What is Digg?1056 Comments
- Apokalyps2547, on 04/17/2008, -46/+447Don't preach in my schools and I won't think in your church!
- inactive, on 04/17/2008, -30/+420You are welcome to believe what you wish... just don't try to teach your belief as if it were science.
- pyro12, on 04/17/2008, -23/+315A belief that "intelligent design" is somehow a valid scientific theory reveals a severe lack of scientific education. A scientific theory MUST be testable, how are you going to "test" a "theory" that the universe was designed? Doesn't matter what you believe, it falls outside the boundaries of science. Period.
- custal, on 04/17/2008, -25/+247They can believe what they want. The whole point is, that ID is not science.
- CC440, on 04/17/2008, -14/+220I have lost a lot of repsect for Ben Stein just because of this movie. It is nothing but a media attention grabber designed to stir up "controversy" and get free publicity. This movie will make huge amounts of money just because people want to see its controversial nature, even though almost everything in it has been refuted or is pure conjecture. The mere mention of Darwin causing the Holocaust is enough to make me want to punch Mr. Stein in the dick.
- gordonj, on 04/17/2008, -19/+155and therefore shouldn't be taught in science class
- rollem, on 04/17/2008, -10/+144They are not both theories. ID is not falsifiable: if anything looks out of the ordinary or does not match an original statement made through ID's logic, then the obvious explanation is that the designer just made the system that way. Evolution by natural selection is falsifiable by many, many ways. A fossil rabbit in the precambrian, to quote another evolutionary biologist, is one such proof. Darwin even said that if an organ were ever found whose origins could not be explained by successive, tiny improvements, his theory would be completely falsified. This is the "irreducible complexity" that some ID proponents espouse that turns out not to be the case for the immune response, flagellum, or the eye.
- Coven, on 04/17/2008, -20/+132SciAm should sit Ben Stein down and grill him over these issues. I'd love to see how he behaves when backed into a corner on these issues.
- archstant0n, on 04/17/2008, -32/+141lol creationism
- inactive, on 04/17/2008, -7/+114REPEAT AFTER ME:
EVOLUTION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH COSMOLOGY.
SAY IT A MILLION TIMES. THEN WRITE IT ON YOUR ***** FOREHEAD. - Nougat, on 04/17/2008, -18/+115ID is not theory. It is dogma.
Also, I believe you are stupid. I defy you to prove me wrong. - wierdaaron, on 04/17/2008, -12/+104My problem with the movie isn't that it tries to make intelligent design look legitimate, it's that Stein plays it off like he's a REBEL standing up to THE MAN and THE ESTABLISHMENT because he QUESTIONS THE STATUS QUO. This is entirely contrary to my experiences in this world.
I'm an atheist in a family of Christians, and I'm constantly having to edge around the fact that I've studied and subscribe to evolution in conversation. For me, I feel like the rebel being crushed by the status quo of everybody else believing in an invisible space monster. You can't get elected to office in this country unless you do enough interviews about how the holy spirit moves you and how 9/11 was because we love god SO MUCH it makes the satan worshipers in "not america" angry.
As a practical atheist (and not an atheist just because I hate the world or want to piss off my parents) I feel like a very suppressed minority, like a homosexual or a mutant or a fan of Rachael Ray.
If there's anyplace I should be able to not feel like a loser for believing a widely held scientific fact, it should be school. A place for learning about real things.
I grew up going to Christian schools and I was taught nothing but lies about evolution and I got "God did it" the rest of the day. Math class? God did it. History class? God did it. Science class? Oh you'd better believe God did it. If the religious majority (which represents the largest contiguous group of voters in the country and a billion dollar lobby) wants to wag its dick around and try to rebel against an idea so "mainstream" that I feel like my parents will decide me a witch if I mention in public, they can keep building their brainwashing christian schools.
It's just arrogant. - Dimensio, on 04/17/2008, -10/+101"In the end, they are still BOTH theroys!"
