Oh shit, Rob Sherman. I remember him. My dad used to always call him a jew just because he was so adamant about separation of church and state. I'm not sure if he was actually a good guy or not. He was, however, responsible for getting my home city to remove a cross off of the official seal.
Even if scientists are being black-listed for being creationists, I'm totally fine with that. It's like a medical doctor being fired for thinking that using leaches to cure cancer is a reasonable medical practice.
@Pulpgimp Yes, exactly. Science isn't biased against ID, it's biased against unsupported claims. There isn't a scientist alive that wouldn't LOVE to disprove evolution, or prove God, creationism or ID. They would be famous, mega rich and considered the Einstein of the their time. Oh, and a Nobel Prize or two. Who would give that up?
Lol, the music is enough to void any point that this video even tried to make. Well done sir, this is a flopping failure. Go ahead, get vicious with me because the more defensive someone becomes about their "truth," is actually more than likely because they're hiding an untruth.
@BashYouLongtime I'm sorry you don't like electronica or punk music, but as this video has absolutely nothing to do with music, your complaint and claim that it "voids any point" is irrelevant and wrong. Your tone is already very defensive, and using your comment here, I guess you're hiding an untruth?
@brittanythecaptain No, it completely does because it gives me a background to how 'professional' or 'unproffesional' you are to make this video. The fact is, the point you're trying to prove would require much bigger production, and by failing to do that, and trying to make a 'relevent point,' but by using this type of music? There's no way it can be taken seriously. I'm not defensive over anything right now, I'm just telling you the facts-this video is just stupid, from any perspective.
@BashYouLongtime You're not a professional film critic, and I'm not a professional filmmaker. These are all moot points, I'm afraid. You're arguing from a stylistic approach, and that's irrelevant to the point of the video. There's no need to make a big, dramatic presentation to show that Expelled was full of lies.
Actually, I graduated from Wesleyan University as a film major. But thanks anyways. How can you just prove that a film was full of lies? Aren't most films anyways? They're all skewed. I'm just saying, literally, ALL of your efforts in this video are futile and will have little effect swaying anyone (except those who already take the stance that you have, which actually isn't swaying them since they already share it) because all films are biased one way. Am I full of lies, too, then? Think.
@BashYouLongtime That doesn't make you a film critic. If you've watched the movie, and then this video, you'll understand how it was full of lies. If you're not swayed, then I guess you just don't care about logic. Plenty of people who were otherwise undecided have seen this video and realized that what Ben Stein did was untruthful.
@brittanythecaptain Are you shitting me? Wow, clearly you have no right to try and debase my statements. Talk to me when you graduate film school, bitch boy. Holy shit you're so fucking dumb
@BashYouLongtime Really? You're coming back after almost a month? And you call me a boy, when it's very clear that my name is Brittany? You claim you went to graduate film school when this is the internet, and anyone can make up anything? And then you call ME "fucking dumb"? Wow. I'm floored by your sheer idiocy. Slow clap for the imbecile here!
@spacecoonass You know what? You're a troll. You haven't done any actual debating; you've just been crapping all over this video without ever actually saying anything worthwhile. You just like to insult, and that's how you try to "win" an argument. You're nothing but an idiot, and you have hereby been blocked. Have a nice life, you idiot.
@Blazen1212: Didn't realize you were concerned about Ben STILLER, or that he even had a position on intelligent design. ROFL. And actually, the only political thing I'm concerned about is when people politicize the intelligent design versus evolution debate to the point where people are fired from their jobs on that basis. I actually accept special evolution as the most probable hypothesis for how we got from single-celled organisms to where we are.
People go out of their way to try to "scientificize" their damned beliefs. These people are weaklings who need to pretend that they are going to live forever. Furthermore, they want everyone else to be helpless weaklings like them so they try to force their damned beliefs into any arena they can. They think they are "patriots" or "soldiers for jesus" but what they are is pathetic.
The intensity of this attack on Ben Stein is uncalled-for. Stein himself is probably the nicest guy in conservatism, and a very articulate spokesman for tolerance (not the political correctness sort, but really reaching out to people and embracing their differences). Stein responded to the intolerance of the media and large parts of the scientific and academic community to views that may be wrong, but deserve an equal chance to be heard. THIS is the response. It makes Stein's point for him.
@spacecoonass What's so nice about Stein? The fact that he thinks evolution inspired Nazi Germany, the parts where he edits interviews to make Biology professors looks stupid, or is it the part where he lied about the movie, had liars in the movie, and had those liars talk about an untrue theory? ID had its equal chance to be heard. It's been refuted many, many times. Do scientists still cling to things that are obviously wrong? No. They move on. These people won't.
@spacecoonass You are such a moron. Ben Stein has been embarrased publicly time and time again by people such as Peter Schiff who call out his ignorance. This film is pure propaganda in order to push a conservative and religious point of view. This is not only appauling but also disengenuous on every single level. The mere fact that you are not only deffending it but in fact buy into it shows that your are uninformed and hold a very low IQ. I will gladly debate you publicly on this issue.
@spacecoonass And please debate me on this so we can all laugh at you together. That is in fact if you very low IQ can handle forming concepts for about an hour. So if you want to get slapped right in your fucking mouth you know where to find me. Im sick of idiots like you who know nothing about science and only assert childish nonsense as if it was fact deserve to be put in your place. So bring it on you bitch!!
@Blazen1212 You've just shown how much of your thought process is based in reason and science - very, very little. Since I'm 6'2", strongly built and a veteran police officer, I think I'll take my chances on being able to twist your arm behind your back and frogwalk you to the door before your hand gets anywhere near my mouth. And as far as the name calling, I have a college degree with a strong minor in biotechnology. You seem to have majored in talking trash under the influence of meth.
So far, all the video "responses" I've seen to Ben Stein's documentary either (like the slick AAAS piece) avoid dealing with Stein's charges altogether and attempt to justify the treatment of ID advocates (most of whom I disagree with, too, but don't want to deprive of a living) on general grounds or weasel-word their "exposure" of individual cases with rhetoric that doesn't really dispute that these people lost their jobs for saying the "wrong thing" about evolution.
@spacecoonass This video DID talk about the claims made by the ID supporters in the movie. I'm not all for firing people, either, but a lot of these people simply were not fired.
@spacecoonass Dude. Honestly how blind can you really be. You are turning this into a political point completely out of left field. Ben Stiller has no credibility whatsoever. Everything he did in this movie was 100% disingenuous. If you do not believe me then you are simply dillusional. I cannot stress enough how much pure propaganda that this entire movie is. The saddest part is that the disinformation has worked on the sad souls such as yourself who believe this nonsense. Get educated!
@Blazen1212 Ben Stiller's a COMEDIAN. Ben STEIN is the man whose documentary is under discussion. If you stepped away from the meth pipe long enough to stop ranting and read the discussion here, you'd know that. The more comments you type here, the more you reveal yourself as an educational failure and a raving lunatic.
This is a bitchy, abusive, pathetic attempt to attack Ben Stein after he assaulted one of liberalism's sacred cows. The "explanations" brittany the captain offers are very weak ones - (translations of one example from BS to English: "Oh, this lady supported ID and lost her paid job in mainstream journalism, but it's all good - her old paper lets her publish a guest column now and then and she lives on the royalties of a book and sell the odd piece to Weekly Standard"). Hateful and pathetic.
@spacecoonass This is a bitchy, abusive, pathetic attempt to attack those who support evolution. I never said anything about Pamela losing her job- she didn't lose her job; that's the point. She said she was fired in 2000, but was with them in 2002 when SHE left. Furthermore, she had claimed to be blacklisted. Do you know what that means? It means that NO ONE would accept her work- not even as a guest columnist. You are ignorant.
@spacecoonass I'm actually a pretty open-minded person. That's why I'm a liberal, dumbass. If you want to say I'm narrow-minded because I don't put any stock in an unscientific load of bullshit; then whatever. But that's not what being narrow-minded is about. I don't care if these people in the video believe in ID; I just don't want them trying to teach it as scientific fact/lying about how they were fired and blacklisted when they obviously weren't. Go learn some reading comprehension.
@spacecoonass Again you havent addressed any point that I have made. This is because you are an ignorant fuck that worries more about wanting to be the spelling police you fucking bitch. I attack ignorance anywhere I see it. If you dont like this, or you think the substance of my actual points were unfair, I will gladly debate you on these issues over webcam so I can slap you right in your fuckin mouth for being such a fuckin idiot. Your a joke who knows nothing about science!!
@spacecoonass Wow. Honestly you are so delusional that you are forever hopeless. First will say that you have a very low IQ!! 2nd if you want to debate me on this in person we will be able to do so quite easily over webcam.Then we can post it as a response to this video so I can show everyone how much of a moron you are. Third what is your academic background. I have 2 Masters degress in Economics and probabiliy theory. You sir are an IGNORANT FUCK with no grounds to comment on anything!
@Blazen1212 You don't write like someone with two Master's degrees. I hold a BA in Technical Writing with strong minors in chemistry, mathematics and biomedical engineering. Your writing skills are abysmal and reflect your general poverty of thought, your high level of hatred, and general lack of reflection on what it is you're writing about. I'll put my academic transcripts up versus yours - those "Master's degrees" are as real as your other qualifications on this subject.
