Google
 

View Full Version : new Documentary exposes Evolutionist!!!


Pages : 1 2 3 [4]

Spirit
06-01-08, - 10:08 PM
thx...probably need to close it too! cuz spirit already start out wrong!

right and wrong is NOT determined by you!!!!!!!!!!!

catch yourself!!!!!!!!!!!

YardManPickney
06-01-08, - 10:36 PM
I taught the biggest lie was man going to the moon. Just my opinion tho, who here believe man been 2 der moon in da 60's?

Spirit
06-01-08, - 10:37 PM
thx...probably need to close it too! cuz spirit already start out wrong!

I mean if you dont like my thread why dont you find another thread to post on and stop trying to infringe on my right to post because I certainly do not infringe on yours


JUST GO SOMEWHERE ELSE PLEASE!! I SICK OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU'ALL

foxhillgal
06-01-08, - 10:43 PM
if you really study evolution you will discover that you are the one brainwashed.
Read the reviews. *BOL*
The New York Times leads with:
One of the sleaziest documentaries to arrive in a very long time, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” is a conspiracy-theory rant masquerading as investigative inquiry.
Mixing physical apples and metaphysical oranges at every turn “Expelled” is an unprincipled propaganda piece that insults believers and nonbelievers alike. In its fudging, eliding and refusal to define terms, the movie proves that the only expulsion here is of reason itself.
From Time:
It’s in the film’s final third that it runs entirely off the rails as Stein argues that there is a clear line from Darwinism to euthanasia, abortion, eugenics and–wait for it–Nazism. Theories of natural selection, it’s claimed, were a necessary if not sufficient condition for Hitler’s killing machine to get started. The truth, of course, is that the only necessary and sufficient condition for human beings to murder one another is the simple fact of being human. We’ve always been a lustily fratricidal species, one that needed no Charles Darwin to goad us into millenniums of self-slaughter.
From the New York Post:
After all of his efforts to unhook the ID caboose from the creationism train, Stein makes it clear that his beef with Darwinism is that it weakens religion.
In a long, greasy detour, Stein shows that the Nazis were Darwinists. So what? They also liked skiing. Having Nazi fans doesn’t make Darwin wrong.
From Slant Magazine:
For a film about American freedom of expression and the necessity for open dialogue, it’s hard to imagine Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed being more one-sided, narrow-minded, and intellectually dishonest.
To their film’s catastrophic detriment, Stein and director Nathan Frankowski fail to provide concrete examples of the flaws in Darwin’s theory, content instead to simply have speakers (many with impressive credentials) state that it’s problematic and then treat such unsupported statements as verifiable truth. Nor, ultimately, do they examine the obvious and crucial religious underpinnings of the “intelligent design movement,” whose onscreen adherents deliberately refuse to speculate on the source of this creative “intelligence” because their opinion on the identity of this fundamental biological architect—God—would conclusively reveal Expelled as propaganda for a Christian-right movement whose own champion, Ronald Reagan, Stein ultimately depicts as his spiritual counterpart.
From E! Reviews:
A flunkout of a documentary, this features Ben Stein—still best known for his monotone “Anyone…anyone?”—advocating creationism, er, intelligent design, in science classrooms. Stein’s credibility is blown on this poorly constructed diatribe, and you’d be smart to save your bucks.
Plus, he’s tedious and unfunny.
With a heavy, heavy hand, the pic punctuates every scene with over-the-top archival footage—the Berlin wall, Stalin and other Cold War imagery.
Despite insisting “intelligent design” isn’t pro-God propaganda, Stein argues we’re waging a religious war (cut to cannon fire) with Darwinists smiting the faithful with—gasp!—atheistic ideas. Most outrageously, he plays the overused Nazi card—he tours an old concentration camp and notes Hitler himself was influenced by Darwin. Yes, kids, studying evolution leads to this (cut to dead prisoners).
Expelled pretends it wants to encourage debate but shuts down and edits around every Darwinian scientist who attempts to explain complex issues, as Stein makes snide remarks in voice-over.
From the Colorado Springs Independent:
Nazis? It’s all about Nazis?
In a parallel universe even crazier than our own, Ben Stein, former Nixon speechwriter turned ironic symbol of the anti-hip, may be making a documentary about how the Nazis used the “controversial” theory of gravity to make bombs fall to earth — so, of course, the theory of gravity must be wrong. But we are here, and in this universe Ben Stein is actually telling us that because the Nazis thought it would be a good idea to breed people like animals, the theory of evolution must be wrong.
It’s nuttiness right from the opening moments of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. Images of Nazi atrocities and the terrors of life behind the Berlin Wall are smugly deployed in an attempt to editorialize away basic scientific fact.
Expelled isn’t about “intelligent design,” about an alternative scientific theory, or even about academic freedom. It’s about Stein believing he has proven that acceptance of evolution leads to atheism (and also, we’re told, to such horrors as birth control). Hence, evolution cannot be allowed to be true. Even if it is.
From Newsday:
