To all the creationist and ID advocates, gaps in evolutionary theory are the meat and potatoes for scientists. They give the scientists the avenue to embark on the five-step scientific process which relies on empirical and objective evidence. ID does not show why and how the "designer" made any specific complexity occur, it just shows that some "designer" could be responsible for it. I'm not a scientist but that doesn't represent the basic tenants of science. R
well well well.....they had their day in court....and the evidence proves we evolved...its great to be human......and i say its about time we raise again and take god to court again.....this time we sue him for slander..........for calling me a sinner....a born sinner.......if thats not slander then i dont know what is.....and for attempted blackmail.......for daming my soul (if we really do have one) to hell just because i WILL NOT accept their version of the truth.........
if evolution and intelligent design were fairly evenly split or even if ID had a significant scientific following (say 15%) then it might be suitable for a high school science class. Its not and it isn't.
Whatever happened to letting evidence build up a claim and examination of data? Why is it being perverted into STARTING with a claim [goddidit] and looking for evidence to support THAT?
@JungleJargon You people repeat that like a mantra "There is no evidence there are no fossils evolution is a lie." I believe we call that "Denial" and "Wishful thinking". No matter how many times you say "There is no evidence" that doesn't make it so. If a doctor were to take my height, weight, BMI, and take a measurement of my total body fat and tell me I'm obese, I could say "I'm not obese" all I want it's not gonna make it true.
Evolution is denial of the facts and wishful thinking.
All of the evidence supports Creation.
The ordered function of hydrogen working inside of us is evidence that our Maker is the Maker of all matter in the universe consisting primarily of hydrogen.
@JungleJargon I wasn't trying to prove anything to you, people like you who repeat that mantra over and over again are impossible to reason with. Your whole argument is the equivalent to saying "I can't possibly imagine how life came to be, therefore it must have been poofed into existence by god." and repeating your mantra "Evolution is wrong there is no evidence" Ignore all the fossils, the fact that micro-evolution has been observed and tested, genetics, and ring species.
@LotusPhoenix93 I can't possibly imagine how objects can have such magical powers as you continually ascribe to them.
Fossils buried under 125 million cubic sqare miles is evidence of the flood because no one has ever accounted for the sediments that came to cover all living things on earth.
Mutations do not accumulate in real life or amount to anything in real life experimentation, observation and in the fossil record.
You still didn't prove anything. Variation is what the genome does.
@JungleJargon What do you mean "Magical Powers" I don't think things have "Magical powers" Creationists are the ones claiming that there is a giant wizard in the sky that created everything though... As for the sediments that covered all living thing on Earth, um, I'm confused as to what you're even talking about there, could you clarify? As for the part about mutations - that's a complete lie, and obviously you haven't bothered even using google.
@LotusPhoenix93 There is evidence of a Maker and there is no evidence that any objects have magical powers to order the functions of anything.
Since you have not explained the origin of the 125 million cubic miles of sediments covering every living thing there ever was on earth, there is nothing you can say about mutations because it is the fossils in those sediments that are unchanged.
@JungleJargon Actually, I asked you to explain what you were talking about. I can't answer a question when I don't even know what you're referring to. And as I just said, I don't believe anything on earth has "Magical Powers". All you have done is make assertions without backing any of it up, and tried to say "You can't explain this therefore god did it." Which is exactly what I said you were doing earlier, and frankly shows why creationism isn't science.
@LotusPhoenix93 I already told you about orderd functions that hydrogen and most of the most common elements have in life forms requiring a Maker. You did not show me any other simple function that does not have a maker. How can I believe that much greater ordered functions with nano and quantum functions do not have a Maker? You are giving all of the credit for ordered functions to objects in nature and you just said yourself that objects don't have any magic and you still believe they did it.
@JungleJargon OMFSM you're stupid, I'm going to throw a few words out at you, CHEMISTY, PHYSICS, BIOLOGY, also known as SCIENCE, NOT magic. all of which you apparently didn't take in high school. Plus, you're asserting that things must have a maker, which again comes back to you not understanding science and saying god must have done it without further exploration.
@JungleJargon ... You do realize physicists are mostly Atheists, right? The people who understand this stuff and know it most, don't believe in a creator.
I love to see the depths to which a creationist will stoop. The Pat Robertson remark is a classic example. I give some credit to the two men that voted in ID. They were man enough to be interviewed. That is more than the Discovery Institute can say. The "War" that is being fought has more to do with Biblical Indoctrination and less to do with Science. Anything that shows a natural, testable and unbiblical answer is thrown out by biblical literalists. It's too bad.
Pat Robertson is such a tard. 'If there's a disaster in your town don't turn to god'?
Firstly if you believe in god then he wanted the disaster to happen anyway. Second, what the fuck is god gonna do to help? Start magically rebuilding houses and hand out bottles of water or something? Pure moron talk.
I just love it when conservatives yammer on about how they *love* the Constitution, right up until it doesnt produce the results they want. They then blather on about how it was misread or misapplied. Cause, as all true Americans know, the COTUS is *always* on the side of the christian far right...even when it's not. :-/
Buckingham: You committed purgery and you have no formal training in law. Additionally, you are not a trained scientist. So when it comes to law or science, sir, you are the only clown in the ring.
Right or wrong it doesn't look good on science when it tries to silence opposing views - book banning? It was like when religion tried to ban science - I guess people don't change - they fear the unknown
@sobpatrick Book banning? Where did they say the book was banned? You can probably still go to a library or bookstore and buy a copy of "Of Pandas and People" if you really wanted. It was simply determined that it was unconstitutional to require the four paragraph statement about evolution being "just a theory" to be read before school science classes, and that there were ulterior motives behind the donation of those books to the school.
@sobpatrick Where is the ban? Nobody's trying to stop the publication of "Of Pandas an People". Nobody is burning those books. They don't fit the curriculum. You think kids should know about god or an intelligent designer made the world, then study it in your CHURCH!!!
@derman077 Yeah i was thinking of that too. Another point is, there should be a separation of church and state right? Well, if the court system is a part of the state than how come you have to swear with your hand on a bible?
One of the more awesome things I've found here on youtube. Hard to dodge all the makeup, model, and celebrity crap that youtube people love for some insane reason. Anyway, first off, these so-called good christian first break one of their more basic laws, bear false witness, and then lie about id being religious since that tv evangelist whatshisname is pissed and want them all to die in a disaster cause the thinks they rejected god. If god is in id, its religious..duh
I am surprised to hear that teaching evolution was fined in court in 1929 and today it is unconstitutional to teach intelligent design or creationism. Religion has been an obstacle against almost all scientific progress and civil rights movements throughout the history. It is losing power everyday. I am hopeful for a future when religious dogmas get no more credit than they really deserve while we are making public decisions
Ha ha-ha ha-ha. Your magic invisible celestial policeman idea fails again. Maybe it's time ya'll grew up and stopped stupifying the next generation. They might like a fair shot at competing with the rest of the human race in this here global economy.
Attorney for ID proponets at 8:03 says "i'm just disturbed about the extent of his opinion; that it went way beyond what he should have gone and into deciding matters of science". YOU FUCKING ASKED HIM TO DECIDE IF I.D. WAS SCIENCE. You agreed for the judge to decide if it was science at the beginning of the case. You could have just had him answer the constitutional issues, but you ALSO asked him to specifically answer the question "Is I.D. Science".
Ironic, isn't it? that the side claiming evolution will lead to a breakdown of the moral fabric of society can do no better than lie, cheat, and steal to fight against it. In attempting to "keep god in the classroom" they managed to break one of 10 things literally etched in stone by this deity as utter no-go actions.
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
They're not even holding to their own moral standards, and evolution is supposedly the antagonist of human morality?
