Expelled the movie could be a great catalyst for this century.
Freedom of speech in the science room will have a huge impact on the future of America. Many people blame the “Dark Ages” on the church. Now we have evolutionists using the same limiting belief systems. I don’t think we are heading into a period of “Darkness”, but I can see America loosing it’s edge as a scientific community.
10 responses so far ↓
Ed Darrell // June 1, 2008 at 7:29 pm
You’re joking, right? You’re worried about heading into a new Dark Age, but you support Ben Stein, who is leading the drive to snuff out the lights?
Have you ever studied science seriously?
airtightnoodle // June 2, 2008 at 4:32 pm
What are people supposed to be fighting to study in science? I’m assuming you mean they should fight for intelligent design…but how would one study that, scientifically?
drewsnews // June 2, 2008 at 7:51 pm
Hi Ed
1. If someone pursues a thought outside of “approved evolution” and it snuffs out the lights; it might not be something you want to base your religious belief system on.
2. “have you ever studied science seriously?” sounds a lot like the “have you ever sudied the Bible seriously?” of the dark ages.
drewsnews // June 2, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Hi airtightnoodle
People need to fight for the freedom pursue the science in any direction it leads without the established scienctific community, killing their job, killing their career, killing their publications, and killing their reputation, when the science leads outside the dogmatic religious beliefs of evolutionists.
Ed Darrell // June 2, 2008 at 10:00 pm
Drew, the problem is that there isn’t any science leading in any direction from the phrase “intelligent design.” There are no hypotheses spinning out for experimentation (a rather sure sign of sterility in the field, don’t you think?). There is not even a hypothesis of intelligent design, let alone a theory derived from several solid hypotheses.
You put the scare quotes around the phrase approved evolution, and that’s appropriate. There’s no such thing as a body that approves theory. Science is done on the lab bench, and then described to other scientists and the public at large so that others can try the same observations and experiments. If others try and get different results, the hypothesis fails, and theory is adjusted to reflect the new reality.
There is no reality in intelligent design. In more than 20 years, there have been only two halfway serious papers about ID published in the science literature. That paucity of publication isn’t because science snuffs the publication — quite the opposite, that’s 100% of the papers submitted to science journals. The paucity is because not even ID advocates do research in the area. Why? They know flapdoodle when they spin it, I suspect.
There is not a laboratory in the world working on a hypothesis of intelligent design. Think I’m wrong? Try this experiment: Find a photo of the lab, find a description of the people in the lab who are doing the work, and find a description of the science issues they are working to resolve. And most important, tell us the hypotheses they are testing to disprove.
So, I gather that, unlike many scientists who are faithful and have spent much time studying the Bible, you’ve not bothered to study evolution. Here’s a place to start:
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/
There you get real science, from real scientists. Real research is referred to in journal articles that site is drawn from. You can find photographs of scientists in action, descriptions of their past work and future work, and serious discussion of the questions of science they pursue in the laboratory and in the field.
I ask whether you have studied evolution, and you answer in a fashion that shows you don’t really understand what science does, how it does it, or how it would report it. Plus, you respond with the assumption that my religion is somehow connected to science. Making unwarranted and erroneous assumptions is what I was trying to prevent you from doing. You’re not getting anywhere running without information. Check out the site and see if it doesn’t clear up some of your questions.
Ed Darrell // June 2, 2008 at 10:02 pm
By the way, one of my concerns is this: The advocates of ID have proposed in more than a dozen states to censor science. This is keeping with the creationist tradition, which has proposed more than 100 times over the last 83 years to pass state laws to outlaw the teaching of evolution.
If you’re worried about unwarranted religious beliefs snuffing out knowledge, you’ll fight intelligent design and all other forms of creationism that requires laws to stop science from seeking new knowledge.
drewsnews // June 3, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Ed, Thank you for your comments.
I like this theory and accompanying science. http://75.125.60.6/~creatio1/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5&Itemid=7
airtightnoodle // June 7, 2008 at 7:21 am
Drew, the creaton evidence museum (and its website) have been discredited numerous times.
airtightnoodle // June 7, 2008 at 7:21 am
That obviously should have said “creation”, not “creaton”.
Ed Darrell // June 7, 2008 at 5:30 pm
Drew, see if you can find out where Dr. Baugh got his doctorate, and what his dissertation was on.
Also, you might want to visit the 7 signs of bogus science:
http://chronicle.com/free/v49/i21/21b02001.htm