly the intelligent designer must also be too complex to have just happened by happenstance. Therefore the intelligent designer must have had an intelligent designer and so on, ad infinitum,...

You see, it's not going anywhere. It doesn't solve anything, and it has no basis to stand on. In other words, it's a circular argument.

How can you teach 'Intelligent Design' if they premise is that the reason you believe in an intelligent designer is because the world is too complex to have just popped into being with out one?

It's like, the very next question is then,... "So where did the Intelligent Designer come from". And that's the end of the course because there is no answer to that question (unless people want to start pointing to ancient religious doctrines)

But therein lies the problem. It's all just a trick to try to sell specific religious doctrines.

If people are being fired or expelled from universities because they insist on teaching Intelligent Design without any evidence for it, then that's the way things should be.

Until they can come up with better evidence than just the idea that "The universe is too complex not to have been designed" then they have nothing solid to stand on.

I'm willing to bet that the video is extremely biased. I will be glad to watch it when it comes out on DVD.

But I seriously doubt that it will offer anything new from what I already just said in this post.

I would add also, that I'd find very hard to believe that people are being rejected or expelled for a mere casual belief that there may be Intelligent Design involved.

I'm sure we're talking about radical fanaticals here who are very vehmenent about pushing the issue. And if they are just religious zealots with an agenda then clearly the whole video is totally meaningless.

I'll watch it as soon as I can find a copy. Netflix doesn't offer it yet to rent. I just checked, but they do have it listed as 'coming soon'.

Now there's a surprise



From Wikipedia

This is precisely what I'm thinking. Religious zealots are just in an uproar because they can't push their religious agendas into schools under the pretense that they are 'science'.

I've already stated that the arguments for Intelligent Designer are clearly circular and not scientific at all.

So they have no leg to stand on. They deserve to be rejected and held at bay if that's what they are actually attempting to get away with.

I hope they all get rejected. They are being dishonest.

Shame shame!

This is really disgusting when you stop and think about it.

Religious people are being totally dishonest. How contrary is that to the morals they profess to have?

The biggest lie that they support is the lie that science is somehow teaching atheism in the first place. Science doesn't say that there is no intelligent creator!

Science doesn't say anything about what started the universe. All it says is what we actually know about the universe to date. It doesn't even take a stance on how it all came to be.

So it's not like science is teaching against Intelligent Design to begin with!

That's the biggest lie that religious people seem to be thriving on at the moment to begin with.

When students start out learning physics, for example, they are taught how balls move. They are talk about the laws of physics. Science doesn't say anything about where the laws of physics came from, or where the balls came from. All that science does is describe how they move. It deals only with the facts.

Religious people want to come in and claim that they know where the balls came from and where the laws of physics came from.

And they don't know this. They mere believe it on faith.

So they are totally out of line wanting to teach faith as though it's science.

Totally out of line.

It's not even a topic worthy of discussing. They are totally in the wrong.

Their religious beliefs are not science.

Pure and simple.

I want to see it. I read a review that claimed that Ben Stein asked questions and they show the unedited answers. One segment shows Richard Dawkins admitting that life might have been designed, but stating that it wasn't god who designed life, but aliens. The really interesting thing is that ID specifically doesn't mention an entity as the designer. The theory of ID is rejected because it's presented by Christians. The thought that life on earth was designed by aliens is growing in acceptance, but if Christians say "Maybe life was designed", they are shut down because they believe in God. Not because they suggest that God created life, but because they believe in God. It's pure thought police.

They have no "theory".

What's the theory?

All they have to offer is the biblical story and that already conflicts with known science.

They have no "scientific theory" to offer.

Even the anthropic principle is useless, becasue if you apply that to the universe, then you must also apply to the Intelligent Designer, and then you're right back at square one again with a circular argument that has no resolution.

It goes nowhere. It's an empty theory.

Let's face it, they're just peeved because they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar having used public schools to preach their religion for decades, and now they are just trying to weasel their way back in again.

They have no 'science' to offer. Just pure faith religion.

That's the TRUTH.

Aren't Christians interested in TRUTH?

Religion is religion, and science is science.

There's a difference between faith and facts.

Or can't Christians tell the difference?