Ben Stein, the actor, lawyer, columnist and onetime speechwriter for Presidents Nixon and Ford, is probably smarter than you. He’s definitely smarter than I am. What’s galling about his new documentary, “Expelled,” is that he seems to think we’re both slobbering idiots.
In an increasingly hysterical tone, Stein lambastes Darwinians as misguided, ignorant fascists, cutting repeatedly to old footage of the Berlin Wall - a metaphor for squelched thought.
Finally, he unleashes his biggest attention-getter, holding Darwinism responsible for Nazi atrocities and genocide. I’m no lawyer, but that’s a pretty lousy argument.
Did Stein really think audiences wouldn’t balk at being suckered into a propaganda rally? Or was he preaching to the converted from the start? Stein claims to denounce the tyranny of dogma, then browbeats us with his own.
From Variety, whose reviewer is predisposed to like the movie:
Even more offensive is the film’s attempt to link Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” ideas and Hitler’s master-race ambitions (when in doubt, invoke the Holocaust), complete with solemnly scored footage of the experimentation labs at Dachau. Evocations of the Berlin Wall, treated as a symbol of a bullheaded scientific establishment on the verge of collapse, are equally fatuous.
The Village Voice:
[Stein's] thesis: Teaching Darwinian evolution but ignoring intelligent design in America’s public schools and universities is the biggest threat to American freedom today—bigger, presumably, than Al Qaeda, Iraq, and the recession combined. A series of interviews with ID true believers has him playing Michael Moore–dumb—no hard questions for the folks at the Discovery Center
ID’ers protest that they’re simply interested in secular alternatives to Darwinian evolution; their scientific opponents, meanwhile, are potential Communists and Nazis. Bizarre and hysterical.
The Orlando Sentinel, whose review was also run by the Chicago Tribune:
….Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, [is] a cynical attempt to sucker Christian conservatives into thinking they’re losing the “intelligent design” debate because of academic “prejudice.”
It’s a rabble-rouser of a doc that uses all manner of loaded images, loaded rhetoric, few if any facts, dubious ID “experts” and mockery of hand-picked “weirdo” legit scientists to attack those who, Stein claims, are stifling the Religious Right’s efforts to inject intelligent design into science courses, science curricula and the national debate.
It just isn’t particularly funny. Or the least bit convincing.
I lost track of the number of times Stalin’s image hit the screen, and in the ways the movie equated science with Darwinism with atheism with Hitler or Stalin. Subtle, it’s not.
Stein (he co-wrote it) builds his movie on classic Big Tobacco Tactics.
On Rotten Tomatoes, the movie currently has a rating of less than one out of ten.
The Waco Tribune:
[The] film’s arguments are a rhetorical mishmash of straw men, red herrings, guilt by association, quote harvesting, gotcha interviews and post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this, therefore because of this) associations that may cause your head to pop. It’s a propaganda form highly polished by director/activist Michael Moore on the other end of the political spectrum.
Those coming to Expelled hoping to learn something about any research behind ID, a fair appraisal of weaknesses in evolutionary theories or — perhaps the film’s most glaring and telling omission — how Christian evolutionists reconcile faith and science will leave sorely disappointed. The latter is quickly dismissed by a chain of quotes that brand them as liberal Christians and duped by militant atheists in their efforts to get religion out of the classroom.
From TV Guide:
It’s hard to pinpoint the most insulting aspects of this obvious propaganda piece from Ben Stein, the eye-drops spokesman, conservative writer and pundit whom most people remember from a bit part in FERRIS BUELLER’S DAY OFF.
But surely the film’s greatest offense is the utter shamelessness with which it exploits the Holocaust, veering far off topic for a side trip to Nazi killing centers at Hadamar and Dachau in an attempt to tar Darwin with the old “Evolution led directly to eugenics and the Final Solution” brush. The camera’s slow tracking shots through the death camps are followed by a similar creepy crawl through Down House, where Darwin wrote On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. None of this has anything to do with the validity of evolutionary theory or intelligent design, and only serves to point up how any theory can be used to justify evil ends.
From the Salt Lake Tribune:
The scholars Stein and the film’s producers interview say they just want an open debate where creationism - pardon, intelligent design - and Darwinist evolution can be discussed side-by-side. What’s wrong with that? Stein asks with mock-innocence.
Alas, the movie’s makers (Stein and co-writers Kevin Miller and Walt Ruloff, and director Nathan Frankowski) don’t debate honestly. Stein mocks university officials for not “getting off [their] script,” but says nothing about the repetitive talking points from the ID crowd. The ID folks complain that the term “evolution” is too vaguely defined, and yet never adequately define what “intelligent design” is. They swear they aren’t espousing religion, then try to discredit the leading evolutionary biologists - such as Richard Dawkins and P.Z. Myers - because they are atheists.
