MOVIE: "Expelled"

Perhaps narrow bandwidth of belief was a bad phrase to use, individual bandwidth of belief. Of course some atheists and I’m slowly reaching said category, want to (undermine is such a hard word) get children to rethink their religious ideals because they identify religion as problematic for the advancement of society. As well identified in The God Delusion and succinctly put in Letter to a Christian Nation.

This brings me to the second pronoun you used in and interesting fashion when you said, “moulding the minds of our children.” The point in fact is that “we” do not have children. The mind of my children is primarily my responsibility to form, not yours and not the government’s. Under the current school system we have, I will pay my school taxes and then pay a second time to provide a good Catholic education, at least in the most formative years. No, I do not wholly trust the public school system.

That is a really good point. They are your children. But then what about the children? How can we consider their future possible views? I guess we can only really do what we feel is best. And for you that is imparting your religious views on them. But should that not be done by you in your own home, or if you choose in a private school? If your country had a good public school system could you not send your children to said school and then at home teach whatever religion you believe in.

I just don’t think it should be the responsibility of a public education to indoctrinate children in a particular religious world view. Perhaps learning about views political and religious, comparatively. But you can’t expect a public school to cater to every single individuals religious view.

Taking the major religions into consideration how would you put that into effect? How can a public school teach Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism and X. How can it teach these and not contradict it’s self? And how much time would this occupy?

You can’t start bringing in religion into public schools not only because of your constitution but because of the ridiculous logistics of implementing it in a multicultural society.

Bird flu was just an example, you missed the point entirely. How about the flu? Thats not “deadly” and it also mutates every year you get a new flu shot. Do you know what a genetic mutation is?

After all these millions of years, all of a sudden we have a virus that is really dangerous. I don’t buy this at all.

Have you heard of small pox? What do you think the black plague was?

I have visited a museum many times. Looking at those fossils is truly fascinating. All of that doesn’t say one word about evolution and Natural Selection.

Well where did these animals come from? How come we find them at certain periods of time but not at others? Why are there no bunny rabbits during the cretaceous?

Are you actually trying to prove Darwinism by the speed of light and the distance planets are to the earth. The speed of light is 186,000 miles/sec.
This indicates that if we see a sun exploding and can estimate how far that star is to our solar system, then we could give a pretty good guess as to when the explosion took place.
This has absolutely nothing to do with Darwinism. You’re trying to fake out not only me but everyone else that reads this thread.

Smoke and mirrors. That’s all you have!!

Darwanism, I hear this thrown around alot you make it sound like a religion. Since darwin first proposed the theory there have been some great new discoveries and refinements to the theory. Do you mean Evolution? Well what i was trying to indicate by the age of the earth and the age of the universe is that we have vastly enough time for the theory to function. If the universe was say 10 000 years old there would be no way evolution is even a considered theory.

I’m sorry but science doesnt work on smoke and mirrors. How else could science and scientific advancement send man to the moon. Cure diseases, provide clean water through filtration. Feed millions on Hubes priciple to increase yield. on average increase life expectancy by 30 - 50 years. International communication at your fingertips, worldwide travel capabilities.

IF science worked on smoke and mirrors then we would not have any of these things. I trust the scientific method BECAUSE it has made my world a better place. And i understand it. I’m not an evolutionary biologist, and i dont know if an evolutionary biologist would spend his time on these boards. But i do know the roughs of evolution or can find them out. Instead of me asking you questions how about you tell me why do you think evolution is smoke and mirrors?

I’m moving from a design degree into a science degree and beginning next semester will mainly be doing human biology. So hopefully in the next few months I will be more equiped to answer such questions at a higher level.

But I can tell you right now that there is no debate in the scientific community about the validity of evolution. And at the end of the day when it comes to questions OF science, the global science community’s opinion of the time is the only thing that counts.

Evolution isn’t that important (beside the basic principles) to my future studies, but just because of the amount of bashing it seems to not only get but give, the theistic view point may mean i have to go deep into it.

