West Seattle Blog...

WSB Forum » Freebies, Deals, Sales, Trades, Barters

1. Farmerbetsy
   Member Profile

   just in case the guy at the corner of California and Alaska handed you a ticket to go see Expelled and you thought it sounded to good to be true, it's about "how the freedom to teach creationism is being suppressed across America." Just so's you know.

   Posted 3 years ago #         

2. HunterG
   Member Profile

   

   Creationism...wow! So I can go see a movie that highlights something Sarah Palin believes in?!?

   Yikes.

   Posted 3 years ago #         

3. Anonymous
   Member Profile

   Expelled exposed

   http://www.expelledexposed.com/index.php/the-truth

   Interesting to read the movie's claims debunked. Website goes through the list of people supposedly expelled from their profession for supporting intelligent design. Seems a lot of facts were left out. Who'd of thought.

   Posted 3 years ago #         

4. Ken
   Member Profile

   

   http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/02/the_ad_expelled_ought_to_have.php

   This is the poster that should have been used.

   The sad thing is that most of the people attacked by this film are pretty sure Ben Stein is not really dumb enough to believe the stuff he says.

   Details of the lies christianist have used in this film.
   http://www.expelledexposed.com/

   http://www.expelledexposed.com/index.php/contest

   Posted 3 years ago #         

5. HMC Rich
   Member Profile

   

   I need to see the movie before I can say too much. Have any of you seen it by chance?

   Posted 3 years ago #         

6. Anonymous
   Member Profile

   Rich, I can't stand Ben Stein's voice so there's no way i could sit through a whole movie with him narrating. It would truly hurt my ears. That said, the claims made in it would still have to be independently verified. You can find all of that info and the examinations of those alleged facts, in print online. Much easier for me to digest that way.

   In addition to the above links, which contain research of those claims from the source, wiki has a pretty thorough write up as well.

   *The American Association for the Advancement of Science describes the film as dishonest and divisive propaganda, aimed at introducing religious ideas into public school science classrooms.*

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

   The theme of the movie is essentially to claim that scientists have proof of intelligent design. Teachers that have attempted to introduce this information in to the classroom have lost their job and have had their reputations and lives ruined by harassment(expelled). They also claim many scientists have proof of ID, but because of the backlash, are afraid to reveal it.

   Both websites reveal how these alleged firings and harassment are fabricated lies.

   And, my personal opinion on scientists is that if one of them had proof of god, the last thing they would be, is afraid to share it. They would be worldwide heroes. To allege there's some conspiracy in covering up the truth of our origin is ridiculous. Scientists, scholars, archeologists, theologians, etc, have devoted their lives to this quest.

   What bothers me is why so many supposed believers in faith, can't just live their faith and be content. Instead, they have to make up hate and persecution coming from their enemies, in order to keep up the good fight. Is this some form of warped recruitment tool?

   The filmmakers even went as far as to pay public schools, cash per ticket stub submitted ($5-$10), to entice viewers. Whatever happened to the idea of a product being good enough to sell itself.

   Not that any of this matters. I have serious doubts that the target audience will choose to verify the movie's premise.

   Posted 3 years ago #         

7. HMC Rich
   Member Profile

   

   Bueller, anyone Bueller.? Thank God for Jimmy Kimmel. My age is showing. Maybe our school aged children should be EXPELLED, FROM AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH on RELIGIOUSITY and not participate in AN AMERICAN CAROL.

   I can't comment on Stein's movie but I am glad you supplied the information you and others have.

   From my perspective most people, religious or not, that I know do believe in evolution. Our lives evolve before us. Our careers, our children, etc. There are many examples. Yes there are also holes in evolutionary chain but between trilobites and dinosaurs there weren't machines popping up, which would have interrupted the chain and debunked the theory, but it has strong proof that this is what has happened. Funny how some of the holes need a leap of "faith" but that evidence I think will be found eventually. Anyway we see evolution at work all the time.

