What is Digg?1199 Comments
- raulbot, on 04/16/2008, -10/+172i hate how he tries to act like a rebel
- coollettuce, on 04/16/2008, -10/+166I used to think Ben Stein was cool, now he's let me down. It's the same feeling I get when I find out someone I looked up to is a Scientologist. :-/
- cybrspin, on 04/16/2008, -32/+186wow talk about making a guy look stupid :)
- whoreable, on 04/16/2008, -34/+159Expelled has my vote for comedy of the year.
- gllopc, on 04/16/2008, -9/+132Your God appears fairly complex. Who designed him?
- str3ama, on 04/16/2008, -11/+1332 Reasons to Digg This:
1) 5:36 - Intelligent Design 'scientist' emulating reproductive act with a banana and his hand
2) 6:25 - Kirk Cameron? holding a picture of a Dinosaur - omnithought, on 04/16/2008, -17/+107If only Ben Stein was a genius who was doing this as satire. That would be hilarious. So sad that he's such a douche.
- ziptnf, on 04/16/2008, -4/+89Man designed God.
- Coven, on 04/16/2008, -7/+78Watch the video again. This isn't a free speech issue. It is an issue of scientific integrity. Stein wants something that isn't science to be taught in a science classroom. End of story. You want evidence? Science needs evidence. ID and Creationism provide no evidence.
- themarq, on 04/16/2008, -0/+67Regarding the dude with the banana. What he was trying to explain was that God designed the banana to be the perfect food for humans and this can be illustrated by the fact that a banana fits 'perfectly' in the human hand. Ergo; God designed bananas for humans... they're also very nutritions yadda yadda yadda.
No really, they're serious about this http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-447200459 ...
The only problem is; he's holding a domesticated banana. One bred and designed by man. The banana designed by "god" is (was) considerably less user friendly: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Inside_a_wild-t ... - Harabeck, on 04/16/2008, -5/+67The scary part is that the ignorant masses may actually believe him... I love that we in the know can see all of these logical refutations of his arguments, but main stream media seems to be doing a poor job of putting down this crap like the ignorant BS it is.
- chirwan, on 04/16/2008, -10/+71However in nature we find many things that have no "designer" and are a product of natural selection through their environment.
we exist simply through natural selection and evolution. us ***** sepains have no designer. the same goes for any living being.
we see this in biology, and chemistry, through viruses and molecules, RNA, and DNA. we also see this through the evolution of our universe. we've have very solid theories that say our universe is expanding and was very dense at some point. what happend before that we don't know, yet but thats what we are trying to figure out.
if we stopped at saying "we were designed" we would have never figured all this wonderfull stuff out. - MattBlackCat, on 04/16/2008, -1/+60Thank you Mr Hat
- exec721, on 04/16/2008, -5/+57Why I Won't Debate Creationists by Richard Dawkins
http://pages.sbcglobal.net/amun_ra/
In response to Ben Steins question of why scientists won't let the other guy speak and then blow him out of the water (In a conversation between Dawkins and Stephen Jay Gould):
"Don't do it." The point is not, he [Gould] said, whether or not you would "win" the debate. Winning is not what the creationists realistically aspire to. For them, it is sufficient that the debate happens at all. They need the publicity. We don't. To the gullible public that is their natural constituency, it is enough that their man is seen sharing a platform with a real scientist. "There must be something in creationism, or Dr. So-and-So would not have agreed to debate it on equal terms." - theexitwound, on 04/16/2008, -0/+52That's a Crocoduck actually.
- Makaveli604, on 04/16/2008, -2/+53you're retarded, in addition to the above, the big bang is a seperate idea from evolution
as for macro-evolution vs micro-evolution, they are the same thing, sorry. - shadowspawn, on 04/16/2008, -3/+53Bueller?
- hinchb, on 04/16/2008, -0/+47"HEY GUYS I DIDN'T WATCH THE VIDEO"
- alphgeek, on 04/16/2008, -3/+48Rrouse's analogy falls apart very quickly. With evolution by natural selection, no-one is "[trying] to build anything of some complexity." There is no plan, no goal, no endpoint and no reason. None is needed.