I can agree with you here. I have a different perspective than many because I am not of the same faith of my parents (or anyone in my family, for that matter.) I am the first Catholic in the whole lineage of my family, among hundreds. It is not so much that I want to indoctrinate my children, as guard them from indoctrination until they can reason well for themselves. I do not know about using public school in high school yet. I guess the real controversy of this movie is not about evolution as much as crossing religion and science. In the classroom setting, this should never happen in a public school.

You’re welcome, pnewton!

So the flu is a mutation of some virus that came before it. So What? I hardly think a flu virus is going to prove Darwins theories correct.
By the way, every year that I took a flu shot I came down with a very bad flu. I don’t take flu shots anymore and I stay healty all year long. When that bird flu comes, I won’t be taking that either. You take it and let me know what happens.

Have you heard of small pox? What do you think the black plague was?

I wasn’t there for either one. Neither were you.

Well where did these animals come from? How come we find them at certain periods of time but not at others? Why are there no bunny rabbits during the cretaceous?

What animals are you discussing here? God didn’t necessarily make all the animals at the same split second. Are you aware that at approximately 350 million years ago scientists found that the earth was covered with animals. They found their bones. All over the place. All kinds of bones. Now when these same scientists go back to 375 million years ago there are no bones. Where did these animals come form? There were no ancestors of the animals in which the bones were found. Almost like they just showed up. Mmmmmm. What can this mean?
They couldn’t have evolved. There were no ancestors. Wow! Now this is a mystery. Of course Darwinians just ignore it, as they should ignore it. Why? Because it may put them out of business.

Darwanism, I hear this thrown around alot you make it sound like a religion. Since darwin first proposed the theory there have been some great new discoveries and refinements to the theory. Do you mean Evolution? Well what i was trying to indicate by the age of the earth and the age of the universe is that we have vastly enough time for the theory to function. If the universe was say 10 000 years old there would be no way evolution is even a considered theory.

I meant to say Darwinism. This is also known as the religion of evolution and natural selection with Darwin as the founder and Dawkins as the high priest.
Please, we don’t have 10,000 years to prove that the founder was correct. I say we go on to bigger and better things than Darwinism.

I’m sorry but science doesnt work on smoke and mirrors. How else could science and scientific advancement send man to the moon. Cure diseases, provide clean water through filtration. Feed millions on Hubes priciple to increase yield. on average increase life expectancy by 30 - 50 years. International communication at your fingertips, worldwide travel capabilities.

I never said that science works on smoke and mirrors. We do have a lot of really good scientists, unfortunately none of them are Darwinians. Your statement implies that Darwinians made the above discoveries. My own opinion is that Darwinians prayed at the alter of Dawkins while the real scientists went to work.

IF science worked on smoke and mirrors then we would not have any of these things. I trust the scientific method BECAUSE it has made my world a better place. And i understand it. I’m not an evolutionary biologist, and i dont know if an evolutionary biologist would spend his time on these boards. But i do know the roughs of evolution or can find them out. Instead of me asking you questions how about you tell me why do you think evolution is smoke and mirrors?

Darwinians haven’t got a clue as to what the “scientific method” is. If they did, their work doesn’t show it!

I’m moving from a design degree into a science degree and beginning next semester will mainly be doing human biology. So hopefully in the next few months I will be more equiped to answer such questions at a higher level.

But I can tell you right now that there is no debate in the scientific community about the validity of evolution. And at the end of the day when it comes to questions OF science, the global science community’s opinion of the time is the only thing that counts.

Sorry, there is a huge scientific debate as to the validity of Darwinism.
Global Science Community: What praytell is this?
Are these the people that mix the poisonous cocktails for the women in the Philipines? In my humble opinion I would say that the Global science community is failing badly in doing their duty.

Evolution isn’t that important (beside the basic principles) to my future studies, but just because of the amount of bashing it seems to not only get but give, the theistic view point may mean i have to go deep into it.

Please do.
[/quote]

Remember that Isaac Newton also bears guilt for the gravitational death of the thousands of Chilean desaparecidos pushed out of airplanes by the henchmen of the devout Catholic Agosto Pinochet. Einstein is guilty by association of the deaths of hundreds of thousands in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And John Edvard Lundström’s invention of safety matches has led directly to the death hundreds in all the forest fires started by arsonists since 1855. Let us hope that on the last day God holds them as accountable as he will those of us who accept his creation through evolution!