   The Intelligent Design theory is interesting because of the use of belief and science in which mathematics seems to be part of life, the universe and beyond. Time itself is also questioned when delving into the question of I.D. I really haven't given this theory a lot of research but I will sometime in the future (or present, or past, maybe a different lifetime. I'm confused).

   What many Christians do not believe in is Darwinism and atheistic tendencies to demean their views just like the reverse for atheists from hardcore non evolutionists. There you find the issue.

   Second, science benefits everyone if they want to embrace it, and interestingly enough, quite often science may state HOW, but doesn't always say WHY.

   Like I say, I want to see the movie AND read the differing opinions due to the movie. I think it makes for a fascinating discussion.

   Posted 3 years ago #         

8. Ken
   Member Profile

   

   1) Read.
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District#Decision
   2) Understand the difference between a scientific theory and a drunken hallucination.
   http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html

   3) Understand that intelligent design shorn of it's doublespeak and syllogisms, postulates the exact same theory as creationism but allows the substitution of the phrase "space aliens" for "God".
   4) Evolution as a scientific theory (see above) supports and is supported by the disciplines of geology (oil drilling?), genetics, archeology and paleontology just to name a few. Our entire medical establishment is built on facts that support and mesh with this theory. Gravity is also "just a theory" but you don't often talk to people who reject its validity more than once.

   5) The wedge document lays out the entire reason for the existence of the concept of intelligent design.
   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_document
   http://www.antievolution.org/features/wedge.pdf
   Note this document was published on our local Howard Ahmenson financed "think tanks" web site (discovery institute) and I saw the original shortly after it was published and before it was scrubbed.

   6) as an old fart (tm) I realize there are people who are incapable of accepting the basic premise of anything that is not exceptionally simple or implanted by an authority figure, and I have given up arguing with them because "it annoys the pig".

   Posted 3 years ago #         

9. Julie
   Member Profile

   

   Tangentially related--for a good laugh, check out initiatives 1040 and 1047 filed with the Secretary of State, "concerning a supreme ruler of the universe":

   http://www.secstate.wa.gov/elections/initiatives/people.aspx

   Posted 3 years ago #         

10. B-squared
    Member Profile

    

    Well, if you want to see "Expelled", it would be good to follow that up with "Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial".

    I highly recommend it.
    --------------------------------------------
    With this episode, the popular "Nova" series examines the trial of Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, a controversial legal battle sparked by a group of science teachers who refused to comply with an order to teach intelligent design. Through scene re-creations, interviews and expert testimony, the program presents the arguments of both sides and illuminates the conflict that thrust the people of Dover into the worldwide spotlight.
    -------------------------------------------

    Posted 3 years ago #         

11. JanS
    Member Profile

    

    Julie...after slogging through all of the Tim Eyman stuff on there (boy, that guy needs to get a job), I found 1040 and 1047....seems to me that someone has a little too much time on their hands...wow....

    Posted 3 years ago #         

12. Ken
    Member Profile

    

    http://www.tacomaatheists.com/archives/1103

    More fun with creationists.

    Posted 3 years ago #         

13. HMC Rich
    Member Profile

    

    Why Ken, your dripping with sarcasm. You like this stuff.

    Julie, to add to your post please read the Preamble to the State of Washington Constitution. Can't put my finger on it, but something sounds familiar.
    http://www.leg.wa.gov/LawsAndAgencyRules/constitution.htm

    Seriously, I need to read and view all of this stuff you are posting. Have a great night everyone.

    Posted 3 years ago #         

14. Anonymous
    Member Profile

    Apparently the supreme ruler of the universe is a 19 yo female from Perth, Western Australia. At least that's what myspace says. I thought s/he would at least be some sort of superhero.

    Posted 3 years ago #         

15. pigeonmom
    Member Profile

    

    MySpace is wrong. Bacon is the supreme ruler of the universe.

