Glenn Beck - Nutjob of the week

[erictheactorsactor]

he has those crazy mormon eyes.

[anaemia]

Aww, I thought that this was going to be a Chaser video :(.

Rethink the title "Nutjob of the Week". It's been done by 5 Aussie blokes.

[mzyzer19]

I do not like beck but this video was all over the place



[Illumified]

Its funny hearing secularist and so-called scientist arguing against having equal debates, against skepticism, against anyone who isnt "with the consensus". They've decided that they are so right, that there isn't even a basis to discuss alternatives. That it gives them not only the imperative but the right, to lie, cheat and ridicule those who disagree with their position.

[alienannanaki]

Glenn Beck has been hiding his gay sexual preference for years. He was arrested in a new jersey public bathroom for solicitation. He was caught going down on an older man. There is proof

[bookwormsrcool]

Why does Glenn Beck not win the Nutjob Award every week?

[permexOQ]

more like Nutjob of the Milennium

[FilmCryptic]

I was a little confused at this video. I heard the narrator, SecularTalk, say that debates needn't be equal in the instance of ID, because of it's credibility. Hummm... I wonder how we would let a Galileo through in our scientific community. Because, if I remember correctly, he did not have a lot of cred with the institution of the time, yet we find that it was beneficial that he was allowed to have his view in the end. This is what equal debate is for. For the betterment of our understanding.

[SecularTalk]

this is a good point. I think i need to clarify a little bit here. what i'm not TRYING to say but how you (and other people may have percieved it) is the idea of "dismiss ID offhand". This is not what i mean to say, what i mean to say is the scientific community HAS examined the evidence presented by the ID hypothesis, and it has failed miserably. So at the beginning of this debate, looking at the evidence presented by both sides is a MUST. but TODAY, the jury is in.

[cegtown]

@FilmCryptic You should have just said that we have the lawful obligation to ( as declared in the Bill of Rights) respect popular as well as "unpopular" conversation.

[martidw]

You should send your resume to BSNBC, you could replace Keith Olbermann.

[StepOnMeLadies]

This is five minutes of character degradation and name calling. As to the subject itself, there was really no substance whatsoever, just another leftist ramble (poorly read I might add). I have yet to hear ANY person, scientist or otherwise, explain how the world was created, other than creation. Maybe someone from seculartalker can explain it to me like i'm a 6 year old child. I confuse very easily so plase start from THE VERY BEGINNING.

[Albinoceros]

SINCE NO ONE CAN EXPLAIN IT, IT GOTTA BE GAWD.

Well ramen, SOML, you really do like to have your cake and eat it too. Creationism explains nothing, I might add, which is not a supposition. It's based on the mythology which Judaism, like any good religion, had in lieu of explanations. We have science now, which never fills in the gaps with sawdust, but takes its time and thinks about the task at hand. It's pretty fun. You should try it.

[rd1999]

as Beck is on CNN there is no reason for him to be so far right unless he has been pegged by the producers as "that guy"

[guelphgryphon]

Glenn Beck isn't lead news anchor, dumbass, he hosts his own show separate...

[shaphanw]

I HATE GLENN BECK he really is the idiot of the work,how retarded do you have to be to like this guy

[breakfastisready]

did you see the movie?

[1500hothotz]

Ben Stein's claim liking Darwinism to genocide was somewhat wrong. However, he did have a legit historical claim liking Hitler's action to the older understanding of Darwinism. I do think he is right when he states that people should be allowed to go outside of Darwinism and consider Int. design. However the down side is that some crazy creationists will over celebrate and perverse the idea of Int. design.The idea of Int. design is reasonable, outweighs Darwin's guess and requires less faith.

[thegodlessatheist]

hitler = catholic

get ur facts streight

[1500hothotz]

I never said hitler was not catholic. But he was influenced by intelects of his time who were influenced by Darwinism. Oh and btw many catholics and other christians believe in both darwinism and christ. Maybe this is problematic yet at the end of the day the truth is they do.

[IricForset]

So howcome if God did exist, it created creatures with obvious flaws.  Why wouldnt it create other things too? Howcome other animals and organisms dont display any act or sign that they know OF a GOD or at least think there is one? Do you see cats praying or is that just them licking their ass a sign of their alleigance to god? Oh wait I know! When Chimpanzees masturbate that is their way. Howcome I didnt see that before, Im going to convert! Intelligent design is fucking stupid. Sorry.

