And you're listening to a washed up actor and game show host.
Fuck you.
Actually Ben Stein is an accomplished intelligent design advocate. Unfortunately that probably actually helps his credibility on this abortion of a bored.
His movie was pretty good when he got the atheist expert to speculate that humans could have been seeded by aliens as he argued against ID.
I preferred the part where he used the holocaust to further his agenda.
Now watch this.
There could be a god.
!
I just speculated that there could be a god! And I'm an atheist! What a fucking magic trick.
Here's my point. In our fucktarded political debate ID has to be creationism so we can divide ourselves between "evolution deniers" in Kansas and smart people who follow science and vote for democrats. From what I remember of Stein's movie Europe is pursuing ID as a science. It isn't about who the intelligence is, it is a study to see if the systems of our reality down to the sub cellular level have evidence of an intelligence behind it. Evolution could be design it could be random. Why would we stop research on that subject?
Real liberals like myself are open minded and used to spend hours dropping acid and exploring all sorts of possibilities. That's where discovery comes from.
The humor was the guy in the film that was a staunch evolutionist who spent the film mocking ID and religion would at the end say we could have been seeded by aliens. Which would be ID.
Am I a believer? Sure. Do I know everything? No. Are we done here?
Here's my point. In our fucktarded political debate ID has to be creationism so we can divide ourselves between "evolution deniers" in Kansas and smart people who follow science and vote for democrats. From what I remember of Stein's movie Europe is pursuing ID as a science. It isn't about who the intelligence is, it is a study to see if the systems of our reality down to the sub cellular level have evidence of an intelligence behind it. Evolution could be design it could be random. Why would we stop research on that subject?
Real liberals like myself are open minded and used to spend hours dropping acid and exploring all sorts of possibilities. That's where discovery comes from.
The humor was the guy in the film that was a staunch evolutionist who spent the film mocking ID and religion would at the end say we could have been seeded by aliens. Which would be ID.
Am I a believer? Sure. Do I know everything? No. Are we done here?
The reason why ID has to be creationists is because the people propping up ID are all creationists. It's because they had to defend, in court, a book about ID and it was shown that all they did was erase the word creation from the book and added ID.
Oh Europe may or may not be doing something that you think you may remember from some movie made by a game show host. Well good point.
Here's why we would stop research on it. Because it's not science. Science even says so. Because all of the evidence ends with "supernatural". But somehow you think it's not about god. The supernatural can't be tested. Therefore it's not science. Testing things is kind of big deal in science. Perhaps you could point me to the scientific studies that have been done by ID. There's a shit load of money in it. They got a movie made. Where are the studies? You found a watch on a beach isn't science. Irreducible complexity sounds nice. But go ahead and test it. Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
You are not a real liberal. Just like all your California buddies with their crystals and their shockras aren't real liberals. Not sure why you're not making the case to study that more. After all it could be true.
Real liberals are open to good ideas that can be supported by evidence. Real liberals don't believe any load of shit that comes along. Real liberals recognize that just because something sounds good and fits into a narrative that we already believed in doesn't make in true.
The humor is that you don't see how stupid you are for falling for that parlor trick. Race, I'm a staunch evolutionist and guess what? We might have been seeded by aliens. We might have been created by God for God in gods image. Those things could be true. And if you want to wildly speculate on them that's great. Speculate away. Just like people are free to speculate about 9/11 and Bigfoot and Godzilla. But no one is trying to jam aliens seeding the planet into classrooms. Because there's no science behind it. And that's something that would be natural, that their could be science behind. But there still isn't. It's just speculation. Which everyone enjoys but that doesn't make it true.
Here's my point. In our fucktarded political debate ID has to be creationism so we can divide ourselves between "evolution deniers" in Kansas and smart people who follow science and vote for democrats. From what I remember of Stein's movie Europe is pursuing ID as a science. It isn't about who the intelligence is, it is a study to see if the systems of our reality down to the sub cellular level have evidence of an intelligence behind it. Evolution could be design it could be random. Why would we stop research on that subject?
Real liberals like myself are open minded and used to spend hours dropping acid and exploring all sorts of possibilities. That's where discovery comes from.
The humor was the guy in the film that was a staunch evolutionist who spent the film mocking ID and religion would at the end say we could have been seeded by aliens. Which would be ID.
Am I a believer? Sure. Do I know everything? No. Are we done here?
Real liberals are open to good ideas that can be supported by evidence. Real liberals don't believe any load of shit that comes along. Real liberals recognize that just because something sounds good and fits into a narrative that we already believed in doesn't make in true.