@spacecoonass So until then SHUT THE FUCK UP!!! Your done. You are not smart enough to understand any of this nor do you have the background to be taken seriously. Please let people who know what they are talking about handle this. In fact the lack of education you hold on this issue is in fact the reason that NOBODY CARES WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY!! YOU AND I BOTH KNOW THAT YOU ARE IRRELEVANT TO ANYBODY WHO MATTERS!!! YOU HAVE A MEANINGLESS EXISTENCE AND YOU FUCKIN KNOW IT!!!!
If YouTube actually paid attention to the posts here, you'd have been banned a while back. You're an abusive, toilet-mouthed idiot. And my academic background qualifies me to comment on technical aspects of the likelihood of random synthesis of long chain biopolymers more than your background in economics. (By the way, I got A's in every college course in economics I ever took. What did you make in organic chemistry, thermodynamics of living systems, and physical chemistry?)
@serinthor actually it said "darwinistic behaviour" which dawkins has even admitted is something found in the holocaust. He does however defend himself as saying this behaviour is not what we should follow
unbelievable, how much they cry 'persecution, you're persecuting me for being a christian' and then they get people expelled from schools, cause them to lose their jobs, murder them... for not being christian
I'm not religious and I'm not very convinced by ID at all, but I'm annoyed at the whining by Dawkins and Shermer that they were tricked into being interviewed for the film under false pretences. Hypocrites! There are many examples of Skeptical agents infiltrating non-Skeptical institutions and doing the exact same thing, EG: Penn and Teller. Some, like Derren Brown, even pose as mediums and astrologers etc.
I was looking forward to seeing this film and hearing the arguments, but 10 mins on Google told me it was all so much crap. How disappointing. Ben Stein is obviously an intelligent man - how could he get duped into fronting this nonsense? The opening Nazi images were discraceful. I haven't watched the last half - is it worth me even bothering?
You must be joking. This video is just one huge lie. The evolutionists looked for a reason other than ID to expell Mr. Gonzales. That way it wouldn't look controversial. What about David Coppedge? I'm sure you'll try to find something minuscule to justify his treatment too.
I have to watch this damn movie during religion class... As I go to a catholic school even though im athiest, but WOW I felt like just falling on the floor laughing my ass off when it tried to say how evolution caused holocaust... Even though this movie is incredibly boring, i find it mildly entertaining trying to find as many things wrong with it as I can...
Ben Stein's documentary is meant to showcase a badly dressed man. Sneakers with suits? I mean, the guy's a grown man. Doesn't he own a proper pair of shoes?
Disclaimer...i am an atheist. I have no reason to doubt evolution. 'Expelled' was a load of bull, clearly 'designed' (ha!) to misrepresent facts, and tug at heartstrings with inter-cut shots of the Berlin Wall and Nazi Germany.
BUT...at least one thing in Brittany's video is inaccurate. Ben Stein NEVER claimed that evolution led to Nazi Germany/Holocaust. He claimed that the THEORY of evolution INSPIRED Hitler. BIG DIFF.
In truth, evolution was Hitler's twisted JUSTIFICATION for eugenics.
@comiconline To be honest, it's been a very long time since I've watched Expelled, so I don't remember what it was that he said, but your claim seems fair enough. To be honest, what I said in the video and what you said here isn't that far enough. In fact, it's probably what I meant. ;)
@comiconline 1. You have a Bias 2. You look down on people that believe in God 3.Where did you get your info? 4. You can't prove that there isn't a God, people have been trying for a really long time and failed, I tried and failed. 5. There is no such thing as an "atheist", wnhy would someone be so bent on proving that there is no deity, if one knows that there isn't? 6.You can't really find truth when you are stuck in a bias, you have to take yourself outside any bias to have clarity.
@Thefunkerful 1. So do you. 2. And? 3. I think that's the only intelligent statement you made in that post. 4. She doesn't need to, it's up to you to prove that YOUR particular flavor of deity exists in the first place. Prove that there aren't mile-long pink elephants on Pluto. You can't? Well, by your logic, I guess you have to believe they exist then! 5. You don't even know what the word atheist means. That's rather pathetic. 6. Pot meet kettle.
@comiconline But if you watch the 'movie' it clearly is implied that atheism and nazism are connected.the SS and Hitler were devout catholics,they had it written on their beltbuckles. It is obvious that hitler was racist,not an evolutionist. Wanting to wipe out a race of people is not evolution,evolution is a natural process,if I go and kill all dogs on the planet,that wasnt evolution,thats crazy to compare the two.
@comiconline evolution is just a fact of nature. If it makes certain things possible like eugenics is just tough luck I am afraid. You could say that combustion inspired rifles and rockets that are used in wars all over the world. In truth, it didn't inspire it, it just made it possible.
this video is a fail the colleges interviewed 2 admitted thats why they where fired so maybe your correctr on them but your wrong about 2 for sure thats how many of the colleges where interviewed and admitted to doing it
@prettybabs25 I've never heard anyone mentioning two colleges admitting to anything. All my information came from the Expelled Exposed website and was all very well documented.
@brittanythecaptain you should watch the documentary they did right to the camera as far as the website im not sure if they are right or not i need to find the site actually i was curious to find the other side of the argument
@prettybabs25 I have watched the documentary, and I still don't quite know what you're talking about. I have a link in the bar below my video that will take you to the site I used to get all my information.
@prettybabs25 you didnt watch the documentary or you missed apart because i witnessed with my own eyes their employers admitting thats why they where fired
I am a law student at Vermont Law School, one of the most liberal Law Schools in the country. I have taken quite a few science classes in my years of schooling and I have asked teachers with doctorates and master's degrees to provide me with some explanation of how the first living cell was born. I would also like to know where matter came from.
Since I have received no answer which employs established science I remain to this day an avid agnostic. Any theory explaining how life came from non-life is as faith-based and unscientific as the next, in my mind, and until I am convinced otherwise, I cannot tolerate the view that evolution is science and ID is not.
Also, in this video, many facts are stated. In law it is not enough to state a bold allegation, it must be supported with authority, i.e. the reference to the law being asserted. If your video presents "real" facts, then you should provide citations, so others can know where the facts come from.
@embertilton There is the fact of evolution and there is the the theory of evolution. The fact obviously addresses the fact that animals evolve, the theory addresses the mechanism by which animals evolve and is compounded by a ton of evidence from all life-sciences.
In order to be considered a theory, intelligent design would have to explain the mechanism by which animals where designed, how it was done and possibly the tools. Otherwise all you have is a bold assertion without hold in reality.
@Korkzor Thank you for the rational response. The theory is that life came about by the design of a supernatural force and has survived since that time, which in my view is no less rational than the big bang and primordial ooze theory which say the same thing without explaining how and leaves that question unanswered. Personally, I think both are faith-based and neither is pure science.
@embertilton Ah, the Big Bang. Well, that correlates to how the universe evolved a split second after it came in to excistance. You´d have to come up with a new theory in order to explain where the BB "came" from if such a thing is even possible. Much like you can explain how an apple tastes and how to cut it without knowing where it was grown, one can explain how the universe "evolved" without knowing where and how it was grown.
@embertilton The thing is, scientists have already produced self-replicating molecules under circumstances similar to what the primordial earth has looked like. The theory of abiogenesis actually does explain how life arose from the primordial soup, or makes an attempt to do so.
One can properly never "prove" that was the way it happened but if there is a natural explanation from which life can occur, which is the simplest one? Magic (not trying to mock you) or that natural process?
@Korkzor Do you have a citation to the scholarly document supporting the self-replicating molecule? This is another ID point. If scientists do create life someday in a test tube, that only shows it can happen with a designer. I am an agnostic, I will believe any peer-reviewed research data, I have not seen any yet showing...
..1) That life CAN come into existence on its own, 2) that life did so, 3) that a species can evolve into a new and entirely different one even over extended periods of time. My contention is that such data would be almost impossible to find and the study of the origin of man is in and of itself a faith-based endeavor. Until I am shown scientific data otherwise, I assert that neither theory holds more merit. As our conversation demonstrates, intelligent can differ.
I mostly care that one side of the debate is being silenced and that is not democracy or science. There is no proof beyond dispute, as of now, and people should not be so offended by other people's opposing beliefs.
You find the fingerprints on a knife in a house next to the body of a women. That women has been stabbed numerous times and is obviously killed by someone. You also find hair remnants from another person on the body. When checking the fingerprint you find it belongs to her neighour. (think of more evidence if need be)
Now, this neighbor claims an intelligent imposterer put all the evidence there but since they cannot reconstruct the even (duh)(cont..)
@Korkzor .. both sides deserver to be heard. He offers no proof of this intelligent imposterer and says he did it by magic. Would you believe him? Would you say him being guilty or the IP did it require equals amounts of faith?
Evolution is much like a detective trail. You follow the trail back in time, through rocks, genetics, archeology, fossils etc. etc. Then you arrive at 3.5 billion years ago and before that, there is nothing. Then you construct the environment on earth as you can (cont...)
You take this circumstances to your lab and find the results very, very good.
(nothing fossilised that is)
Now is the point where the murderer says, well, were you there? Did you see the murder?
Because the detective trail of evolution "stops" at the origin of life where fossils before that disappear, doesn´t mean we cannot figure it out, much like a murder investigation.
Check out CDK007´s origin vidoes: /watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg
@embertilton " My contention is that such data would be almost impossible to find and the study of the origin of man is in and of itself a faith-based endeavor." because you have not educated yourself on the matter. the data is not impossible to find, it is everywhere, and it is worked with every day. the time you take to write things like this, can be taken on learning basic scientific principles, and then reading scientific journals. not ID/creationist propaganda.