As Richard Dawkins pointed out, real scientists are happy when their particular theory is shown to be false as it means they are one step closer to the truth of nature.
On the other hand, proponents of ID call the opposition "a jackass" and wish natural disasters on them.
@Hackmodford You're right, it only explains why there is such a wide variety of life. It explains this very well, and it is not meant to explain anything else. For information about the origins of life and the origins of the universe look up Abiogenesis and Cosmology respectively.
Amazing the lack of humility from the the ID folks. If the only facts about the case you knew were from the ID folks, you would never know that the judge was a churchgoer, Republican and appointed by Bush.
Instead, you would hear, 'activist', 'atheist', 'fool', etc.
No show of humility saying, "Wow, we had the trial stacked for us and we *still* lost."
Buckingham and Bonsell lied under oath - and then have the temerity to call the Judge a "jackass"? Those 2 should be doing time like the felons they are. Evil b1tches. And they commit their evil in the name of G0D
Buckingham and Bonsell lied under oath - and then have the temerity to call the Judge a "jackass"? Those 2 should be doing time like the felons they are. Evil b1tches. And they commit their evil in the name of G0D
Buckingham and Bonsell lied under oath - and then have the temerity to call the Judge a "jackass"? Those 2 should be doing time like the felons they are. Evil b1tches. nd they commit their evil in the name of G0D
Buckingham and Bonsell lied under oath - and then have the temerity to call the Judge a "jackass"? Those 2 should be doing time like the felons they are. Evil b1tches. And they commit their evil in the name of G0D
I don't understand why people who believe so strongly one way or another can't just say that both theories are "possible". I believe in evolution, because it can be proven with facts & evidence. When I was young and was taught about how God created everything, it was ok. At that age it made sense, but as we grow & our need to absorb knowledge increases, we become interested in truths & facts, which is what evolution is! Theory in science means something different than theory in general context.
Brilliant. While those for evolution have shown that all they want is the advancement of humanity & the preservation of truth, those for creationism & ID have shown their hypocrisy, bigotry, ignorance, & narrow-mindedness that fuel their foulness & mindlessness. I truly wonder at those who sent death threats while believing themselves to be holy. I look forward to the future when religion is eradicated. It will be a proud day for humanity. One where we are freed from the shackles of stupidity
@Seikhupatz - you seem to lack a fundamental understanding of recent history, but I can help. Religion was eradicated, in the soviet union (estimated body count 30 million) the peoples republic of china (est. body count 50-70 million) - any of this starting to ring a bell?
where is your outrage for the atrocities of atheistic totalitarianism? Let's try and be a little less hysterical in future posts - this frame of mind does not communicate intelligence
@mollkatles I was unaware that I mentioned anything about recent history in my post. Everything I said was pointing towards the actions of the people in the video and I was condemning THEIR actions. Perhaps it would be best if you consider posts carefully before replying to them instead of jumping at what you think are opportunities to look intelligent and knowledgeable.
Additionally, totalitarianism is not defined by atheism, religion or the lack thereof. Unlike what went on in the crusades.
@Seikhupatz - not sure how you are confused by your own post, but you are. Re-read the part of your post, the religion eradicated part, are you saying that is a specific not general tangent?
Look, clearly you were hysterical when you posted that, like a lot of folks, you allowed your emotions to overwhelm you - I understand, it happens to undisiplined soft minds all the time. But we can reach a compromise -if you don't post any more comments on youtube, I won't read & reply to them, deal?
@mollkatles Wow, you are one of the most pretentious people I have ever met. Yes, my "religion is eradicated" statement. It says religion is stupid. Where is the outrage for Christian/religious deeds over the centuries? It's not there. The only part where I am outraged is when I discussed the people in the video sending death threats. The level of your pomposity is simply incredible. Almost hilarious! I'm inclined to meet you in person just so I can see it. Do you live in the UK?
@Seikhupatz - yes, the people that made the deaths threats are morally reprehensible - so is generalizing the actions of a few to an entire religious community, wouldn't you agree?
Atheism is the simply the lack of belief in any god or gods, THAT'S IT..... It has no dogmas no tenets, it is simply saying as an atheists we do not believe in a god or gods, because there IS NO evidence.
"so is generalizing the actions of a few to an entire religious community"
When you state that "millions" where killed because of atheism, aren't you generalizing in exactly the same way.
@astev52 - 1st a tip, to help you refine your atheist position, so you have some credibility, your atheist superiors - hitchens, dawkins etc., acknowledge evidence of God, they don't beleive the evidence means anything, but they don't deny evidence. To say there is no evidence, gives one the impression you have not looked, so you have not found - following? I only offer this so you don't come across as virtually every other atheist, emotional, uniformed parrots of science they do not comprehend
"To say there is no evidence, gives one the impression you have not looked"
But I have looked. Otherwise I would not be an athiest. If anyone could offer me solid, verifiable, scientific evidence for a god(s), I would convert tomorrow.
"I only offer this so you don't come across as virtually every other atheist"
@mollkatles You are still unable to grasp the fact that I am talking about the creationist side and the evolution side in the video. Where did I generalize the actions of a few to an entire religious community? I repeated what has been shown in the video. And isn't what you are saying in fact, what your first argument was entirely about? Your lack of comprehensive ability is wearisome. You were looking for an easy ego boost and you didn't find it here. Isn't it high time you moved on?
@Seikhupatz - apparently you just don't appreciate my benevolent attempts to educate, you are resisting, and my patience is not inexhaustible. One parting, and yes good natured lesson plan - more logic fewer words will make you profoundly more clear, right now your posts are nothing more than a jumbled collection of adjectives - do, run along now
@mollkatles Educate? From someone who can't even read arguments properly? Good natured? From a person who steeps every sentence with narcissistic condescension? No need to attempt to salvage your "dignity". You aren't fooling anyone. Just go.
@mollkatles Tell you what. I'll address your misguided argument. The only way that example would work was if:
1.Atheism was the irrefutable motivation behind those deaths, like the Crusades. The coincidental presence of atheism doesn't indicate anything.
2.Atheistic dominance was achieved through gradual individualistic choice, not immediately and absolutely imposed by one person on the state. Forced atheism is not atheism at all.
seriously, you need to read more before opining away on youtube. so your contention is that citizens in the ussr and china had a choice, one at a time to accept the complete ban on religion - are you nuts? Communism & atheism are inextricably linked, whether you like it or not, marx's manifesto is clear, remember "religion...opiate of the masses" you cannot seperate communism-atheism, & the inevitable crimes that followed - your pal Nietzsche predicted the bloody Godless 20th century - learn!
@mollkatles Again, my "read carefully" argument? Did I say they had a choice? What I said was that just because a leader declares they have a certain religious view doesn't mean it's so. It's the exact opposite. They were branded atheist. No choice. You'd think you'd be more careful in reading after that narcissistic intro of yours. Of course they would be linked if communism always includes atheism. But that doesn't mean atheism was the motivation for those crimes. Most of them were ideological
Oh but I can, its quite easy. You see, when I call myself an atheist, I'm saying I lack a belief in any god(s) and that is all I'm saying, nothing else. I'm not saying I'm a democrat, I'm not saying I'm a republican and I'm certainly not saying I'm a communist, all I'm saying is, I do not believe in any god(s).
Linking communism to atheism is typical religious generalization.
@astev52 - For goodness sake, do I need to sound it out for you to? You can seperate atheists from communism, but not communism from atheists. Of course there are atheists that are all over the place politically - but name one communist regime that has had any tolerance for religion? Go back to you pal, Marx the communist disdain for religion is set from the very beginning
Did I mention that the bloodiest regimes in the history of the planet for Godless? ussr, maos' china, cambodia etc?
Let me spell it out again. Now pay attention and for goodness sake try to keep up.
Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a god(s), nothing else. Unlike religion and communism it has no tenets, no dogmas and no doctrines.
No-one has ever been killed in the name of atheism.
The same however cannot be said for religion. The crusades and the inquisition, carried out in the name of the christian god were some of the most barbaric, cruel, and inhumane acts ever perpetrated by man.
@astev52 Actually I, as an atheist, had some problems with this statement recently.
Namely when Soviet Russia specifically targetet priests and churches for killing, is not this action motivated by their atheism? In my eyes unless we could somehow pinpoint another reason for killing them except their religious beliefs, your statement is correct. However if the only reason was that they had belief, as communism thinks is wrong, then someone has killed for atheism.
@Solensherre I was recently in china, and all the religious movements are owned by the state. So communism doesn't think it's wrong, they just don't want them to grow too big because it can become a thread to society (this video is a great example of how).
But if what you're saying is correct, I'd blame it on the government, and not "atheism", because atheism has "no tenets, no dogmas and no doctrines".
Atheism is NOT anti-religious btw. Budhists are by definition atheists.
@nejtilsvampe Very true about the buddhist thing, may be why I lingered so long on that when I was deconverted.
It should be noted that according to the communist manifesto by Marx, original communism did think that religion was bad for society, in that it made people docile and easy to control.
But yes, atheism in itself cannot motivate anything, but it may lead to any variety of things which can motivate certain actions, I think is the point I was making.
@mollkatles One of the most free countries to have ever existed is the United States. It is notable for its promotion of liberty and equal rights for all. It was based on secularism and NOT religion as made evident by the first amendment. Many if not a majority of the founding fathers were deists, not Christians. From the outset, this country was not established as a Christian nation. A majority of its citizens are Christian, but a majority are also white. A majority is no excuse for tyranny.
@mollkatles The American government is as you have said "Godless." It does not support nor does it suppress any religion. Now one may say that this case of evolution suppressed religion, but in fact the religion was impressing itself upon the government and asked to be endorsed. This is clearly unconstitutional and the only logical verdict is to say the US government will not endorse this religion. Some of the most violent governments in the history of mankind have endorsed Christianity.
@mollkatles Examples of violent Christian governments include the capitalistic government of South Vietnam during a portion of the Vietnam War. It killed monks who were peacefully protesting and openly denounced all religions not of Christianity. Your argument that atheist governments are evil and Christian governments are best is not well founded by historical evidence. There have been good secular nations (USA) and bad Christian nations (South Vietnam). Secularism is a virtue of a good gov.
@mollkatles maybe you should read more of your American history. In the 19th century, Christian Utopians communes (Quakers and Shakers in particular--loosely based on a proto-socialist model) sprung up and flourished for several decades. These communities were highly agragrian and isolated other communites of the same sort. Though they might have had access to the Manifesto, it would have been in German at the time. When the industrial revolution happened....
@mollkatles when the industrial revolution happened ( a capitalist movement), agragrian communities in America began to disband. Larger farms and companies began to take the necessary land these Christian communes needed to remain independent. The Shakers, though communistic, did not believe in sexual reproduction and as such, died out. As such, communism can work as a mode of social organization independent of particular religious ideologies.
PBS left this out was the technical ruling. What the judge ruled in Dover was ID was not "methodological naturalism".
For those of you who do not know what that means, it's, ""nature is all there is, and all basic truths are truths of nature." So what was ruled in Dover was ID is not science because we think ID deals with something that is not in nature and we define in science that nature is all there is.
am surprised to see someone profanely criticize and belittle a judge on t.v.. in singapore u get a 3 year jail term for that and a whole lotta caning..!!!
@rjereza - Buckingham and Bonsell aren't the only jackasses here. I've read "Of Pandas and People" (the 1983 version) and it is unsatisfactory as a high school biology textbook.
I think the best part about Pat Robinson's message was that the school board and the ID people were trying to show that ID wasn't religion, but then Robinson goes and says that Dover "rejected [God] from their town."
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
talk about a paradox and a contradiction, I would say that Darwin finches are a good metaphor for the argument, you could say that Intelligent design is by its vary" nature" is an evolutionary idea which lends it self to the same sort of process. you would do well not to ignore it Natural selection for it natures rule... life make,s life.
wtf death threats? Creationists had the best possible odds in this case, they had more than a fair trial and they still loose. Then have the audacity to question a conservative judge that dubbya (their favourite buddy) nominated. Christianity: if mans law fails, then break it and declare "gods" law is higher.
I think it is truly sad that these so-called "good Christians" supporting ID are so unwilling to accept defeat in a fair trial that they would send death threats to a judge.
@covega79 well when you divorce your arguments and worldviews from evidence and believe for no good reason and someone else comes along and challenges your view the only way to defend it IS to kill the other person. and its even worse when BOTH base their views on nothing at all, hence holy wars.
Thanks for the input @ 3:20 Mr. Pat Robertson. Now kindly go fuck yourself! Organised religion may once have served a purpose among the preliterate, but it's the 21st century of the Common Era. Time for it to die. Astev52: Thanks for posting this series sir. It really needs to see more traffic and more discussion. 5*, faved, and subbed!
@popgoiuuod: I've found a ball-peen hammer (several times) between the eyes does help make understanding his rants. Perhaps that point explains much about his mind to start with?
Excellent series. The courts even ruled that ID is Creationism and is a religious based position.
What more evidence do we need to prove ID is BS? It is obviously an attempt to leverage religion into school, to discredit science and to start the wedge that could split America over this non-issue.
Fundamentalists fear Darwinism as a bugaboo undermining 'objective morality' - but what 'morality'?
The 'morality' of death threats, perjury and deception. No surprise. They're just practicing what their god teaches: see Numbers 31:17 ('kill...the little ones..,' keep alive for yourselves all the young girls...') and Hosea 13:16 ('...their infants shall be dashed to pieces and their women with child ripped open...').
With 'objective morality' like theirs, I'm proud to call myself an atheist.
Buckingham is a vile and disgusting human being. What an asshole. Burning down a child's painting just because it didn't fit his own personal beliefs? How selfish can you get? If there is a God, he's the one going to hell.
"I think he went to clown college... or else he went to law school and slept during the constitution classes"! What an arrogant ignoramus Buckingham is!
If this continues to be a debate, this trial will be excellent support AGAINST creationism, ID, and whatever other label that is slapped on a purely religious concept. Until they start to act like scientists and come up some testable evidence to suggest Earth was effected by some kind of designer they'll never be taken seriously, and in that respect it'd have to be a secular designer anyways which wouldn't prove God but aliens.
A big difference between a god and an alien that aliens are phisical beings and not imagined.
IF aliens would be the answer for Earth's evolution that wouldn't falsify evolution at all, just expand its time-limit and place abiogenesis to another planet - not to fairytales.
no living christian has any grounds to draw the favoritism card over anyone when this topic is at table, because they themselves will tolerate only their own view to exist. Christians are scared of abiogenesis because it hints our ancestors might have been black folks. not too suprising the biggest supporters of IDiotism are almost all from .. yep.. u.s of a.
Easy they lost the trial, most of the ID people decided not to even testify because they were getting their asses handed to them. Its bias because they lost, and people do not like to lose.
One of the best broadcasts on YT and a triumph for common sense. How much longer are these biggoted, religious arseholes going to deny the truth.
Hitchens was right -religion poisons everything, especially the minds of the pathetically inadequte idiots who subscribe to whats no more than a death cult.