Oddly enough, the tactics employed in “Expelled” undercut the movie’s argument, most notably in the interviews with Dawkins and Myers and in Stein’s trip to Darwin’s British home (now a museum). Either the filmmakers suckered these participants under false pretenses, or the evolutionists are more open to debate than Stein suggests. Perhaps the intelligent-design proponents know that in a truly open debate, their argument isn’t fit enough to survive.
From the Seattle Times, hometown newspaper to the Discovery Institute:
Pop quiz: What is the real source of evil in the modern world? Greed? Intolerance?
Well, according to “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” it’s Darwinism, described as a philosophy that posits the pointlessness of life and encourages the “de-privileging of human beings” — and as such is responsible for everything from atheism to abortion, euthanasia to the Holocaust.
But Jon Stewart is a lot funnier than Stein.
From BeliefNet:
Like the tobacco companies once they could no longer question the legitimacy of the scientific evidence connecting cigarettes and disease, Stein quickly shifts the debate from a head-to-head assessment of analysis of data to frame the issue as one of freedom of speech. The movie opens with archival footage not of science labs or the animal life on Galapagos Island, where Darwin first began to develop his theory, but of the construction of the Berlin Wall. Stein tries to draw a parallel between the wall that divided Germany and the impenetrable wall that keeps Intelligent Design out of the science establishment. But he is also associating Darwinian science with Godlessness, communism, and totalitarianism, with detours into Nazi atrocities and atheism so over-the-top that it becomes shrill and irrational.
The conservative Ayn Rand Institute:
“The premise of Expelled is that proponents of ‘intelligent design’ have been shunned, denied tenure, and even fired because of a conspiracy to quash the scientific evidence supporting their theory,” said Dr. Keith Lockitch, resident fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute. “But the truth is: there is no evidence supporting their theory. Intelligent design is completely devoid of any positive scientific content, and consists of nothing more than a religiously motivated attack on evolution. To the extent intelligent design advocates are facing obstacles in academia it is because they are not doing real science: they haven’t been ‘expelled’ they have flunked out of the scientific community, just as a faith healer would flunk out of medical school.
A Scientific American podcast reports on the movie’s dishonest quoting of Charles Darwin:
Toward the end [of the movie], Stein reads the following quote from the book Descent of Man: “With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination. We build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. Hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.”
…I went to a full text of Descent of Man online and found the quoted passage. And then found the sentences that come right after where Stein stopped quoting.
So here’s Charles Darwin again, from Descent of Man: “The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil.“
National Review says:
…creationists have been morally corrupted by the constant effort of pretending not to be what they are. What they are, as is amply documented, is a pressure group for religious teaching in public schools.
…The creationists took the morally fatal decision to campaign clandestinely. They overhauled creationism as “intelligent design,” roped in a handful of eccentric non-Christian cranks keen for a well-funded vehicle to help them push their own flat-earth theories, and set about presenting themselves to the public as “alternative science” engaged in a “controversy” with a closed-minded, reactionary “science establishment” fearful of new ideas. (Ignoring the fact that without a constant supply of new ideas, there would be nothing for scientists to do.) Nothing to do with religion at all! I think this willful act of deception has corrupted creationism irredeemably. The old Biblical creationists were, in my opinion, wrong-headed, but they were mostly honest people. The “intelligent design” crowd lean more in the other direction. Hence the dishonesty and sheer nastiness, even down to plain bad manners, that you keep encountering in ID circles.
Our scientific theories are the crowning adornments of our civilization, towering monuments of intellectual effort, built from untold millions of hours of observation, measurement, classification, discussion, and deliberation. This is quite apart from their wonderful utility — from the light, heat, and mobility they give us, the drugs and the gadgets and the media…. Simply as intellectual constructs, our well-established scientific theories are awe-inspiring.
And now here is Ben Stein, sneering and scoffing at Darwin, a man who spent decades observing and pondering the natural world — that world Stein glimpses through the window of his automobile now and then, when he’s not chattering into his cell phone. Stein claims to be doing it in the name of an alternative theory of the origin of species: Yet no such alternative theory has ever been presented, nor is one presented in the movie, nor even hinted at. There is only a gaggle of fools and fraudsters, gaping and pointing like Apaches on seeing their first locomotive: “Look! It moves! There must be a ghost inside making it move!”
The “intelligent design” hoax is not merely non-science, nor even merely anti-science; it is anti-civilization.
fisherman will never call his fish stink!!! reviews by a bunch of evolutionists!!!