    Posted 3 years ago #         

16. JanS
    Member Profile

    

    HMC...I have never paid attention to that part of the WA State constitution. In all seriousness, since it says that we are grateful to the Supremem Ruler of the Universe. So who gets to decide who this "Supreme Ruler of the Universe" is? You? me? George Bush ("I am the decider")?

    Seems to me to be an odd way to start our state constitution, but maybe that's just me.

    I'm with pigeonmom...bacon, bacon, bacon....

    Posted 3 years ago #         

17. HMC Rich
    Member Profile

    

    What? Arnold Ziffel is the supreme ruler? Who would have known. Kind of like the mice in Hitchhikers Guide.
    On the first day He created light, the Big Bang, and what is not commonly known is on the 8th day after he rested he was hungry and created bacon. He would not share with his chosen people so that is why they do not eat pork. Pigeonmom knew it. I apologize if I offended my Jewish friends. I am guessing God has a sense of humor. I mean really, the platypus?

    I have read quite a bit of your posts. There is slight condescension in tone on one side as well as falsehood displayed by people who should know better on another side. I guess passion can get in the way of "facts" but facts change over time with new evidence. I hope I come from the more fact based scientific background in my views but I do not mind taking up the cause for the other side.

    First let me say that I value science and the proof it provides and helps us try to understand the world and universe in which we live.
    Second, the creationist community needs to prove their theories in scientific fields and in academia to be taken seriously by science and more secular institutions.
    Third, as more evidence comes forward views and theories will change as they always have.
    Four, people who are not open minded to facts as well as other possibilities are sadly limiting themselves.
    Five, Unless it is a private school, Intelligent Design should not be taught as the prevailing train of thought on HOW WE ARE HERE. Even in a private school, evolution should be taught since there is much evidence and facts concerning Evolution.
    Six, it is my belief that in time both views will be reconciled.

    Before speaking of Evolution, there was a singularity where space, time, and matter as we barely perceive it started. The Big Bang has been explained by scientists using The second law of thermodynamics and Einstein's theory of relativity. There are more examples too which support the Big Bang Theory and debunk Perpetual Motion. Just like the Big Bang has been argued against, there is scientific proof from earlier hypothesis that the big bang happened which gives certain scientists indigestion. If one can accept the big bang then someone might be open enough to accept that something outside our understanding of physics caused it to happen. Something outside time and our reality.

    Using the science from my last paragraph, I can set forth that the Bible says this (that the Big Bang occurred) in Genesis, but stated in much simpler forms. The Bible is unique in forming a starting point of the universe. Other ancient texts and philosophies differ but no other that I am aware of states an absolute beginning. On the first day He created light, and many have read about the earth forming etc. Modern Science helps support the beginning outlined in Genesis.

    I and some others differ on how the universe was formed, especially out of "nothing". I really do not know and will probably never know. But, before there was modern science, there was Genesis which told the common man how the world came about. Thank You modern science for solidifying the word of the bible.

    I cannot and will not agree with the creationists who said the world was only 6,000 years old. The evidence doesn't support it. I can come to terms with the fact that our universe was created about 15 billion years ago. It took billions of years for our earth to evolve out of space dust and the other elements of the universe. As Mr. D'souza (from whom I base much of this response on) points out, the bible is not a science textbook but it has been shown to be accurate with the help of modern science in telling human beings how the universe came into being.

    I think I have to quit for now. I could very well be wrong, but If I am, so what. If I am wrong and the "truth" is different, then aren't we all better off? Obviously, I am not yet talking about Intelligent Design, but if need be I can later.

    Posted 3 years ago #         

18. Anonymous
    Member Profile

    Rich, among other disagreements, you lost me after revealing your source is Dinesh D'Souza. The guy outed closeted gays in college. Blames 9/11 on liberals, thinks slavery was not racist, and unforgivably dated Ann Coulter. Not my kind of guy.