Here's my point. In our fucktarded political debate ID has to be creationism so we can divide ourselves between "evolution deniers" in Kansas and smart people who follow science and vote for democrats. From what I remember of Stein's movie Europe is pursuing ID as a science. It isn't about who the intelligence is, it is a study to see if the systems of our reality down to the sub cellular level have evidence of an intelligence behind it. Evolution could be design it could be random. Why would we stop research on that subject?
Real liberals like myself are open minded and used to spend hours dropping acid and exploring all sorts of possibilities. That's where discovery comes from.
The humor was the guy in the film that was a staunch evolutionist who spent the film mocking ID and religion would at the end say we could have been seeded by aliens. Which would be ID.
Am I a believer? Sure. Do I know everything? No. Are we done here?
The reason why ID has to be creationists is because the people propping up ID are all creationists. It's because they had to defend, in court, a book about ID and it was shown that all they did was erase the word creation from the book and added ID.
Oh Europe may or may not be doing something that you think you may remember from some movie made by a game show host. Well good point.
Here's why we would stop research on it. Because it's not science. Science even says so. Because all of the evidence ends with "supernatural". But somehow you think it's not about god. The supernatural can't be tested. Therefore it's not science. Testing things is kind of big deal in science. Perhaps you could point me to the scientific studies that have been done by ID. There's a shit load of money in it. They got a movie made. Where are the studies? You found a watch on a beach isn't science. Irreducible complexity sounds nice. But go ahead and test it. Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
You are not a real liberal. Just like all your California buddies with their crystals and their shockras aren't real liberals. Not sure why you're not making the case to study that more. After all it could be true.
Real liberals are open to good ideas that can be supported by evidence. Real liberals don't believe any load of shit that comes along. Real liberals recognize that just because something sounds good and fits into a narrative that we already believed in doesn't make in true.
The humor is that you don't see how stupid you are for falling for that parlor trick. Race, I'm a staunch evolutionist and guess what? We might have been seeded by aliens. We might have been created by God for God in gods image. Those things could be true. And if you want to wildly speculate on them that's great. Speculate away. Just like people are free to speculate about 9/11 and Bigfoot and Godzilla. But no one is trying to jam aliens seeding the planet into classrooms. Because there's no science behind it. And that's something that would be natural, that their could be science behind. But there still isn't. It's just speculation. Which everyone enjoys but that doesn't make it true.
Well Tequila, you did contradict yourself a couple of times in your gloves off reply. Let me first set the record straight, I am a REAL northwest logger liberal who once upon a time would smash your face in for calling me a Californian.
If your mind is closed then you see no reason to explore something. The world ends at the edge of the water, why would we sail beyond it.
You gave a political reply to a philosophical question that proves my point. Science can't determine who the intelligent designer is but it can prove design instead of randomness and there is no reason not to pursue that study as it is in other places in the world.
Dogma is dogma be it the church or the current liberal belief system that has closed the minds of millions of people.
I don't know about crystals and shit but I know science can study life and should. There is nothing to be afraid of. All the evidence does not end with supernatural. There is no end or conclusion.
This all could be random. Or not.
I would submit that you are fitting things into a narrative you already don't believe. And I'll defend you to the death to do so. Skeptics make the best scientists. Pre conceived beliefs are the death of real investigation. That's my problem with climate change. Sure there is science to the climate but until there are real answers as to what causes how much and what can be fixed it is also just speculation.
Here's my point. In our fucktarded political debate ID has to be creationism so we can divide ourselves between "evolution deniers" in Kansas and smart people who follow science and vote for democrats. From what I remember of Stein's movie Europe is pursuing ID as a science. It isn't about who the intelligence is, it is a study to see if the systems of our reality down to the sub cellular level have evidence of an intelligence behind it. Evolution could be design it could be random. Why would we stop research on that subject?
Real liberals like myself are open minded and used to spend hours dropping acid and exploring all sorts of possibilities. That's where discovery comes from.
The humor was the guy in the film that was a staunch evolutionist who spent the film mocking ID and religion would at the end say we could have been seeded by aliens. Which would be ID.
Am I a believer? Sure. Do I know everything? No. Are we done here?
The reason why ID has to be creationists is because the people propping up ID are all creationists. It's because they had to defend, in court, a book about ID and it was shown that all they did was erase the word creation from the book and added ID.
Oh Europe may or may not be doing something that you think you may remember from some movie made by a game show host. Well good point.
