Im tired of seeing people talking shit to each other about their beliefs. This is America, you are free to believe whatever the fuck you want. If you are a believer in intelligent design and you belittle people for believeing in science, fuck you. If you are an anal "evolution this, big bang that" and you talk down at religious people calling them primitive, heres a big fuck you too. Im agnostic and respect peoples beliefes but dont try to brain wash me with YOUR own.
@Stevoukos he never said he was right. he just said there are two points of view that have to be acknowledged. if you think thats repulsive then idk how much your opinion is worth :/
That movie was the most dishonest, anti-intellectual load of trash yet made. It offered not one ounce of proof to advance ID since there is none. All it offered up was a bunch of paranoia about "Big Science" oppressing the little people and how Evolution leads to Auschwitz. Notice how O'Reilly, the Dunce automatically goes into his mindless rant about "secular progressives" cause he is a non thinker just like the movie's target audience.
Lol, not acting defense it is admitting that evolution is not even about how it started. It is about how we came here and how things adapt to change. We admit it, but the idea of a god would mean he had to be created. And that raises more questions than answers.
Ben Stein has no idea how evolution works, we dont decend from monkeys, we both share a common ancestor. its not a ladder system.
also Darwins theory isnt to explain how life began?, it tries to explain what we observe in the natural world and the passing on of traits through generations
"(ID) may not be right but it will fill in the gaps in the theory of evolution"
ah the creationist talks.. i find it amusing how you suddenly chase evidence yet your willing to accept the idea of a god without the need for the same.
i am not an evolutionary biologist but i can say that its not a case that there were apes and then humans suddenly appeared, the change takes a very long time and like i said its not a ladder system, speciation plays a big part.
I would maybe recommend that you learn about evolution/speciation before you comment on the subject.
firstly if your going to quote at least get it right, to incorrectly quote just shows your ignorance and lack of comprehension.
which one of us is the sheep here? sheep follow blindly, i have shown that i have an understanding of the subject, something you have failed to do, maybe you would prefer to discuss the holy book of yours? i assume you have read it?
Also i would be very interested to see the evidence for a designer that you claim is so abundant.
An argument can be easily made for the case of creation and against evolution without having to refer to a holy book. You obviously don't know both sides of the argument
This is a extreme misrepresentation of what is actually going on between science teachers and the "ID" (formerly known as creationist) movement.
It is NOT about whether or not God exists, but whether or not ideas and arguments formulated by "ID" proponents (that have not gone through peer review, have been repeatedly debunked, and are sometimes blatant misrepresentations) should be taught in science class.
Many ID OPPONENTS are Christians - including the FRICKIN' POPE.
Wow - love it when they constantly mention Newton. Why can't we have as much freedom as Newton? He was an anti-trinitarian heretic. If the church knew about his religious beliefs he may have been killed for all we know.
Call that freedom?
I suppose it was intellectual tyranny that prompted his publishers to omit the stuff about the Atlantians. :)
Why do I watch these things - you CAN say in ANY class you want that there are people who believe in creationism and believe that a higher power is responsible for directing nature.
What you can't do is FORCE biology teachers to tell students things that are not true because you have an agenda.
It's interesting how O'Reilly equates a court case that was championed BY science teachers so that they were not FORCED to say something in class - with censoring science teachers.
Funny that. Those interested should look into the Dover case.
Lets recall why the theory of Intellignet Design is denied in science class. Oh, it is because, this concept scientificly speaking is rubbish! It's based on pure faith with no scientific evidence to support the theory. In contrast evolution has been proven many times by scientific findings wether it be genetics, biology, geology etc. If you allow ID to be taught in schools you are giving up everything western society is based on since the Enlightenment!
It has therefore nothing to do with free thinking or suppressing an opinion. On the contrary it's the apologists of creation that deny the right of free speech and thought.
omfg this country is dumb.... and Bill O'Riley is an idiot.
There is no scientific dispute about evolution. Just like the "Theory" of gravity, cells, electricity, etc, evolution is based on facts.
Creationists are laughed at because rejecting evolution is as laughable as rejecting gravity. "Maybe angels are pushing our feet to the ground, eff gravity, go god!"
Please please stop accepting supernatural garbage that goes against REALITY.
I cracked up watching this, no wonder Americans are lacking behind in education if they keep watching Fox News and E and other channels to keep you as stupid as a door.
Well, another being creating something perfect such as cells, seems more plausible to happen than lightning stricking a mud puddle and creating a cell.
Mm-hm. And explain to me, if you would please, how the atomic physics of God's voice creating matter work. Can I create matter with my voice, too? If not, then what are the fundamental differences between my voice and God's voice?
I will tell you all I know. It simply says in Genesis that God created the heavens and the earth. You, sir, arent God, therefore you cant possibly think you can do what He can. Also, atomic physics primary concerns are with the arrangement of electrons around the nucleus and the processes by which these arrangements change, not how they (atoms) are created.
I don't know. I can't even say for sure that the Universe was created at all. Perhaps it is uncreated and eternal. I don't know. But we are getting off track here. Let me rephrase one of my prior posts: Your hypothesis is that God's voice can create matter...How do you intend to go about testing this hypothesis?
What we can both agree on, though, is the necessary fact of eternity as a concept, whether that eternal thing is God, or something else. Hence, the argument that causation cannot regress in infinite perpetuity as an argument for the existence of God is refuted.
"What we can both agree on, though, is the necessary fact of eternity as a concept, whether that eternal thing is God, or something else."
On the contrary, within our finite view of the universe, comprising of matter/energy/time, we are unable to observe anything beyond it, EXcept the inference that something outside it--eternal is the only explanation for its existence, as the universe cannot explain its own existence.
So perhaps there is some agreement there, if our definitions coincide.
We learn from the Big Bang the universe always existed. All the Big Bang says is that the universe is expanding. At one point the universe was smaller than an atom but it still always existed.
Actually, that's false. The Big Bang states that the universe and everything in it had a beginning, and therefore did not always exist. Look it up. Hawking did have some hopeful speculation about "bouncing" universes, but unfortunately, there are no facts to support it, other than the fact that he is really smart.
No, all the Big Bang Theory says is the universe is expanding. The Big Bang wasn't big nor was there a bang. It expanded out of a singularity smaller than an atom.
I cannot force you to pick up a science book if you don't want to. Science is about facts, but maybe you believe differently, and I respect your beliefs.
Umm, yes there is! Edwin Hubble discovered red shifting in the stars which he won the Noble Science Award for. This discovery proved the universe was growing.
What can't I explain? How God speaking creates matter? That is not something that I would propose in the first place. I am not an astro-physicist or a molecular biologist, so no, I can't explain the Big Bang or Abiogenesis either. You're missing the point though. My point is that even if God exists, all things are naturalistically explicable.