Creationists got their asses handed to them!!! Yes, I say CREATIONISTS, because THATS WHAT ID SUPPORTERS ARE!!! I don't know how *anyone* can say that they aren't the same damn thing!
what gets to me is that these people making the death threats against the judge are probably christians.Jesus preached peace and yet for most christians that seems only to apply to others and not themselves.I get the feeling that most leaders of the church think they are above the teachings of a book that they profess to be the ultimate word of God
Excellent work NOVA, Plantiffs, Legal Team, Parents, Students, Scientists, Teachers, New School Board, NCSE, Volunteers, Mr. Jones & open minded and reasonable Dover residents.
One of the problems that this case highlights is the existence of school boards. Only in the US to my knowledge do these things exist: they give far too much power to idiots with an axe to grind. Just look at those two main creationist clowns on the board: what on earth qualifies them to make decisions about the education of the children in their community? And how much money did they cost their school district?
I have been a big supporter of the Occam's Razor approach to religion (though perhaps Einstein's Razor is more fitting). However I read a comment a few weeks back that made me laugh; perhaps a god only rewards those courageous enough to challenge convention and who seek knowledge through the evidence. In other words, trusting the physical explanations we can create even though they would be fabricated by a higher power, is infinitely more beneficial than simple blind faith.
Pft, creationists don't need a court of law to show they are correct. All they need is some votebots and too much free time to reiterate the same FAILED examples of design that, well, FAILED.
You seem to be still confused about what is evidence. There is no evidence for intelligent design yet, and anything that was claimed to be has been irrefutably disproved.
However, there is plenty of evidence for Evolution. Like any good scientific theory, experimental predictions can be made and results have reinforced knowledge and confidence.
But if you are so anti-science, how about leaving the internet or just quitting irl.
The real evidence was simply not BELIEVED. You can't refute the evidence of intelligent design because it is still here. Intelligent design will always be here with us as long as we are here because that is what makes us what we are.
Don't kid yourself. There is no evidence for evolution. It is nothing more than wishful thinking, imagination, speculation and conjecture. No science. Science is observable like intelligent design is observable.
Calling a sitting federal judge, to whom under oath you lied to, an ass is a truly brilliant thing to do.
abetterpersonthanyou 3 weeks ago
To all the creationist and ID advocates, gaps in evolutionary theory are the meat and potatoes for scientists. They give the scientists the avenue to embark on the five-step scientific process which relies on empirical and objective evidence. ID does not show why and how the "designer" made any specific complexity occur, it just shows that some "designer" could be responsible for it. I'm not a scientist but that doesn't represent the basic tenants of science. R
annoyance82 3 weeks ago
@Solensherre Could you be more spesific as to what kind of things you believe it can lead to?
knuthoem85 1 month ago
well well well.....they had their day in court....and the evidence proves we evolved...its great to be human......and i say its about time we raise again and take god to court again.....this time we sue him for slander..........for calling me a sinner....a born sinner.......if thats not slander then i dont know what is.....and for attempted blackmail.......for daming my soul (if we really do have one) to hell just because i WILL NOT accept their version of the truth.........
TheeJediSmurf 1 month ago in playlist Lecture Series - The Dover Trail
Pat Robertson only serves one master, and it's not God.
patogiannis49 1 month ago
Pat Robertson, the true face of Christian charity and compassion. ;-)
SqueakerAlpha 2 months ago
if evolution and intelligent design were fairly evenly split or even if ID had a significant scientific following (say 15%) then it might be suitable for a high school science class. Its not and it isn't.
The judge did a fantastic job.
SqueakerAlpha 2 months ago
It's not just the town of Dover that's divided..the whole damn country is!
Lennon4ever1 3 months ago
They ought to shove that 'wedge' up their pompous self-righteous asses!!
Lennon4ever1 3 months ago
Troll much, Jargon?
Whatever happened to letting evidence build up a claim and examination of data? Why is it being perverted into STARTING with a claim [goddidit] and looking for evidence to support THAT?
MindOfGenius 6 months ago
Since when is observable ordered functions requiring a very great Maker, physical truth not science?
Evolution is an absolute outright fraud! It is a lie! No science supports it!
Mutations do not accumulate to amount to any ordered functions in real life experimentation and in the fossil record.
A fish is still a fish and nothing more.
You cannot arrive at having intelligence without thinking.
watch?v=lEledPONpkQ
JungleJargon 6 months ago
@JungleJargon You people repeat that like a mantra "There is no evidence there are no fossils evolution is a lie." I believe we call that "Denial" and "Wishful thinking". No matter how many times you say "There is no evidence" that doesn't make it so. If a doctor were to take my height, weight, BMI, and take a measurement of my total body fat and tell me I'm obese, I could say "I'm not obese" all I want it's not gonna make it true.
LotusPhoenix93 6 months ago
@LotusPhoenix93 You didn't prove anything.
Evolution is denial of the facts and wishful thinking.
All of the evidence supports Creation.
The ordered function of hydrogen working inside of us is evidence that our Maker is the Maker of all matter in the universe consisting primarily of hydrogen.
JungleJargon 6 months ago
@JungleJargon I wasn't trying to prove anything to you, people like you who repeat that mantra over and over again are impossible to reason with. Your whole argument is the equivalent to saying "I can't possibly imagine how life came to be, therefore it must have been poofed into existence by god." and repeating your mantra "Evolution is wrong there is no evidence" Ignore all the fossils, the fact that micro-evolution has been observed and tested, genetics, and ring species.
LotusPhoenix93 6 months ago
@LotusPhoenix93 I can't possibly imagine how objects can have such magical powers as you continually ascribe to them.
Fossils buried under 125 million cubic sqare miles is evidence of the flood because no one has ever accounted for the sediments that came to cover all living things on earth.
Mutations do not accumulate in real life or amount to anything in real life experimentation, observation and in the fossil record.
You still didn't prove anything. Variation is what the genome does.
JungleJargon 6 months ago
@JungleJargon What do you mean "Magical Powers" I don't think things have "Magical powers" Creationists are the ones claiming that there is a giant wizard in the sky that created everything though... As for the sediments that covered all living thing on Earth, um, I'm confused as to what you're even talking about there, could you clarify? As for the part about mutations - that's a complete lie, and obviously you haven't bothered even using google.
LotusPhoenix93 6 months ago
@LotusPhoenix93 There is evidence of a Maker and there is no evidence that any objects have magical powers to order the functions of anything.
Since you have not explained the origin of the 125 million cubic miles of sediments covering every living thing there ever was on earth, there is nothing you can say about mutations because it is the fossils in those sediments that are unchanged.
You have not bothered to face the truth.
JungleJargon 6 months ago
@JungleJargon Actually, I asked you to explain what you were talking about. I can't answer a question when I don't even know what you're referring to. And as I just said, I don't believe anything on earth has "Magical Powers". All you have done is make assertions without backing any of it up, and tried to say "You can't explain this therefore god did it." Which is exactly what I said you were doing earlier, and frankly shows why creationism isn't science.
LotusPhoenix93 6 months ago
@LotusPhoenix93 I already told you about orderd functions that hydrogen and most of the most common elements have in life forms requiring a Maker. You did not show me any other simple function that does not have a maker. How can I believe that much greater ordered functions with nano and quantum functions do not have a Maker? You are giving all of the credit for ordered functions to objects in nature and you just said yourself that objects don't have any magic and you still believe they did it.
JungleJargon 6 months ago
@JungleJargon OMFSM you're stupid, I'm going to throw a few words out at you, CHEMISTY, PHYSICS, BIOLOGY, also known as SCIENCE, NOT magic. all of which you apparently didn't take in high school. Plus, you're asserting that things must have a maker, which again comes back to you not understanding science and saying god must have done it without further exploration.
LotusPhoenix93 6 months ago 2
@LotusPhoenix93 You are guessing yourself and saying that I don't understand.
Explore the nano and quantum functions in life forms that require a Maker.
No simple functions ever exist without having a maker.
