I met this man at the annual meeting of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society. A few speakers at the conference took some cheap shots about "racist" Republicans. I was ashamed.
@sloanishy It may be the case that you can't ascertain given numbers alone the range of expertise on either side of a debate which is why I said I was making no more than a guess. However there is plenty of sociological data that would make somebody who endorsed creationist thinking over scientific theory as being less likely to have stayed on in higher education so it reasonable to assume that more people liking this video on a university site as being as self selecting academics.
@sloanishy It may be the case that you can't ascertain given numbers alone the range of expertise on either side of a debate which is why I said I was making no more than a guess. However there is plenty of sociological data that would make somebody who endorsed creationist thinking over scientific theory as being less likely to have stayed on in higher education so it reasonable to assume that more people liking this video on a university site as being as self selecting academic.
@sloanishy Because the audience is self selecting and the content is not packaged as a Fox News sound bite but as an educational piece which would probably put off a lot of people with those views. But thats a guess.
@bingofingers, if the audience is self selecting in these types of issues, its hard then to determine the side which is in the majority with the weight of numbers and the side which is in the minority claiming the weight of the most "educated" experts. Or as it seems in this issue, who has the majority of the most educated experts' agreement. And in such case, John Jones is in line with the norm, the establishment, the position with positive reinforcement.
One of his main points is that a majority believe in creation, and he was therefore standing for the rule of law against the masses. Why is there 111 likes to 2 dislikes of this video?
Maximum respect to Judge Jones but let's be honest here: any rational unbiased judge should have found that the attempt made by the school board to get ID into the school science curriculum was unconstitutional. ID is clearly not science and as such could never have been acceptable. Only a partisan judge with a Christian agenda sympathetic to ID would have ruled in its favour. Judge Jones merely made the only decision possible, but we should be happy he did!
His quotation from 'Democracy in America' is profound. Democracy is a system that depends upon an educated electorate, and it's all too apparent that the US media has mastered the art of peddling ignorance and bias to the population.
The US Constitution was top notch based on the advanced top PHILOSOPHICAL ideas of it's time. Though when the law says every american can own a gun I think the framers meant MUSKETS!!!
They meant military-grade weapons. The idea was that should the government ever become as unbearably dictatorial as the nations America established the constitution to prevent it from becoming, the citizenry could overthrow the government and begin anew.
all this fight over evo vs creatard is a defining moment for US history or of the world in the far distant futur this age will be documented in historical "databases" as HISTORICAL
I'm glad he weighted his decision on this matter not because of his beliefs, but because of the evidence (or the lack of it in ID's case) on the Dover trial, as this was the pillar that withstood the brutal attacks enforced by religious biggots.
That's exactly right. Judge Jones did an excellent job setting forth the profound dishonesty of the creation/intelligent design proponents and showed them to be the liars they are. Keep them out of our classrooms, and don't ever leave them alone with your children.
Walter Cronkite was a recipient of the Norman Cousin's award for world governance. He did not believe in the sovereignty of the United States. He advocated planetary government.
Darwinists employ Orwellian NEWSPEAK to pervert the language so naturally, as in "1984," anyone who questions philosophical science's orthodoxy is deemed mentally unbalanced. Stalin & Mao had "re-education" camps to deal with dissenters.
Obviously there are many similarities betwixt simians & humans: fingers, toes, mammae, circulatory & endocrine systems, digestive & excretory functions and on & on. Similarly there are innumerable traits common betwixt humans & equines; between maggots & earthworms and so forth. A vivid imagination, which is the lynch pin upon which human evolutionary conjecture hinges upon, is a requisite for anyone who has a pathological need "to believe."
Obviously there are many similarities betwixt simians & humans: fingers, toes, mammae, circulatory & endocrine systems, digestive & excretory functions and on & on. Similarly there are innumerable traits common betwixt humans & equines; between maggots & earthworms and so forth. A vivid imagination, which is the lynch pin upon which human evolutionary conjecture hinges upon, is a requisite for anyone who has a pathological need "to believe."
as an aside- i'm not even to the judge yet, but the number of times these intro speakers say 'um' is making it hard to stay focussed. this makes the intro seem much less professional and expert, like they're almost winging it.
I thought I was being overly critical when I noticed how weak the intro was. I understand this woman is not a professional speaker, but the standards should be higher. It takes away from what follows.