Here's why we would stop research on it. Because it's not science. Science even says so. Because all of the evidence ends with "supernatural". But somehow you think it's not about god. The supernatural can't be tested. Therefore it's not science. Testing things is kind of big deal in science. Perhaps you could point me to the scientific studies that have been done by ID. There's a shit load of money in it. They got a movie made. Where are the studies? You found a watch on a beach isn't science. Irreducible complexity sounds nice. But go ahead and test it. Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
You are not a real liberal. Just like all your California buddies with their crystals and their shockras aren't real liberals. Not sure why you're not making the case to study that more. After all it could be true.
Real liberals are open to good ideas that can be supported by evidence. Real liberals don't believe any load of shit that comes along. Real liberals recognize that just because something sounds good and fits into a narrative that we already believed in doesn't make in true.
The humor is that you don't see how stupid you are for falling for that parlor trick. Race, I'm a staunch evolutionist and guess what? We might have been seeded by aliens. We might have been created by God for God in gods image. Those things could be true. And if you want to wildly speculate on them that's great. Speculate away. Just like people are free to speculate about 9/11 and Bigfoot and Godzilla. But no one is trying to jam aliens seeding the planet into classrooms. Because there's no science behind it. And that's something that would be natural, that their could be science behind. But there still isn't. It's just speculation. Which everyone enjoys but that doesn't make it true.
Well Tequila, you did contradict yourself a couple of times in your gloves off reply. Let me first set the record straight, I am a REAL northwest logger liberal who once upon a time would smash your face in for calling me a Californian.
If your mind is closed then you see no reason to explore something. The world ends at the edge of the water, why would we sail beyond it.
You gave a political reply to a philosophical question that proves my point. Science can't determine who the intelligent designer is but it can prove design instead of randomness and there is no reason not to pursue that study as it is in other places in the world.
Dogma is dogma be it the church or the current liberal belief system that has closed the minds of millions of people.
I don't know about crystals and shit but I know science can study life and should. There is nothing to be afraid of. All the evidence does not end with supernatural. There is no end or conclusion.
This all could be random. Or not.
I would submit that you are fitting things into a narrative you already don't believe. And I'll defend you to the death to do so. Skeptics make the best scientists. Pre conceived beliefs are the death of real investigation. That's my problem with climate change. Sure there is science to the climate but until there are real answers as to what causes how much and what can be fixed it is also just speculation.
But we study it.
You moved, and make no mistake - I'll kick your ass straight back to California from Olympia, you old pansy-ass.
Intelligent design isn't intelligent at all. It's for dumbfucks like pawz who deny science in favor of bullshit conspiracy crap from Jenny McCarthy-types who think anecdotal evidence means something, or being an ignorant human means things we don't understand very well like quantum physics and string theory are liberal ideas. They aren't liberal, they are just in conflict with ideas dumbfucks have been peddling for centuries.
Science isn't afraid of being wrong - scientists are. The mistake is thinking science and scientists are the same. They aren't, and science has made liars out of many scientists and will continue to do so.
I'll still vote for you for President, Race - but as long as you live in California, I'll say I didn't.
Here's my point. In our fucktarded political debate ID has to be creationism so we can divide ourselves between "evolution deniers" in Kansas and smart people who follow science and vote for democrats. From what I remember of Stein's movie Europe is pursuing ID as a science. It isn't about who the intelligence is, it is a study to see if the systems of our reality down to the sub cellular level have evidence of an intelligence behind it. Evolution could be design it could be random. Why would we stop research on that subject?
Real liberals like myself are open minded and used to spend hours dropping acid and exploring all sorts of possibilities. That's where discovery comes from.
The humor was the guy in the film that was a staunch evolutionist who spent the film mocking ID and religion would at the end say we could have been seeded by aliens. Which would be ID.
Am I a believer? Sure. Do I know everything? No. Are we done here?
The reason why ID has to be creationists is because the people propping up ID are all creationists. It's because they had to defend, in court, a book about ID and it was shown that all they did was erase the word creation from the book and added ID.
Oh Europe may or may not be doing something that you think you may remember from some movie made by a game show host. Well good point.
Here's why we would stop research on it. Because it's not science. Science even says so. Because all of the evidence ends with "supernatural". But somehow you think it's not about god. The supernatural can't be tested. Therefore it's not science. Testing things is kind of big deal in science. Perhaps you could point me to the scientific studies that have been done by ID. There's a shit load of money in it. They got a movie made. Where are the studies? You found a watch on a beach isn't science. Irreducible complexity sounds nice. But go ahead and test it. Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
You are not a real liberal. Just like all your California buddies with their crystals and their shockras aren't real liberals. Not sure why you're not making the case to study that more. After all it could be true.
Real liberals are open to good ideas that can be supported by evidence. Real liberals don't believe any load of shit that comes along. Real liberals recognize that just because something sounds good and fits into a narrative that we already believed in doesn't make in true.