I've seen it....., one of the "arguments" of the film is that discussions always turn to Evolution vs Creationism, ID is (by their definition (I'm just starting to become interested in this debate)) not refering to "God".
I have to go, daughter and grandkids just showed up.

when I was in public school Satan was in my social studies class and came there to learn evil..we use to chat about life and the afterlife and stuff but he dropped out of school because the kids would beat him up and take his lunch money and cause him all types of hell ...them public school kids are rough

Aren't Scientists interested in truth?
There is no science to back up Darwin’s theory...., well, there is. But it's the same type of "science" that says mankind had or could have had anything to do with Global Warming, a consensus is not science. I've got my problems with ID, but, why are people loosing their jobs just for saying, "there are several theories on how cells developed, Darwinism, Intelligent Design, Creationism"..., nothing more, and out of a job. How does that promote science?

Notice how interested in the truth Abra is? ID is the theory that life on earth was designed. If JeanieBeanie said that life on earth was designed, I don't believe Abra would have a problem with that. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that Abra believes life was designed by his god. But if a Christian says the exact same thing, Abra starts foaming at the mouth biting anyone who might believe in the God of Abraham. It's really sad and the primary reason that I no longer try to communicate with the man.

You're absolutely correct Spider. I do believe in Intelligent Design (a completely undefined term by the way)

Yet I openly admit that there is no theory to support it. It's merely based on a hunch. Moreover, my hunch is that the universe itself is the intelligent designer. But once again, I have no evidence to prove this or even support it scientifically. So I would never try to call it a 'theory'

Christians also have no 'theory'.

That's all I said. And instead of you coming back and explaining the theory (that the Christians clearly don't have) you decide to spout personal accusations against my credibility. I think that was against your own forum rules,...

Ah yes, here it is,...



So you change the subject into a personal attack on me?



You aren't coming back with logic here at all. Just personal innuendos.



I would say that making a condescending comments against my personal character is a violation of this rule of yours. Not to mention the actual forum rules.

I said that Christians have no well-constructed theory of Intelligent design. Your rebuttal is that Abra foams at the mouth?



I certainly hope so. You did request to have them pointed out to you when you break them.

So instead of answering the question concerning the where this well-defined theory of Intelligent Design is, you have decided to belittle me personally.

I'm still waiting to see if you can actually address a topic instead of avoiding the topic to spew unwarranted personal insults at me.

Where's your well-defined theory of Intelligent Design?

I don't have one. Do you have something to add other than personal innuendos to spew?

Just asking.

Christians theory is called Creationism, ID is not Creationism.
Expelled question is why can't anything other than Darwinism be discussed, considered, not taught, just discussed?
What is science afraid of?

Creationism isn’t a theory. It’s a faith-based religion.

First off, there is no such thing as “Darwinism”, that’s just a catch-phrase used by creationist. The modern evidence for Evolution is far beyond Darwin’s original ideas.

Even if Intelligent Design is involved it can’t possibly conflict with evolution. Evolution is established science. Any theories of Intelligent Design would need to incorporate evolution.

It’s not a matter of science being afraid of anything. The point is that there is nothing to teach concerning non-evolution ideas because they fly in the face of what has already been well-established.

If you want to talk about Intelligent Design, you’ll have to come up with a ‘theory’ that includes evolution. Otherwise what are you going to be talking about? All you'd be doing is taking wild stabs in the dark.

Evolution does not preclude the idea of Intelligent Design. Evolution is not atheism in the strictest sense of the word. It simply flies in the face of the biblical creationism.

The bottom line is that there is no credible scientific theory to support biblical creationism. That’s entirely a faith-based religion.

The bottom line is that religious people are trying to teach religious ideals as though they are scientific ‘facts’. But they don’t stand up to the rigors of science. They are entirely unsupported ideas from religious doctrine that have absolutely no scientific support whatsoever.

There is no need to denounce evolution to consider Intelligent Design. But if you consider Intelligent Design wouldn't you need to consider who might be the intelligent designer? Clearly this is just a way for religious people to get their foot in the door to talking about a specific picture of God and let's face it, we know precisely what picture they intend on bringing up!

There are already theological schools and seminaries in existence. Christians can teach their religion as a religion. They are already free to do that.

All they are upset about is that they can’t teach it as science.

Well, the fact of the matter is, that there is no credible science to back it up. They are simply out of line in wanting to teach theology as though it is science. That’s just plain wrong.

Why can’t they own up to the truth that it’s purely a faith-based religion and teach it as such through the proper channels? Why are they so intent on trying to teach religious views as though they are science?

They are totally out of line. They should know better.

Besides, evolution does not teach that there is no Intelligent Design. It simply doesn't even bring the topic up because of the fact that there is no evidence to support it either way. Evolution does not deny Intelligent Design.

Religious zealots are simply trying to get the ok to teach religious ideals as though they are science.

Stick with the theology schools. What's wrong with that? There's no legitimate reasons to be trying to teach religious ideals as science.