@embertilton even if that were so, maybe someone did kick start life on the planet. i wouldn´t deny it if there was actualy evidence of it. And then let evolution sit for 4 billion years or so. Not impossible, no. But evolution is a fact, regardless of how life started.
@Korkzor Anyways, this will be last comment on here. If you are interested in further discussion you can send me a private message with what would have been your next comment.
And don´t forget, you can explain how to cut, cook and eat an apple without knowing how and where the apple was grown. That´s what evolution does.
Abiogenesis explains how the apple was grown.
Big bang explains what happened to the universe after it came in to existance. Such are all scientific theorys designed.
@embertilton "Personally, I think both are faith-based and neither is pure science" again, the fact that you think evolutionary theory is "faith based" shows you have not educated yourself on the matter. you talking like this would be like me walking into an orchestra, knowing nothing about music, and demanding the conductor listen to my opinions about musical theory. i would be laughed out of the room, as should you, until you learn what it is you are speaking about.
@BillKiernan Again, I am not convinced by analogies and rhetoric, citations, citations citations, I can't say it enough. Cite to the peer-reviewed experiment or collection of data to make your case. Where's the Beef? So Bill? What is your degree in? I will listen to facts but commentary and insults are weak support for your faith-based beliefs. Evolution has never been documented or witnessed, there are no pictures or exhibits it is a religion. If I am wrong, let's see the citation.
@embertilton "Cite to the peer-reviewed experiment or collection of data to make your case." um, ok, the entire body of biological, and evolutionary biological, work in all peer reviewed scientific journals since darwins time. start from there and then get back to me. "lets see the citation" please. there's nothing we can show you to make you change your mind, you're wilfully ignorant and such people cannot be reached.
I think it is very good that you exposed many of the lies Ben Stein told in that film. If someone has a good idea that don't need to tell lies to get their ideas accepted. ID is weak and down right silly.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
Yes, but Richard Dawkins believes that the first cell was created by some far off aliens in another galaxy. His pretentious little face is indelibly etched into the annals of the web saying that he believed that an "intelligent signature" was quite probable. Stein nailed his sorry little ass. Dawkins and L. Ron Hubbard have a great deal in common!
@Wilhelm95070 Actually, that's not correct. Dawkins doesn't believe such things, and was simply trying to make the best possible case for ID, as asked by Ben Stein. But, by way of editing tricks a la Michael Moore, Dawkins was made to look like a fool.
It's not surprising then that real fools would think he believed such ridiculous things.
@Wilhelm95070 He only said it was remotely plausible...just like your bible...just EXTREMELY unlikely...again, like your bible. To believe so thoroughly (see: 100%) in something that can't be proven (like the bible)...is much closer to Hubbard's way of thinking than Dawkins'.
OOPS...sorry! i was actually researching Winnick and Crocker at the same time and also for the first time and got the journalist confused with the scientist. i'm sorry...but i still don't agree with the claim that Mr. Stein is a liar and a cheat. if his claim that dominant evolutionism is opressive than of course he would be forced to "play hard ball" in order to get his idea out there. i am an advocate of ID and have been persecuted and ridiculed my whole life. i, for one, am grateful to him.
And it's not that evolution is oppressive, it's just the accepted theory. There's really not good science presented with ID. It's just not a very credible theory.
And I'm sorry if you were made fun of for your beliefs, but it'd probably be for the best to not say you were persecuted. That's a rather heavy word, and I doubt you've ever come across persecution.
Well, thanks for taking an interest, but all the information in the video was obtained from the Expelled Exposed site. Pamela R. Winnick is the person who appeared in the movie.
so you get all your info from a website that already claims to have exposed the documentary.??? maybe you should do you own reserch and have some common sense on the matter. and regardless if the persons werw crizitized or not i still have one huge question i think everyone else has as well WHERE DID IT ALL COME FROM....
The website investigated the claims made by the people and found that they were falsified.
"Where did it all come from?" is not a question for evolution. It's a question for abiogensis. Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life. It just shows how animals how become what they are today.
Excuse me sir, but I'd like to point out that "common sense" is usually the biggest mistake you can make in science... The whole point of science is that it predicts and describes everything based on reason, not on precessing conclusions. Modern science is so advanced that common sense is only good for making observations, but can be extremely deceiving for the other steps of the scientific method...
that being said i agree 100% that this a war between science and religion the two are in a constant struggle as are good and evil, i belive in Good as well evil do you deny the two...
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
where do we get those moral compasses.... why are they not prevalent in the animal kingdom but somehow with us evolunists do not like christians and christians do not like evoluionists i think thats a fair and honest statement but i think as a country THAT WAS FOUNDED ON GODLY PRINCIPLES AND AFTERWARD BECAME ONE OF THE GREATEST EMPIRES OF ALL TIME we need to stand firm on what our founding fathers seemed so fit to include on our freedoms.
Your country was founded by deist who reject theism in all it's forms.
You easily discover this information by reading the autobiographies of Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, the letters of George Washington
The book "the age of reason" by Thomas Paine or "the Jefferson bible" by Thomas Jefferson.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
i am currently resading tomas jefersons autobiography and have found no truth in you statment i highly dought your word on any of these matters considering ive been gether this info for the last month my country was founded by god fearing men hence the constition the bill of rights and the dec. of independence
Maybe you should learn to spell his name before you read his autobiography.
He was by no means god fearing.
Shake off all fears of servile prejudices, under which weak mines are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." -Thomas Jefferson
@torak101 Half of the founding fathers were Episcopalian, and another quarter of them were Congregationalists. A great deal of them were Deists of course. Neither side can claim that this is a Christian, or an Atheist country - it's both.
@brchful Wellllll, it WOULD be both, except for the fact that the founding fathers, including the christian ones, went out of there way to specifically leave religion out of government. Neat little thing we call seperation of church and state. They were quite adamant about there being no government religion, but rather, the freedom of religion. I know christians get confused, but "freedom of religion" and "christianity" are not the same thing. The forefathers specifically wrote religion out.
@EppurSiMuove419 -- I never made the claim that there was a government religion. I'm merely refuting the claim that our nation was founded purely by atheists, or purely by theists.
"religion, as well as reason, confirms the soundness of those principles on which our government has been founded and its rights asserted."
@brchful It's odd that you would cherry pick a quote by, arguably, the most famously non-christian forefather that we have. There are forefathers who were Christians, but yet you chose the words of one of the confirmed deists.
"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites" –Thomas Jefferson, 1782
@brchful In any case I was simply refuting your idea that this is both a christian and non-christian country. As I said before, ALL the founding fathers were secularists above anything else. Even the Christian founding fathers saw fit to completely forbid Christianity from holding any prestigious, official, or in any way special place. I say again, this is not a "both" country, because our founding fathers went WAY out of there way to keep religion out. Not half, or a quarter, but all of them.
@EppurSiMuove419 -- I can agree that the founding fathers were secularists, in the sense that they believed that religious institutions should have no place in the government. Our government is not a "both" government, and was never intended to be. But to say that there is no place for Christianity in the nation as a whole is simply incorrect, which is my argument.
@brchful Ah okay then we have a middle ground. My problem was was that people who use this "Christian Nation" narrative usually mean it in the sense of government, which is patently absurd. As you have made clear this was not your narrative, but rather that the populace of this country is primarily christian, I relent.
Certainly the facts show that the majority of people in this country are Christian. Now if only all our politicians could keep that straight, like you.
@EppurSiMuove419 -- The problem are these evangelicals. There is a clear shift in the new testament away from the understanding that god judges nations, to a one where god judges individuals. Evangelicals do not understand this, and it needs to be retaught.
as a matter of fact they are in the animal kingdom...and the U.S. had only been around some 200 years the brits had an empire that lasted far longer the romans the normans the U.S. are babies in the empire ring,and by the looks of it there are on the way out now.
If one of em kills, steals, doesn't return favors,... the other ones will get pissed at him. Of course all animals have less complex senses of morality, but that 'd be to be expected from species that don't have language... They can't think of and exchange complex (or mainly abstract) ideas... Also, many human forms of morality don't have anything to do with religion, such as utilitarism. Religious morality is intrinsically deonthological in practice...
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
great docummentory by Ben Stein we as a country need to wake up because we have been falling for a long time and i dont think we should piss off God who helped pave the road for this great nation
what is stien lieing about ???? im sure you can get alot done with doing everything your way next time something comes thats out of your two hands maybe try putting them together and see what happens
why not give this a try And whatever you ask in my name, I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything of me in my name, I will do it. John 14:13-14 If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask for whatever you want and it will be done for you.John 15:7
nothice it does not say maybe or the answer might be no it say "will do"do you know anyone that gets everything they ask for in prayer...NO!!! ya don't
If as darwinists believe, there is no intelligent designer (God), why are they so enraged at those who do believer that there is an intelligent designer.
If we who believe are wrong, what difference does it make? It seems that there is something else that is bothering them. Maybe it is their consciences!
Why do you imagine we are "enraged" when we refute the lies of the religious fundamentalists?
Is it because truth hurts your brains; and because you feel hurt you assume it is because we are intentionally trying to hurt you; and that therefore we must be angry at you?
I see no evidence of rage in this video.
Don't your scriptures tell you not to bear false witness? Aren't you angered by the lies which this video exposes?