    “The American slave was treated like property, which is to say, pretty well.” (from D’Souza’s book, The End of Racism)

    "for many whites the criminal and irresponsible black underclass represents a revival of barbarism in the midst of Western civilization." (from D’Souza’s book The End of Racism)

    “In reality, the left already has a foreign policy and a strategy, and it’s called working in tandem with bin Laden to defeat Bush.” (from The Enemy at Home)

    “What disgusts [Muslims] is not free elections but the sights of hundreds of homosexuals kissing one another and taking marriage vows. The person that horrifies them the most is not John Locke but Hillary Clinton.” (from The Enemy at Home)

    “...black males have the highest self-esteem of any group. Yet on academic measures black males score the lowest. The reason is that self-esteem in these cases is generated by factors unrelated to studies, such as the ability to beat up other students or a high estimation of one’s sexual prowess.” (from D’Souza’s book Letters to a Young Conservative)

    Posted 3 years ago #         

19. Ken
    Member Profile

    

    The complete quote wherein Dinesh D'Souza tries to force Genesis chapter 1 to prove the bible is a good source of science, while ignoring the contradiction of the earth being created a couple of days before the universe and the stars, as well as ignoring all the hundreds of supernatural explanations and claims that conflict with science (archeology, paleontology, animal husbandry, genetics and geology as well as the rest of the life sciences, physical sciences) and damn near any minimally educated persons understanding of the allegory accepted by most people who do not suffer from massive rectocranial inversion.

    The Big Bang resolves one of the apparent contradictions in the book of Genesis. For more than two centuries, critics of the Bible have pointed out that in the beginning--on the first day--God created light. Then on the fourth day God separated the night from the day. The problem is pointed out by philosopher Leo Strauss: "Light is presented as preceding the sun." Christians have long struggled to explain this anomaly but without much success. The writer of Genesis seemed to have made an obvious mistake.

    But it turns out there is no mistake. The universe was created in a burst of light fifteen years ago. Our sun and our planet came into existence billions of years later. So light did indeed precede the sun. The first reference to light in Genesis 1:3 can be seen to refer to the Big Bang itself. The separation of the day and the night described in Genesis 1:4 clearly refers to the formation of the sun and the earth...The Genesis enigma is solved..." (p. 123)
    -- Dinesh D'Souza, What's So Great About Christianity?

    It's bunk, he knows it's bunk, but a paycheck is a paycheck and he knows educated people are not gonna pay his bills.

    Posted 3 years ago #         

20. HMC Rich
    Member Profile

    

    Hello JT. I appreciate you bringing up past points that D'Souza has made. They are provocative and to some very insulting. You are fair minded and your posts are well thought out.

    You are questioning the messenger and not the message. But, if you discount it due to dislike of D'Souza, that is your choice.

    I can bring up similar responses about Robert Byrd and his past association with the KKK. He became quite a statesman afterward didn't he?

    I may not agree with all of his points which you point out but I will not discount everything a person has to say. My experience in life is not his nor can I say mine is like yours. We can infer certain stances, but his are not mine.

    I may take exception to what Hitchens or Dawkins believe, but I will listen. They could be right, but I think time will tell. Take Richard Dreyfuss. I probably disagree with him more than I agree, but he has some extremely valid points that all sides need to look at. Bill Maher is another example. I dislike what he says quite often but at times I have to agree with him or at least ponder what he has to say.

    I always marveled at how James Carville and Mary Matlin stayed married. Talk about two opposites. If they can differ in opinions, then I think we can too.

    Unlike some, I really try to not demean and belittle people, (And I am certainly not accusing you of this) but I will use sources that are unpopular to back up an argument.

    Coming up I have a commentary from a conservative radio host explaining the government's role in the banking problem. It is one point of view. Many will discount it because of the messenger, and he is extremely outspoken, but if others can get past the messenger, they might learn something from the message.

