Ben Stein shows he's no Michael Moore

[Diuretic]

Really? Prove life started the way science says it started. Prove man evolved from an ape like creature and also that mice and men must have evolved from a single species at one time.

Prove the big bang happened. Prove the Universe is expanding. Shall I go on?

Please do, but the response wil be along these lines:

1. No one knows yet how life started so asking for proof about something that hasn't yet been put forward as a theory is a bit much.

2. Ask a scientist about the rest of it 'cos I ain't one.

 

[Diuretic]

On a more serious note.

A number of people who post here hold religious beliefs and those people can still accept scientific theories about evolution and the rest of it. Why is that a minority of fundies can't do the same?

I mean frazzled you're going to hate this so just ignore it - the Catholic Church has accepted the theory of evolution and other scientific ideas after hundreds of of years of persecuting those who proposed and held those ideas. Back then they were probably scared that science would cause an outbreak of atheism or at least agnoticism and threaten the power base of the Church (which was Catholic of course). But now they're even joining in the research. They worked out that you can use science to explain observed phenomena and it's not necessarily going to lead an individual or masses of individuals to declare that God is dead.

But along come the Creationists with their closed, fundie minds to try to tell us the World was made a fortnight ago when God had a bit of time off. When that one fell flat they created the ID movement. Now we're being polite and using the term ID-ers but I'm getting to the point where I'm going to make a habit of using the term ID-iots. Not yet though, still want to be civil.

I don't care what people believe. I'm rather interested in theology as a subject of study (can you believe I was refused enrolment in a theological elective as a postgrad because I wasn't an avowed Christian? Nice eh? I was furious, couldn't do anything about it though).

What gets me really cranky is this propaganda outfit of ID-ers who want the rest of us to accept their theology as science. Well shove it. I'm not having a bit of it. ID is theology, theology isn't science. You have no hope getting that garbage accepted in any real university as being science. Heck you only have to go to a science faculty and see what they've done in the men's - one I know about has a little handwritten sign above the toilet roll - "sociology degrees, please take one". Now if sociology (which is a valid social science) is going to get that from the pointyheads do you think your mumbo jumbo has a chance?

So drop the God of the Gaps rubbish, it's stale, it's discredited and it makes you look very, very stupid and/or duplicitous. Go ahead and believe what you will but don't tell anyone else if you get out of the compound, they'll piss themselves laughing.

Okay, serious bit over, frazz you can crank up another macro if you wish.

 

[José]

Originally posted by frazzledgear
A materialism paradigm says that EVERYTHING is causally dependent on physical processes and reducible to those physical processes.

Your information is in error.

When scientists like Dawkins say everything is reducible to physical processes they are speaking as materialist philosophers, not as scientists.

Materialist philosopher: Everything is reducible to physical processes.

Scientist: I can explain things more effectively and get better results if I conduct my experiments as if they were only affected by natural causes.

The assumption that all phenomena that happen in the Universe are affected only by natural forces is A WORKING ASSUMPTION.

A working assumption that has proved to be tremendously successful at understanding the entities and events that surround us and the technological civilization built by the rational beings who inhabit this planet is living proof of it.

 

[José]

I’m gonna try to simplify frazzledgear’s main argument.

He thinks the basic working assumption of science (“science makes more progress if it “makes believe” everything in the Universe has physical causes&#8221 should be abandoned and replaced by a working assumption that allows for divine intervention.

A concrete example:

According to frazzledgear, when biologists study the origin of life they should not discard the possibility that it was created directly by God or the possibility that God directed the creation of life from “behind the scenes”.

He fails to understand that it doesn’t matter in the least, whether scientists discard this idea or not, they simply can’t put this hypothesis to the test, they can’t do anything with it other than speculate about it.

And this is precisely what philosophers and theologians are for!! Their job is to speculate about issues that cannot be verified/falsified.

Listen frazzledgear,

This is a compromise solution.

It’s the BEST deal Diuretic, Shogun, ReillyT and myself can offer you. So take it or leave it:

Science will continue to use its fundamental working assumption (it’s useful, even if not entirely true, to imagine that everything has physical causes).

If you are correct and there really are entities and events in the Universe that did not result from physical causes, science won’t be able to find a definitive, solid explanation for them and your religious belief will not be threatened by scientists for eons to come.

But the new scientific working assumption you propose (science should investigate the divine origin of the Universe, life and the existence of the human soul) is SHEER LUNACY, and reveals a total lack of understanding of how science really works.

 

[Ravi]

I've decided for the most part that arguing with fundies is no different than arguing with someone that believes in martians...pointless.

 

[Shogun]

Shogun
So, when are the thumpers going to stop crying about not being accepted by science and start conducting experiments with their dogma?

José
As soon as they invent a theometer to detect supernatural interventions in the Universe.

HA!




Of course, anyone who does not give equal consideration to the use of Frankinsence burners over the secular bunson burner is probably like sand in ben steins crack too.


who needs ager in a petrie dish when praying for bacterial culture growth isn't allowed in the lab!

 

[Shogun]

Really? Prove life started the way science says it started. Prove man evolved from an ape like creature and also that mice and men must have evolved from a single species at one time.

Prove the big bang happened. Prove the Universe is expanding. Shall I go on?

if you wanna continue looking stupid as hell, please do.

 

[AllieBaba]

I find that those who defend evolution to the exclusion of all other theories are a hundred times more fanatical than "fundies".