While i agree with his decision here there is one thing i would love to ask him. As opposed to everybody else he is addressing,I would like to ask him; Is it not scientific to teach that Darwin's has some factual scientific deficiencies? Secondly,would it be constitutional in his opinion,to teach intelligent design as a part of a history or social studies class that teaches about various religions?My science teacher taught me that if I was Catholic I had to deny evolution occurred.That is wrong
Your teacher is uninformed regarding the Catholic stance on evolution. The pope has officially stated that evolution is not incompatible with church teaching. Contrary to common belief, the Catholic Church does not promote a strictly literal interpretation of the bible, as do some fundamentalists.
Why would it not be constitutional do discuss ID in a social studies class?
Yes I know my teacher was/is wrong(I am Catholic). That was my point (sorry if i was not clear). I also agree with you and that was my other point-according to the judge ID should be permissible to teach in social studies. Further, I think it needs to be taught given the common incorrect belief that Catholics cannot accept evolution.
We don't waste time talking about fairy tales. If you believe creationism should be taught in science class than you must also teach about the three little pigs in our building construction class, Jack and the Beanstalk for agriculture, Little Red Riding Hood for economics, and the Muffin Man in our cooking class.
Similarities:
Talking pigs=Talking Bush
Beanstalk to cloud fortress=Chariot to cloud fortress
jwil2570 i certainly didn't say i thought "creationism" should be taught in science class. the point is science class should teach that random mutation and survival of the fittest are scientifically very weak. therefore science still has much to learn in order to explain evolution. finally, you should know that the Pope recognizes evolution (just not that evolution disproves the existence of God)
Random mutation and survival of the fittest/most capable are the theorized mechanisms by which evolution occurs.
Even if these ever increasing credible theories were weak, it wouldn't go against the evidence that evolution actually occurs. Suppose we arrive at a scene of a car accident. Cars are mangled and thrown about. From what we see, we can't actually tell how it happened. Does this mean we should question whether the accident actually occurred?
Your right, evolution doesn't disprove a god. That's a silly myth that keeps creationism alive in the first place. I'm an atheist, but that doesn't mean I cling to false ideas that would somehow increase the credibility of my own beliefs. If god does exist, evolution is the mechanism by which she created us.
God leaves fingerprints in his work. We call it evidence. Jwil2570
So Jwil2570, we agree: Science proves evolution actually occurs. How it happens is the work that current and future scientists still have yet to figure out. While I am not an atheist like you, I don't cling to false ideas to increase credibility of my own beliefs. It is just that I am comfortable with both science and God without feeling one must choose either / or.
Well, I wish the majority of theist had your insight. Although I say I'm an atheist, I don't claim there absolutely is no god. I just lean towards the possibility of there not more than there is. Know what I'm saying? Science pretty much does disprove all the organized religion that I know of. If god exist, he is the ultimate scientist. Therefore, I think that we should feel obligated to learn his works in a scientific manner. Theist=open mindedness / Religious=Empty mindedness
"random mutation and survival of the fittest are scientifically very weak"
Natural selection is not the entirety of biological evolution, nor is it in any way "weak." Making that claim indicates to me that you just haven't done the math.
The decision of that case was an important step in the right direction. If the fundies had gotten their way it would have been a step back towards the pre-enlightenment period and we would have eventually become a society full of hive-minded, ignorant people if we'd kept giving ground.
The horror christians bring upon the world never cease to amaze me.
reanimated6 3 weeks ago
Death threats from Christian? surely not, you jest me, good sir ;)
Nevangelus 3 weeks ago
this is worth watching...
muhammadzahmad 1 month ago
nice video.. interesting...
thegreeensky 1 month ago
Stupid people shouldn't have a say in educational policies.
TAz69x 4 months ago 5
I met this man at the annual meeting of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society. A few speakers at the conference took some cheap shots about "racist" Republicans. I was ashamed.
darwinkilledgod 5 months ago
A highly educational and informative lecture! Thanks very much for posting this video.
imrich6 6 months ago 3
@sloanishy It may be the case that you can't ascertain given numbers alone the range of expertise on either side of a debate which is why I said I was making no more than a guess. However there is plenty of sociological data that would make somebody who endorsed creationist thinking over scientific theory as being less likely to have stayed on in higher education so it reasonable to assume that more people liking this video on a university site as being as self selecting academics.