JungleJargon 6 months ago
@JungleJargon ... You do realize physicists are mostly Atheists, right? The people who understand this stuff and know it most, don't believe in a creator.
LotusPhoenix93 6 months ago 2
If the truth is that the ordered functions in life forms require a very great Maker, so be it.
JungleJargon 6 months ago
creationists are bad loosers...
doyoublush 7 months ago
I love to see the depths to which a creationist will stoop. The Pat Robertson remark is a classic example. I give some credit to the two men that voted in ID. They were man enough to be interviewed. That is more than the Discovery Institute can say. The "War" that is being fought has more to do with Biblical Indoctrination and less to do with Science. Anything that shows a natural, testable and unbiblical answer is thrown out by biblical literalists. It's too bad.
whhardiek1972 7 months ago
F you, Pat Robertson, you scumbag bigot.
TerisOneil 7 months ago
America,never forget what happened here.This is one of the most important annals in your development history.
I'm english but i feel very american after watching this.I feel we might have been next had you not done such a fine job.
funkyleaf 7 months ago
Pat Robertson is such a tard. 'If there's a disaster in your town don't turn to god'?
Firstly if you believe in god then he wanted the disaster to happen anyway. Second, what the fuck is god gonna do to help? Start magically rebuilding houses and hand out bottles of water or something? Pure moron talk.
Brushles83 8 months ago 2
Comment removed
Brushles83 8 months ago
7:25
I just love it when conservatives yammer on about how they *love* the Constitution, right up until it doesnt produce the results they want. They then blather on about how it was misread or misapplied. Cause, as all true Americans know, the COTUS is *always* on the side of the christian far right...even when it's not. :-/
sakar181 8 months ago
Buckingham: You committed purgery and you have no formal training in law. Additionally, you are not a trained scientist. So when it comes to law or science, sir, you are the only clown in the ring.
peasantsoul 9 months ago
Why are we even mentioning Christianity? It's clearly stating RELIGION.
meliefore 10 months ago
So, how DO you use the science of the bible to advance mankind?
yourjunk420 10 months ago
What scares me is that there are only 8800 views and videos on creationism have 100,000 of views, sad...
rencull 10 months ago
3:52 Resident Evil menu sound... it's a classic.
iainreekiecouk 10 months ago
Thank you for posting- this is an excellent documentary.
LeonhardEuler1 10 months ago 10
Teach religion where religion is taught, IN CHURCHES! Is that so fucking hard?
Seeking a monopoly by co-opting schools is unlawful on many levels.
GermanChocolateCake 11 months ago
hooray science!! HOORAY SCIEEENNNNNNNCE!!!!! Goddamned i feel like dancing.
marting1984 11 months ago
Right or wrong it doesn't look good on science when it tries to silence opposing views - book banning? It was like when religion tried to ban science - I guess people don't change - they fear the unknown
sobpatrick 11 months ago
@sobpatrick Book banning? Where did they say the book was banned? You can probably still go to a library or bookstore and buy a copy of "Of Pandas and People" if you really wanted. It was simply determined that it was unconstitutional to require the four paragraph statement about evolution being "just a theory" to be read before school science classes, and that there were ulterior motives behind the donation of those books to the school.
GuardianHaukness 11 months ago
@sobpatrick Where is the ban? Nobody's trying to stop the publication of "Of Pandas an People". Nobody is burning those books. They don't fit the curriculum. You think kids should know about god or an intelligent designer made the world, then study it in your CHURCH!!!
yourjunk420 10 months ago
The irony being they had to swear in with their hand on the bible.
derman077 11 months ago
@derman077 Yeah i was thinking of that too. Another point is, there should be a separation of church and state right? Well, if the court system is a part of the state than how come you have to swear with your hand on a bible?
mindelo23 6 months ago
One of the more awesome things I've found here on youtube. Hard to dodge all the makeup, model, and celebrity crap that youtube people love for some insane reason. Anyway, first off, these so-called good christian first break one of their more basic laws, bear false witness, and then lie about id being religious since that tv evangelist whatshisname is pissed and want them all to die in a disaster cause the thinks they rejected god. If god is in id, its religious..duh
slask25 11 months ago
@slask25 Sorry for the typos. Written in a haste and youtube have no edit function so blah...
slask25 11 months ago
I am surprised to hear that teaching evolution was fined in court in 1929 and today it is unconstitutional to teach intelligent design or creationism. Religion has been an obstacle against almost all scientific progress and civil rights movements throughout the history. It is losing power everyday. I am hopeful for a future when religious dogmas get no more credit than they really deserve while we are making public decisions
alperduru 1 year ago
To all creatards:
Ha ha-ha ha-ha. Your magic invisible celestial policeman idea fails again. Maybe it's time ya'll grew up and stopped stupifying the next generation. They might like a fair shot at competing with the rest of the human race in this here global economy.
Just sayin.
themsfightinwoids 1 year ago 3
Attorney for ID proponets at 8:03 says "i'm just disturbed about the extent of his opinion; that it went way beyond what he should have gone and into deciding matters of science". YOU FUCKING ASKED HIM TO DECIDE IF I.D. WAS SCIENCE. You agreed for the judge to decide if it was science at the beginning of the case. You could have just had him answer the constitutional issues, but you ALSO asked him to specifically answer the question "Is I.D. Science".
MrJmm999 1 year ago 2
OK god has to send sneaky liars & cheats to prove he exists. great.
nayanmalig 1 year ago 3
Ironic, isn't it? that the side claiming evolution will lead to a breakdown of the moral fabric of society can do no better than lie, cheat, and steal to fight against it. In attempting to "keep god in the classroom" they managed to break one of 10 things literally etched in stone by this deity as utter no-go actions.
Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
They're not even holding to their own moral standards, and evolution is supposedly the antagonist of human morality?
Reerrpad5515 1 year ago 3
As Richard Dawkins pointed out, real scientists are happy when their particular theory is shown to be false as it means they are one step closer to the truth of nature.
On the other hand, proponents of ID call the opposition "a jackass" and wish natural disasters on them.
Definitely the words of respectable scientists.
vbellbrick 1 year ago 2
7:23 what an ignorant asshole. Get a life, ya old loser geezer.
loner1878 1 year ago
"... Don't turn to God. You just rejected him from your city"!
WTF! GOD????? I thought ID was nothing "religious"?????!!!!!
Fucking drivining me mental these fucking creationists!
ShahnamPersia 1 year ago 21
@aaronzvz because evolution doesn't explain everything imho
Hackmodford 1 year ago
@Hackmodford You're right, it only explains why there is such a wide variety of life. It explains this very well, and it is not meant to explain anything else. For information about the origins of life and the origins of the universe look up Abiogenesis and Cosmology respectively.
Jonstern1983 1 year ago
Comment removed
aaronzvz 1 year ago
Even though I'm on the ID side, I can't honestly see how the judge could have made a different decision based on the evidence presented to him.
Hackmodford 1 year ago
@Hackmodford than why are you still on the ID side?
aaronzvz 1 year ago
Amazing the lack of humility from the the ID folks. If the only facts about the case you knew were from the ID folks, you would never know that the judge was a churchgoer, Republican and appointed by Bush.
Instead, you would hear, 'activist', 'atheist', 'fool', etc.
No show of humility saying, "Wow, we had the trial stacked for us and we *still* lost."
jessc1979 1 year ago 2
Thanks Pat Robertson, "Intelligent Design" was Creationism by God after all.