Evolution by natural selection is not a guided process. Nobody is trying to build anything.
To suggest that it is driven, with an end goal in mind, is akin to saying that the sun chooses to emit light for the benefit of mankind, and causes the fusion of hydrogen to helium to enable the process. Ridiculous? Of course. - glasnostic, on 04/16/2008, -2/+47listen to the other side? see thats the problem.
the ID crowd is running around saying "nobody will listen to my side of the debate over the validity of evolution", but their "side" ONLY amounts to "there is no evolution because magic is the answer" it goes no further then that.
now how would you feel if some pesky hippies came up to you ever time you started your car and tried to convince you that your car was a living being and you should let it go free, you would eventually start ignoring them and probably kick their asses.
i have no patience with idiots telling me my science is wrong because everything is magic. - gllopc, on 04/16/2008, -3/+48The mustn't see comedy of the year.
- haiduz, on 04/16/2008, -12/+54That guy has by far one of the most annoying accents/voices I have heard on you tube. YOU FOOL!
- unrealJEDI, on 04/16/2008, -4/+46a lightening bolt striking a puddle of mud!!!!
where did he get that from? - str3ama, on 04/16/2008, -32/+74There's no point in bringing up the inaccuracies in his argument, people who believe in intellectual design are not going to be open to listening to you set the facts straight. They'll try to counter it with some quasi-scientific study (sponsored in part by some Church or religious organization). If people want to believe that a Virgin gave birth to a child, or that a prophet had a long in-depth conversation about morality with burning foliage - let them. Arguing with them only seems to make them think that we're out to persecute them or that we're the minions of the devil, out to tempt them to sin or some nonsense like that.
- TheCatsPants, on 04/16/2008, -11/+51They don't interpret it differently, they start with the assumption that the bible is the inerrant word of God. It's not science is it? It's religion and should be taught as such. And that's fine by me. Biologists aren't persecuting creationists any more than astronomers persecute astrologists. It's a different viewpoint, but it's not science. It's the creationists that are trying to wedge their beliefs into science that make the scientists push back.
- giveer, on 04/16/2008, -2/+41Completely off topic, but I yearn for the day when those with a microphone (on both sides of any debate) learn how to speak and/or narrate without audibly making copious amounts of "listen to my saliva" noises... aaauuggh!
- juniorb, on 04/16/2008, -4/+43I'd be happy to discuss religion vs. science with you, so long as you admit that creationism is religion and evolution is science.
- LemmingJesus, on 04/16/2008, -6/+43Wow, that guy has a very annoying voice.
- InfamousAtheist, on 04/16/2008, -6/+43I'll give you a reason to point out his inaccuracies:
To prevent his *****, non-scientific, faith-based garbage from making its way into the classroom and being taught as fact, which it plainly is not.
I agree that most creationists are beyond help; but they're out there teaching their children that evolution is fraud and that their parents didn't evolve from 'monkeys' (their words, not mine). Armies of creationists are being created all the time to spread misinformation about accepted theory. It's bad for all of us and will lead to more people clamoring for a church-state.
Ignoring them will make them more powerful - it won't make them go away. - staydead, on 04/16/2008, -0/+35Creationism isn't a theory, it's a postulate with no evidence and it's accepted by faith. Evolution is a scientific theory which means it's been tested, makes predictions which have been verified, and withstood 150 years of peer review by tens of thousands of scientists in dozens of disciplines. Darwinism is a made up word.
No evolution doesn't explain everything, nor does it try to. Evolution does not mean God doesn't exist, the two can peacefully coexist; most Christians accept evolution.
Agreed there's no harm in having a good debate, but this isn't about debate, this is about a dishonest film made by dishonest people to achieve a dishonest goal. - chirwan, on 04/16/2008, -41/+76Part of a series of videos exposing the funny stupidity of creationists and why they deserve to be laughed at. for more see the rest of thunderf00t's videos. they never disappoint.