bingofingers 6 months ago
@sloanishy It may be the case that you can't ascertain given numbers alone the range of expertise on either side of a debate which is why I said I was making no more than a guess. However there is plenty of sociological data that would make somebody who endorsed creationist thinking over scientific theory as being less likely to have stayed on in higher education so it reasonable to assume that more people liking this video on a university site as being as self selecting academic.
bingofingers 6 months ago
@sloanishy Because the audience is self selecting and the content is not packaged as a Fox News sound bite but as an educational piece which would probably put off a lot of people with those views. But thats a guess.
bingofingers 6 months ago 2
@bingofingers, if the audience is self selecting in these types of issues, its hard then to determine the side which is in the majority with the weight of numbers and the side which is in the minority claiming the weight of the most "educated" experts. Or as it seems in this issue, who has the majority of the most educated experts' agreement. And in such case, John Jones is in line with the norm, the establishment, the position with positive reinforcement.
sloanishy 6 months ago
One of his main points is that a majority believe in creation, and he was therefore standing for the rule of law against the masses. Why is there 111 likes to 2 dislikes of this video?
sloanishy 6 months ago
@sloanishy
Maybe the 70 minutes length?
I guess creationists watching this quit before he gets to the Terri Schiavo case..
I've noticed the other long video's in the suggestions >>>
get few dislikes as well. Maybe someone should make a study of video length vs dis-/likes for both evolution and creationism vids. ;-)
Belgianmeth 6 months ago
He was appointed by Bush. The best thing he ever did.
Jussimania 7 months ago
Maximum respect to Judge Jones but let's be honest here: any rational unbiased judge should have found that the attempt made by the school board to get ID into the school science curriculum was unconstitutional. ID is clearly not science and as such could never have been acceptable. Only a partisan judge with a Christian agenda sympathetic to ID would have ruled in its favour. Judge Jones merely made the only decision possible, but we should be happy he did!
Tapiola2007 9 months ago
Cameras in the U.S. Supreme Court would reveal Clarence Thomas sleeping during arguments.
bburkie55 9 months ago
His quotation from 'Democracy in America' is profound. Democracy is a system that depends upon an educated electorate, and it's all too apparent that the US media has mastered the art of peddling ignorance and bias to the population.
GrandSupremeDaddyo 9 months ago 4
The US Constitution was top notch based on the advanced top PHILOSOPHICAL ideas of it's time. Though when the law says every american can own a gun I think the framers meant MUSKETS!!!
FreeeeS 9 months ago
@FreeeeS
They meant military-grade weapons. The idea was that should the government ever become as unbearably dictatorial as the nations America established the constitution to prevent it from becoming, the citizenry could overthrow the government and begin anew.
rkyeun 9 months ago
my fave books on FB are The Selfish Gene and The U.S. Constitution
FreeeeS 9 months ago
I thought the Russian judge had tremendous insight. I wish they mentioned his name.
Newenlightenmentnow 9 months ago
Hey Republicans.
This is an example of a rational conservative who conducts himself with dignity. Take a lesson out of his book for once.
HiveDes 9 months ago 5
this man is the reason why our system is better then most . . . . its not perfect but at least we can do something.
keggerous 9 months ago
all this fight over evo vs creatard is a defining moment for US history or of the world in the far distant futur this age will be documented in historical "databases" as HISTORICAL
FreeeeS 9 months ago
3:35 .. even though it wasnt what she meant to say, I think most of us could agree that it was as equally acceptable statement.
ID =! Education
davelantor 9 months ago
LOL, Judge Jones is COMPLETELY talking about Behe at ~54:00+, isn't he?!
xD
TAz69x 9 months ago
Judge Jones looks like JT Walsh
sinmantky 10 months ago
People like Judge Jones are the pillars of American values and we should all be proud of him.
MrJdgr8 1 year ago 4
@MrJdgr8 american values? you mean television and potato chips?
Meskiagkasher 9 months ago
Judge Jones is an amazing man. I want his autograph!
=3
TAz69x 1 year ago 6
What I like about this man is that after hearing all this I still have no idea what his own personal beliefs are. He is all about the law.
Guitcad1 1 year ago 4
starts at 7:00
williamcardno 1 year ago
The fact, that Judge John E. Jones and his family received death threats because of his decision, speaks volumes of the mindset of religious nutbags.
leungchaan 1 year ago 10
This man is what our founders truly had in mind when they established the judicial branch of our government.
Great man.
Floridanon407 1 year ago 4
"... Intelligent Design as an alternative to education." I think that was more correct than as an alternative to evolution.