MegaGayjesus 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Buckingham and Bonsell lied under oath - and then have the temerity to call the Judge a "jackass"? Those 2 should be doing time like the felons they are. Evil b1tches. And they commit their evil in the name of G0D
MrR0X 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Buckingham and Bonsell lied under oath - and then have the temerity to call the Judge a "jackass"? Those 2 should be doing time like the felons they are. Evil b1tches. And they commit their evil in the name of G0D
MrR0X 1 year ago
Buckingham and Bonsell lied under oath - and then have the temerity to call the Judge a "jackass"? Those 2 should be doing time like the felons they are. Evil b1tches. nd they commit their evil in the name of G0D
MrR0X 1 year ago 3
Buckingham and Bonsell lied under oath - and then have the temerity to call the Judge a "jackass"? Those 2 should be doing time like the felons they are. Evil b1tches. And they commit their evil in the name of G0D
MrR0X 1 year ago
Best Court Case Ever.
sabertooth1980 1 year ago
I don't understand why people who believe so strongly one way or another can't just say that both theories are "possible". I believe in evolution, because it can be proven with facts & evidence. When I was young and was taught about how God created everything, it was ok. At that age it made sense, but as we grow & our need to absorb knowledge increases, we become interested in truths & facts, which is what evolution is! Theory in science means something different than theory in general context.
Amalinde2788 1 year ago
Comment removed
Amalinde2788 1 year ago
Brilliant. While those for evolution have shown that all they want is the advancement of humanity & the preservation of truth, those for creationism & ID have shown their hypocrisy, bigotry, ignorance, & narrow-mindedness that fuel their foulness & mindlessness. I truly wonder at those who sent death threats while believing themselves to be holy. I look forward to the future when religion is eradicated. It will be a proud day for humanity. One where we are freed from the shackles of stupidity
Seikhupatz 1 year ago
@Seikhupatz - you seem to lack a fundamental understanding of recent history, but I can help. Religion was eradicated, in the soviet union (estimated body count 30 million) the peoples republic of china (est. body count 50-70 million) - any of this starting to ring a bell?
where is your outrage for the atrocities of atheistic totalitarianism? Let's try and be a little less hysterical in future posts - this frame of mind does not communicate intelligence
mollkatles 1 year ago
Comment removed
Seikhupatz 1 year ago
@mollkatles I was unaware that I mentioned anything about recent history in my post. Everything I said was pointing towards the actions of the people in the video and I was condemning THEIR actions. Perhaps it would be best if you consider posts carefully before replying to them instead of jumping at what you think are opportunities to look intelligent and knowledgeable.
Additionally, totalitarianism is not defined by atheism, religion or the lack thereof. Unlike what went on in the crusades.
Seikhupatz 1 year ago
@Seikhupatz - not sure how you are confused by your own post, but you are. Re-read the part of your post, the religion eradicated part, are you saying that is a specific not general tangent?
Look, clearly you were hysterical when you posted that, like a lot of folks, you allowed your emotions to overwhelm you - I understand, it happens to undisiplined soft minds all the time. But we can reach a compromise -if you don't post any more comments on youtube, I won't read & reply to them, deal?
mollkatles 1 year ago
@mollkatles Wow, you are one of the most pretentious people I have ever met. Yes, my "religion is eradicated" statement. It says religion is stupid. Where is the outrage for Christian/religious deeds over the centuries? It's not there. The only part where I am outraged is when I discussed the people in the video sending death threats. The level of your pomposity is simply incredible. Almost hilarious! I'm inclined to meet you in person just so I can see it. Do you live in the UK?
Seikhupatz 1 year ago
@Seikhupatz - yes, the people that made the deaths threats are morally reprehensible - so is generalizing the actions of a few to an entire religious community, wouldn't you agree?
mollkatles 1 year ago
@mollkatles
Atheism is the simply the lack of belief in any god or gods, THAT'S IT..... It has no dogmas no tenets, it is simply saying as an atheists we do not believe in a god or gods, because there IS NO evidence.
"so is generalizing the actions of a few to an entire religious community"
When you state that "millions" where killed because of atheism, aren't you generalizing in exactly the same way.
Wouldn't you agree?
astev52 1 year ago
@astev52 - 1st a tip, to help you refine your atheist position, so you have some credibility, your atheist superiors - hitchens, dawkins etc., acknowledge evidence of God, they don't beleive the evidence means anything, but they don't deny evidence. To say there is no evidence, gives one the impression you have not looked, so you have not found - following? I only offer this so you don't come across as virtually every other atheist, emotional, uniformed parrots of science they do not comprehend
mollkatles 1 year ago
@mollkatles
"To say there is no evidence, gives one the impression you have not looked"
But I have looked. Otherwise I would not be an athiest. If anyone could offer me solid, verifiable, scientific evidence for a god(s), I would convert tomorrow.
"I only offer this so you don't come across as virtually every other atheist"
You are generalizing again.
Wouldn't you agree?
astev52 1 year ago
@mollkatles You are still unable to grasp the fact that I am talking about the creationist side and the evolution side in the video. Where did I generalize the actions of a few to an entire religious community? I repeated what has been shown in the video. And isn't what you are saying in fact, what your first argument was entirely about? Your lack of comprehensive ability is wearisome. You were looking for an easy ego boost and you didn't find it here. Isn't it high time you moved on?
Seikhupatz 1 year ago
@Seikhupatz - apparently you just don't appreciate my benevolent attempts to educate, you are resisting, and my patience is not inexhaustible. One parting, and yes good natured lesson plan - more logic fewer words will make you profoundly more clear, right now your posts are nothing more than a jumbled collection of adjectives - do, run along now
mollkatles 1 year ago
@mollkatles Educate? From someone who can't even read arguments properly? Good natured? From a person who steeps every sentence with narcissistic condescension? No need to attempt to salvage your "dignity". You aren't fooling anyone. Just go.
Seikhupatz 1 year ago
@mollkatles Tell you what. I'll address your misguided argument. The only way that example would work was if:
1.Atheism was the irrefutable motivation behind those deaths, like the Crusades. The coincidental presence of atheism doesn't indicate anything.
2.Atheistic dominance was achieved through gradual individualistic choice, not immediately and absolutely imposed by one person on the state. Forced atheism is not atheism at all.
Seikhupatz 1 year ago
seriously, you need to read more before opining away on youtube. so your contention is that citizens in the ussr and china had a choice, one at a time to accept the complete ban on religion - are you nuts? Communism & atheism are inextricably linked, whether you like it or not, marx's manifesto is clear, remember "religion...opiate of the masses" you cannot seperate communism-atheism, & the inevitable crimes that followed - your pal Nietzsche predicted the bloody Godless 20th century - learn!
mollkatles 1 year ago
@mollkatles Again, my "read carefully" argument? Did I say they had a choice? What I said was that just because a leader declares they have a certain religious view doesn't mean it's so. It's the exact opposite. They were branded atheist. No choice. You'd think you'd be more careful in reading after that narcissistic intro of yours. Of course they would be linked if communism always includes atheism. But that doesn't mean atheism was the motivation for those crimes. Most of them were ideological
Seikhupatz 1 year ago
@mollkatles
"you cannot seperate communism-atheism"
Oh but I can, its quite easy. You see, when I call myself an atheist, I'm saying I lack a belief in any god(s) and that is all I'm saying, nothing else. I'm not saying I'm a democrat, I'm not saying I'm a republican and I'm certainly not saying I'm a communist, all I'm saying is, I do not believe in any god(s).
Linking communism to atheism is typical religious generalization.
Wouldn't you agree?
astev52 1 year ago 4
@astev52 - For goodness sake, do I need to sound it out for you to? You can seperate atheists from communism, but not communism from atheists. Of course there are atheists that are all over the place politically - but name one communist regime that has had any tolerance for religion? Go back to you pal, Marx the communist disdain for religion is set from the very beginning
Did I mention that the bloodiest regimes in the history of the planet for Godless? ussr, maos' china, cambodia etc?
mollkatles 1 year ago
@mollkatles
Let me spell it out again. Now pay attention and for goodness sake try to keep up.