The humor is that you don't see how stupid you are for falling for that parlor trick. Race, I'm a staunch evolutionist and guess what? We might have been seeded by aliens. We might have been created by God for God in gods image. Those things could be true. And if you want to wildly speculate on them that's great. Speculate away. Just like people are free to speculate about 9/11 and Bigfoot and Godzilla. But no one is trying to jam aliens seeding the planet into classrooms. Because there's no science behind it. And that's something that would be natural, that their could be science behind. But there still isn't. It's just speculation. Which everyone enjoys but that doesn't make it true.
Well Tequila, you did contradict yourself a couple of times in your gloves off reply. Let me first set the record straight, I am a REAL northwest logger liberal who once upon a time would smash your face in for calling me a Californian.
If your mind is closed then you see no reason to explore something. The world ends at the edge of the water, why would we sail beyond it.
You gave a political reply to a philosophical question that proves my point. Science can't determine who the intelligent designer is but it can prove design instead of randomness and there is no reason not to pursue that study as it is in other places in the world.
Dogma is dogma be it the church or the current liberal belief system that has closed the minds of millions of people.
I don't know about crystals and shit but I know science can study life and should. There is nothing to be afraid of. All the evidence does not end with supernatural. There is no end or conclusion.
This all could be random. Or not.
I would submit that you are fitting things into a narrative you already don't believe. And I'll defend you to the death to do so. Skeptics make the best scientists. Pre conceived beliefs are the death of real investigation. That's my problem with climate change. Sure there is science to the climate but until there are real answers as to what causes how much and what can be fixed it is also just speculation.
But we study it.
You moved, and make no mistake - I'll kick your ass straight back to California from Olympia, you old pansy-ass.
Intelligent design isn't intelligent at all. It's for dumbfucks like pawz who deny science in favor of bullshit conspiracy crap from Jenny McCarthy-types who think anecdotal evidence means something, or being an ignorant human means things we don't understand very well like quantum physics and string theory are liberal ideas. They aren't liberal, they are just in conflict with ideas dumbfucks have been peddling for centuries.
Science isn't afraid of being wrong - scientists are. The mistake is thinking science and scientists are the same. They aren't, and science has made liars out of many scientists and will continue to do so.
I'll still vote for you for President, Race - but as long as you live in California, I'll say I didn't.
Yes, as someone who works in a bio-related field...
ID as it is in the US is a load of shit.
That isn't to say that isn't more than meets the eye when it comes to humans and their origins and purpose in the universe. I personally think that there is more to evolution than just the blind process of mutated genes and survival of the fittest. I don't really have concrete evidence for this though.
But in the US, ID has been used to try and backdoor creationism into the classroom. In the Dover trial, it was found that they had literally done a ctrl+f creationism, replace with Intelligent Design in the materials that they were trying to get put into classrooms. And then it usually boils down to using God of the gaps type arguments (We don't know how X, therefore God) . Unfortunately for this type of God that lives in the unknown, he gets smaller over time as we figure out more about how reality works.
I do think it would be good to teach limitations of the current evolutionary theory. For example, we do not have a good idea of how the first organisms were able to form, as there were many limitations (chirality of molecules, how to develop the first DNA replication systems. etc). This opens the door for people to insert their own interpretations of the unknown. You could even teach how the properties of the universe "appear" to be fine tuned for life.
Part of what makes this a tricky issue is the fact that there is a continuum of creationist type beliefs. There are the extremist ones who think the Earth is 6000 years old, and the word of the bible is literal truth. Then you have creationists who believe in the scientific age of the universe, but that there was actual creation going on still (god made the species). Then you have people believing that god helped out evolution, god seeded the first life, or god just made the universe and it went on its own.
I think that if schools allowed ID, they would be worried about the literal "earth was made in 7 days" people trying to inject their beliefs into the classroom. I think this is a valid concern. Unfortunately, a side effect may be stifling potential advances in evolution, since any criticism of the current theories can be met with "omg creationism!".
Comments
Now watch this.
There could be a god.
!
I just speculated that there could be a god! And I'm an atheist! What a fucking magic trick.
Real liberals like myself are open minded and used to spend hours dropping acid and exploring all sorts of possibilities. That's where discovery comes from.
The humor was the guy in the film that was a staunch evolutionist who spent the film mocking ID and religion would at the end say we could have been seeded by aliens. Which would be ID.
Am I a believer? Sure. Do I know everything? No. Are we done here?
Oh Europe may or may not be doing something that you think you may remember from some movie made by a game show host. Well good point.