TheMrDeist 1 year ago 3
My name is Judge.
quidproquo2004 1 year ago
Who da man! "J.JEJ da 3rd" da man!!
temporaldisplacement 1 year ago
id as an alternative to education. exactly.
tyrannosaurusinf14 1 year ago
lol "an alternative to education"
HamsterFueledRocket 2 years ago 2
A true inspiration of a man.
I'm glad he weighted his decision on this matter not because of his beliefs, but because of the evidence (or the lack of it in ID's case) on the Dover trial, as this was the pillar that withstood the brutal attacks enforced by religious biggots.
xXshinzoXx 2 years ago 32
@xXshinzoXx:
That's exactly right. Judge Jones did an excellent job setting forth the profound dishonesty of the creation/intelligent design proponents and showed them to be the liars they are. Keep them out of our classrooms, and don't ever leave them alone with your children.
ccp5150 1 year ago 3
He has to be the next judge appointed to the supreme court
JBeneforti 2 years ago 6
this is way too much discussion
Religious fucks are pathetic stupid morons who are allergic to serious thought, or too weak to deal with reality in a grown up , responsible way.
end of discussion
nekftw 2 years ago
Don't generalize religious individuals, many of them aren't like that.
IgnosticView101 2 years ago 3
This comment has received too many negative votes show
...because people who resort to the insults of their five year old selves are so much more grown up and responsible, right?
farsight001 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Walter Cronkite was a recipient of the Norman Cousin's award for world governance. He did not believe in the sovereignty of the United States. He advocated planetary government.
SufferInJuly 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Darwinists employ Orwellian NEWSPEAK to pervert the language so naturally, as in "1984," anyone who questions philosophical science's orthodoxy is deemed mentally unbalanced. Stalin & Mao had "re-education" camps to deal with dissenters.
SufferInJuly 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Obviously there are many similarities betwixt simians & humans: fingers, toes, mammae, circulatory & endocrine systems, digestive & excretory functions and on & on. Similarly there are innumerable traits common betwixt humans & equines; between maggots & earthworms and so forth. A vivid imagination, which is the lynch pin upon which human evolutionary conjecture hinges upon, is a requisite for anyone who has a pathological need "to believe."
procommenter 2 years ago
the fact is...there is at least some evidence for evolution and absolutely NONE for god...just think
EndCatProductions 2 years ago 3
ID as an alternative to education ( nice one prof ! )
ilikezappa 2 years ago 49
Plus the fact there is a HUGE amount of evidence across multiple areas of science and medicine.
Supporting evidence in geology, paleontology etc.
ISLAM4THICKONES 2 years ago 2
lol, I don't think 'some' really does the justice of the evidence of evolution LOL. Considering it's verified throughout multiple scientific fields.
Entertainmentwf 2 years ago
Oh what? Educated people are educated people. What are the chances?
jwil2570 2 years ago
Obviously there are many similarities betwixt simians & humans: fingers, toes, mammae, circulatory & endocrine systems, digestive & excretory functions and on & on. Similarly there are innumerable traits common betwixt humans & equines; between maggots & earthworms and so forth. A vivid imagination, which is the lynch pin upon which human evolutionary conjecture hinges upon, is a requisite for anyone who has a pathological need "to believe."
procommenter 2 years ago
[theory : 5 : an unproved assumption : CONJECTURE, SPECULATION, SUPPOSITION {her ~ that the house was once occupied by spies}]
SufferInJuly 2 years ago
wrong definition of theory lol...use the scientific theory definition for theory... the other one is interchangeable to conjecture.
Entertainmentwf 2 years ago
thanks for posting this- it was worth the hour.
d33pthought 3 years ago
as an aside- i'm not even to the judge yet, but the number of times these intro speakers say 'um' is making it hard to stay focussed. this makes the intro seem much less professional and expert, like they're almost winging it.
d33pthought 3 years ago
I thought I was being overly critical when I noticed how weak the intro was. I understand this woman is not a professional speaker, but the standards should be higher. It takes away from what follows.
williamthomaspowell 3 years ago
While i agree with his decision here there is one thing i would love to ask him. As opposed to everybody else he is addressing,I would like to ask him; Is it not scientific to teach that Darwin's has some factual scientific deficiencies? Secondly,would it be constitutional in his opinion,to teach intelligent design as a part of a history or social studies class that teaches about various religions?My science teacher taught me that if I was Catholic I had to deny evolution occurred.That is wrong
billnj1444 3 years ago
Your teacher is uninformed regarding the Catholic stance on evolution. The pope has officially stated that evolution is not incompatible with church teaching. Contrary to common belief, the Catholic Church does not promote a strictly literal interpretation of the bible, as do some fundamentalists.