[1500hothotz]

1. Humans are CAN be seen as significantly seperate then other animals and hense special.

2. You are asking me to speak for why a God would creat the way it did. If i even tried to answer that then i would be a dumb ass and ingnorant. I do like your point however about animals not acknolaing a God in an obvious way. Its a good point, however, even considering it my heart is not convinced that because animals don't show signs of praying like humans do then God must not exist.

[IricForset]

I apoligise, I didnt mean to sound standoffish, I need to control my anger when it comes to these issues.Humans are seen as seperate to other animals,just the same as a cat is seen seperate to a giraffe, but we all share similar chromosomal make up.I was trying to make the point that Homo Sapiens are the only one who can create unanswerable questions or ones that dont need to be asked, and even God.I believe 100% that these things are indeed due to our inquisitive nature but also psyhologically.

[electricalcomplex]

I'd rather be a conservative nut job then a liberal with no nuts and no job. ;-)

[SecularTalk]

OOOHH BOY YOU GOT ME!!!

[chaoscontrot]

Lol wow awesome analogy... seriously it may be incredibly idiotic but I literally loled.

[MULESLAX]

@SecularTalk Yeah, he did.

[GBS990]

Next week look in the mirror...

[bodiezoffa]

I still don't know what the heck secular thinking is?

[Albinoceros]

Secular thinking is thought which distances itself from theology. It doesn't necessarily mean atheism, but it can. An example of secular research is a Christian scientist who leaves God outside of his research.

[NanoFishMan]

Ben Stein may be a brilliant man, but he isn't a research biologist. He has produced zero peer reviewed articles about evolutionary theory in scientific journals. He has all the veracity of Tom Cruise discussing psychology. His main complaint about science is that it "leads to killing." I saw his movie. All I can sya is he's dropped some IQ points since Yale. When he dies and they autopsy him, I wouldn't be surprised if they find a brain tumour the size of an eggplant. He's gone crazy.

[bodiezoffa]

The idea of a "documentary" is that the host talks to people who are experts in the field, who have written articles, who have experienced the events or studied the events being discussed. He found mathematicians, biologists, astronomers, and even neurologists.

This is what Stein did. Aside from that, the film is largely about academia, where Stein has much expertise because he has taught at the Ivy League.

As far as your last few sentences, that is just really really lame.

[SecularTalk]

Expelled wasn't peer reviewed, it didn't present any evidence in favor of "ID", It was full of distortions & half truths and the implication of "oh boy, scientists don't know about this particular thing yet. God anyone?" and it was an absolute ad hom attack against non-believers (trying to make the case that evolution leads to eugenics) Its laughed at and ridiculed because its not scientific, you can make a half-assed documentary about anything if u have an agenda & good editors.

[bodiezoffa]

Your interpretation of the film is so way off, I dont know where to start.

Stein never said evolution leads to eugenics. Evolution theory may lend some to social darwinism, which lends itself to other, more ugly things that have nothing to do with real science.

Winston Churchill called it "perverted science".

As far as your comments on documentaries, I completely understand. Supersize Me, Inconventiant Truth, and anything Michael Moore has ever done are all fine examples of this.

[bodiezoffa]

Saying evolution leads to eugenics or anything else is not supposed to be a scientific argument. Whether it was true or false or somewhere in the middle could never be proven or disproven by the scientific methodology.

The subject itself is not material science. It remains in the subjects of politics, social science, and history. These are not true sciences.

Not everything is science, not even economics.

[bodiezoffa]

What is secular thinking anyway?

[Johnrosssssss]

I LOVE Glen Beck... you can ohm.... suck a ohm... yeah

[SecularTalk]

wow, you should use your intelligence to think for yourself instead rationalizing for stein in an argument that you should know he doesn't have a shot at winning. You used special pleading and appeal to illegitimate authority in your analysis. Stein being completely off base on evolution doesn't reflect in the slightest his ability to be possibly dead on in other aspects (which i made clear). But the fact remains, he is dead wrong on evolution and if you don't criticize him on those grounds...

[SecularTalk]

then its clear that you're just a knee-jerk reactionary rhetorical speaker.

[bodiezoffa]

So are you saying that one must have a degree in micro biology to have an opinion on evolution?

Do evolutionists in your opinion, have a monopoly on rational thought?