- Takfam, on 04/16/2008, -18/+50PROTIP: If you want to be taken seriously, do not use l33tsp34k text in your name.
- oldhick, on 04/16/2008, -11/+42You damn fool... Alright, I like this guys video. But since he's being a bit of a nitpicker, I'll be one too. You can't say something doesn't exist when it does: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwinism
- doctechnical, on 04/16/2008, -2/+32Watch the beginning of the video - Stein brought the mockery on himself when he said (paraphrasing) "If these ideas aren't correct why doesn't some one yell 'You fool!' and blow them out of the water?"
The video presenter did exactly that, and did so rather well, I thought. - epmc, on 04/16/2008, -9/+38Religious believers don't have the mental capacity to operate computers.
- ApokalypseNow, on 04/16/2008, -3/+32Creationists don't "interpret it differently", they're just practicing apologetics. Basically, they're attempting science in reverse, by starting with a position and attempting to justify it by cherry-picking evidence in their favor and dismissing the rest.
- simplicityiskey, on 04/16/2008, -3/+30Dugg. But, the creator of this video does seem to misrepresent Stein's comments at the beginning. Correctly, as the creator of this video states, Darwin's theory isn't about explaining the creation of life--which is what it seems Stein was suggesting from the clip he played. Likewise, he uses Wikipedia as a source in his video and frankly, to be taken seriously, he should have maybe used a real encyclopedia or perhaps a biology textbook rather than Wikipedia. But, he does do a good job of explaining why Stein, who is an economist, should stick to his field.
- Coven, on 04/16/2008, -8/+35His rectum
- Loonacy, on 04/16/2008, -0/+26On the contrary, it's been my experience that atheists know more about Christianity than Christians do. I didn't become an atheist simply because I didn't want to believe in God. I studied a few religions before deciding that it's highly unlikely any of them have it right. In the case of Christianity, I read the Bible more than once. The Bible is what convinced me that Christianity is false.
- jstone, on 04/16/2008, -0/+26No. Ligers are real.
- jezsik, on 04/16/2008, -1/+26Which is exactly what Ben Stein does in the movie.
- johnnysaucepn, on 04/16/2008, -2/+27Explain by what mechanism 'microevolution' differs from 'macroevolution'. At what point do things stop 'microevolving'?
- Crosshare, on 04/16/2008, -0/+24Somehow that comes off even more awesome in text.
- mtjohnson, on 04/16/2008, -0/+23EVIDENCE MOTHER *****, DO YOU HAVE IT?
- lamiaconfitor, on 04/16/2008, -4/+27Timothy, a fourteen year old child who exists eternally and created St Elmos place. and thusly the rest of the world around of it. WHAT DON'T YOU GET ABOUT THAT?
- punkcat, on 04/16/2008, -3/+26i wish the subject was dropped, ID has been shown to be shallow so many times but yet things like this still come up.
in actuality the main force behind ID is an irrational fear that if god isn't seen as the foundation of life, people will lose all morals and the world will fall into chaos. - zeitgueist, on 04/16/2008, -1/+23LOL. Okay, we're ready to listen to your evidence. Please give 1 piece of evidence for ID. Not a criticism of evolution, that's not evidence. You need a positive, testable fact. Don't worry we'll wait.
- cwmather, on 04/16/2008, -4/+26What I think is funny is that 92% of Americans believe in God, yet all the forums are filled with atheists... How does that work exactly?
- NeilVickers, on 04/16/2008, -2/+24Science makes no assumptions that there is no god, but it DOES restrict itself to only working with things that are measurable and testable. Well, apart from String Theory that is, and there are plenty of people who debate whether that's true science or just mental masturbation.
- dygel, on 04/16/2008, -2/+23Your mistake was in ever thinking Ben Stein was cool. I mean his resume reads like this: "I was a speech writer for one of my nations greatest douchebag politicians. Then I had a bit role in a movie and end up being a game show host." Now attaching the Expelled debacle to his resume, the only fitting follow up I can think of is for him to become a used car salesman.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 1187 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 