You guys seem to get really distraught when anybody else has a pet theory.

 

[Diuretic]

I find that those who defend evolution to the exclusion of all other theories are a hundred times more fanatical than "fundies".

You guys seem to get really distraught when anybody else has a pet theory.

Yeah we have this thing about keeping theology out of science. It's a constant struggle.

 

[AllieBaba]

Science is a religion. And no more accurate or reliable.

 

[ReillyT]

Science is a religion. And no more accurate or reliable.

So when you need medical care, do you just pray, or do you go to a doctor?

 

[AllieBaba]

I do both.

 

[jillian]

Science is a religion. And no more accurate or reliable.

That might well have deserved stupidest post of the week. But you've picked a week where we have people defending old men raping young girls, so no prize this time around.

 

[ReillyT]

I do both.

Good answer. I should have seen that one coming, but you are still a fool.

 

[Shogun]

I find that those who defend evolution to the exclusion of all other theories are a hundred times more fanatical than "fundies".

You guys seem to get really distraught when anybody else has a pet theory.

thats the thing though.. we can EXPERIMENT and actually USE the principles of science using tangible evidence.


You cant. No it's, ands or buts about it. You've got your worthless faith in a book and a dogma and nothing else to offer the scientific community. Why don't you go create some fucking experiments instead of bitch about scientists who won't let you participate since you are not actually practicing science.


In other words, put up or shut up.

 

[Shogun]

I do both.

unfortunatley for you, it's the DRs visit that has anything to do with your recovery.



go pray for an amputee, baba. see what happens.

 

[AllieBaba]

I forgot. You only believe in freedom of speech and human rights for seculars, jews, and underaged girls in abortion clinics and the assholes who get them pregnant.

 

[Shogun]

oh you can say what you want (for the most part) but so, too, are we allowed to call you batshit crazy when you mount another stupid rant. INCLUDING scientists who understand the reason your batshit craziness is not science.


Like i said, put up or shut the fuck up. Post one single example of your theology producing a reproducible experiment from which we can deduce something about the physical nature of our world. Go ahead. Show your cards.



acting like a groupie to Mt. Ararat on the offhand chance that someone will find the fucking Ark just isn't science. sorry. Insisting that noah's fucking flood created the grand canyon just isn't science. sorry.

 

[Uknow_me72]

All the theories of the big bang and evolution are all batshit as shogun likes to say.

I mean wake the F up people. You keep ignoring the fact that what you see on TV is not real. TV was made for you to become lazy, to keep you distracted and tell you what to think while giving you false information.

The whole time these scientific theories were made here to leave God out of the equation. The teaching of fallicies to you happened so long ago that you believe them to be true because a populace believes them.

I love the people, I am here to wake us up. The conspiricy's of reducing 2/3's of the worlds population are true. The less people in the world the easier it is to contol. Shogun if you think you a random interent blogger and forum poster are going to be one of the lucky ones that do not lose there lives then you are dead wrong. Even the ones that get left alive are going to want to be taken also.

The time is so close for this to happen, we have no freedom. We have illusions of freedom.

Shogun again you want your scientific proof of God? Look around you. Look at the life, the universe, yourself. Some random thing did not happen for you to be here. You are here on purpose.

 

[frazzledgear]

On a more serious note.

A number of people who post here hold religious beliefs and those people can still accept scientific theories about evolution and the rest of it. Why is that a minority of fundies can't do the same?

I mean frazzled you're going to hate this ......QUOTE]

I have to wonder at the ability of some people to comprehend the written word. Because I defend the absolute right and scientific FREEDOM of a scientist to propose a theory he claims is based on his work and provides that work in support - you think that somehow means I "oppose" the theory of evolution and am some kind of religious fundamentalist? Sorry to disappoint you then. I think in its original form, Darwin's theory is flawed and attempted to explain far more than can be explained by a single broadbased theory like that. That does NOT mean I think it should be thrown out entirely because I think Darwin did get some parts right. Just not all of it -and further research has shown that to be absolutely true. So far no scientist has EVER gotten it completely correct right out of the box -and Darwin is no exception. So what? It just means research must continue.

Unlike those who oppose ID for no other reason than what it implies, my defense of ID is not for what the theory says or implies. My defense is that for some of these scientists, they DO have scientific grounds and their work that led them to propose that theory. Those who discount the work of ANY scientist whose work led them to a conclusion that challenges your view of the world are NO different from those who demanded that Darwin's work be tossed out without any need for scientists to tackle his conclusions.

You can't DEMAND that all scientists MUST only have results that fit in with the current view the world and the information in it that the majority hold. Are you nuts? We made of the greatest leaps in science BECAUSE a scientist refused to view the world and information in it the way everyone else did. But that is exactly what some people ARE insisting -and just like they did with Darwin, willing to go to court to stifle scientific freedom by demanding that no scientist can be allowed to view the world differently from the way they do. And it is nothing new either.

Throughout history, every time a scientist refused to view the world and the information in it by the identical standard of the day -they had their work condemned as not "real" science.

Sorry all you people frothing at the mouth over this theory -but if a scientist reaches his conclusions based on nothing but his scientific work, then it IS science. And only science can determine the validity of that work, not popular opinion. If there is no validity to their work -it will die a natural death and doesn't need any help from those who oppose it for no other reason than it conflicts with THEIR view of the world. If it does have validity, then it isn't going to go away no matter how many temper tantrums you throw. Deal with it.