You're right. There is only one explanation for how the World came to be: Brahman. I looked into Christianity, and that has wacky stories like vast geological formations being built in a day, light and dark being created AFTER the planets (even though our particular light comes from our sun. figure THAT one out!) and 2 of every 'kind' (how clear and unambiguous) of animal being loaded onto just 1 boat, then nature simply exploding into a variety of life in the few thousand following years!
I was not talking about Christianity I was talking about intelligent design. Believe what you want man this is still the land of the free as of today anyway. PS: I LOVE JESUS :)
Do YOU know what ID is? Because officially it's simply creationist bile wrapped up in a thin veil of more bullshit in an attempt to hide the fact it's actually the same venomous nonsense being marketed under a different name. If I'm wrong please enlighten me. Show me the evidence FOR ID. I don't mean filling in an unkown with a tidy litle 'goddidit', I mean evidence that supports an 'intelligent designer', because I have honest to the 13 major greek 'IDs' never been presented with any. Cheers.
Officially on who's authority? People who are already biased against any kind of religion in the first place. Yes it's true that many religions use ID to prove their validity, but that doesn't mean that it's just some hypothesis a group of idiots came up with.
The two biggest things that support ID are the conservation of matter and entrapy.
there is nothing to support intelligent design because well what is there to support ID because everything that biologist have picked up and look at shows trade offs not a sudden ID.
" Have you noticed that the general scientific community is leaving the big bang? " have you notice that you just made that up?LoL, do you even know what the big bang theory explains?
Oh please. I learned this in eigth grade. The big bang theory explains where the universe started. To get much more in depth would be to run out of space. And I'm not making it up. You don't read Scientific American, one of the most read science magazines in the nation, do you?
Read the Bible people! Genesis 1:1. ya'll will all see that Creationists are right in the end when the true Christians go to heaven and the atheists burn in hell. don't say we didn't warn you.
Hahaha. What the hell are they even on about? At least Darwinism is based on some SCIENCE. Creationism isn't based on ANY science at all! If there was scientific evidence for it- well who will argue against it?? But there simply isn't has never been. Please, creationists neo or otherwise, we're all ears.
"Maybe were wrong, maybe were stupid" Get rid of the word Maybe and your right. And NO you cant have "all cards on the academic table without first providing evidence other than a 2000 year book that can be backed by real certified scientists as being a credible theory not a non answer, otherwise it's just an opinion held by a majority of people.
I'm not sure about the US, but in the UK we have Religious studies. If someone wants to learn creationism or another religious theory, they should go to a church, which teaches it anyway
Jesus, when are people going to realize that Evolution and a "deity" are not incompatible? There is no one saying that there wasn't a god who caused the Big Bang. I fail to see why morons like O'Reilly and Stein also seem to think all naturalist evolutionists are atheists. (Hint: I believe in Evolution and the Big Bang and I'm Jewish)
Haha this is a theory, a brilliant theroy from the 19th century... lets replace this brilliant theroy of the 19th century with a theroy from 4000 years ago. Darwin did not believe in god nor did Einstein. Occams razor for classrooms thank you very much. I am glad these two wont be filling my kids minds full of nonsense. The question of holes in the theory is moot - a basic school education of evolution will not be able to provide anywhere near the depth needed to prod those holes.
Notice Out of all the research they did for the film, it was spent all on the creationist side and none was used for the darwinism side. Great research for your shitty documentery Stein.
If you think the bible is the ultimate say in everything, even science, then that's fine. But, you cannot benefit from advances in secular science. So, faith healers only. No medicine or doctors allowed. You can use leaches and bleeding if you so chose to be that progressive, but on the whole, anything that isn't specifically spelled out in the Bible is only for those who agree that secular science is correct. So, no cars, no heated houses, no indoor plumbing. And definitely no internet.
Two guys arguing about a completely irrelevant debate and both agreeing with each other. How is that useful to anyone?
Evolution theory was never intended to explain how life began, but how we came from the first primitive lifeforms to the species we have today.
Evolution is a fact (think of bacteria becoming resistent to antibiotics), natural selection however isn't, but it's very likely to happen that way. Creationism is purely speculative and therefore will never be able to prove anything.
"In the unresolved problems segment tonight: abiogenesis!"
Sure O'Reilly, solve a problem on which scientist have been working for more than a hundred years in one evening with a creationist nut job with no scientific training whatsoever.
I agree with Bill. That whole "separation of church and state" thing is stupid. I mean, hey, some scientists believe a magical pink unicorn shot life-beams from its horn and created the dinosaurs- why PERSECUTE them by not teaching that view in science classes?
For fuck's sake, they're SCIENCE CLASSES and SCIENTISTS! Intelligent Design is not science and shouldn't be involved in either case!
yes but that isnt the issue. the issue is that it is a THEORY there are holes in the theory because that is what it is. it is not fact it is a theory.
they have no buissness teaching theories. school is were we go for facts not theories.
....I'm...I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. Theories are the BASIS of science. NOTHING is a "fact"-due to infinite time reference and limited experimentation, NOTHING can be proven. That you would say "no, not a fact, get rid of it" just completely skips over the fact that theories make up science.
And by the way, in case you haven't heard, the actual idea of evolution IS considered fact in the scientific community. Only descent with modification is still denied by...certain... people.
I do not have beliefs. I do not make the claim that I know with 100% certainty that a god does not exist, I only make the claim that there is insufficient evidence to reasonably assume that a god exists. The same is true of unicorns, faeries, and the tea cup that orbits pluto.
not only that, he claims to give Stein the last word, and cuts him off to put in his own last word. am i the only one to think this guy's a piece of shit?
Does anyone else see O'Reilly's hyprocrisy here. He talks about giving the other side the right to put in their opinion when his career is founded on his ability to yell louder than his opponents.
99.975% of scientists agree that evolution is the most likely for life as it it is on earth at the moment. 0.025% of scientists believe that God is responsible. I know which group I would go with if my life depended on it.
As for people being persecuted for promoting intelligent design. I doubt that. I have found plenty of web sites promoting it and just turn on ones TV on Sunday. There is no short supply of Televangalists promoting ID.
If one wants to learn about ID there are plenty of religious institutions that will be more then happy to teach it to you without my tax money. Thank you very much.
Diesel779, a professor can mention it in some privately funded schools. What a privately funded school teaches its students is its choice. However, I doubt rational people would support a private institution financially that taught this in their SCIENCE classes to their students.
I would have no problem with ID being taught in a world views class alongside of other creation myths. That is where it belongs, not taught as SCIENCE.
Ben Stein also paints all those that promote evolution as atheists. How dishonest! Even the Vatican agrees with evolution and is against the teaching of Intelligent Design.