I find it troubling that in 2009, we are still taking people like this somewhat serious (like actually making an attempt to debunk them). That's like seriously debating the existence of zombies, unicorns, santa and hovering babies with musical skills.
It's an insult to intelligence. Will humans ever grow up from these fairytales?
Dude, zombies do exist, that is why they make so many movies about them. Funny that the people who supported Expelled and repeated his oppression mantra are mainly fundamentalists who do that sort of thing all the time
Oh, bad example. Yeah zombies exists, but I'm talking about "good" zombies. Zombies that aren't interested in your brain and instead heals the sick.... yeah right. That's so unrealistic that even Jesus even hates the people who believe it.
This video still fails to address the topic at hand. After reading and looking at videos from various sources in the area of "exposing" Ben Stein's Expelled video, it seems to me the naysayers are playing legal nitpicks with certain claims, but when it comes to addressing the base issue that the film brings out (that there is a biased underlying power in the scientific community that truly is denying the freedom of intelligence) the naysayers are having a hard time trying to counter Ben Stein.
Well certainly real scientists are going to step in and say that ID is absolutely ridiculous, but the fact remains that these people were liars who tried to push unscientific God-propaganda, and even then- they didn't lose their jobs or have difficulty finding other jobs.
What's so "real" about scientists who conduct research based on grants they receive from institutions? Do you really think institutions donate millions to the scientific community just because?
Corruption (politics) does exist in the scientific community, just as corruption exists in all of society. After all, they're human. The rare "independent" scientists today, the ones who truly pursue their research dreams and have no outside influence, are the ones labeled as "fake" by their community.
"Why would it even matter where scientists get their money?"
There is much you don't understand about science and politics.
ID and religion do NOT go hand in hand. In fact, many ID proponents don't believe in any religious gods. ID simply states that scientific laws cannot explain how organic matter could have evolved from inorganic matter. How ID gets interpreted is up to the individual. Some believe it was a god, others believe the universe is just part of a much larger system.
Not true. An intelligent agency does not necessarily mean a god. For example, lets say we have a large ant farm with ants living inside. Those ants will perceive the ant farm as their "system" and cannot see beyond that. In actuality, the humans that created that ant farm are the "intelligent agency". We however, are not gods, yet were more intelligent than they are. As such, this universe may be part of a much larger "system" that was created by something/someone more intelligent than us.
Ants of also capable of creating their own systems. Last time I checked, humans couldn't create another world. One would have to have some incredible powers to create such a thing.
But I understand that it could be more of a deistic view, but that still doesn't eliminate the fact that there is absolutely no proof of an intelligent being(s) capable of creating a world.
The theories we have now have so much fact behind them.
Of course there is no proof of an intelligent being capable of creating a world, just as there is no proof of the original cell (that we supposedly evolved from) popping out of nowhere.
We can create a super technologically-advanced ant farm that will have ants thinking "there is no way ants created this" just as there is no way humans created this universe. Who said humans were the ones to create this universe? The whole point of ID is that it's something/someone much "higher" than us.
If this "higher" something/someone isn't a god then what is it? Where did it come from? Did it orginate from natural processes or was it created by something "higher" than it? The problem with ID is that it answers nothing. It isn't science.
Sydpart2 is right. Evolution has just as many holes as ID. The problem is evolutionists will not, for any reason, admit it. So, if Evolution is to be taught in schools we should explain the holes in it and offer ID as another solution. It is unfair to the children to push one belief on them without offering any other, just as valid, options.
I think that most evolutionists would agree that there are holes in the theory. But holes don't discedit evolution. Evolution isn't a "belief" - it's a part of science; one of the points is to figure out what's missing.
ID just isn't scientific, and therefore, doesn't belong in a classroom.
Evolution as a scientific theory does not have as many holes as ID. The problem is that children aren't being educated and grow up to be ignorant of evolution (and biology as a whole). During the Dover trial the scientists literally had to teach the theory of Evolution from the ground up because nearly no one in the courtroom understood it!!! It's one thing to be educated in evolution and disagree, it's another thing to be ignorant of it and try to discredit it because you find it uncomfortable.
As I said before, it depends if one believes in his or her religion. You think the bible is true, therefore you use it as evidence to prove that your religion is right. You are using what you are trying to prove to PROVE your point. And what do you mean heal exactly? Almost all religions advocate for peace, not just a single one.
Because the Bible is the only God-breathed text... there is no other.
I mean exactly what I said. If you would like more info on how to heal the sick in Jesus' name (proving He is the only way to Heaven... NO other) then shoot me an e-mail.
As I said before, your logic goes in circles. You are using what you are trying to prove to PROVE your point. Your evidence is basically what you are trying to prove. Thanks for wishing me a good day though!
Oh shit, Rob Sherman. I remember him. My dad used to always call him a jew just because he was so adamant about separation of church and state. I'm not sure if he was actually a good guy or not. He was, however, responsible for getting my home city to remove a cross off of the official seal.
zzyzx0788 19 hours ago
Great Video :D
xMizumi 1 day ago
i don't know how I got here: i was busy looking up kissing videos on youtube and then my computer lagged...better clear out the spyware again =_=
DorkyDorkMikeyMike 2 weeks ago
By the way, Brittanythecaptain, don't listen to Bashyoulongtime. I liked the song. It makes me nostalgic for highschool. =)
Pulpgimp 1 month ago
Even if scientists are being black-listed for being creationists, I'm totally fine with that. It's like a medical doctor being fired for thinking that using leaches to cure cancer is a reasonable medical practice.
Pulpgimp 1 month ago
@Pulpgimp Yes, exactly. Science isn't biased against ID, it's biased against unsupported claims. There isn't a scientist alive that wouldn't LOVE to disprove evolution, or prove God, creationism or ID. They would be famous, mega rich and considered the Einstein of the their time. Oh, and a Nobel Prize or two. Who would give that up?
RockBanned 1 week ago
Lol, the music is enough to void any point that this video even tried to make. Well done sir, this is a flopping failure. Go ahead, get vicious with me because the more defensive someone becomes about their "truth," is actually more than likely because they're hiding an untruth.
BashYouLongtime 1 month ago
@BashYouLongtime I'm sorry you don't like electronica or punk music, but as this video has absolutely nothing to do with music, your complaint and claim that it "voids any point" is irrelevant and wrong. Your tone is already very defensive, and using your comment here, I guess you're hiding an untruth?
brittanythecaptain 1 month ago 4
@brittanythecaptain No, it completely does because it gives me a background to how 'professional' or 'unproffesional' you are to make this video. The fact is, the point you're trying to prove would require much bigger production, and by failing to do that, and trying to make a 'relevent point,' but by using this type of music? There's no way it can be taken seriously. I'm not defensive over anything right now, I'm just telling you the facts-this video is just stupid, from any perspective.
BashYouLongtime 1 month ago
@BashYouLongtime You're not a professional film critic, and I'm not a professional filmmaker. These are all moot points, I'm afraid. You're arguing from a stylistic approach, and that's irrelevant to the point of the video. There's no need to make a big, dramatic presentation to show that Expelled was full of lies.
brittanythecaptain 1 month ago 5
Actually, I graduated from Wesleyan University as a film major. But thanks anyways. How can you just prove that a film was full of lies? Aren't most films anyways? They're all skewed. I'm just saying, literally, ALL of your efforts in this video are futile and will have little effect swaying anyone (except those who already take the stance that you have, which actually isn't swaying them since they already share it) because all films are biased one way. Am I full of lies, too, then? Think.
BashYouLongtime 1 month ago
@BashYouLongtime That doesn't make you a film critic. If you've watched the movie, and then this video, you'll understand how it was full of lies. If you're not swayed, then I guess you just don't care about logic. Plenty of people who were otherwise undecided have seen this video and realized that what Ben Stein did was untruthful.
brittanythecaptain 1 month ago 5
@brittanythecaptain Are you shitting me? Wow, clearly you have no right to try and debase my statements. Talk to me when you graduate film school, bitch boy. Holy shit you're so fucking dumb
BashYouLongtime 1 week ago
@BashYouLongtime Really? You're coming back after almost a month? And you call me a boy, when it's very clear that my name is Brittany? You claim you went to graduate film school when this is the internet, and anyone can make up anything? And then you call ME "fucking dumb"? Wow. I'm floored by your sheer idiocy. Slow clap for the imbecile here!
brittanythecaptain 1 week ago
@brittanythecaptain: I'd rather let your posts and those of Blazen1212 speak for themselves.
spacecoonass 2 months ago
I'd rather let everyone read your posts, my posts and those of your friend Blazen1212. They speak for themselves.
spacecoonass 2 months ago
@spacecoonass That's pretty brave coming from an imbecile posting idiotic things on my video.
brittanythecaptain 2 months ago
@brittanythecaptain. no, just perceptive. As far as the idiocy, I think you and Blazen1212 corner the market.
spacecoonass 2 months ago
@spacecoonass You know what? You're a troll. You haven't done any actual debating; you've just been crapping all over this video without ever actually saying anything worthwhile. You just like to insult, and that's how you try to "win" an argument. You're nothing but an idiot, and you have hereby been blocked. Have a nice life, you idiot.
brittanythecaptain 2 months ago
This is a pretty hollow and pathetic attempt to shut down something that was a breath of fresh air in a stingy, rotting community of incompetents.