Atheism is simply the lack of belief in a god(s), nothing else. Unlike religion and communism it has no tenets, no dogmas and no doctrines.
No-one has ever been killed in the name of atheism.
The same however cannot be said for religion. The crusades and the inquisition, carried out in the name of the christian god were some of the most barbaric, cruel, and inhumane acts ever perpetrated by man.
astev52 1 year ago 8
@astev52 Actually I, as an atheist, had some problems with this statement recently.
Namely when Soviet Russia specifically targetet priests and churches for killing, is not this action motivated by their atheism? In my eyes unless we could somehow pinpoint another reason for killing them except their religious beliefs, your statement is correct. However if the only reason was that they had belief, as communism thinks is wrong, then someone has killed for atheism.
Solensherre 6 months ago
@Solensherre incorrect* damnit...
Solensherre 6 months ago
@Solensherre I was recently in china, and all the religious movements are owned by the state. So communism doesn't think it's wrong, they just don't want them to grow too big because it can become a thread to society (this video is a great example of how).
But if what you're saying is correct, I'd blame it on the government, and not "atheism", because atheism has "no tenets, no dogmas and no doctrines".
Atheism is NOT anti-religious btw. Budhists are by definition atheists.
nejtilsvampe 5 months ago
@nejtilsvampe Very true about the buddhist thing, may be why I lingered so long on that when I was deconverted.
It should be noted that according to the communist manifesto by Marx, original communism did think that religion was bad for society, in that it made people docile and easy to control.
But yes, atheism in itself cannot motivate anything, but it may lead to any variety of things which can motivate certain actions, I think is the point I was making.
Solensherre 5 months ago
@Solensherre well I can only agree with Carl then :) Religion IS harmfull.
nejtilsvampe 5 months ago
@mollkatles One of the most free countries to have ever existed is the United States. It is notable for its promotion of liberty and equal rights for all. It was based on secularism and NOT religion as made evident by the first amendment. Many if not a majority of the founding fathers were deists, not Christians. From the outset, this country was not established as a Christian nation. A majority of its citizens are Christian, but a majority are also white. A majority is no excuse for tyranny.
JustinJustice22 1 year ago
@mollkatles The American government is as you have said "Godless." It does not support nor does it suppress any religion. Now one may say that this case of evolution suppressed religion, but in fact the religion was impressing itself upon the government and asked to be endorsed. This is clearly unconstitutional and the only logical verdict is to say the US government will not endorse this religion. Some of the most violent governments in the history of mankind have endorsed Christianity.
JustinJustice22 1 year ago
@mollkatles Examples of violent Christian governments include the capitalistic government of South Vietnam during a portion of the Vietnam War. It killed monks who were peacefully protesting and openly denounced all religions not of Christianity. Your argument that atheist governments are evil and Christian governments are best is not well founded by historical evidence. There have been good secular nations (USA) and bad Christian nations (South Vietnam). Secularism is a virtue of a good gov.
JustinJustice22 1 year ago
@mollkatles maybe you should read more of your American history. In the 19th century, Christian Utopians communes (Quakers and Shakers in particular--loosely based on a proto-socialist model) sprung up and flourished for several decades. These communities were highly agragrian and isolated other communites of the same sort. Though they might have had access to the Manifesto, it would have been in German at the time. When the industrial revolution happened....
peasantsoul 1 year ago
@mollkatles when the industrial revolution happened ( a capitalist movement), agragrian communities in America began to disband. Larger farms and companies began to take the necessary land these Christian communes needed to remain independent. The Shakers, though communistic, did not believe in sexual reproduction and as such, died out. As such, communism can work as a mode of social organization independent of particular religious ideologies.
peasantsoul 1 year ago
@mollkatles you're so ignorant. and stupid
AgeOfReasonXXI 1 year ago
Comment removed
Seikhupatz 1 year ago
hahaha creationist are losers
satibablaze 1 year ago
great documentary! thanks for posting this.
dstachon2002 1 year ago
PBS left this out was the technical ruling. What the judge ruled in Dover was ID was not "methodological naturalism".
For those of you who do not know what that means, it's, ""nature is all there is, and all basic truths are truths of nature." So what was ruled in Dover was ID is not science because we think ID deals with something that is not in nature and we define in science that nature is all there is.
Less than a brilliant conclusion eh?
gcnengineer 1 year ago
I am a Christian, however I am outraged by Pat Robinson's comment,
sneakytanderson 1 year ago
am surprised to see someone profanely criticize and belittle a judge on t.v.. in singapore u get a 3 year jail term for that and a whole lotta caning..!!!
dumpigno 1 year ago
@dumpigno They don't have freedom of speech there?
BMBaccount 1 year ago
wow they still complain even after they clearly lost.
slicingwater 1 year ago
@rjereza - Buckingham and Bonsell aren't the only jackasses here. I've read "Of Pandas and People" (the 1983 version) and it is unsatisfactory as a high school biology textbook.
gpietsch 1 year ago 3
WOW pat robertson is a douche. The most unChristian words from a 'pastor' I have ever heard.
Xamaza 1 year ago
I think the best part about Pat Robinson's message was that the school board and the ID people were trying to show that ID wasn't religion, but then Robinson goes and says that Dover "rejected [God] from their town."
He just comes out and says that ID is religious.
dianwei32 1 year ago
Thanks for the upload astev52, I loved watching this series.
CannibalCorpse909 2 years ago 7
This comment has received too many negative votes show
talk about a paradox and a contradiction, I would say that Darwin finches are a good metaphor for the argument, you could say that Intelligent design is by its vary" nature" is an evolutionary idea which lends it self to the same sort of process. you would do well not to ignore it Natural selection for it natures rule... life make,s life.
jimsim3 2 years ago
wtf death threats? Creationists had the best possible odds in this case, they had more than a fair trial and they still loose. Then have the audacity to question a conservative judge that dubbya (their favourite buddy) nominated. Christianity: if mans law fails, then break it and declare "gods" law is higher.
b0b0maj0 2 years ago 13
Death threats...... How Christian, and un-Christlike!
dizzitoast 2 years ago 10
@dizzitoast I'm a Christian and I couldn't agree more
sneakytanderson 1 year ago
I think it is truly sad that these so-called "good Christians" supporting ID are so unwilling to accept defeat in a fair trial that they would send death threats to a judge.
astahle13 2 years ago 9
There is nothing more Christian than death threats.
covega79 2 years ago 31
Nothing more Old Testament Christian for sure.
astahle13 2 years ago
@covega79 he he he .. lol ...
dkinetik 11 months ago
@covega79 And nothing more religious than lies and unsubstantiated claims.
GermanChocolateCake 11 months ago
@covega79 well when you divorce your arguments and worldviews from evidence and believe for no good reason and someone else comes along and challenges your view the only way to defend it IS to kill the other person. and its even worse when BOTH base their views on nothing at all, hence holy wars.
tuseroni 8 months ago
Thanks for the input @ 3:20 Mr. Pat Robertson. Now kindly go fuck yourself! Organised religion may once have served a purpose among the preliterate, but it's the 21st century of the Common Era. Time for it to die. Astev52: Thanks for posting this series sir. It really needs to see more traffic and more discussion. 5*, faved, and subbed!
magick205 2 years ago 10
Pat Robertson hehehe.. How can anyone watch him without laughing?
What a charade..
popgoiuuod 2 years ago 6
@popgoiuuod: I've found a ball-peen hammer (several times) between the eyes does help make understanding his rants. Perhaps that point explains much about his mind to start with?
magick205 2 years ago
7:35 Yeah......like it's been stated before in the Constitution of the United States of America: Seperation of Church and State.
jscanyon 2 years ago
Thanks for posting this, Astev
GoblinXXX 2 years ago 5
Thank you Judge Jones
paintersron 2 years ago 70
@paintersron A hero for rationality and our secular democracy.