Here's why we would stop research on it. Because it's not science. Science even says so. Because all of the evidence ends with "supernatural". But somehow you think it's not about god. The supernatural can't be tested. Therefore it's not science. Testing things is kind of big deal in science. Perhaps you could point me to the scientific studies that have been done by ID. There's a shit load of money in it. They got a movie made. Where are the studies? You found a watch on a beach isn't science. Irreducible complexity sounds nice. But go ahead and test it. Anyone? Bueller? Bueller?
You are not a real liberal. Just like all your California buddies with their crystals and their shockras aren't real liberals. Not sure why you're not making the case to study that more. After all it could be true.
Real liberals are open to good ideas that can be supported by evidence. Real liberals don't believe any load of shit that comes along. Real liberals recognize that just because something sounds good and fits into a narrative that we already believed in doesn't make in true.
The humor is that you don't see how stupid you are for falling for that parlor trick. Race, I'm a staunch evolutionist and guess what? We might have been seeded by aliens. We might have been created by God for God in gods image. Those things could be true. And if you want to wildly speculate on them that's great. Speculate away. Just like people are free to speculate about 9/11 and Bigfoot and Godzilla. But no one is trying to jam aliens seeding the planet into classrooms. Because there's no science behind it. And that's something that would be natural, that their could be science behind. But there still isn't. It's just speculation. Which everyone enjoys but that doesn't make it true.
#obamacare
If your mind is closed then you see no reason to explore something. The world ends at the edge of the water, why would we sail beyond it.
You gave a political reply to a philosophical question that proves my point. Science can't determine who the intelligent designer is but it can prove design instead of randomness and there is no reason not to pursue that study as it is in other places in the world.
Dogma is dogma be it the church or the current liberal belief system that has closed the minds of millions of people.
I don't know about crystals and shit but I know science can study life and should. There is nothing to be afraid of. All the evidence does not end with supernatural. There is no end or conclusion.
This all could be random. Or not.
I would submit that you are fitting things into a narrative you already don't believe. And I'll defend you to the death to do so. Skeptics make the best scientists. Pre conceived beliefs are the death of real investigation. That's my problem with climate change. Sure there is science to the climate but until there are real answers as to what causes how much and what can be fixed it is also just speculation.
But we study it.
lol You moved, and make no mistake - I'll kick your ass straight back to California from Olympia, you old pansy-ass.
Intelligent design isn't intelligent at all. It's for dumbfucks like pawz who deny science in favor of bullshit conspiracy crap from Jenny McCarthy-types who think anecdotal evidence means something, or being an ignorant human means things we don't understand very well like quantum physics and string theory are liberal ideas. They aren't liberal, they are just in conflict with ideas dumbfucks have been peddling for centuries.
Science isn't afraid of being wrong - scientists are. The mistake is thinking science and scientists are the same. They aren't, and science has made liars out of many scientists and will continue to do so.
I'll still vote for you for President, Race - but as long as you live in California, I'll say I didn't.
ID as it is in the US is a load of shit.
That isn't to say that isn't more than meets the eye when it comes to humans and their origins and purpose in the universe. I personally think that there is more to evolution than just the blind process of mutated genes and survival of the fittest. I don't really have concrete evidence for this though.
But in the US, ID has been used to try and backdoor creationism into the classroom. In the Dover trial, it was found that they had literally done a ctrl+f creationism, replace with Intelligent Design in the materials that they were trying to get put into classrooms. And then it usually boils down to using God of the gaps type arguments (We don't know how X, therefore God) . Unfortunately for this type of God that lives in the unknown, he gets smaller over time as we figure out more about how reality works.
I do think it would be good to teach limitations of the current evolutionary theory. For example, we do not have a good idea of how the first organisms were able to form, as there were many limitations (chirality of molecules, how to develop the first DNA replication systems. etc). This opens the door for people to insert their own interpretations of the unknown. You could even teach how the properties of the universe "appear" to be fine tuned for life.
Part of what makes this a tricky issue is the fact that there is a continuum of creationist type beliefs. There are the extremist ones who think the Earth is 6000 years old, and the word of the bible is literal truth. Then you have creationists who believe in the scientific age of the universe, but that there was actual creation going on still (god made the species). Then you have people believing that god helped out evolution, god seeded the first life, or god just made the universe and it went on its own.
I think that if schools allowed ID, they would be worried about the literal "earth was made in 7 days" people trying to inject their beliefs into the classroom. I think this is a valid concern. Unfortunately, a side effect may be stifling potential advances in evolution, since any criticism of the current theories can be met with "omg creationism!".