Blimpo7 2 months ago
@Blimpo7 What a joke.
brittanythecaptain 2 months ago
@brittanythecaptain Great reasoning ability there.
spacecoonass 2 months ago
Comment removed
spacecoonass 3 months ago
Comment removed
spacecoonass 3 months ago
@Blazen1212: Didn't realize you were concerned about Ben STILLER, or that he even had a position on intelligent design. ROFL. And actually, the only political thing I'm concerned about is when people politicize the intelligent design versus evolution debate to the point where people are fired from their jobs on that basis. I actually accept special evolution as the most probable hypothesis for how we got from single-celled organisms to where we are.
spacecoonass 3 months ago
People go out of their way to try to "scientificize" their damned beliefs. These people are weaklings who need to pretend that they are going to live forever. Furthermore, they want everyone else to be helpless weaklings like them so they try to force their damned beliefs into any arena they can. They think they are "patriots" or "soldiers for jesus" but what they are is pathetic.
magos2k6 5 months ago
The intensity of this attack on Ben Stein is uncalled-for. Stein himself is probably the nicest guy in conservatism, and a very articulate spokesman for tolerance (not the political correctness sort, but really reaching out to people and embracing their differences). Stein responded to the intolerance of the media and large parts of the scientific and academic community to views that may be wrong, but deserve an equal chance to be heard. THIS is the response. It makes Stein's point for him.
spacecoonass 6 months ago
@spacecoonass What's so nice about Stein? The fact that he thinks evolution inspired Nazi Germany, the parts where he edits interviews to make Biology professors looks stupid, or is it the part where he lied about the movie, had liars in the movie, and had those liars talk about an untrue theory? ID had its equal chance to be heard. It's been refuted many, many times. Do scientists still cling to things that are obviously wrong? No. They move on. These people won't.
brittanythecaptain 6 months ago 2
@spacecoonass You are such a moron. Ben Stein has been embarrased publicly time and time again by people such as Peter Schiff who call out his ignorance. This film is pure propaganda in order to push a conservative and religious point of view. This is not only appauling but also disengenuous on every single level. The mere fact that you are not only deffending it but in fact buy into it shows that your are uninformed and hold a very low IQ. I will gladly debate you publicly on this issue.
Blazen1212 4 months ago
@spacecoonass And please debate me on this so we can all laugh at you together. That is in fact if you very low IQ can handle forming concepts for about an hour. So if you want to get slapped right in your fucking mouth you know where to find me. Im sick of idiots like you who know nothing about science and only assert childish nonsense as if it was fact deserve to be put in your place. So bring it on you bitch!!
Blazen1212 4 months ago
@Blazen1212 You've just shown how much of your thought process is based in reason and science - very, very little. Since I'm 6'2", strongly built and a veteran police officer, I think I'll take my chances on being able to twist your arm behind your back and frogwalk you to the door before your hand gets anywhere near my mouth. And as far as the name calling, I have a college degree with a strong minor in biotechnology. You seem to have majored in talking trash under the influence of meth.
spacecoonass 3 months ago
My IQ is 145. What's yours? So far you haven't answered any of my objections with anything but empty, ad hominem rants. Seek psychiatric help.
spacecoonass 3 months ago
So far, all the video "responses" I've seen to Ben Stein's documentary either (like the slick AAAS piece) avoid dealing with Stein's charges altogether and attempt to justify the treatment of ID advocates (most of whom I disagree with, too, but don't want to deprive of a living) on general grounds or weasel-word their "exposure" of individual cases with rhetoric that doesn't really dispute that these people lost their jobs for saying the "wrong thing" about evolution.
spacecoonass 6 months ago
@spacecoonass This video DID talk about the claims made by the ID supporters in the movie. I'm not all for firing people, either, but a lot of these people simply were not fired.
brittanythecaptain 6 months ago
@spacecoonass Dude. Honestly how blind can you really be. You are turning this into a political point completely out of left field. Ben Stiller has no credibility whatsoever. Everything he did in this movie was 100% disingenuous. If you do not believe me then you are simply dillusional. I cannot stress enough how much pure propaganda that this entire movie is. The saddest part is that the disinformation has worked on the sad souls such as yourself who believe this nonsense. Get educated!
Blazen1212 3 months ago
@Blazen1212 Ben Stiller's a COMEDIAN. Ben STEIN is the man whose documentary is under discussion. If you stepped away from the meth pipe long enough to stop ranting and read the discussion here, you'd know that. The more comments you type here, the more you reveal yourself as an educational failure and a raving lunatic.
spacecoonass 2 months ago
This is a bitchy, abusive, pathetic attempt to attack Ben Stein after he assaulted one of liberalism's sacred cows. The "explanations" brittany the captain offers are very weak ones - (translations of one example from BS to English: "Oh, this lady supported ID and lost her paid job in mainstream journalism, but it's all good - her old paper lets her publish a guest column now and then and she lives on the royalties of a book and sell the odd piece to Weekly Standard"). Hateful and pathetic.
spacecoonass 6 months ago
@spacecoonass This is a bitchy, abusive, pathetic attempt to attack those who support evolution. I never said anything about Pamela losing her job- she didn't lose her job; that's the point. She said she was fired in 2000, but was with them in 2002 when SHE left. Furthermore, she had claimed to be blacklisted. Do you know what that means? It means that NO ONE would accept her work- not even as a guest columnist. You are ignorant.
brittanythecaptain 6 months ago
@brittanythecaptain: And you're a narrow-minded little twit who knows how to edit video, but not how to think.
spacecoonass 2 months ago
@spacecoonass I'm actually a pretty open-minded person. That's why I'm a liberal, dumbass. If you want to say I'm narrow-minded because I don't put any stock in an unscientific load of bullshit; then whatever. But that's not what being narrow-minded is about. I don't care if these people in the video believe in ID; I just don't want them trying to teach it as scientific fact/lying about how they were fired and blacklisted when they obviously weren't. Go learn some reading comprehension.
brittanythecaptain 2 months ago
@spacecoonass Again you havent addressed any point that I have made. This is because you are an ignorant fuck that worries more about wanting to be the spelling police you fucking bitch. I attack ignorance anywhere I see it. If you dont like this, or you think the substance of my actual points were unfair, I will gladly debate you on these issues over webcam so I can slap you right in your fuckin mouth for being such a fuckin idiot. Your a joke who knows nothing about science!!
Blazen1212 2 months ago
@spacecoonass Wow. Honestly you are so delusional that you are forever hopeless. First will say that you have a very low IQ!! 2nd if you want to debate me on this in person we will be able to do so quite easily over webcam.Then we can post it as a response to this video so I can show everyone how much of a moron you are. Third what is your academic background. I have 2 Masters degress in Economics and probabiliy theory. You sir are an IGNORANT FUCK with no grounds to comment on anything!
Blazen1212 3 months ago
@Blazen1212 You don't write like someone with two Master's degrees. I hold a BA in Technical Writing with strong minors in chemistry, mathematics and biomedical engineering. Your writing skills are abysmal and reflect your general poverty of thought, your high level of hatred, and general lack of reflection on what it is you're writing about. I'll put my academic transcripts up versus yours - those "Master's degrees" are as real as your other qualifications on this subject.
spacecoonass 2 months ago
@spacecoonass So until then SHUT THE FUCK UP!!! Your done. You are not smart enough to understand any of this nor do you have the background to be taken seriously. Please let people who know what they are talking about handle this. In fact the lack of education you hold on this issue is in fact the reason that NOBODY CARES WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY!! YOU AND I BOTH KNOW THAT YOU ARE IRRELEVANT TO ANYBODY WHO MATTERS!!! YOU HAVE A MEANINGLESS EXISTENCE AND YOU FUCKIN KNOW IT!!!!
Blazen1212 3 months ago
If YouTube actually paid attention to the posts here, you'd have been banned a while back. You're an abusive, toilet-mouthed idiot. And my academic background qualifies me to comment on technical aspects of the likelihood of random synthesis of long chain biopolymers more than your background in economics. (By the way, I got A's in every college course in economics I ever took. What did you make in organic chemistry, thermodynamics of living systems, and physical chemistry?)
spacecoonass 2 months ago
@serinthor actually it said "darwinistic behaviour" which dawkins has even admitted is something found in the holocaust. He does however defend himself as saying this behaviour is not what we should follow
TtotheYinthemorning 8 months ago
unbelievable, how much they cry 'persecution, you're persecuting me for being a christian' and then they get people expelled from schools, cause them to lose their jobs, murder them... for not being christian
GodsArePeopleToo 9 months ago
Ben Stein has 31 accounts
1990PatMorrison 9 months ago
I'm not religious and I'm not very convinced by ID at all, but I'm annoyed at the whining by Dawkins and Shermer that they were tricked into being interviewed for the film under false pretences. Hypocrites! There are many examples of Skeptical agents infiltrating non-Skeptical institutions and doing the exact same thing, EG: Penn and Teller. Some, like Derren Brown, even pose as mediums and astrologers etc.
benthejrporter 11 months ago
I was looking forward to seeing this film and hearing the arguments, but 10 mins on Google told me it was all so much crap. How disappointing. Ben Stein is obviously an intelligent man - how could he get duped into fronting this nonsense? The opening Nazi images were discraceful. I haven't watched the last half - is it worth me even bothering?
lozman67 11 months ago
You must be joking. This video is just one huge lie. The evolutionists looked for a reason other than ID to expell Mr. Gonzales. That way it wouldn't look controversial. What about David Coppedge? I'm sure you'll try to find something minuscule to justify his treatment too.
gavinmajors 1 year ago
I have to watch this damn movie during religion class... As I go to a catholic school even though im athiest, but WOW I felt like just falling on the floor laughing my ass off when it tried to say how evolution caused holocaust... Even though this movie is incredibly boring, i find it mildly entertaining trying to find as many things wrong with it as I can...
serinthor 1 year ago
We need to address removing "In God We Trust" from our money.