    Ken, your response is as I expected and if you need to feel superior, that is ok with me.

    Posted 3 years ago #         

21. HMC Rich
    Member Profile

    

    JT, one other thing. D'Souza did a piece on our President's half brother in Kenya. I found it tasteless and petty. I think he can be very tasteless too and I believe I understand where you are coming from also.

    I think I will shut up for now.

    Posted 3 years ago #         

22. Anonymous
    Member Profile

    Rich, I understand that we all pick and choose elements of a person or idea that we agree or disagree with and emphasize those attributes, usually to prove a point. You're essentially stating the don't throw the baby out with the bathwater philosophy.

    I do try to listen to dissenting voices with an open mind. The difference here, for me, is when someone is clearly coming from the far ends of the ideological spectrum. I tend to dismiss them. I don't find extremes on either side appealing nor do I think that person has any genuine intellectual curiosity. D'Sousa has an agenda, and I don't personally feel it is to inform or educate.

    BTW, you are the last person who needs to shut up. You are always considerate on here. I enjoy your perspective specifically because of how they are delivered. You are not confrontational. You are not condescending. You ask rather than assume. You have a great deal of patience towards difficult people. I can not claim that quality at all.

    Posted 3 years ago #         

23. datamuse
    Member Profile

    

    Huh. I thought the reason for the contradictions regarding the inception of the universe in Genesis were due to it being at least two distinct creation myths mushed (that's the technical term, of course) together...

    I don't get why the Bible has to be good science to be an acceptable religious text anyway. Does it entirely negate its value if it's not?

    Posted 3 years ago #         

24. Ken
    Member Profile

    

    The value of the Bible is not as a science text.

    That is the core of my objections to Dinesh D'Souza's statements.

    Why can no conservative understand that atheist and liberals the world over would support any move to include a comparative religion course in highschool or even elementary school as long as it actually presented all religions and their creation myths on an equal footing.

    The issue is that creationism (and ID) ARE NOT SCIENCE and cannot be presented as science in a classroom setting.

    ------------------------

    "Those who cavalierly reject the Theory of Evolution, as not adequately supported by facts, seem quite to forget that their own theory is supported by no facts at all."
    --Herbert Spencer: Nineteenth-century English social scientist

    --------------------

    Posted 3 years ago #         

25. datamuse
    Member Profile

    

    Ken,

    My point exactly.

    Posted 3 years ago #         

26. Anonymous
    Member Profile

    Ken, I completely agree. As an atheist, I would fully support comparative religion courses. We would all benefit from knowing and understanding what the world thinks and believes, regardless of whether we're in agreement. Religion through the ages has taught us much about civilization. Not to mention a large portion of the mess in Iraq can be attributed to our lack of understanding of their religious and cultural practices.

    When and why did this big push to put christianities' beliefs into our science classes occur? And why stop at christianity if that's the way some want to play it. Lets dump all the major religion's human origin stories in there.

    I know my parents biggest fears about comparative religion were two-fold. I might find a better one, or discover just how un-original the bible really is. Maybe that's still the problem now.

    Posted 3 years ago #         

27. HMC Rich
    Member Profile

    

    Wow, Ken and JT, I agree with both of your posts. These last few posts get to the core. I am a big fan of hearing all sides of an issue and letting our children know what is considered scientific compared to belief. I am not a fan of forcing a particular viewpoint down someone's throat especially in public school.

    I cannot view the bible as a science book but more as a religious/philosophical history book. There might be a better definition but I can't think of one for now. If someday there is better proof for I.D. so be it. But like I said before, it needs to be proven through the scientific processes that have taken place in the past and continue through today. Science is great, stubborn, and always changing.

    Unfortunately, I have to go. I used to be a very independent man, now I am a servant to my felines, canine, spouse and child. I am being summoned by one of the cats. They know what worship is. :)

    Posted 3 years ago #         

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.