Please sttae the "theory" of "Intelligent Design". Please define the scope of observations that it purports to explain, state the specific known extant processes that are incorporated as an explanation for those observations and cite the research and testing that has been done that has yeilded results sufficient to establish confidence in the claim by scientists in relevant fields of study such that it can be classified as "theory". - ApokalypseNow, on 04/17/2008, -8/+96Probably about the same way as any other Christian with a persecution complex - they love to bash science all day long, but when they themselves are subjected to scrutiny they whine about how they're being prosecuted, and how this is all part of some leftist anti-Christian agenda. It's a frickin' double standard, and I'm tired of it.
- Coven, on 04/17/2008, -2/+82Hubble's Law, Cosmic microwave background radiation, abundance of primordial elements, galactic distribution, radiometric dating, all are observable evidence of the occurance of the Big Bang.
- spongya77, on 04/17/2008, -12/+80Jesus f@cking Christ. Do you have any idea what "theory" means in science? Go and get an education, moron.
- alkajazz, on 04/17/2008, -11/+76Science is welcome to scrutiny. Religion not so much. I think if all believers objectively looked at their beliefs all of them would be atheists.
- CC440, on 04/17/2008, -8/+72My problem with science versus religion is that religious zealots believe that if you deny science it goes away. You can spend all day saying that the world is flat, god created man by ID, and the world is 6000 years old, but it isn't true. Every person on earth could believe these facts but the earth's age won't care, it will still be several billion years old and will act like it. Deny all you want, supress it, teach your facts, but the universe won't change to suit you, and someday the truth will surface with some dramatic event that makes you look like a liar.
- orangefly, on 04/17/2008, -12/+74i want my kids to learn about evolution in school and god in church....i don't see them teaching evolution in church by the way....
- pintomp3, on 04/17/2008, -2/+63osama bin laden utilized the theory of gravity to make the towers fall. it's newton's fault, really.
- ncairns, on 04/17/2008, -2/+59Darwinian evolution has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the origin of the Universe, or for that matter even the origin of life.
- Daedalus81, on 04/17/2008, -8/+63We care because the movie LIES to push an AGENDA that is *****.
- wukillabee, on 04/17/2008, -13/+66Win Ben Steins MONEY!
WOWWWWWWWWWWW... the difference is clear, clear eyes - ncairns, on 04/17/2008, -2/+49Does the fact that nuclear physics has been used to kill hundreds of thousands of people discredit its veracity or detract from its importance?
- JacksColon, on 04/17/2008, -7/+54Turtles all the way down
- Coven, on 04/17/2008, -4/+49The problem is not them believing in ID. The problem is when they want to inject it into the science curriculum in public schools.
- ApokalypseNow, on 04/17/2008, -3/+47"where do we get the idea of right and wrong anyway?"
From the societal contract and our common cultural mores. These things, like life, change over time. - MacEnvy, on 04/17/2008, -3/+46I'd have to go with "complex biochemical reaction chain over several million years" for $2000, Alex.
But more importantly, being a rational person also means being able to say "I'm not entirely sure, but this is what the evidence points to." The inability of creationists to do so is what upsets me about them. To claim absolute knowledge of the universe simply because you read it in a Bronze Age goat herder's manuscript is pretty lame. - klco, on 04/17/2008, -2/+44Henry Ford made cars, cars accidents have killed thousands of people, therefore Henry Ford is a mass murderer.
Logical fallacy much?
Just because someone's ideas get twisted or abused doesn't make the ideas false or evil. - bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -11/+52Once a Republican speech-writer, always a Republican speech-writer.
- Harabeck, on 04/17/2008, -1/+42Evolution has in fact been observed over small scales. Hell, you have a pet dog or cat? Ever seen a domesticated farm animal? We forced their evolution a certain way through selective breeding and they are now becoming more a more different from their wild relatives.
Furthermore, all of biochemistry and all of the fossil record adds evidence to support evolution. It has a huge body of evidence supporting it and therefore is as close to a "fact" as science can claim to make. - brstilson, on 04/17/2008, -5/+44You can believe what you want, just don't try to push it as "science" when it clearly is not.
- realyst, on 04/17/2008, -1/+39Absolutely not. You yourself are showing the same ignorance. There is a distinction that must be made.
You cannot test the beginning of the Universe. However you can extrapolate where it is now using observable, testable phenomena and logic. For example, we observe the effect gravity has on mass. We can also observe the correspondence mass and energy have. We can also measure the speed at which objects in our Universe are racing away from each other using a very reproducible and predictable Doppler effect.
Then you use the logic bit to form an idea of how the Universe attained it's current form. None of this is formed out of philosophy, but rather measurement and extrapolation to form a hypothesis. This is not perfect, but certainly more scientific then "I dunno....let's say it's God." - cwgannon, on 04/17/2008, -5/+42Oh wow. You truly are the baddest of asses.
- ncairns, on 04/17/2008, -2/+39http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
- spongya77, on 04/17/2008, -3/+39Care to elaborate on the evolution part? I must have studied a different biology, that you did.
- neognostic, on 04/17/2008, -13/+49Why do the same uneducated mouth breathers that believe in ID also believe there is no global warming?
- dgendreau, on 04/17/2008, -3/+39Evidence or STFU.
- drlha, on 04/17/2008, -4/+39This whole "my ideas are being suppressed by the scientific elite" stance is the standard model for all cranks. Scientists love new theories, and they especially love new theories that replace old ones.
Note to cranks: If you think your theory is being suppressed due to a global cabal of scientists trying to keep you down: You're crazy and so are your ideas.
Stein isn't crazy, he's just ignorant, small minded and possibly clouded by a religious agenda. - zeitgueist, on 04/17/2008, -4/+38Topher, stop posting. You're making yourself look like an idiot, and everyone here knows that you don't understand why.
- bjornski, on 04/17/2008, -3/+36Studying theology is what led me to become one.
- theaceoffire, on 04/17/2008, -4/+37Sciene?
Evolution is the changes observed in an organism over time.
What you are pissy over is Abiogenesis. - atticus8, on 04/17/2008, -2/+34"Logically, no number of positive outcomes at the level of experimental testing can confirm a scientific theory, but a single counterexample is logically decisive: it shows the theory, from which the implication is derived, to be false. Popper's account of the logical asymmetry between verification and falsifiability lies at the heart of his philosophy of science. It also inspired him to take falsifiability as his criterion of demarcation between what is and is not genuinely scientific: a theory should be considered scientific if and only if it is falsifiable." ID is not falsifiable. It not even junk science, just junk.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Popper#Philosoph ... - spongya77, on 04/17/2008, -1/+33Well said. Creating fake controversy where none exists, dragging science into your own political agenda is disgusting.
- shadowkin, on 04/17/2008, -22/+54Sooo, basically he's taking his film making lessons from Michael Moore?
They're both just propaganda artists. I just like Moore's propaganda better. - groumpf, on 04/17/2008, -2/+32Do you mean falsifying, or are you just an idiot?
- inactive, on 04/17/2008, -4/+34Hahaha that would be a great compromise, we give them an hour to pitch creationism in schools but they have to give atheists an hour at church. The problem would solve itself.
- inactive, on 04/17/2008, -5/+34I'd like one of these creationists to explain WHO created their imaginary friend?
- Dimensio, on 04/17/2008, -1/+29Please explain the specific differences between the processes of "micro evolution" and "macro evolution". Also, state the "beliefs" of Intelligent Design proponents that are actually scientific.
- jimmy17, on 04/17/2008, -1/+29Evolution has been observed (bacterial resistance to antibiotics), it has been tested (drosophila in the lab) has been verified again and again and is definitely falsifiable (as someone said on a forum a few days ago, a Precambrian rabbit fossil would rather falsify evolution, for example)
I was gonna link you to several papers but I'm bored of doing others peoples research for them when I should be doing mine. To use an on line colloquialism - educate yourself. -
Show 51 - 100 of 1056 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is