In Exxon or "In Microsoft We Trust" would be more appropriate.
gjsterp 1 year ago
these ppl killed and stuff, are they in america?
omg religion is retarted!
kashif9595 1 year ago
Fuck him he lies and deserves a small stash not thin! ha ha
JASON9948 1 year ago
I've only watched Expelled once and even though I thought it was a crock of crap I found it very entertaining.
comingatchu 1 year ago
Ben Stein's documentary is meant to showcase a badly dressed man. Sneakers with suits? I mean, the guy's a grown man. Doesn't he own a proper pair of shoes?
GonzomanOfLamancha 1 year ago
Disclaimer...i am an atheist. I have no reason to doubt evolution. 'Expelled' was a load of bull, clearly 'designed' (ha!) to misrepresent facts, and tug at heartstrings with inter-cut shots of the Berlin Wall and Nazi Germany.
BUT...at least one thing in Brittany's video is inaccurate. Ben Stein NEVER claimed that evolution led to Nazi Germany/Holocaust. He claimed that the THEORY of evolution INSPIRED Hitler. BIG DIFF.
In truth, evolution was Hitler's twisted JUSTIFICATION for eugenics.
comiconline 1 year ago
@comiconline To be honest, it's been a very long time since I've watched Expelled, so I don't remember what it was that he said, but your claim seems fair enough. To be honest, what I said in the video and what you said here isn't that far enough. In fact, it's probably what I meant. ;)
brittanythecaptain 1 year ago
@comiconline 1. You have a Bias 2. You look down on people that believe in God 3.Where did you get your info? 4. You can't prove that there isn't a God, people have been trying for a really long time and failed, I tried and failed. 5. There is no such thing as an "atheist", wnhy would someone be so bent on proving that there is no deity, if one knows that there isn't? 6.You can't really find truth when you are stuck in a bias, you have to take yourself outside any bias to have clarity.
Thefunkerful 1 year ago
@Thefunkerful 1. So do you. 2. And? 3. I think that's the only intelligent statement you made in that post. 4. She doesn't need to, it's up to you to prove that YOUR particular flavor of deity exists in the first place. Prove that there aren't mile-long pink elephants on Pluto. You can't? Well, by your logic, I guess you have to believe they exist then! 5. You don't even know what the word atheist means. That's rather pathetic. 6. Pot meet kettle.
paceetrate 1 year ago
@comiconline But if you watch the 'movie' it clearly is implied that atheism and nazism are connected.the SS and Hitler were devout catholics,they had it written on their beltbuckles. It is obvious that hitler was racist,not an evolutionist. Wanting to wipe out a race of people is not evolution,evolution is a natural process,if I go and kill all dogs on the planet,that wasnt evolution,thats crazy to compare the two.
onemarilynfan 1 year ago
@comiconline evolution is just a fact of nature. If it makes certain things possible like eugenics is just tough luck I am afraid. You could say that combustion inspired rifles and rockets that are used in wars all over the world. In truth, it didn't inspire it, it just made it possible.
TacticalHub 6 months ago
this video is a fail the colleges interviewed 2 admitted thats why they where fired so maybe your correctr on them but your wrong about 2 for sure thats how many of the colleges where interviewed and admitted to doing it
prettybabs25 1 year ago
@prettybabs25 I've never heard anyone mentioning two colleges admitting to anything. All my information came from the Expelled Exposed website and was all very well documented.
brittanythecaptain 1 year ago
@brittanythecaptain you should watch the documentary they did right to the camera as far as the website im not sure if they are right or not i need to find the site actually i was curious to find the other side of the argument
prettybabs25 1 year ago
@prettybabs25 I have watched the documentary, and I still don't quite know what you're talking about. I have a link in the bar below my video that will take you to the site I used to get all my information.
brittanythecaptain 1 year ago
@prettybabs25 you didnt watch the documentary or you missed apart because i witnessed with my own eyes their employers admitting thats why they where fired
prettybabs25 1 year ago
I am a law student at Vermont Law School, one of the most liberal Law Schools in the country. I have taken quite a few science classes in my years of schooling and I have asked teachers with doctorates and master's degrees to provide me with some explanation of how the first living cell was born. I would also like to know where matter came from.
embertilton 1 year ago
Since I have received no answer which employs established science I remain to this day an avid agnostic. Any theory explaining how life came from non-life is as faith-based and unscientific as the next, in my mind, and until I am convinced otherwise, I cannot tolerate the view that evolution is science and ID is not.
embertilton 1 year ago
Also, in this video, many facts are stated. In law it is not enough to state a bold allegation, it must be supported with authority, i.e. the reference to the law being asserted. If your video presents "real" facts, then you should provide citations, so others can know where the facts come from.
embertilton 1 year ago
so that they can be independently verified.
embertilton 1 year ago
@embertilton There is the fact of evolution and there is the the theory of evolution. The fact obviously addresses the fact that animals evolve, the theory addresses the mechanism by which animals evolve and is compounded by a ton of evidence from all life-sciences.
In order to be considered a theory, intelligent design would have to explain the mechanism by which animals where designed, how it was done and possibly the tools. Otherwise all you have is a bold assertion without hold in reality.
Korkzor 1 year ago
@Korkzor Thank you for the rational response. The theory is that life came about by the design of a supernatural force and has survived since that time, which in my view is no less rational than the big bang and primordial ooze theory which say the same thing without explaining how and leaves that question unanswered. Personally, I think both are faith-based and neither is pure science.
embertilton 1 year ago
@embertilton Ah, the Big Bang. Well, that correlates to how the universe evolved a split second after it came in to excistance. You´d have to come up with a new theory in order to explain where the BB "came" from if such a thing is even possible. Much like you can explain how an apple tastes and how to cut it without knowing where it was grown, one can explain how the universe "evolved" without knowing where and how it was grown.
Korkzor 1 year ago
@embertilton The thing is, scientists have already produced self-replicating molecules under circumstances similar to what the primordial earth has looked like. The theory of abiogenesis actually does explain how life arose from the primordial soup, or makes an attempt to do so.
One can properly never "prove" that was the way it happened but if there is a natural explanation from which life can occur, which is the simplest one? Magic (not trying to mock you) or that natural process?
Korkzor 1 year ago
@Korkzor Do you have a citation to the scholarly document supporting the self-replicating molecule? This is another ID point. If scientists do create life someday in a test tube, that only shows it can happen with a designer. I am an agnostic, I will believe any peer-reviewed research data, I have not seen any yet showing...
embertilton 1 year ago
..1) That life CAN come into existence on its own, 2) that life did so, 3) that a species can evolve into a new and entirely different one even over extended periods of time. My contention is that such data would be almost impossible to find and the study of the origin of man is in and of itself a faith-based endeavor. Until I am shown scientific data otherwise, I assert that neither theory holds more merit. As our conversation demonstrates, intelligent can differ.
embertilton 1 year ago
I mostly care that one side of the debate is being silenced and that is not democracy or science. There is no proof beyond dispute, as of now, and people should not be so offended by other people's opposing beliefs.
embertilton 1 year ago
@embertilton Let me pose a scenario to you:
You find the fingerprints on a knife in a house next to the body of a women. That women has been stabbed numerous times and is obviously killed by someone. You also find hair remnants from another person on the body. When checking the fingerprint you find it belongs to her neighour. (think of more evidence if need be)
Now, this neighbor claims an intelligent imposterer put all the evidence there but since they cannot reconstruct the even (duh)(cont..)
Korkzor 1 year ago
@Korkzor .. both sides deserver to be heard. He offers no proof of this intelligent imposterer and says he did it by magic. Would you believe him? Would you say him being guilty or the IP did it require equals amounts of faith?
Evolution is much like a detective trail. You follow the trail back in time, through rocks, genetics, archeology, fossils etc. etc. Then you arrive at 3.5 billion years ago and before that, there is nothing. Then you construct the environment on earth as you can (cont...)
Korkzor 1 year ago
@Korkzor @Korkzor @Korkzor figure out from astronomy, geology etc.
You take this circumstances to your lab and find the results very, very good.
(nothing fossilised that is)
Now is the point where the murderer says, well, were you there? Did you see the murder?
Because the detective trail of evolution "stops" at the origin of life where fossils before that disappear, doesn´t mean we cannot figure it out, much like a murder investigation.
Check out CDK007´s origin vidoes: /watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg
Korkzor 1 year ago
@embertilton " My contention is that such data would be almost impossible to find and the study of the origin of man is in and of itself a faith-based endeavor." because you have not educated yourself on the matter. the data is not impossible to find, it is everywhere, and it is worked with every day. the time you take to write things like this, can be taken on learning basic scientific principles, and then reading scientific journals. not ID/creationist propaganda.
BillKiernan 1 year ago
@embertilton even if that were so, maybe someone did kick start life on the planet. i wouldn´t deny it if there was actualy evidence of it. And then let evolution sit for 4 billion years or so. Not impossible, no. But evolution is a fact, regardless of how life started.