Petrus

Was hoping when I found this thread that it would be less poisonous that the debates about “Expelled the Movie” that I have seen elsewhere, but I guess the topic is just naturally explosive.

Anyway, couldn’t let the idea that all scientists agree with Darwinism get by without posting this link discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-download.php?command=download&id=660 to the 17 pages of names of hundreds of scientists who dissent.

BTW, to put in my two cents, I have a BS in Biology and thought the movie was absolutely wonderful and extremely well done.

QUOTE=drpmjhess;3615745]Remember that Isaac Newton also bears guilt for the gravitational death of the thousands of Chilean desaparecidos pushed out of airplanes by the henchmen of the devout Catholic Agosto Pinochet. Einstein is guilty by association of the deaths of hundreds of thousands in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And John Edvard Lundström’s invention of safety matches has led directly to the death hundreds in all the forest fires started by arsonists since 1855. Let us hope that on the last day God holds them as accountable as he will those of us who accept his creation through evolution!

Is this the typical Darwinian use of logic and reason?

Hi Another Chance
Your link was really good!:slight_smile:

NCSE’s “Project Steve” is a tongue-in-cheek parody of a long-standing creationist tradition of amassing lists of “scientists who doubt evolution” or “scientists who dissent from Darwinism.”

Creationists draw up these lists to convince the public that evolution is somehow being rejected by scientists, that it is a “theory in crisis.” Most members of the public lack sufficient contact with the scientific community to know that this claim is totally unfounded. NCSE has been exhorted by its members to compile a list of thousands of scientists affirming the validity of the theory of evolution, but although they easily could have done so, they have resisted such pressure, not wishing to mislead the public into thinking that scientific issues are decided by who has the longer list of scientists!

Project Steve mocks this practice with a bit of humor, and because “Steves” are only about 1% of scientists, it incidentally makes the point that tens of thousands of scientists support evolution. And it honors the late Stephen Jay Gould, NCSE supporter and friend. ncseweb.org/resources/articles/3697_the_list_2_16_2003.asp

NCSE would like to think that after Project Steve, we’ll have seen the last of bogus “scientists doubting evolution” lists, but it’s probably too much to ask. We do hope that at least when such lists are proposed, reporters and other citizens will ask, “but how many Steves are on your list!?”

Here is the list of scientists who support evolutionary science. I include only those whose surnames begin with “A.”

Stephen T. Abedon
Associate Professor of Microbiology, Ohio State University
Ph.D.,�Microbiology, University of Arizona
Creator of The Bacteriophage Ecology Group, Home of Phage Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (www.phage.org)

Steven G. Ackleson****
Oceanographer, Office of Naval Research
Ph.D., Marine Studies, University of Delaware

Stephen A. Adam****
Associate Professor, Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University
Ph.D., Biochemistry, Molecular, and Cell Biology, Northwestern University

Steve Adams*****
Vice President, Curl Inc.
Ph.D., Astrophysics, University College London

Steven Reid Adams******
Assistant Professor, Department of Biology, University of Central Arkansas
Ph.D., Zoology, Southern Illinois University

Steve Adolph******
Professor of Biology, Harvey Mudd College
Ph.D., Zoology, University of Washington

Stephen R. Addison*
Associate Professor of Physics, University of Central Arkansas
Ph.D.,�Physics, University of Mississippi

Stephen L. Adler
Albert Einstein Professor, School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study
Ph.D.,�Physics, Princeton University
Member, National Academy of Sciences

Steven K. Akiyama*****
Scientist, Laboratory of Molecular Carcinogenesis, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health
Ph.D., Chemistry, Cornell University

Stephen B. Aley
Associate Professor of Biological Sciences, University of Texas, El Paso
Ph.D., Biology, Rockefeller University

Stephen C. Alley*
Senior Scientist, Seattle Genetics, Inc.
Ph.D., Chemistry, University of Washington

Steve Allison******
Staff scientist, Photonics Group, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Ph.D., Engineering Physics, University of Virginia

Steven I. Altchuler*
Assistant Professor of Psychiatry, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine; Consultant in Psychiatry, Mayo Clinic
Ph.D., Nutritional Biochemistry and Metabolism, Massachusetts Institute of Technology; M.D., Baylor College of Medicine