Case closed! Spam does ketch spam, Sir Yorik doon believe, doon worry bout dem, dey is great guys!


GOD IS STILL GOOD!

foxhillgal
06-01-08, - 10:45 PM
I mean if you dont like my thread why dont you find another thread to post on and stop trying to infringe on my right to post because I certainly do not infringe on yours

JUST GO SOMEWHERE ELSE PLEASE!! I SICK OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU'ALL

Where is da love, baby doon hurt me no mo....................



neva ax dem to leave u dred, dey gern eat ur bones.....................BOL!

Spirit
06-01-08, - 10:46 PM
That was not called for! When u were running on on the other thread no one insulted you!

WHAT POST WERE YOU READING!!!! THEY CALLED ME EVERYTHING BUT THE CHILD OF GOD

people have cursed me out making these kind of post

Brown Suga
06-02-08, - 06:03 AM
I mean if you dont like my thread why dont you find another thread to post on and stop trying to infringe on my right to post because I certainly do not infringe on yours

JUST GO SOMEWHERE ELSE PLEASE!! I SICK OF PEOPLE LIKE YOU'ALL
Ok u old fool, I was referring to the fact that u called persons dumb...u need to catch yourself, you educated fool!

No point being educatedif you are still a fool!

Brown Suga
06-02-08, - 06:06 AM
yes there was a post similar but because there are soo many dumbo's out there I have to break things down in more detail!!

referring to this!!!!

Not because someone cusses u out means u have to stoop to their level!


Anyway get on with your so called evolution theory,....u probably won't get much responses in any event!

Lurker
06-02-08, - 10:23 AM
I taught the biggest lie was man going to the moon. Just my opinion tho, who here believe man been 2 der moon in da 60's?