That only evolutionists understand the scientific method?

[SecularTalk]

ha, now you're using straw man...We can have an intelligent discussion regarding evolution when you fully grasp the topic and are willing to agree that Steins views regarding evolution in particular are laughably absurd. Until then, don't put words in my mouth or waste my time with your rhetorical defense of Stein (which just happens to be loaded with fallacious arguments, as i've pointed out)

[bodiezoffa]

I didn't comment on his particular points against evolution, I simply commented on your initial dismissal of Stein's opinion-- "odd knowledge" I think you called it.

Which is a total mischaracterization of this man's well known intellectual pursuits. Which I listed, but not exhaustively.

[bodiezoffa]

In addition, I think Stein probably sat down with and chatted with more biologists, neurologists, and mathematicians in the two years that it took to produce the documentary then you will probably meet in your whole life. The list of scientists includes the infamous Dawkins and the incredulous Mr. Burlinski.

[bodiezoffa]

Stein is brilliant, knows either's scientific points, is aware of the nature of this polemic, and yet still questions Macro Evolution.

Very simply, you just can't emotionally handle this so you personally attack anyone who would have the audacity to question YOUR bible of truth, "Daddy Darwin". Evolution is no longer a scientific theory; it is your ideology, your dogma. This is actually what 90% of Expelled is really about.

[Albinoceros]

Quoi?

You're asserting that we worship Darwin? Nothing is further from the truth. Darwin was intelligent but no rational person ever deified him. There is no Darwinism ideology, just like there is no Newtonism ideology. (I am quoting Thunderf00t here.) Sticking to "God" as an explanation presents us with a hypothesis BEFORE any evidence has been unearthed. Therefore it is in direct contradiction to the scientific method.

[bodiezoffa]

Who mentioned "God"?

Aside from Einstein's improvement of his theory, I don't think anybody is arguing with Newton's work. Aside from Einstein's disdain for quantum physics, I don't think Einstein's contributions are under assault.

Hear anyone preachers lately assail Hawkins thoughts on a black whole.

String Theory is at the little more than a joke phase, yet I don't see the Discovery Institute doing a special soon.

This is about Dogma.

[Albinoceros]

No one's insulted that Darwin is being questioned. It's the MANNER of his questioning we find unscientific. Simply put, ID is not equal in terms of scientific backing to evolution. Check out DonExodus2's channel to see some good rebuttals. They sum up the point better than I can.

Also, you don't actually associate yourself with the Discovery Institute, right? Because that would make me lose quite a bit of respect for you. They are laden with many more ulterior motives than any "Darwinist".

[bodiezoffa]

I'm certain Creationists, Christians, IDers, and the Discovery Institute all have of various ulterior motives. There is little question for me but not because they may or may not have faith in a god.

But because they are human beings.

And as far as I know, atheists, evolutionists, agnostics, and even Richard Dawkins are human beings.

Unless, of course, they have evolved into something else?

Aside from that, I rarely discuss the merits, or lack of, ID or creationism.

[Albinoceros]

You make a good point, but what I'm trying to say is that the proponents of ID are not fit to question evolution with their theory because they lack tangible proof and also because they have a preconcieved conclusion, God. This is detrimental to the scientific method, as has been illustrated in numerous videos and as I have already stated. Therefore, I find the motives of IDers slightly more sinister, because they circumvent science.

[StepOnMeLadies]

Evolution is and has always been a theory. God was not always a theory, but became a theory because of the THEORY of evolution. By the way, how was science created?

[Albinoceros]

Science was "created" when some men decided to not take things as givens. God is not a theory. God is a notion, or a means of control, or any of a myriad of attributes, but God is not a theory. Theories can be empirically tested, and therefore matter. Evolution has empirical evidence backing it up (yes, there are fossils, so don't even start that bullshit), whereas God is scientifically inconsequential.

[StepOnMeLadies]

Oh, of course..you are right. I tested my car and it is a given that God did not create it. Thanks!

[SecularTalk]

"Evolution is no longer a scientific theory; it is your ideology, your dogma" really? Because i'm pretty sure it is a scientific theory, no matter what YOU like to call it. You're comments presuppose that evolution at this point in time is debatable.Ben Stein understood what the premise of his move was going to be before he made it, so he had an agenda that the evidence had to coincide with, THAT is dogma, THAT is propaganda (in the negative sense of the term)...Whats my agenda to being down...