Stephen J. Anderson*****
Commercial Officer, U.S. Export Assistance Center, Baltimore, U.S. Department of Commerce
Ph.D.,�Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Stephen Robert Anderson
Professor of Linguistics and Cognitive Science, Yale University
Ph.D.,�Linguistics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences

Steven C. Anderson******
Emeritus Professor of Biology, University of the Pacific
Ph.D.,�Biology, Stanford University

Steven D. Anisman*****
Fellow, Cardiovascular Disease, Worcester Medical Center
M.D., University of Vermont
Diplomate, American Board of Internal Medicine; Member, American College of Cardiology

Steven Anschel******
Director, Local Public Health Sales, Netsmart Technologies, Inc.
Ph.D., Zoology, University of Maryland

Steve J. Aplin*****
Calorimeter Coordinator, HERA experiment H1, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron
Ph.D., Particle Physics, University of Portsmouth

Stephen W. Arch
L. N. Ruben Professor of Biology, Reed College
Ph.D., Biology, University of Chicago

Steve Archer****
Professor of Rangeland and Forest Resources, University of Arizona
Ph.D., Rangeland Ecosystem Science, Colorado State University, Ft. Collins

J. Steven Arnold*
Medical Director, Intensive Care and Sleep Medicine, St. Mary’s Hospital
Medical Director, Respiratory Care and Sleep Medicine, Decatur Memorial Hospital
M.D.,�Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago

Stevan J. Arnold
Professor of Zoology, Oregon State University
Ph.D.,�Zoology, University of Michigan
Past President, Society for the Study of Evolution

Steven E. Arnold*****
Assistant Professor of Chemistry, Auburn University, Montgomery
Ph.D.,�Chemistry, Louisiana State University

Stephen M. Arthur****
Research Biologist, Alaska Department of Fish and Game
Ph.D.,�Wildlife Biology, University of Maine

Steven N. Austad
Professor of Biological Sciences, University of Idaho
Ph.D.,�Zoology?, Purdue University
Author, Why We Age

Stephen J. Aves******
Associate Professor of Molecular Biology, University of Exeter
Ph.D., Biochemistry, University of Bristol

Stephen Azevedo*
Deputy Division Leader, Electronics Engineering Technologies Division, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
Ph.D., Electrical Engineering and Computing Science, University of California, Davis

I guess this prove my theory about Darwinians correct. All the scientists on your link obviously have nothing better to do than make up these lists.

The scientists had nothing to do with makingup this list. They are busy working in their laboratories to further humankind’s knowledge of the the universe, and in their classrooms to teach this to students. The ID “scientists,” meanwhile – who have yet to offer a single discovery to the world – are sitting around their coffee houses bitterly whining that they can’t get tenure.

My statement was made tounge-in-cheek. By the way none of the scientists that were recorded in Another Chances message claimed to be ID scientists. However, you could look at their credentials and tell they didn’t teach in elementary school.

Yes but I then have to copy and paste it into another thing to check it. Sorry, not worth my time. Most of us here aren’t so sensitive about obvious overlooking. BTW, did you correct the spelling of your Darwin buddy. He obviously made a slight mental error but it’s hardly the end of the world. At least you could be an equal opportunity spelling snob. :wink:

What Darwin buddy? I don’t have a Darwin buddy list.

Again, I have to snicker. While I haven’t gone through the whole list, the last one you gave cracks me up. That’s about at relevent as the gynecologist who believes in the Global Warming crisis. An EE is hardly the expert in the field. If you’re going to count that then I’d have to offer my Nuclear Physicist as proof that Darwinism is wrong. :shrug: Besides that, I know several people who work at LLNL who believe in ID and have trouble with Darwinism.

I understand, and my compulsion comes from teaching in a university where a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for “A” work is that it be flawlessly spelled and be free of grammatical errors and stylistic problems.

What I discover is that there is a correlation between the care with which people compose posts and the cogency of their arguments. Posts that are poorly spelled, badly constructed, and replete with grammatical errors are quite often posts that don’t make enough sense to convince anyone.

Petrus

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.