Why would it not be constitutional do discuss ID in a social studies class?
williamthomaspowell 3 years ago
Yes I know my teacher was/is wrong(I am Catholic). That was my point (sorry if i was not clear). I also agree with you and that was my other point-according to the judge ID should be permissible to teach in social studies. Further, I think it needs to be taught given the common incorrect belief that Catholics cannot accept evolution.
billnj1444 3 years ago
Surprisingly, George Bush admitted on Nightline the other day that evolution is not incompatible with his biblical beliefs.
williamthomaspowell 3 years ago
"Surprisingly, George Bush admitted on Nightline the other day that evolution is not incompatible with his biblical beliefs. "
Maybe so, but he certainly personally espouses ID and supports its teaching in science classes.
Man, am I glad he's gone.
FreePlay 3 years ago 2
We don't waste time talking about fairy tales. If you believe creationism should be taught in science class than you must also teach about the three little pigs in our building construction class, Jack and the Beanstalk for agriculture, Little Red Riding Hood for economics, and the Muffin Man in our cooking class.
Similarities:
Talking pigs=Talking Bush
Beanstalk to cloud fortress=Chariot to cloud fortress
Bears living in a house=Man living in a whale
Muffin Man=I don't know the muffin man
jwil2570 3 years ago 3
jwil2570 i certainly didn't say i thought "creationism" should be taught in science class. the point is science class should teach that random mutation and survival of the fittest are scientifically very weak. therefore science still has much to learn in order to explain evolution. finally, you should know that the Pope recognizes evolution (just not that evolution disproves the existence of God)
billnj1444 3 years ago
Random mutation and survival of the fittest/most capable are the theorized mechanisms by which evolution occurs.
Even if these ever increasing credible theories were weak, it wouldn't go against the evidence that evolution actually occurs. Suppose we arrive at a scene of a car accident. Cars are mangled and thrown about. From what we see, we can't actually tell how it happened. Does this mean we should question whether the accident actually occurred?
Theories and evidence are different things.
jwil2570 3 years ago
billnj1444
Your right, evolution doesn't disprove a god. That's a silly myth that keeps creationism alive in the first place. I'm an atheist, but that doesn't mean I cling to false ideas that would somehow increase the credibility of my own beliefs. If god does exist, evolution is the mechanism by which she created us.
God leaves fingerprints in his work. We call it evidence. Jwil2570
jwil2570 3 years ago
So Jwil2570, we agree: Science proves evolution actually occurs. How it happens is the work that current and future scientists still have yet to figure out. While I am not an atheist like you, I don't cling to false ideas to increase credibility of my own beliefs. It is just that I am comfortable with both science and God without feeling one must choose either / or.
billnj1444 3 years ago
Well, I wish the majority of theist had your insight. Although I say I'm an atheist, I don't claim there absolutely is no god. I just lean towards the possibility of there not more than there is. Know what I'm saying? Science pretty much does disprove all the organized religion that I know of. If god exist, he is the ultimate scientist. Therefore, I think that we should feel obligated to learn his works in a scientific manner. Theist=open mindedness / Religious=Empty mindedness
jwil2570 3 years ago
"If god does exist, evolution is the mechanism by which she created us."
Then God is just the universe, and there's no need to call it God or worship it.
FreePlay 3 years ago 2
"finally, you should know that the Pope recognizes evolution (just not that evolution disproves the existence of God)"
FYI, the official position of the Catholic church is that this is a lie perpetuated by the media, and that the church has never accepted evolution.
Not that a religious pontiff's acceptance of the truth is at all relevant.
FreePlay 3 years ago
"random mutation and survival of the fittest are scientifically very weak"
Natural selection is not the entirety of biological evolution, nor is it in any way "weak." Making that claim indicates to me that you just haven't done the math.
ulbh 2 years ago
i liked the story about the Russian Judge. interesting
hooah68 3 years ago
The decision of that case was an important step in the right direction. If the fundies had gotten their way it would have been a step back towards the pre-enlightenment period and we would have eventually become a society full of hive-minded, ignorant people if we'd kept giving ground.
federalD 3 years ago