GermanChocolateCake 11 months ago
Excellent series. The courts even ruled that ID is Creationism and is a religious based position.
What more evidence do we need to prove ID is BS? It is obviously an attempt to leverage religion into school, to discredit science and to start the wedge that could split America over this non-issue.
Thank God I live in the UK...
Rokusho39 2 years ago 7
Fundamentalists fear Darwinism as a bugaboo undermining 'objective morality' - but what 'morality'?
The 'morality' of death threats, perjury and deception. No surprise. They're just practicing what their god teaches: see Numbers 31:17 ('kill...the little ones..,' keep alive for yourselves all the young girls...') and Hosea 13:16 ('...their infants shall be dashed to pieces and their women with child ripped open...').
With 'objective morality' like theirs, I'm proud to call myself an atheist.
ssatrofma 2 years ago 4
I know, the irony of religious morality.
Freshhhhh1982 2 years ago
wahoo! intelligence 3 delusional nutcase bible bashing ignorant immoral hicks 0!
leighsm 2 years ago
Buckingham is a vile and disgusting human being. What an asshole. Burning down a child's painting just because it didn't fit his own personal beliefs? How selfish can you get? If there is a God, he's the one going to hell.
TheDarkKnight987 2 years ago 8
"I think he went to clown college... or else he went to law school and slept during the constitution classes"! What an arrogant ignoramus Buckingham is!
vp1981ad 2 years ago 6
If this continues to be a debate, this trial will be excellent support AGAINST creationism, ID, and whatever other label that is slapped on a purely religious concept. Until they start to act like scientists and come up some testable evidence to suggest Earth was effected by some kind of designer they'll never be taken seriously, and in that respect it'd have to be a secular designer anyways which wouldn't prove God but aliens.
Deioth 3 years ago 4
One problem. If it's panspermia (aliens), where did the aliens come from? You still end up with the same debate.
wormbaby79 2 years ago 4
A big difference between a god and an alien that aliens are phisical beings and not imagined.
IF aliens would be the answer for Earth's evolution that wouldn't falsify evolution at all, just expand its time-limit and place abiogenesis to another planet - not to fairytales.
gagnashdiak 2 years ago 5
This comment has received too many negative votes show
you can tell by the way this is made that its bias, and it favored one worldview
DeJay14 3 years ago
It favors SCIENCE. Creationism is NOT and will NEVER BE science!!!
ZigZaggityWW 3 years ago 10
no living christian has any grounds to draw the favoritism card over anyone when this topic is at table, because they themselves will tolerate only their own view to exist. Christians are scared of abiogenesis because it hints our ancestors might have been black folks. not too suprising the biggest supporters of IDiotism are almost all from .. yep.. u.s of a.
somberlight 2 years ago 6
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this is completely bias
DeJay14 3 years ago
how?
kwballzandy 3 years ago 7
"this is completely bias"
"how?"
Easy they lost the trial, most of the ID people decided not to even testify because they were getting their asses handed to them. Its bias because they lost, and people do not like to lose.
thzorg 2 years ago 7
Death threats!? In an era where theists are trying to distance themselves from Islamic extremists. Dispicable.
Golkarian 3 years ago 10
Phew`, finally got here. This video is going to be in my midterm on Mon. Thanks astev! Nice job.
cazofy 3 years ago 4
This is one of the best videos on you tube. I can't believe this trial took place in 2005. It almost sounds like 1890 or some later century!
HalfDeath13 3 years ago 7
a very similar trial accrued in the late 80's in the USA and 71' in great Britain
amichak123 3 years ago 5
I watched this series from start to end -- extremely well made, and I am thrilled to see Michael Behe being destroyed at the witness stand.
yellowlynx 3 years ago 10
One of the best broadcasts on YT and a triumph for common sense. How much longer are these biggoted, religious arseholes going to deny the truth.
Hitchens was right -religion poisons everything, especially the minds of the pathetically inadequte idiots who subscribe to whats no more than a death cult.
Regards from England
HURUHRA 3 years ago 42
Creationists got their asses handed to them!!! Yes, I say CREATIONISTS, because THATS WHAT ID SUPPORTERS ARE!!! I don't know how *anyone* can say that they aren't the same damn thing!
ZigZaggityWW 3 years ago 12
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Im not a creationist congrats youve been disproven
DeJay14 3 years ago
Um.... ok?
If you believe in ID, you are a Creationist; that simple.
ZigZaggityWW 3 years ago 8
This happened in 2005? Jeez, it sounds like something from the 1850's or something! "Intelligent Design"?? Haha! :)
winterstellar 3 years ago 9
what gets to me is that these people making the death threats against the judge are probably christians.Jesus preached peace and yet for most christians that seems only to apply to others and not themselves.I get the feeling that most leaders of the church think they are above the teachings of a book that they profess to be the ultimate word of God
ranchai100 3 years ago 8
Excellent work NOVA, Plantiffs, Legal Team, Parents, Students, Scientists, Teachers, New School Board, NCSE, Volunteers, Mr. Jones & open minded and reasonable Dover residents.
DaxxFinsta 3 years ago 5
ID avocates got their asses handed to them.
bigfilmhat 3 years ago 5
At 3:19 that is one of the most vile things i've ever heard anyone say..
It's basically a threat..
Still i guess religion is based on threats..
DoubleIntruder 3 years ago 5
One of the problems that this case highlights is the existence of school boards. Only in the US to my knowledge do these things exist: they give far too much power to idiots with an axe to grind. Just look at those two main creationist clowns on the board: what on earth qualifies them to make decisions about the education of the children in their community? And how much money did they cost their school district?
America get rid of school boards.
rotcafarg 3 years ago 3
They are in the UK too. And it's the same situation as in the USA, just not as mature and virile.
lolgepwnt 3 years ago
I have been a big supporter of the Occam's Razor approach to religion (though perhaps Einstein's Razor is more fitting). However I read a comment a few weeks back that made me laugh; perhaps a god only rewards those courageous enough to challenge convention and who seek knowledge through the evidence. In other words, trusting the physical explanations we can create even though they would be fabricated by a higher power, is infinitely more beneficial than simple blind faith.
lolgepwnt 3 years ago
We need to send that judge some love mail.
zzaaaid 3 years ago 4
Pft, creationists don't need a court of law to show they are correct. All they need is some votebots and too much free time to reiterate the same FAILED examples of design that, well, FAILED.
lolgepwnt 3 years ago
tl:dr
Remind me again of all the evidence for intelligent design, preferably up to date research.
The trial wasn't about if Evolution is science, it was about if intelligent design = creationism = religion. I think you already know the outcome.
Id is religion, and religion is not science; I can draw a venn diagram if you want.
Most of the world doesn't believe in your god so stop trying to convince them one youtube comment at a time.
lolgepwnt 3 years ago
Predetermination leads to logical fallacies.
You seem to be still confused about what is evidence. There is no evidence for intelligent design yet, and anything that was claimed to be has been irrefutably disproved.
However, there is plenty of evidence for Evolution. Like any good scientific theory, experimental predictions can be made and results have reinforced knowledge and confidence.
But if you are so anti-science, how about leaving the internet or just quitting irl.
lolgepwnt 3 years ago
The real evidence was simply not BELIEVED. You can't refute the evidence of intelligent design because it is still here. Intelligent design will always be here with us as long as we are here because that is what makes us what we are.
Don't kid yourself. There is no evidence for evolution. It is nothing more than wishful thinking, imagination, speculation and conjecture. No science. Science is observable like intelligent design is observable.
Seekmosttoprophesy 3 years ago