[SecularTalk]

...Whats my agenda to bring down*** the evil Ben Stein??? to spread my ideology of Darwinism because i'm an ethical nihilst that wants everybody to be miserable??? Or is it that i'm just not to smart a guy and i think that by making this video i'm engaging in groupthink and "playing for the evolution team !"?

[StepOnMeLadies]

Hmm....all of the above.

[bodiezoffa]

Check out Dawkins vs Neil Tyson on youtube.

This is my best answer and illustrates what the problem is. It is not necessarly an issue of the viability of evolution theory. It is what the theory has become.

Tyson actual grasps the problem with anti theists, who have come to represent the theory. Dawkins is the ultimate of this form. This is unfortunate for science education.

This is not supposed to be about teams--that is the problem!

[bodiezoffa]

There is dogma everywhere, yes.

My point is that I wish the ardent evolutionists knew this of themselves.

I'm not so sure they do.

[SecularTalk]

i just checked out the video...if that's the point you are trying to make then i think you're correct. But i also believe that there is "some" room for the "get it or you're an idiot crowd"...I usually remain silent on these issues (i talk mostly politics), but i truly believe that in the age of reason the host of headlines news shouldn't dedicate an hour to evolution bashing and intelligent design advocating...call me crazy.

[bodiezoffa]

"but i truly believe that in the age of reason the host of headlines news shouldn't dedicate an hour to evolution bashing and intelligent design advocating...call me crazy."

Why not?

[SecularTalk]

because the ID hypothesis doesn't have any evidence, is tied to religious political undertones, it perpetuates the ignorance of a large portion of the american people (regarding evolution). It undermines years upon years of research & evidence that have made evolution an ironclad irrefutable theory. It furthers the ideology of ID being taught in science class even though it's not science & Lastly the show is "Healine News" if beck doesnt think there are more important things to discuss hes wrong

[chaoscontrot]

Look, there's a substantial portion of the population that believe in ID creationism and its principles and whether or not another substantial portion of the population thinks it be laughable and stupid does not in any way whatsoever undermine the fact that all Americans are constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion and forcing people to deny ID and their religious belief system absolutely impedes upon that constitutional guarantee. They have a right to believe, no matter what anyone says.

[chaoscontrot]

If you want to contest whether or not people ought to be constitutionally guaranteed freedom of religion in a world of science where people rapidly embrace Darwinism and a constitution which originally allowed slavery- then be my guest. Your going to have a bit of difficulty gaining support for such an ideology though.

The vids are AWESOME btw. Keep em coming.

[bodiezoffa]

I think Ben can handle Darwin just fine.

[bodiezoffa]

There are neurons below the follicles of been steins left index finger that possess more knowledge, aptitude, and intellectual capacity then your entire rather short lived youtube existence.

[bodiezoffa]

Throughout his life, he has been able to enjoy a side career as iconic actor using his own persona. Later he would even run a game show. He does this all for shits and giggles.

He has been both a liberal activist and a fiscal conservative. He is a father, devoted husband, and is loved by persons of the left and right of the political spectrum.

[bodiezoffa]

He is an accomplished attorney to (trial, poverty, civil, libel, securities). Most lawyers never see a courtroom.

He is a professor of law, economics, politics, sociology, civil rights, culture, and the US Constitution (all Ivy League). He was educated in the Ivy League and taught at many Ivy League institutions. His performance as a student and a professor is impeccable.

He has been an economic advisor to Presidents, speech writer for Presidents as well as their legal advisor.

[bodiezoffa]

Secular,

I promise to work on my knowledge of evolution theory if you promise to educate yourself about the biography of a man before attempting to discredit him in a video.

Ben Stein is not a keeper of odd knowledge. He is an intellectual prodigy.

He is a nationally recognized economist and the author of multiple books, many best sellers. His writing in national publications are too numerous to even list.

[theeclecticmind]

I was not surprised by anything that Glenn Beck said, or says for that matter.

I think the reason that intelligent design should not be debated in a science class is not because it is not credible, but because it is not science. Intelligent design (read: creationism) should be debated in religion or theology classes.

[SoCiAlDeMoCrAt69]

certain ppl should get it every week...bill o'reilly, sean hannity, rush limbaugh, glenn beck to name a few.