Korkzor 1 year ago
@Korkzor Anyways, this will be last comment on here. If you are interested in further discussion you can send me a private message with what would have been your next comment.
And don´t forget, you can explain how to cut, cook and eat an apple without knowing how and where the apple was grown. That´s what evolution does.
Abiogenesis explains how the apple was grown.
Big bang explains what happened to the universe after it came in to existance. Such are all scientific theorys designed.
Korkzor 1 year ago
@embertilton "Personally, I think both are faith-based and neither is pure science" again, the fact that you think evolutionary theory is "faith based" shows you have not educated yourself on the matter. you talking like this would be like me walking into an orchestra, knowing nothing about music, and demanding the conductor listen to my opinions about musical theory. i would be laughed out of the room, as should you, until you learn what it is you are speaking about.
BillKiernan 1 year ago
@BillKiernan Again, I am not convinced by analogies and rhetoric, citations, citations citations, I can't say it enough. Cite to the peer-reviewed experiment or collection of data to make your case. Where's the Beef? So Bill? What is your degree in? I will listen to facts but commentary and insults are weak support for your faith-based beliefs. Evolution has never been documented or witnessed, there are no pictures or exhibits it is a religion. If I am wrong, let's see the citation.
embertilton 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@embertilton "Cite to the peer-reviewed experiment or collection of data to make your case." um, ok, the entire body of biological, and evolutionary biological, work in all peer reviewed scientific journals since darwins time. start from there and then get back to me. "lets see the citation" please. there's nothing we can show you to make you change your mind, you're wilfully ignorant and such people cannot be reached.
BillKiernan 1 year ago
Idiotic Design
Fighting4Freedoms 2 years ago
I think it is very good that you exposed many of the lies Ben Stein told in that film. If someone has a good idea that don't need to tell lies to get their ideas accepted. ID is weak and down right silly.
phlewis86 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Yes, but Richard Dawkins believes that the first cell was created by some far off aliens in another galaxy. His pretentious little face is indelibly etched into the annals of the web saying that he believed that an "intelligent signature" was quite probable. Stein nailed his sorry little ass. Dawkins and L. Ron Hubbard have a great deal in common!
Wilhelm95070 2 years ago
@Wilhelm95070 Actually, that's not correct. Dawkins doesn't believe such things, and was simply trying to make the best possible case for ID, as asked by Ben Stein. But, by way of editing tricks a la Michael Moore, Dawkins was made to look like a fool.
It's not surprising then that real fools would think he believed such ridiculous things.
brittanythecaptain 2 years ago
@Wilhelm95070 He only said it was remotely plausible...just like your bible...just EXTREMELY unlikely...again, like your bible. To believe so thoroughly (see: 100%) in something that can't be proven (like the bible)...is much closer to Hubbard's way of thinking than Dawkins'.
r.
theReasonists 2 years ago 2
@Wilhelm95070
Umm, he only said that was possible and very reluctantly. Context.
TeeboTheMightyEwok 2 years ago
@Wilhelm95070 We just made our own 'intelligent signature'. So yeah, ID IS TECHNICALLY TRUE. HOLY SHIT.
JuniorDExchangecore 1 year ago
'ben stein' the best case against 'intelligent' design ever.
stratocaster539 2 years ago 4
Where do u get the facts from for this vid just out of curiousity.
TheFlexproductions 2 years ago
the link is in the more info box.
brittanythecaptain 2 years ago
Thanks
TheFlexproductions 2 years ago
OOPS...sorry! i was actually researching Winnick and Crocker at the same time and also for the first time and got the journalist confused with the scientist. i'm sorry...but i still don't agree with the claim that Mr. Stein is a liar and a cheat. if his claim that dominant evolutionism is opressive than of course he would be forced to "play hard ball" in order to get his idea out there. i am an advocate of ID and have been persecuted and ridiculed my whole life. i, for one, am grateful to him.
citoyenamerican 2 years ago
Don't worry about it. Mistakes happen.
And it's not that evolution is oppressive, it's just the accepted theory. There's really not good science presented with ID. It's just not a very credible theory.
And I'm sorry if you were made fun of for your beliefs, but it'd probably be for the best to not say you were persecuted. That's a rather heavy word, and I doubt you've ever come across persecution.
brittanythecaptain 2 years ago
Comment removed
citoyenamerican 2 years ago
Well, thanks for taking an interest, but all the information in the video was obtained from the Expelled Exposed site. Pamela R. Winnick is the person who appeared in the movie.
brittanythecaptain 2 years ago
so you get all your info from a website that already claims to have exposed the documentary.??? maybe you should do you own reserch and have some common sense on the matter. and regardless if the persons werw crizitized or not i still have one huge question i think everyone else has as well WHERE DID IT ALL COME FROM....
christian2944 2 years ago
The website investigated the claims made by the people and found that they were falsified.
"Where did it all come from?" is not a question for evolution. It's a question for abiogensis. Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life. It just shows how animals how become what they are today.
brittanythecaptain 2 years ago
Excuse me sir, but I'd like to point out that "common sense" is usually the biggest mistake you can make in science... The whole point of science is that it predicts and describes everything based on reason, not on precessing conclusions. Modern science is so advanced that common sense is only good for making observations, but can be extremely deceiving for the other steps of the scientific method...
TakesTwoToTango 2 years ago
that being said i agree 100% that this a war between science and religion the two are in a constant struggle as are good and evil, i belive in Good as well evil do you deny the two...
christian2944 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
where do we get those moral compasses.... why are they not prevalent in the animal kingdom but somehow with us evolunists do not like christians and christians do not like evoluionists i think thats a fair and honest statement but i think as a country THAT WAS FOUNDED ON GODLY PRINCIPLES AND AFTERWARD BECAME ONE OF THE GREATEST EMPIRES OF ALL TIME we need to stand firm on what our founding fathers seemed so fit to include on our freedoms.
christian2944 2 years ago
Animals all some sort sense of morality. It's why some animals can live in groups- why mother's protect their young.
There are people whoa re evolutionists and Christians.
America wasn't founded on the Christian religion.
brittanythecaptain 2 years ago
Your country was founded by deist who reject theism in all it's forms.
You easily discover this information by reading the autobiographies of Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, the letters of George Washington
The book "the age of reason" by Thomas Paine or "the Jefferson bible" by Thomas Jefferson.
torak101 2 years ago 18
This comment has received too many negative votes show
i am currently resading tomas jefersons autobiography and have found no truth in you statment i highly dought your word on any of these matters considering ive been gether this info for the last month my country was founded by god fearing men hence the constition the bill of rights and the dec. of independence
christian2944 2 years ago
Maybe you should learn to spell his name before you read his autobiography.
He was by no means god fearing.
Shake off all fears of servile prejudices, under which weak mines are servilely crouched. Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call on her tribunal for every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason than that of blindfolded fear." -Thomas Jefferson
flynbryan41 2 years ago 14
@torak101 Half of the founding fathers were Episcopalian, and another quarter of them were Congregationalists. A great deal of them were Deists of course. Neither side can claim that this is a Christian, or an Atheist country - it's both.
brchful 1 year ago
@brchful Wellllll, it WOULD be both, except for the fact that the founding fathers, including the christian ones, went out of there way to specifically leave religion out of government. Neat little thing we call seperation of church and state. They were quite adamant about there being no government religion, but rather, the freedom of religion. I know christians get confused, but "freedom of religion" and "christianity" are not the same thing. The forefathers specifically wrote religion out.
EppurSiMuove419 1 year ago
@EppurSiMuove419 -- I never made the claim that there was a government religion. I'm merely refuting the claim that our nation was founded purely by atheists, or purely by theists.
"religion, as well as reason, confirms the soundness of those principles on which our government has been founded and its rights asserted."
Jefferson - 1815
brchful 1 year ago
@brchful It's odd that you would cherry pick a quote by, arguably, the most famously non-christian forefather that we have. There are forefathers who were Christians, but yet you chose the words of one of the confirmed deists.
"Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned. What has been the effect of this coercion? To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites" –Thomas Jefferson, 1782
EppurSiMuove419 1 year ago
@brchful In any case I was simply refuting your idea that this is both a christian and non-christian country. As I said before, ALL the founding fathers were secularists above anything else. Even the Christian founding fathers saw fit to completely forbid Christianity from holding any prestigious, official, or in any way special place. I say again, this is not a "both" country, because our founding fathers went WAY out of there way to keep religion out. Not half, or a quarter, but all of them.
EppurSiMuove419 1 year ago
@EppurSiMuove419 -- I can agree that the founding fathers were secularists, in the sense that they believed that religious institutions should have no place in the government. Our government is not a "both" government, and was never intended to be. But to say that there is no place for Christianity in the nation as a whole is simply incorrect, which is my argument.
brchful 1 year ago
@brchful Ah okay then we have a middle ground. My problem was was that people who use this "Christian Nation" narrative usually mean it in the sense of government, which is patently absurd. As you have made clear this was not your narrative, but rather that the populace of this country is primarily christian, I relent.
Certainly the facts show that the majority of people in this country are Christian. Now if only all our politicians could keep that straight, like you.
EppurSiMuove419 1 year ago
@EppurSiMuove419 -- The problem are these evangelicals. There is a clear shift in the new testament away from the understanding that god judges nations, to a one where god judges individuals. Evangelicals do not understand this, and it needs to be retaught.
brchful 1 year ago
as a matter of fact they are in the animal kingdom...and the U.S. had only been around some 200 years the brits had an empire that lasted far longer the romans the normans the U.S. are babies in the empire ring,and by the looks of it there are on the way out now.
alltiedup217 2 years ago
Just go see a group of monkeys...
If one of em kills, steals, doesn't return favors,... the other ones will get pissed at him. Of course all animals have less complex senses of morality, but that 'd be to be expected from species that don't have language... They can't think of and exchange complex (or mainly abstract) ideas... Also, many human forms of morality don't have anything to do with religion, such as utilitarism. Religious morality is intrinsically deonthological in practice...
TakesTwoToTango 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
great docummentory by Ben Stein we as a country need to wake up because we have been falling for a long time and i dont think we should piss off God who helped pave the road for this great nation
christian2944 2 years ago
what does it say about steins point of view that he has to lie.How did God have anything to do with the U.S.
2 hands working can do more then a 1000 clasped in prayer
alltiedup217 2 years ago 2
what is stien lieing about ???? im sure you can get alot done with doing everything your way next time something comes thats out of your two hands maybe try putting them together and see what happens
christian2944 2 years ago
why not give this a try And whatever you ask in my name, I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything of me in my name, I will do it. John 14:13-14 If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask for whatever you want and it will be done for you.John 15:7
nothice it does not say maybe or the answer might be no it say "will do"do you know anyone that gets everything they ask for in prayer...NO!!! ya don't
alltiedup217 2 years ago
If as darwinists believe, there is no intelligent designer (God), why are they so enraged at those who do believer that there is an intelligent designer.
If we who believe are wrong, what difference does it make? It seems that there is something else that is bothering them. Maybe it is their consciences!
ibibletools 2 years ago
Why do you imagine we are "enraged" when we refute the lies of the religious fundamentalists?
Is it because truth hurts your brains; and because you feel hurt you assume it is because we are intentionally trying to hurt you; and that therefore we must be angry at you?
I see no evidence of rage in this video.
Don't your scriptures tell you not to bear false witness? Aren't you angered by the lies which this video exposes?
pirbird14 2 years ago 2
I find it troubling that in 2009, we are still taking people like this somewhat serious (like actually making an attempt to debunk them). That's like seriously debating the existence of zombies, unicorns, santa and hovering babies with musical skills.
It's an insult to intelligence. Will humans ever grow up from these fairytales?
piip4 2 years ago
Dude, zombies do exist, that is why they make so many movies about them. Funny that the people who supported Expelled and repeated his oppression mantra are mainly fundamentalists who do that sort of thing all the time
MongoloidBabyUSA 2 years ago
Oh, bad example. Yeah zombies exists, but I'm talking about "good" zombies. Zombies that aren't interested in your brain and instead heals the sick.... yeah right. That's so unrealistic that even Jesus even hates the people who believe it.
piip4 2 years ago
This video still fails to address the topic at hand. After reading and looking at videos from various sources in the area of "exposing" Ben Stein's Expelled video, it seems to me the naysayers are playing legal nitpicks with certain claims, but when it comes to addressing the base issue that the film brings out (that there is a biased underlying power in the scientific community that truly is denying the freedom of intelligence) the naysayers are having a hard time trying to counter Ben Stein.
RodneyVoelker 2 years ago
Well certainly real scientists are going to step in and say that ID is absolutely ridiculous, but the fact remains that these people were liars who tried to push unscientific God-propaganda, and even then- they didn't lose their jobs or have difficulty finding other jobs.
brittanythecaptain 2 years ago
What's so "real" about scientists who conduct research based on grants they receive from institutions? Do you really think institutions donate millions to the scientific community just because?
Corruption (politics) does exist in the scientific community, just as corruption exists in all of society. After all, they're human. The rare "independent" scientists today, the ones who truly pursue their research dreams and have no outside influence, are the ones labeled as "fake" by their community.
RodneyVoelker 2 years ago
Because all institutions want to elimate God? Why would it even matter where scientists get their money?
And just because some "scientist" has dreams of fusing together fact anf fiction doesn't mean that they're all of the sudden right.
brittanythecaptain 2 years ago
"Why would it even matter where scientists get their money?"
There is much you don't understand about science and politics.
ID and religion do NOT go hand in hand. In fact, many ID proponents don't believe in any religious gods. ID simply states that scientific laws cannot explain how organic matter could have evolved from inorganic matter. How ID gets interpreted is up to the individual. Some believe it was a god, others believe the universe is just part of a much larger system.
RodneyVoelker 2 years ago
An "intelligent agency" is a god. You guys can try to spruce it up in an attempt to distant yourself from creationism, but it's pretty much the same.
brittanythecaptain 2 years ago
Not true. An intelligent agency does not necessarily mean a god. For example, lets say we have a large ant farm with ants living inside. Those ants will perceive the ant farm as their "system" and cannot see beyond that. In actuality, the humans that created that ant farm are the "intelligent agency". We however, are not gods, yet were more intelligent than they are. As such, this universe may be part of a much larger "system" that was created by something/someone more intelligent than us.
RodneyVoelker 2 years ago
Ants of also capable of creating their own systems. Last time I checked, humans couldn't create another world. One would have to have some incredible powers to create such a thing.
But I understand that it could be more of a deistic view, but that still doesn't eliminate the fact that there is absolutely no proof of an intelligent being(s) capable of creating a world.
The theories we have now have so much fact behind them.
brittanythecaptain 2 years ago
Of course there is no proof of an intelligent being capable of creating a world, just as there is no proof of the original cell (that we supposedly evolved from) popping out of nowhere.
We can create a super technologically-advanced ant farm that will have ants thinking "there is no way ants created this" just as there is no way humans created this universe. Who said humans were the ones to create this universe? The whole point of ID is that it's something/someone much "higher" than us.
RodneyVoelker 2 years ago
If this "higher" something/someone isn't a god then what is it? Where did it come from? Did it orginate from natural processes or was it created by something "higher" than it? The problem with ID is that it answers nothing. It isn't science.
jkryten2x4b 2 years ago
Yes one leads to the other, because ID says that someone really powerful and advanced designed life. Who could that be, ahh, Paris Hilton.
MongoloidBabyUSA 2 years ago 2
where did you get all of this information?
BadMtrFngr 2 years ago
The link is right in the description box.
brittanythecaptain 2 years ago
ID is not science.
Science is science.
Science (truth) goes in the Science Classrooms.
ID (fairy tales) don't belong there.
Nuff said.
beyondbedandbathisme 2 years ago 3
Hey wow after this I watched the movie expelled! Thank you for letting me know about this movie, It owns! thank you brittany
Skripmusic 2 years ago
Comment removed
Skripmusic 2 years ago
Sydpart2 is right. Evolution has just as many holes as ID. The problem is evolutionists will not, for any reason, admit it. So, if Evolution is to be taught in schools we should explain the holes in it and offer ID as another solution. It is unfair to the children to push one belief on them without offering any other, just as valid, options.
BadMtrFngr 2 years ago
I think that most evolutionists would agree that there are holes in the theory. But holes don't discedit evolution. Evolution isn't a "belief" - it's a part of science; one of the points is to figure out what's missing.
ID just isn't scientific, and therefore, doesn't belong in a classroom.
brittanythecaptain 2 years ago
Evolution as a scientific theory does not have as many holes as ID. The problem is that children aren't being educated and grow up to be ignorant of evolution (and biology as a whole). During the Dover trial the scientists literally had to teach the theory of Evolution from the ground up because nearly no one in the courtroom understood it!!! It's one thing to be educated in evolution and disagree, it's another thing to be ignorant of it and try to discredit it because you find it uncomfortable.
InsanityManifest 2 years ago 2
In other words you havent takin any time to actually try an study and understand evolution. What holes? ID is a giant hole all together
LBTennis 2 years ago
Anyone who doesn't believe in God is a fool.
Psalm 14:1
Psalm 53:1
NobodySpecial85 2 years ago
Anyone who does believe in God is a greater fool.
And I didn't need a book to tell me that.
InsanityManifest 2 years ago
Then you are a fool of all fools and you need to repent.
NobodySpecial85 2 years ago
other religions also hold that one who does not follow in what they believe in is a fool himself
it just depends if you believe it or not.
ericthered314 2 years ago
Yes, but no other religions heal the sick. That's why Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to heaven. John 14:6
NobodySpecial85 2 years ago
Why do you cite the bible?
As I said before, it depends if one believes in his or her religion. You think the bible is true, therefore you use it as evidence to prove that your religion is right. You are using what you are trying to prove to PROVE your point. And what do you mean heal exactly? Almost all religions advocate for peace, not just a single one.
ericthered314 2 years ago 3
Because the Bible is the only God-breathed text... there is no other.
I mean exactly what I said. If you would like more info on how to heal the sick in Jesus' name (proving He is the only way to Heaven... NO other) then shoot me an e-mail.
Have a good day now, k?
NobodySpecial85 2 years ago
As I said before, your logic goes in circles. You are using what you are trying to prove to PROVE your point. Your evidence is basically what you are trying to prove. Thanks for wishing me a good day though!
ericthered314 2 years ago
Heals the sick..maybe...but didn't save 6 million Jews though...that's for sure...funny way to heaven.
Zuler01 2 years ago 2
oh right...that's only because they put him on the cross. Right? Give me a break.
Zuler01 2 years ago 2
Hate God much?
NobodySpecial85 2 years ago