Also, Ben Stein mentions Enstein in possibly believing in creator. The thing Mr. Stein doesn't mention is that Enstein did not believe in the cartoonish orthodox god of three monotheistic religions.
The reason why God talk is not mentioned in science class, because it is has nothing to do with science. God, morals, ethics, philosophy and theology are completely different academic disciplines. Science/Biology teachers are hired to teach the scientific method and other topics related to Science. God questions are religious questions and science deals with the natural world not the supernatural.
So sorry Bill that we haven't figured out the exact origin of life based on events that took place billions of years ago. In the meantime, lets teach the kids about Noah's Ark.
Stein suggests that the reason that an unscientific theological argument for intelligent design isn't presented in compulsory science classes alongside the scientific theory of evolution is because evolution is riddled with holes, and that its a weak theory?
The breakdown:
Intelligent has deeper holes than evolution.
Intelligent is a much weaker scientific argument than evolution.
By Stein's own standards, he's implying that intelligent design shouldn't be mentioned.
i cant understand how any christen is felling persecuted in America. The only thing christens are being persecuted from is science. and what do they want from scientists? are they supposed to include all religions into scientific theory? or just your religion? were will this end? arn't the Hindus and Muslims being left out of science as well? are christens going to demand that all religions be taught in science class or just thers?
Lightning striking a mud puddle!!!??? Dude, it wasn't just a mud puddle! they did tests on this shit. they recreated what they figured was the rough composition of the Earth's atmosphere in a test tube, and ran an electric current through it (to simulate lightning) and IT DIDN'T MAKE A LIVING THING!!! It made Proteins, which are one of the building blocks of life, dumbass!
Why can't they understand that life CANNOT be an instantaneous thing? It takes Millennia for life to become and change!
lightning striking a mud puddle? well i have seen lightning, and i have seen mud. it seems more plosiable to me that lightning struk a mud pudle and made a single celled organism then an invisable man in the sky making man from mud and the woman from his rib.
Maybe we are stupid??? WTF? You think he would be a litle more confident about his scientific findings if he's gonna attack evolution. Does he know that it is supported not only by biology?? He's arguing for ABIOGENESIS, but he's hoping to kill 2 birds with 1 stone. I wonder what he would say if you asked him WHY"someone" would create us in the first place. What are we pets, or slaves? Seems creepy...and unethical at that.
Science hasn't figured out everything yet...Must be God done it! I must admit God has done some pretty big things on Earth: The Crusades, The Spanish Inquisition, The Holocaust, The KKK, the 9-11 attacks, it goes on and on. Don't even say God wasn't responsible for these events. Man makes God,then man kills each other for God. We as a species would be in better shape if we unmade God.
All cards put on the academic table leaves Intelligent Design being ridiculed as it is currently. It is an ignorant proposition (not a theory, as it isn't science) that relies upon the person being presented to, being ignorant of the facts.
a WEAK theory Ben Stein??? It's perhaps the most accepted scientific idea among the scientific community. It's only weak to you because there's no definitive explanation for the beginning of the universe.
yeah really. to religious people it's "oh there are gaps in this theory, IT CAN'T BE TRUE THEN!"
they fail to realize that is why it's called a THEORY, not a FACT.
i don't even know why they argue with it, it's way better than any religious theory of the universe beginning or man becoming what it is: "god did it. lets leave it at that. lul."
I would just like an explanation on the law "all matter tends to greater disorder over time"? This law would have to apply to everything. So how could we evolve from a single celled organism?
Theres a lot of anger here on these comments..why don't you all just watch the movie and see what Ben has to say? Your bashing and name calling before you even know what he is going to say.
hold up I wasn't bashing Ben Stein for his movie, I was bashing him on his comment about how Evolution is weak. I'm unaware of the law you presented, but to find one problem in this idea does not constitute it being untrue.
dont quote me on this but this is 1 of 2 possible things
it either refers to the fact that matter decays (eg protons have a half life of 1000000000000000000000000000000000 years [very approx]) or the fact that the universe is continually drifting outwards from the moment the big bang started which, for some reason i dont understand, is viewed as chaotic
but again it might be something else, those are just possible references
These creationist scientists get rejected(expelled) because there is overwhelming proof for evolution. And if you want to refute that, you need even more evidence then what evolution is providing. They provide nothing but faith. And then act like they are the victim of some freedom of speech violation.
I like how the bvible was written way after the visit of christ, a little over 200 years later. So much fabrication, but thats true with all religions. At least it does some good things.
You've been boring from the start. I was having a perfectly intelligent conversation with the other guy, and you came jumping in here like a raving lunatic, posting lies and lauging like a hyena.
You're WRONG. None of those organizations you just listed would make the claim that abiogenisis is a proven fact. You're just a complet moron.
You're an idiot. Go back to your stupid list and ask everyone one of those organizations if they accept it as proven fact or not. There is a difference between accepting it as the answer that seems probable, and accepting it as proven fact backed up by physical evidence. It IS NOT provewn fact. You're ignorant, and a listing a bunch of organizations doesn't disprove what I say. You can cut and paste a list, but you don't even know what those organazations know about abiogenisis. It's NOT FACT.
" don't get mad because you lost and I'm more educated than you."
How did I lose? You cut and pasted a list of organizations that DON'T Support the thing you're claiming they do. I'm not "mad" at you, You're just an idiot. Stop wasting my time with your inane babbel.
Do I know you? No I don't. Do you know me? No, you don't. Don't make assumptions about me, you stupid atheist robot. Making comments calling other people stupid. How about you refute something he said, before you go making judgement calls against him?
Which honest scientific organization are you talking about that makes this claim.? By the way adding your "God" is not science. Do you know what the definiton of science is?? I doubt you have any science credentials if you say such things.
I honestly can't believe you'd call me a robot based on something you think I believe, which I don't. But don't see yourself as a robot for assuming abiogenesis is fact based, not on physical evidence, but rather on "Scientific consensus". Don't you see the hypocrisy in this?
Argumentum ad populum
marshwiggle360 1 month ago
Comment removed
marshwiggle360 1 month ago
Comment removed
marshwiggle360 1 month ago
Im tired of seeing people talking shit to each other about their beliefs. This is America, you are free to believe whatever the fuck you want. If you are a believer in intelligent design and you belittle people for believeing in science, fuck you. If you are an anal "evolution this, big bang that" and you talk down at religious people calling them primitive, heres a big fuck you too. Im agnostic and respect peoples beliefes but dont try to brain wash me with YOUR own.
deathmortis03 8 months ago
Comment removed
deathmortis03 8 months ago
Expelled is just a pathetic movie..
Propaganda on its finest..Stein is just repulsive..
Stevoukos 9 months ago
@Stevoukos he never said he was right. he just said there are two points of view that have to be acknowledged. if you think thats repulsive then idk how much your opinion is worth :/
Dreadztube 3 months ago
@Dreadztube No.Creationism is NOT a second view.Hell..It's not even a hypothesis.It's pure bullshit.
Stevoukos 3 months ago
Science only proves there is a God!!!
Danny3466 1 year ago
"Darwinism" - Stupid talk for Evolution.
Ben Stein only plays smart people. his grasp of Science isn't even jr. high
EsClayWilson 1 year ago
That movie was the most dishonest, anti-intellectual load of trash yet made. It offered not one ounce of proof to advance ID since there is none. All it offered up was a bunch of paranoia about "Big Science" oppressing the little people and how Evolution leads to Auschwitz. Notice how O'Reilly, the Dunce automatically goes into his mindless rant about "secular progressives" cause he is a non thinker just like the movie's target audience.
EsClayWilson 1 year ago
This is freedom of IDIODICY. Typical American phenomenon.
Andrewlohbihler 1 year ago
Lol, not acting defense it is admitting that evolution is not even about how it started. It is about how we came here and how things adapt to change. We admit it, but the idea of a god would mean he had to be created. And that raises more questions than answers.
myg0tpurepunk 1 year ago
Ben Stein has no idea how evolution works, we dont decend from monkeys, we both share a common ancestor. its not a ladder system.
also Darwins theory isnt to explain how life began?, it tries to explain what we observe in the natural world and the passing on of traits through generations
"(ID) may not be right but it will fill in the gaps in the theory of evolution"
we dont know, so god did it.. ha ha .. no
What a moron
Philip0209 2 years ago
@Philip0209
"We share both a common ancestor"
Yet you cannot provide the scientific name of this fictional common ancestor correct?
owensphil 2 years ago
ah the creationist talks.. i find it amusing how you suddenly chase evidence yet your willing to accept the idea of a god without the need for the same.
i am not an evolutionary biologist but i can say that its not a case that there were apes and then humans suddenly appeared, the change takes a very long time and like i said its not a ladder system, speciation plays a big part.
I would maybe recommend that you learn about evolution/speciation before you comment on the subject.
Philip0209 2 years ago
@Philip0209
"Yet your need to accept the idea of a god without the need for the same"
Ah the Darwinian sheep talks
There is tons of evidence for design and thus a designer.
I would suggest that YOU learn about evolution before commenting on the subject
owensphil 2 years ago
firstly if your going to quote at least get it right, to incorrectly quote just shows your ignorance and lack of comprehension.
which one of us is the sheep here? sheep follow blindly, i have shown that i have an understanding of the subject, something you have failed to do, maybe you would prefer to discuss the holy book of yours? i assume you have read it?
Also i would be very interested to see the evidence for a designer that you claim is so abundant.
Philip0209 2 years ago
"Shows your ignorance and lack of comprehension"
What quote of mine shows all of that?
An argument can be easily made for the case of creation and against evolution without having to refer to a holy book. You obviously don't know both sides of the argument
owensphil 2 years ago
yet you still do nothing to put your arguement across..
you fail to point out a single arguement against evolution or for creation. I am beginning to think that maybe you dont have a arguement to make.
Philip0209 2 years ago
This is a extreme misrepresentation of what is actually going on between science teachers and the "ID" (formerly known as creationist) movement.
It is NOT about whether or not God exists, but whether or not ideas and arguments formulated by "ID" proponents (that have not gone through peer review, have been repeatedly debunked, and are sometimes blatant misrepresentations) should be taught in science class.
Many ID OPPONENTS are Christians - including the FRICKIN' POPE.
sinmantyx 2 years ago
@sinmantyx
"Many ID Opponents are Christians - including the FRICKIN' POPE"
Since when is the frickin Pope an authority on the subject?
owensphil 2 years ago
@owensphil Since when are you an authority on the subject?
EsClayWilson 1 year ago
Wow - love it when they constantly mention Newton. Why can't we have as much freedom as Newton? He was an anti-trinitarian heretic. If the church knew about his religious beliefs he may have been killed for all we know.
Call that freedom?
I suppose it was intellectual tyranny that prompted his publishers to omit the stuff about the Atlantians. :)
sinmantyx 2 years ago
Comment removed
jarmendariz115 2 years ago
Comment removed
sinmantyx 2 years ago
Comment removed
sinmantyx 2 years ago
Comment removed
sinmantyx 2 years ago
@jarmendariz115
Sorry about that, I keep posting a time just after he says it (oops) - however, he mentions Newton a short time after 3:35
sinmantyx 2 years ago
Why do I watch these things - you CAN say in ANY class you want that there are people who believe in creationism and believe that a higher power is responsible for directing nature.
What you can't do is FORCE biology teachers to tell students things that are not true because you have an agenda.
sinmantyx 2 years ago
It's interesting how O'Reilly equates a court case that was championed BY science teachers so that they were not FORCED to say something in class - with censoring science teachers.
Funny that. Those interested should look into the Dover case.
sinmantyx 2 years ago
"persecuted" haha, this is ridiculous!
So much idiocy combined is hardly bearable.
Elvikowsky 2 years ago
Denial is also persecution
mastersduhgree 2 years ago
That's a joke, isn't it?
Lets recall why the theory of Intellignet Design is denied in science class. Oh, it is because, this concept scientificly speaking is rubbish! It's based on pure faith with no scientific evidence to support the theory. In contrast evolution has been proven many times by scientific findings wether it be genetics, biology, geology etc. If you allow ID to be taught in schools you are giving up everything western society is based on since the Enlightenment!
Elvikowsky 2 years ago
It has therefore nothing to do with free thinking or suppressing an opinion. On the contrary it's the apologists of creation that deny the right of free speech and thought.
Elvikowsky 2 years ago
Societies may progress in the way he describes, but science doesn't.
dkt80 2 years ago
omfg this country is dumb.... and Bill O'Riley is an idiot.
There is no scientific dispute about evolution. Just like the "Theory" of gravity, cells, electricity, etc, evolution is based on facts.
Creationists are laughed at because rejecting evolution is as laughable as rejecting gravity. "Maybe angels are pushing our feet to the ground, eff gravity, go god!"
Please please stop accepting supernatural garbage that goes against REALITY.
"I dunno how it works, so god dun it!" ....
ojoreakatheoj 2 years ago
I cracked up watching this, no wonder Americans are lacking behind in education if they keep watching Fox News and E and other channels to keep you as stupid as a door.
Ofurstinn 2 years ago
They're not opposed to free speech....they just believe only their speech should be free!
That's why they gang up and try to silence any opposing opinion!
And thus, why many say they are becoming a religious cult.
kdiddle1 2 years ago
Jesus is Lord.
amd7787 2 years ago
NEWS FLASH, BELIEVERS!!!!!!!!!!!:
"God did it" doesn't explain how life began, either.
SSJ3Ulcer 2 years ago
But, it does have a more likely chance of happening than evolution. It also fills in more of the "gaps".
devinsanerd 2 years ago
How?
SSJ3Ulcer 2 years ago
Well, another being creating something perfect such as cells, seems more plausible to happen than lightning stricking a mud puddle and creating a cell.
devinsanerd 2 years ago
Once again: How did this other being create the cell?
SSJ3Ulcer 2 years ago
Well, He simply spoke it into existence.
devinsanerd 2 years ago
Mm-hm. And explain to me, if you would please, how the atomic physics of God's voice creating matter work. Can I create matter with my voice, too? If not, then what are the fundamental differences between my voice and God's voice?
SSJ3Ulcer 2 years ago
I will tell you all I know. It simply says in Genesis that God created the heavens and the earth. You, sir, arent God, therefore you cant possibly think you can do what He can. Also, atomic physics primary concerns are with the arrangement of electrons around the nucleus and the processes by which these arrangements change, not how they (atoms) are created.
devinsanerd 2 years ago
So how are they created, then?
SSJ3Ulcer 2 years ago
Well, they were created by God, atoms arent continuously being created. Matter can neither be created or destroyed.
devinsanerd 2 years ago
Yes, the first law of thermodynamics...conservation of energy/conservation of matter, etc. I am aware of it.
Amazingly, you have cited this law and claimed that atoms were created by God in the same sentence!
SSJ3Ulcer 2 years ago
Then how do you propose they were created? I have an open mind. :)
devinsanerd 2 years ago
I don't know. I can't even say for sure that the Universe was created at all. Perhaps it is uncreated and eternal. I don't know. But we are getting off track here. Let me rephrase one of my prior posts: Your hypothesis is that God's voice can create matter...How do you intend to go about testing this hypothesis?
SSJ3Ulcer 2 years ago
"Perhaps it is uncreated and eternal"
Whoa, the universe is not eternal, so it was "uncreated" at a certain point and "created" at another, from a completely definitive standpoint.
I thought we learned this from the Big Bang.
sofielein 2 years ago
What we can both agree on, though, is the necessary fact of eternity as a concept, whether that eternal thing is God, or something else. Hence, the argument that causation cannot regress in infinite perpetuity as an argument for the existence of God is refuted.
SSJ3Ulcer 2 years ago
"What we can both agree on, though, is the necessary fact of eternity as a concept, whether that eternal thing is God, or something else."
On the contrary, within our finite view of the universe, comprising of matter/energy/time, we are unable to observe anything beyond it, EXcept the inference that something outside it--eternal is the only explanation for its existence, as the universe cannot explain its own existence.
So perhaps there is some agreement there, if our definitions coincide.
sofielein 2 years ago
We learn from the Big Bang the universe always existed. All the Big Bang says is that the universe is expanding. At one point the universe was smaller than an atom but it still always existed.
JesusWasStupid 2 years ago
Actually, that's false. The Big Bang states that the universe and everything in it had a beginning, and therefore did not always exist. Look it up. Hawking did have some hopeful speculation about "bouncing" universes, but unfortunately, there are no facts to support it, other than the fact that he is really smart.
sofielein 2 years ago
No, all the Big Bang Theory says is the universe is expanding. The Big Bang wasn't big nor was there a bang. It expanded out of a singularity smaller than an atom.
JesusWasStupid 2 years ago
I cannot force you to pick up a science book if you don't want to. Science is about facts, but maybe you believe differently, and I respect your beliefs.
sofielein 2 years ago
UM...No the universe is not expanding.THeres no evidence that supports an expanding universe.Its another secular concept.
mastersduhgree 2 years ago
Umm, yes there is! Edwin Hubble discovered red shifting in the stars which he won the Noble Science Award for. This discovery proved the universe was growing.
JesusWasStupid 2 years ago
"Matter can neither be created or destroyed."
Ha! not so, Einstein showed us otherwise, which isn't surprising considering that that theory is 2500 yrs old.
And Anyway, if G-d created matter, than why is matter the eternal substance instead of G-d?
sofielein 2 years ago
Bigger than obviously you can imagine.
mastersduhgree 2 years ago
What are you talking about?
SSJ3Ulcer 2 years ago
BUt you cant explain it either
mastersduhgree 2 years ago
What can't I explain? How God speaking creates matter? That is not something that I would propose in the first place. I am not an astro-physicist or a molecular biologist, so no, I can't explain the Big Bang or Abiogenesis either. You're missing the point though. My point is that even if God exists, all things are naturalistically explicable.
SSJ3Ulcer 2 years ago
MAYBE you should LOOK INTO intelligent design before you say there is nothing to back it up. lol
culturedgraffiti 2 years ago 2
You're right. There is only one explanation for how the World came to be: Brahman. I looked into Christianity, and that has wacky stories like vast geological formations being built in a day, light and dark being created AFTER the planets (even though our particular light comes from our sun. figure THAT one out!) and 2 of every 'kind' (how clear and unambiguous) of animal being loaded onto just 1 boat, then nature simply exploding into a variety of life in the few thousand following years!
Revoltingsheeple 2 years ago
I was not talking about Christianity I was talking about intelligent design. Believe what you want man this is still the land of the free as of today anyway. PS: I LOVE JESUS :)
culturedgraffiti 2 years ago 2
Do YOU know what ID is? Because officially it's simply creationist bile wrapped up in a thin veil of more bullshit in an attempt to hide the fact it's actually the same venomous nonsense being marketed under a different name. If I'm wrong please enlighten me. Show me the evidence FOR ID. I don't mean filling in an unkown with a tidy litle 'goddidit', I mean evidence that supports an 'intelligent designer', because I have honest to the 13 major greek 'IDs' never been presented with any. Cheers.
Revoltingsheeple 2 years ago
Officially on who's authority? People who are already biased against any kind of religion in the first place. Yes it's true that many religions use ID to prove their validity, but that doesn't mean that it's just some hypothesis a group of idiots came up with.
The two biggest things that support ID are the conservation of matter and entrapy.
Lvin4Him 2 years ago
A major ID text book, 'Of Pandas and People' had literally just replaced 'Creationist' with 'ID':
watch?v=M-tk7MkHKtI (1:26-1:10)
This was to the extent that somone hadn't bothered to properly cut and paste (2:35-3:21)!
ID is not scientific in that it misrepresents and undermines years of actual, painstaking scientific research. I can provide evidence of this.
'Conservation of matter'- Please expand as I'd love to know how conservation of matter and entrOpy supports ID, in your opinion?
Revoltingsheeple 2 years ago
there is nothing to support intelligent design because well what is there to support ID because everything that biologist have picked up and look at shows trade offs not a sudden ID.
stupidb8888 2 years ago
What kind of trade offs?
Lvin4Him 2 years ago
answer to the first five seconds,with the big bang.
stupidb8888 2 years ago
Have you noticed that the general scientific community is leaving the big bang? Now they're calling it the big bounce or something.
Lvin4Him 2 years ago
" Have you noticed that the general scientific community is leaving the big bang? " have you notice that you just made that up?LoL, do you even know what the big bang theory explains?
stupidb8888 2 years ago
Oh please. I learned this in eigth grade. The big bang theory explains where the universe started. To get much more in depth would be to run out of space. And I'm not making it up. You don't read Scientific American, one of the most read science magazines in the nation, do you?
Lvin4Him 2 years ago
Read the Bible people! Genesis 1:1. ya'll will all see that Creationists are right in the end when the true Christians go to heaven and the atheists burn in hell. don't say we didn't warn you.
superQtee11 2 years ago
Stein, the right to freedom of speech does NOT include the right to be taken seriously.
DarthServo 2 years ago
Hahaha. What the hell are they even on about? At least Darwinism is based on some SCIENCE. Creationism isn't based on ANY science at all! If there was scientific evidence for it- well who will argue against it?? But there simply isn't has never been. Please, creationists neo or otherwise, we're all ears.
QuixoticM 2 years ago
"Maybe were wrong, maybe were stupid" Get rid of the word Maybe and your right. And NO you cant have "all cards on the academic table without first providing evidence other than a 2000 year book that can be backed by real certified scientists as being a credible theory not a non answer, otherwise it's just an opinion held by a majority of people.
lothor1234 2 years ago
"Maybe we're wrong. Maybe we're stupid." No doubt about it.
And Bill, the reason you don't mention theologians in science class is because theology is not a science.
QuisletEsq 3 years ago
easily one of the worst movies ever made. what an absolute emabarrassment for stein
johhny3rubs 3 years ago
I'm not sure about the US, but in the UK we have Religious studies. If someone wants to learn creationism or another religious theory, they should go to a church, which teaches it anyway
PaleCabbage 3 years ago
Jesus, when are people going to realize that Evolution and a "deity" are not incompatible? There is no one saying that there wasn't a god who caused the Big Bang. I fail to see why morons like O'Reilly and Stein also seem to think all naturalist evolutionists are atheists. (Hint: I believe in Evolution and the Big Bang and I'm Jewish)
tazgrento 3 years ago 4
@tazgrento friend i would like a short word,
If I may ask do you read and believe the torah?
0mypod0 10 months ago
@0mypod0
Not really, anymore. I've changed a bit since two years ago. I consider myself non-religious now.
tazgrento 10 months ago
Haha this is a theory, a brilliant theroy from the 19th century... lets replace this brilliant theroy of the 19th century with a theroy from 4000 years ago. Darwin did not believe in god nor did Einstein. Occams razor for classrooms thank you very much. I am glad these two wont be filling my kids minds full of nonsense. The question of holes in the theory is moot - a basic school education of evolution will not be able to provide anywhere near the depth needed to prod those holes.
baalChrist 3 years ago
Well Einstein didn't believe in a Judeo/Christian God per se, but he wasn't an atheist either.
Joyness333 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
How to become a Christian. Click on
Godisreal101
GodIsReal101 3 years ago
2:40 BECAUSE IT'S A SCIENCE CLASS!!
SolidGaby 3 years ago
THIS!
fyndor 3 years ago
Comment removed
SolidGaby 3 years ago
This is real. It's not propoganda. I watched this happen in a small community college, not a prestigious university.
sciencegeekjsusfreak 3 years ago
Notice Out of all the research they did for the film, it was spent all on the creationist side and none was used for the darwinism side. Great research for your shitty documentery Stein.
MetalEagle95 3 years ago
If you think the bible is the ultimate say in everything, even science, then that's fine. But, you cannot benefit from advances in secular science. So, faith healers only. No medicine or doctors allowed. You can use leaches and bleeding if you so chose to be that progressive, but on the whole, anything that isn't specifically spelled out in the Bible is only for those who agree that secular science is correct. So, no cars, no heated houses, no indoor plumbing. And definitely no internet.
smokezero 3 years ago
Two guys arguing about a completely irrelevant debate and both agreeing with each other. How is that useful to anyone?
Evolution theory was never intended to explain how life began, but how we came from the first primitive lifeforms to the species we have today.
Evolution is a fact (think of bacteria becoming resistent to antibiotics), natural selection however isn't, but it's very likely to happen that way. Creationism is purely speculative and therefore will never be able to prove anything.
pandemiCDG 3 years ago
An easy way to explain creationism is this:
The cells and ways things got here are so complex that only a god could have made it, so we should just quit while we're ahead and start praising him.
Or my version:
God did it, fuck you
Creationism is just another flawed "Science" showing that christians are scared so they're resorting to inane tactics.
MetalEagle95 3 years ago
"In the unresolved problems segment tonight: abiogenesis!"
Sure O'Reilly, solve a problem on which scientist have been working for more than a hundred years in one evening with a creationist nut job with no scientific training whatsoever.
RationalEmotive 3 years ago
I agree with Bill. That whole "separation of church and state" thing is stupid. I mean, hey, some scientists believe a magical pink unicorn shot life-beams from its horn and created the dinosaurs- why PERSECUTE them by not teaching that view in science classes?
For fuck's sake, they're SCIENCE CLASSES and SCIENTISTS! Intelligent Design is not science and shouldn't be involved in either case!
freakingusername 3 years ago
yes but that isnt the issue. the issue is that it is a THEORY there are holes in the theory because that is what it is. it is not fact it is a theory.
they have no buissness teaching theories. school is were we go for facts not theories.
friendofthenazarene 3 years ago
....I'm...I'm sorry, but that's just stupid. Theories are the BASIS of science. NOTHING is a "fact"-due to infinite time reference and limited experimentation, NOTHING can be proven. That you would say "no, not a fact, get rid of it" just completely skips over the fact that theories make up science.
And by the way, in case you haven't heard, the actual idea of evolution IS considered fact in the scientific community. Only descent with modification is still denied by...certain... people.
freakingusername 3 years ago 2
oh you mean evolution is a theory.
like the theory of gravity?
liber8me 3 years ago
I do not have beliefs. I do not make the claim that I know with 100% certainty that a god does not exist, I only make the claim that there is insufficient evidence to reasonably assume that a god exists. The same is true of unicorns, faeries, and the tea cup that orbits pluto.
sykes1024 3 years ago
not only that, he claims to give Stein the last word, and cuts him off to put in his own last word. am i the only one to think this guy's a piece of shit?
jim0watkins 3 years ago
Does anyone else see O'Reilly's hyprocrisy here. He talks about giving the other side the right to put in their opinion when his career is founded on his ability to yell louder than his opponents.
jim0watkins 3 years ago
99.975% of scientists agree that evolution is the most likely for life as it it is on earth at the moment. 0.025% of scientists believe that God is responsible. I know which group I would go with if my life depended on it.
wtargentina 3 years ago
As for people being persecuted for promoting intelligent design. I doubt that. I have found plenty of web sites promoting it and just turn on ones TV on Sunday. There is no short supply of Televangalists promoting ID.
If one wants to learn about ID there are plenty of religious institutions that will be more then happy to teach it to you without my tax money. Thank you very much.
chalk20 3 years ago
Yeah, try mentioning it in a biology class or as a professor, see what happens.
Its not about the televagelists, its that our right to mention it in univeristies is slowly being taken away from us.
diesel779 3 years ago
Diesel779, a professor can mention it in some privately funded schools. What a privately funded school teaches its students is its choice. However, I doubt rational people would support a private institution financially that taught this in their SCIENCE classes to their students.
I would have no problem with ID being taught in a world views class alongside of other creation myths. That is where it belongs, not taught as SCIENCE.
chalk20 3 years ago
Ben Stein also paints all those that promote evolution as atheists. How dishonest! Even the Vatican agrees with evolution and is against the teaching of Intelligent Design.
Also, Ben Stein mentions Enstein in possibly believing in creator. The thing Mr. Stein doesn't mention is that Enstein did not believe in the cartoonish orthodox god of three monotheistic religions.
chalk20 3 years ago
He'res where you cite your references.
diesel779 3 years ago
The reason why God talk is not mentioned in science class, because it is has nothing to do with science. God, morals, ethics, philosophy and theology are completely different academic disciplines. Science/Biology teachers are hired to teach the scientific method and other topics related to Science. God questions are religious questions and science deals with the natural world not the supernatural.
chalk20 3 years ago
So sorry Bill that we haven't figured out the exact origin of life based on events that took place billions of years ago. In the meantime, lets teach the kids about Noah's Ark.
bamafader 3 years ago
A fair speechwriter is not a scientist.
kevinthe1st 3 years ago
Stein suggests that the reason that an unscientific theological argument for intelligent design isn't presented in compulsory science classes alongside the scientific theory of evolution is because evolution is riddled with holes, and that its a weak theory?
The breakdown:
Intelligent has deeper holes than evolution.
Intelligent is a much weaker scientific argument than evolution.
By Stein's own standards, he's implying that intelligent design shouldn't be mentioned.
manateesanssanity 3 years ago
Good stuff. I mean Ben Steins critic, not the mean spirtied hubris of most of you.
sugarrayluc 3 years ago
The Theory of Evolution only covers Biology.
Please educate yourself.
bubbah 3 years ago
i cant understand how any christen is felling persecuted in America. The only thing christens are being persecuted from is science. and what do they want from scientists? are they supposed to include all religions into scientific theory? or just your religion? were will this end? arn't the Hindus and Muslims being left out of science as well? are christens going to demand that all religions be taught in science class or just thers?
buzzkilla12 3 years ago
Lightning striking a mud puddle!!!??? Dude, it wasn't just a mud puddle! they did tests on this shit. they recreated what they figured was the rough composition of the Earth's atmosphere in a test tube, and ran an electric current through it (to simulate lightning) and IT DIDN'T MAKE A LIVING THING!!! It made Proteins, which are one of the building blocks of life, dumbass!
Why can't they understand that life CANNOT be an instantaneous thing? It takes Millennia for life to become and change!
velcroboy60000 3 years ago
lightning striking a mud puddle? well i have seen lightning, and i have seen mud. it seems more plosiable to me that lightning struk a mud pudle and made a single celled organism then an invisable man in the sky making man from mud and the woman from his rib.
buzzkilla12 3 years ago
It didn't make a single cell organism. it made proteins. But proteins are one of the building blocks of life. Mr. Stein is uninformed.
velcroboy60000 3 years ago
creationism should never be teach in biology or science class!!
talk to the preast or something like that if your interested.,.
Jwofl 3 years ago
Evolution is much more solid then Stein makes it out to be.
twentyoneandhalf 3 years ago
"God is a trap - God is the answer when we don't know the answer, when your brain is not big enough." - Phillipe Starck
sekkingu 3 years ago
the parts of the cell evolved as well
we have the explanations
somewhere on YT theres a video explaining exactly how the cell could have evolved
Orygyn 3 years ago
Maybe we are stupid??? WTF? You think he would be a litle more confident about his scientific findings if he's gonna attack evolution. Does he know that it is supported not only by biology?? He's arguing for ABIOGENESIS, but he's hoping to kill 2 birds with 1 stone. I wonder what he would say if you asked him WHY"someone" would create us in the first place. What are we pets, or slaves? Seems creepy...and unethical at that.
BSintolerant 3 years ago
Science hasn't figured out everything yet...Must be God done it! I must admit God has done some pretty big things on Earth: The Crusades, The Spanish Inquisition, The Holocaust, The KKK, the 9-11 attacks, it goes on and on. Don't even say God wasn't responsible for these events. Man makes God,then man kills each other for God. We as a species would be in better shape if we unmade God.
DrJomes 3 years ago
Glad that Ben fucking Stein is correcting DARWIN.
HAAAAAAAAAAAA. What a joke.
bumblebeeees 3 years ago
geee, if guys like these are going to populate heaven, I'd rather go to hell with Dawkins...
aleterra 3 years ago
Stein is an idiot.
All cards put on the academic table leaves Intelligent Design being ridiculed as it is currently. It is an ignorant proposition (not a theory, as it isn't science) that relies upon the person being presented to, being ignorant of the facts.
Alkirin 3 years ago
Most of what hes saying is just plain strawman arguments. LIGHTNING HITTING PUDDLES AMAGAD... no.. thats not how it works.
ohyeh0 3 years ago
Let's burn strawmen and stoke the fire with lies.
devourerofbabies 3 years ago
a WEAK theory Ben Stein??? It's perhaps the most accepted scientific idea among the scientific community. It's only weak to you because there's no definitive explanation for the beginning of the universe.
inaeurotrance 3 years ago
yeah really. to religious people it's "oh there are gaps in this theory, IT CAN'T BE TRUE THEN!"
they fail to realize that is why it's called a THEORY, not a FACT.
i don't even know why they argue with it, it's way better than any religious theory of the universe beginning or man becoming what it is: "god did it. lets leave it at that. lul."
pontolones 3 years ago
I would just like an explanation on the law "all matter tends to greater disorder over time"? This law would have to apply to everything. So how could we evolve from a single celled organism?
Theres a lot of anger here on these comments..why don't you all just watch the movie and see what Ben has to say? Your bashing and name calling before you even know what he is going to say.
googes1984 3 years ago
hold up I wasn't bashing Ben Stein for his movie, I was bashing him on his comment about how Evolution is weak. I'm unaware of the law you presented, but to find one problem in this idea does not constitute it being untrue.
inaeurotrance 3 years ago
dont quote me on this but this is 1 of 2 possible things
it either refers to the fact that matter decays (eg protons have a half life of 1000000000000000000000000000000000 years [very approx]) or the fact that the universe is continually drifting outwards from the moment the big bang started which, for some reason i dont understand, is viewed as chaotic
but again it might be something else, those are just possible references
Orygyn 3 years ago
These creationist scientists get rejected(expelled) because there is overwhelming proof for evolution. And if you want to refute that, you need even more evidence then what evolution is providing. They provide nothing but faith. And then act like they are the victim of some freedom of speech violation.
urantivirus 3 years ago
I like how the bvible was written way after the visit of christ, a little over 200 years later. So much fabrication, but thats true with all religions. At least it does some good things.
CARSONQUAMMSN 3 years ago
ur getting a little boring. You are not proving anything with your god delusion. I'm doubling your dosage of thorazine!! stat.
macomoto 3 years ago
You've been boring from the start. I was having a perfectly intelligent conversation with the other guy, and you came jumping in here like a raving lunatic, posting lies and lauging like a hyena.
You're WRONG. None of those organizations you just listed would make the claim that abiogenisis is a proven fact. You're just a complet moron.
spymaster2 3 years ago
Ha Ha Ha u can't name any science organization that doesn't accept abiogenesis!!!
btw... these accept abiogenesis
American Association For The Advancement Of Science
American Institute Of Biological Sciences
Australian Academy of Science
Geological Society Of America
History of Science Society
Southern Anthropological Society
.... etc ....etc
macomoto 3 years ago
Here's a list of organizations that DON'T say abiogenisis is a proven fact...
Academy Of Science Of The Royal Society Of Canada
Alabama Academy Of Science
American Anthropological Association
American Anthropological Association (2000)*
American Association For The Advancement Of Science (1923)
American Association For The Advancement Of Science (1972)
spymaster2 3 years ago
ha ha ha they all accept it.
macomoto 3 years ago
"they all accept it"
As proven fact?
spymaster2 3 years ago
yes
macomoto 3 years ago
Liar.
spymaster2 3 years ago
You know, lying for jesus doesn't work.
macomoto 3 years ago
non existant jesus that is
macomoto 3 years ago
Do you ever post anything that isn't pure assumption and bullshit?
spymaster2 3 years ago
HA HA HA, u CAN'T give me any organizations that doesn't accept abiogenesis theory!!!
btw... these do accept it.
Academy Of Science Of The Royal Society Of Canada
Alabama Academy Of Science
American Anthropological Association
American Anthropological Association (2000)*
American Association For The Advancement Of Science (1923)
American Association For The Advancement Of Science (1972)
I could list more but I have a 500 limit, there are many more that accept it, so educate yourself
macomoto 3 years ago
You're an idiot. Go back to your stupid list and ask everyone one of those organizations if they accept it as proven fact or not. There is a difference between accepting it as the answer that seems probable, and accepting it as proven fact backed up by physical evidence. It IS NOT provewn fact. You're ignorant, and a listing a bunch of organizations doesn't disprove what I say. You can cut and paste a list, but you don't even know what those organazations know about abiogenisis. It's NOT FACT.
spymaster2 3 years ago
yes they do, they accept both abiogenesis and evolution, don't get mad because you lost and I'm more educated than you.
macomoto 3 years ago
"they accept both abiogenesis"
NO, THEY DON'T.
" don't get mad because you lost and I'm more educated than you."
How did I lose? You cut and pasted a list of organizations that DON'T Support the thing you're claiming they do. I'm not "mad" at you, You're just an idiot. Stop wasting my time with your inane babbel.
spymaster2 3 years ago
Yes Ben, you are both dumb and stupid.
macomoto 3 years ago
So are you.
spymaster2 3 years ago
take some thorazine for your god delusion
macomoto 3 years ago
Do I know you? No I don't. Do you know me? No, you don't. Don't make assumptions about me, you stupid atheist robot. Making comments calling other people stupid. How about you refute something he said, before you go making judgement calls against him?
spymaster2 3 years ago
ok, stupid.
1. Life came about with abiogenesis
2. From there evolution took place
3. Evolution has many practical applications in medicine. Without it, we would stil resort to ID (witchcraft, voodo) to cure diseases.
4. Ben Stein is not qualified to question evolution.
5. All scientific organization accept evolution as the ONLY theory.
6. Your a robot, pal, believing in the "talking snake" what other fairy tales are still dilusional about??
macomoto 3 years ago
"Life came about with abiogenesis"
LoL, I stopped reading right there. Where's your evidence for this?
spymaster2 3 years ago
Scientific consensus, globally. The earlier regions of the fossil record show us this. Google "abiogenesis" and learn.
macomoto 3 years ago
I know what abiogenesis you stupid ass. I already told you not to make assumptions about me, it only makes you look foolish.
The point is that abiogenesis is NOT proven fact, nor is it even backed up with any physical evidence. Any honest scientist will tell you this.
spymaster2 3 years ago
Which honest scientific organization are you talking about that makes this claim.? By the way adding your "God" is not science. Do you know what the definiton of science is?? I doubt you have any science credentials if you say such things.
macomoto 3 years ago
"Which honest scientific organization are you talking about"
Ummm.... ALL. What scientific organization told you that abiogenesis is a proven fact? They lied to you.
"adding your "God" is not science"
And? Is there a point to that?
"Do you know what the definiton of science is"
Yes. Why do you ask so many stupid questions?
"I doubt you have any science credentials if you say such things."
Oooo snap, that's a good one. You must be a hit in the back of the class.
spymaster2 3 years ago
I honestly can't believe you'd call me a robot based on something you think I believe, which I don't. But don't see yourself as a robot for assuming abiogenesis is fact based, not on physical evidence, but rather on "Scientific consensus". Don't you see the hypocrisy in this?
spymaster2 3 years ago
You still haven't named 1 scientific organization that doesn't accept abiogenesis. Give me a name... (All is not an answer)
macomoto 3 years ago