I do. I saw a science project with my own eyes where a couple of highschool kids built themselves a laser inferometer, and pointed it at the moon to pinpoint the exact location of that little dunebuggy thingie (the LEM or Lunar Excursion Module) that the astronauts left behind. They even imaged the result, and sure enough the thing is there from where the astronauts say they left it. They even found that platform that the capsule left behind when it blasted off from the surface to join the mother ship.

Spirit
06-02-08, - 11:30 PM
Ok u old fool, I was referring to the fact that u called persons dumb...u need to catch yourself, you educated fool!
No point being educatedif you are still a fool!


do we have to mis-interpret everything

I never called bahamas issues or anyone dumb directly in this post. I was referring indirectly to the people who read my post view the scientific evidence and still reject what I am saying.

But they certainly have called me dumb stupid idiot and even cursed me out.

so it is wrong of you to suggest that no one called me dumb.

Lurker
06-03-08, - 12:38 AM
Dude, there are questions about existence that science is ill-equipped to tackle. They can answer questions about biology, chemistry, and physics - tools which we use to analyze, interpret and discuss elements of existence - but when those tools are turned on the user, then we have to remember who is in charge. The object or the subject. Scientists seem to forget that. Because, believe it or not, humans are more than biological.

Dude, scientist do realise that:

In physics and cosmology, the anthropic principle states that humans should take into account the constraints that human existence as observers imposes on the sort of universe that could be observed. In other words, the only universe we can see is one that supports life. If it were a different type of universe, we would not exist to see it.

Originally proposed as a rule of reasoning, the term has since been extended to cover supposed "superlaws" that in various ways require the universe to support intelligent life, usually assumed to be carbon-based, and occasionally to be specifically human beings. Anthropic reasoning involves assessing these constraints by analyzing the properties of universes with different fundamental parameters or laws of physics from the current one, and has frequently concluded that essential structures, from atomic nuclei to the whole universe, depend, for stability, on delicate balances between different fundamental forces; balances which occur only in a small minority of possible universes — so that ours seems to be fine-tuned for life. Anthropic reasoning also attempts to explain and quantify this fine tuning. Within the scientific community the usual approach is to invoke selection effects from a real ensemble of alternate universes, which cause an anthropic bias in what can be observed.

The anthropic principle has led to more than a little confusion and controversy, partly because several distinct ideas carry this label. All versions of the principle have been accused of providing simplistic explanations which undermine the search for a deeper physical understanding of the universe. The invocation of either multiple universes or an intelligent designer are highly controversial, and both ideas have received criticism for being untestable and therefore outside the purview of contemporary science.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle

YardManPickney
06-03-08, - 02:22 AM
I do. I saw a science project with my own eyes where a couple of highschool kids built themselves a laser inferometer, and pointed it at the moon to pinpoint the exact location of that little dunebuggy thingie (the LEM or Lunar Excursion Module) that the astronauts left behind. They even imaged the result, and sure enough the thing is there from where the astronauts say they left it. They even found that platform that the capsule left behind when it blasted off from the surface to join the mother ship.
they alsp could have planted it there. I just find it strange that they struggled to get into space, they were behind the soviets then all of a sudden they get the technology to surpass soviet engineering. thats before all the problems with the van allen belt, camera film used, how things were shot and also the lighting complications. up to the apollo missions it was like the soviets had motorbike n dem yankees was drivin on moped. Just my opinion though

SpamStopper
06-03-08, - 02:28 AM
Who cares who reached the Moon first, what matters is that SpamStopper is not there now :hammer:

YardManPickney
06-03-08, - 02:37 AM
Who cares who reached the Moon first, what matters is that SpamStopper is not there now :hammer:
Thats der bleach talkin aye?:hammer::hammer::hammer::hammer:

SpamStopper
06-03-08, - 03:37 AM
Thats der bleach talkin aye?:hammer::hammer::hammer::hammer:

:D :D :D :hammer::hammer::hammer: