It unbelievable how the darwinists like Dawkins are getting away with such lies making out ID is the same as biblical creationism which is clearly not . There are as shown here many intelligent scientists who support the ID idea because of the finding of science. Students should demand a fair playing field.
@dominatorN4 If you believe that matter created mind you are a committed evangelical atheist. If you believe life came from non life you believe in miracles and you are a Darwinist. You can not give a single example of anything you use on a daily basis, from your computer to your cell phone to your t. v. or anything else that was not created by intelligence. But the 2 most complex things we observe, the human body and the universe came into existence from nothing. Evangelic Atheist = Retarded
@redeyetime evangelical atheist? That term doesn't even make sense, and Darwin ,he doesn't say life came from non-life , that is abiogenesis so your terminology doesn't even make sense.
@dominatorN4 Darwin believed life came from life? Explain please. If you believe that life came from non life and that matter created mind and that everything came from nothing you are an irrational "evangelical atheist."
@redeyetime There is that 'evangelical atheist' term again, I am not quite sure what exactly what you're trying to say. I suggest looking up the term evangelical because it is a direct contradiction when you apply atheist to it. Darwin didn't believe that, I was talking about Evolution which Darwin is most known for he however did not create the idea of abiogenesis. I am beginning to think you are trolling me.
@dominatorN4 Did Darwin believe life came from life or life came from non life? Hegel believed that god is what ever a man thought about all day long... 40 of the most influential scientists of all time all believed in God including Sir Francis Bacon who formulated the scientific method... Did Mind create matter or did matter create mind?
@redeyetime Darwin believed in abiogenesis, ok who cares if they believed in god.You also must understand that if mind created matter,who created the mind?who created that?Who created that? Or why who? Why not a what? There are infinite possibilities that could be labled as 'god', is there justification? No.
@dominatorN4 Who cares if they believed in God? You said it hinders true science so apparently you care but without a reason. Does abiogenesis teach life came from life or life came from non life? If you concede that Mind created matter what would you label the Mind as?
@redeyetime Ok those scientists believe in a god, but it does NOT hinder their scientific research. These creation 'scientists' however propose an idea that is scientifically absurd. Abiogenesis teaches life came from non life. Lets teach you the definition of the word: A( without) bio( life) genesis( beginning ). Therefore abiogenesis is the theory that life came from non life. Does that make sense?
@ScottishCaledonian Yes creationists do , but some Christians don't believe in creationism, so it is ok to a point. The more religous, the less credible in scientific research.
@redeyetime What makes you think I believe in any god? Why do you believe a god is infinite, what are your reasons? What evidence do you have to do so?
@dominatorN4 It's more logical to believe that life came from life and that Mind created matter rather than life came from non life (abiogenesis) and that matter created mind. The Teleological, Cosmological, Ontological, ect... are all good arguments against the "nothing x no one = everything" fairy tale. The cause must be sufficient to explain the effect. Everything you use on a daily basis had a creator...
@redeyetime everything I use is from a creator, yes. However you still refuse to answer my question and this is the main problem with biogenesis. If you say everything has a cause, what created the creator? If nothing created it then not everything has a cause, do you understand? If this is the case then why even say that the universe was created? When it could have always existed?
@dominatorN4 We know the universe hasn't always existed from the "Big Bang" and it won't always exist from the 2nd Law of therm-o-dynamics. I'm dealing with the universe that is and not the fantasy world of the evangelical atheists It's not a problem for me but it is a problem for you... Why do you believe in a finite God? The cause must be sufficient to explain the effect.
@redeyetime Why do you think there has ever been a first cause? If everything has a cause then your 'god' requires a cause, then that thing requires a cause and so on. You also just seem to be repeating your statements and you still don't answer my questions, also learn to use a dictionary for evangelical.
@dominatorN4 Evangelical ; "marked by ardent or zealous enthusiasm for a cause". Think about Kim Jung IL or Christopher Hitchens they were evangelical atheists. I don't believe in a finite God if you don't either why make the argument? If their is a knock at your door what is a more reasonable explanation, that some one knocked on your door or that nothing knocked on your door? Since there was a Big Bang is it more reasonable to believe that there was a Big Banger or that nothing did it?
@redeyetime I am simply asking why do you believe in an infinite god? If there was a god then why does that god not need a cause if everything has a cause? why does it have to be a god anyways?
Yes, even scientist who may not believe God have enough sense to know that Darwinism is a mistake. Maybe long time ago Darwinism was a appealing curiosity, but as science progressed as today with a fossil record that turned out to be nothing but a failure, we know they are not 1000's and 100000's of intermedite species between kinds. Yet, Darwinism is still teached as a fact.
@xsandsnowx Teached? Eh, grammar aside, you clearly have a misconception about evolution. Every animal is an "intermediate species", or, more commonly, a "transitional form." All evolution really comes down to mutations in the DNA; this so called lack of fossils is irrelevant. This would be why the most forward proponents of evolution are generally biologists, not archaeologists. In reality there is no distinction between micro- and macro- evolution, if that is what you were getting at.
Yeah! I know Jesus! He's the janitor in my apartment building here in El Paso Texas. He once unclogged my toilet, and he scrubs the hallways in the building.
we are capable of intelligently designing genetically engineered food. Should we believe we are the only beings or thing in the universe capable of doing that?
Secular historians have confirmed the birth of Jesus, they have confirmed several of his miracles, and have confirmed that Roman soldiers who blatantly opposed Jesus Christ before is death claimed he rose from the dead. If you don't want to accept that God is real its because you are afraid that your world and your destiny are not in your control. You can live in ignorance if you want to but don't try to tell me that humans came from monkeys
Nothing from so long ago can be 100% confirmed. People have claimed miracles across all religions. Lets face it, witnesses tend to see what they want to see. Witness testaments are commonly inacurate. Why did you site Jesus rising from the dead as evidence? A lot of people rose from the dead in the bible.
@Oreceo That's fascinating. Let's apply the same argument to the other side. R.Dawkins, E. Scott, PZ Myers, W. Provine, ... = evolutionist R.Dawkins, E. Scott, PZ Myers W. Provine, + virtually all prominent evolutionists = atheists (except for a handful of "useful idiots" like Ken Miller).
I totally dig evolution. but there is no real theory that has been proven with evidence of how life began. So let them go and try to prove it, whatever the hell it may be, because you can't prove it does NOT exist and like Edison said "every wrong attempt is another step forward"
science cannot accept any transcendent (i.e. immaterial), god-like beings. This is no atheist conspiracy but a very useful limitation (which may sound like a contradiction). Here's why
what causes lightning bolt? God does.
what causes the movement of the planets? God does.
what causes earthquakes? God does.
of course , we now know that these phenomena have a perfectly natural explanation and history has learned us that God is really no explanation at all. So God, as an explanation, is excluded
The man at the Discovery Institute mentioned evidence... I'd like to see some for Intelligent Design. Because Darwin's "failed theory" has all the evidence backing it.
The movie starts off with nazi imagry without even explaining it, claims that intelligent design is Unfairly shunned in the scientific community (making more unsupported paralells to violent repression by dictators) but it hasnt explained 1)what intelligent design even is! 2)why it should be taken seriously in the scientific community in the first place .Is it going to answer either of these questions or should i just stop watching now?
@MjXllcommando Intelligent design: "The theory that life, or the universe, cannot have arisen by chance and was designed and created by some intelligent entity." There, that's what it is. And if you were listening, it is simply the alternative to macroevolution or Darwinism, which is the explanation of the origin of life as we know it that is accepted as fact and taught in schools.
An "alternative" to a scientific theory would likely be another scientific theory, something with substantial evidence. Intelligent design is not a scientific theory and does not contain any substantial evidence. So, you're wrong here. Intelligent design is not the alternative to abiogenesis or the theory of evolution.
@TheDowntown86 There is no real difference between micro- and macro-evolution. Also, evolutionary theory does not at all claim to explain the origin of life, that'd be abiogenesis, which is still more or less an unknown.
Teaching the "debate" between evolution and creationism is teaching a false-fuck dichotomy--there is NO real debate that existed before the Intelligent Designers came along seeking to create this wedge issue to teach children the efficacy of irreconcilable differences and theosophy, which is not scientific inquiry, it's just stupidity.
You don't want God to exist regardless of any evidence case or argument no matter what you would not except because you like the idea of there being no God to judge you and hold you accountable for your life don't admit it to me but in your heart you know this is true.
Ur right , I do like the idea of there not being a God that judges us based on what we have to work with.
I'd also like to not believe in cancer , plane crashes, pre-mature death and many other tragedies that ppl face from day to day, but unfortunately there is plenty of evidence to prove they are real. There is none for god and for that I am truly grateful.
And thus shows the absurdly obvious double-talk. This movie was made by a Jew (gasp!) and you sorta kinda wanted to say he as in a false religion, too, didn't you? But you couldn't because he made a movie that supports your claim.
That's the dishonesty of people like the Discovery Instutute and you have expertly illustrated this in real world example. Congratulations.
By the way, atheism (a-theism) is not a religion. Der!
What is so bad about the hypothesis of God? Evolution can't tell us EVERYTHING about the universe, so whats so bad about guessing that God may have done it?
Scientists are arrogant, and very close minded. If the would stop being so arrogant, and if they were more open to new ideas, then it's almost guaranteed that we would be much further along in science than we are now.
God is supernatural. By definition, science seeks to understand the natural. Therefore, by definition, science does not include god as a valid option for explaining natural phenomenon. This has nothing to do with being "closed-minded".
@Synicade What is bad about it is that you cannot test it, you cannot make experiments, and you cannot reproduce them. In the traditional definition of a hypothesis, god cannot be test, therefore there cannot be a hypothesis about it. This isn't some war with religion vs science, it's not an issue of arrogance, it's an issue of you hearing things that goes against your beliefs.
@Synicade Please enlighten me to what was so immature about my response to you. I'm not sure what part of that offended you so deeply but you should thicken up a little or don't start conversations regarding things you do not understand. You were right about one thing though, evolution cannot tell us everything about the universe, mostly because it has nothing to do with the universe. It only relates to the development of life AFTER it began, nothing of the cosmos at all.
So hypocrite "we gonna put christ back in the classroom" So that means only ONE religion is going to be teach.... Not jewish believes, Not Moslims believes, Not the Hindu believes..... Damn religilious people are sooo shallow..
@Ben1987X uh you must not stereo type beilefe systems i am a christian yet i am not religios i am open to my belief being wrong howevr evolutionist scientists who claim to be credible are not there for they have no credibility and i bieleve that although we should not force one religion on everyone in our public schools in middle schools and highschools how ever lets make an elictive in for each bieleife there for we arent being indoctrinated tworeds evolutionism
@sixwingproductions explain why evolution is wrong. Religion say's this: God send two people on earth who have sex and there child have sex (that's incest). Anyway and now the world is full of people of all color.. Now we know that man evolved out of different man. We found different skeletons of those man who have different sizes of structure that envolved. But the bible never say;s that... How do just say ow well....never mind that fact..I just overlook that
@Ben1987X let me say this in response wale there children did sleep with each other God allowed it becuase of enough genetic diversity even in that small group. it became a sin when down the line our genes became so few that it could cuas diginerat side efects. adam and eve had all the genes in humans in them. and there is complete lack of intermediat fossils if you have evedence to suport your side of the debate site your source and email me a video for my pages debate playlist
@sixwingproductions Except there cannot be enough genetic diversity in a group that only includes 2 individuals. That's a fact. You are just making up things to support your claim. There are countless transitional fossils. Not all living things become fossilized by the way. You, right now, as you breathe, are a transitional creature, every single living thing is. YouTube videos aren't evidence either friend, anyone can say anything on YT, maybe read some peer reviewed literature.
@trippinlikegod if the first 2 humans had all the genes needed there would be and i subscribe to the idea that God created man else were on earth as whell as in eden
@trippinlikegod im an inventor and i like teoretical physics but i dont have a degree only an opinion. but i can say this ive been around for 3 trilions years. and being im not human i have more knoledge about the past than you. my race is at a level of civilization were we rule 75% of the universe and i could not dumb down our science enogh for you to understand. + i cant transilate our data to human terms im not a transilator. our science works on a level of multi space layer dimintional phy..
The single most reiterated argument against Intelligent Design is "It's stupid." Depressing that the most "advanced" people among humans(at least by their own opinions) resort so frequently to name-calling.
@studentofthegospel But it is stupid to bring something to the table with absolutely no evidence whatsoever and claim it is science. That is stupid, completely and totally stupid.
@trippinlikegod Dawkins himself says Creation (existence) has the "overwhelming appearance of design." What has no evidence is evolution! Look for some solid, tangible evidence for evolution, and direct me to it. The hypocrisy in the evolutionist arguments is that you demand proof from believers, and demand none of yourselves.
@studentofthegospel The process of science does not operate on discrediting the scientist. I'm sure you aren't aware of that but it's the truth. The proof is available you just refuse to look. Genetics quite clearly demonstrates evolution from common descent. There is no controversy, none, zero. You can try to make it one but you're simply wrong. We ask for proof from creationist because we have proof of change over time, you have absolutely none in regards to creationism. None.
Stop listening to corporate media and actually start reading history. Listen to some of your own specialists like former director of CIA Bin laden Unit Michael Schuer etc.
Such statements only show your own ignorance and an inability to introspect.
Stop blaming others for problems that your politicians have created.
Who is it that designs the world but doesn't create?
Anyone who can design worlds or intelligent life must be
A: a god
or perhaps
B: a ultra-hyper, uber-powerful intelligent life form that EVOLVED
and since the whole point of this exercise is to prove that evolution doesn't happen, who designs (but does not create) worlds and lifeforms but a god?
i think intelligent design is facing stereotype. May be because the Christians burnt Galileo alive, the whole concept now is facing biased analysis? Please remember there were other communities as well like Muslims under whom science flourished and played major part in western renaissance as well in terms of science and technology. There were never incidents like Galileo rather scientists were prized. hope you wont freak out at the name of Islam. I'd welcome your objective analysis.
Why can't we fund yetti-design? Whats wrong with research to find whether or not big foot is the creator of the universe? What are the blood-thirsty, organ-hungry scientists trying to keep from us? Why are they trying to quiet the yetti-design community?!?!
So let me see what Bien is saying, because 10-11 professors say evoultion is not true it discredits all the evedience,and all the great sciencetists who do think it is true. Am I the only one getting that impression?
'Intelligent design is the study of patterns in nature that are best explained as a result of intelligence.' So they look for observations that they don't understand and then they claim that is must have been designed by some external intelligence. This is not science. Once you properly study the patterns in nature, and gain an understanding, you don't need an external 'intelligence' to explain what you don't understand. Intelligent design is not interested in understanding.
deadbutbreathing-----i also sent you a message.first i said god is a spirit.i never said its god if the person you are thinking of calls you at the same moment you are thinking of that person.2nd my point was that like the phone call that there many [crazy things]things that have happen to people and what happen to them people left a powerful impact on them and its something science will not and can not prove but to the people it happens to its real. very real and it is real.thats my point.
Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible qualities have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, both His everlasting power and Mightiness, for them to be without excuse,
they teach both the heliocentric AND geocentric theories, all 3 views of the big bang theory, the theory of the origen of heavy elements, black holes that have never been seen, supernova explosion that date back only 10,000 years ago the theory of relativity that proves that the distance of stars are only that far by the presumptions of man, all technological data was made by man.
but they cannot teach intelligent design AND evolution?
@theREALiceveela Everything you just pointed out has been discovered due to evidence pointing towards it, studies done of how it could be possible, it's been proven to be a valid sciencetific thoery after a lot of empirical evidence. Intellegent design is nothing more then "a feeling" some people have, thinking that everything is too complex to have come about from mother nature. Therefore it is no science, it could be taught in Thoery of knowledge class but not in science.
look iam a very spiritual person some things can not be proven some things are what they are.for instance have you ever thought of someone and the phone rings and its the person you are thinking of .no science can prove that but u know what just happen because u just had it happen to you.god is a spirit .in fact if we acted more like god wanted we wouldnt be in half the trouble this world is in.
@chuckspanda If you're thinking of someone and the phone rings there is always a chance it will be the person you were thinking of. However most of the time when the phone rings you will not be thinking of that person or have any idea who is calling. Just because it happens a couple of times, doesn't mean God exists and is senting you messages.
i can see why the scientist hate the intelgeint design because it sounds like some thing that will never be proven wrong or right and therefore it will allways be naging thorn in the side just like the ufo subject never disproven never proven....... there is another option that both darwin and Inteligent design are both wrong.....but one thing is ofr shure that there still space for another theroy ..........
Amazing, as of yet, no evidence for intelligent design, and why it is credible has been presented. I'm sure if I hold me breath, it will be presented soon. Right?
It is simple and utter propaganda to claim that "Academic Freedom" means that every hypothesis deserves to be taught in public schools.
If Intelligent Design wants official recognition, it needs to fight through the scientific method, publishing data from experiments which support their model, developing a model in the first place, and winning a consensus.
That's how real science works. Why doesn't ID want to go through this?
"because the evidence is being distorted" ....... is anyone else sitting there watching this going ... How ... Please explain what you mean by distorted before you skip over to the next Psuedo scientist for 20seconds of talktime
sorry but this "documental" is so stupid that i can not see it to the end, it is just too much for me. It is just a bad creationist copy from religulous with no jokes , no fun and no evidence of anything
Muslims say Allah, Christians say God/Jesus, Hindus say Vishnu, Buddhist say No God, etc etc. My God is the man, your God sucks, my God my God my God.
A scientist will say "NO NO NO, NATURE DID IT".
Jeez you all are just as bad! Stuck to ONE belief and not being capable of accepting other possibilities. If we were to combine ideas instead of separating them we'd come to a better conclusion and understanding.
@crackercookies There's a huge difference though.. Scientists PROVE IT and USE IT! You can't say this for any of the others.. and science is NOT a belief, any more than fire is!
There's plenty of good evidence out there for Intelligent Design, and the theory should be accepted as another way to look at things.(especially since their obviously isn't any proof against it)
Darwin. Darwin. Darwin. DARWIN! he was only the BEGINNING. why is he always the one to be mentioned? why not quote/speak about someone else who has provided evidence in support evolution, there are hundreds- go check them out. these ignorant Neanderthals are really starting to sound like a Brocken record now, they're acting like evolution hasn't progressed since Darwin published the origin of species!
@h6hfelie Because no one has been able to add the reams evidence to Darwin's theory that were expected when he came up with his reinterpretation of morphology which has nothing to do with information science.
How can he say that ID does not imply a God? You need an entity as unlikely as that at least. Even if it was correct it would still not explain origin, it would expose an origin of which origin you 'cannot' explain. How 'in'convenient, isn't it?
This is not a religous question. There are agnostics who support ID. These annoying evolutionist people need to quit speaking lies and realize this. They are using the Red Herring fallacy.
So, where is your scientific evidence for ID? There is none. Otherwise people'd have been all over it. Stop acting like the kid nobody wants to play with. Change your act. There's a reason people don't want to play with imaginary friends.
U hate this documentary EXPELLED? Great! U've just shown everyone, quite blatantly, that YOU folks are really the ones abusing free speech. WE are losing the right of free speech, not u.
@Eye2EyeIIIV Dude you completely misunderstand the concept of free speech! Free speech does NOT mean that everyone are equally right in their claims, it does not even mean that everyone should be heard! It means that everyone has the right to express them selfs without any kind of persecuting (within limits)! But in doing so you expose yourself for criticism... if people (in this case Stein) speek nonsence they will get hammerd by their critics... accept it or dont go public with your opinion!!
I can already see where this is going - Start by pretending you believe in evolution, then end by pretending the interviews have changed your mind. How annoying.
@DroogieSteve You weren't paying much attention to this documentary, were you? He's pretty clear on his beliefs, while trying to remain unbiased during interviews.
If it is the case that the evidence doesent point towards evolution, wouldnt this video be way more effective if it merely presented the evidence for either side?
Yeah, I'm just agreeing with you. It's funny that the Discovery Institute was created to research intelligent design and yet it still hasn't produced a valid research paper that supports ID.
Im going to pray for your soul before i go to bed tonight, because you need lots of help. Since the beginning of recorded history has anyone ever documented or seen a creature evolve & change into something else? of course not. Dont you think it takes alot more faith to believe in such non sense? is your brain working ok? you might need to get it checked out.
@Gbiz100 BAHAHA. I've never read anything so contradictory. You tell him your going to pray for him... acting like a believer in Christ... and then you make fun of him and make outlandish claims against him... tod i think you have a beautiful mind. maybe it needs correction... all brains do. but Gbiz... i think you might need to get your soul checked out? I'm a christian, and its people like you who make Faith unattractive. Hypocrites.
Thanks little buddy. Take care of yourself.Hope you have a good day!
I forgot you are perfect right? I'm sure you can walk on water right? & by the way i did pray for him, but if someone says something foolish they need to be corrected. The WORD does say "A fool says in his heart says there is no God" any ways may God Bless you brother
yes prayer is what we all need the most. We, the atheist, have been brainwashed by the devil, we are taken over by his demons and we drink christians blood, please help us. Arrgghhh, the sun is coming out...must...escape
@Gbiz100 The burden of proof is on you... You dumbass. You say some magic man in the sky exists, so YOU have to fucking prove it. It's not up to us to disprove every batshit crazy religious claim that you shit stain christians make. And no, we didn't come from monkeys. You're ignorant about evolution and clearly have only heard bullshit from right wing religious morons like yourself. How about you read a book other than your fairytale bible for once, and pray to jesus some more, tool.
Thank you very much for the nice comment you posted. I really appreciate the foul language.You seem to know everything there is to know, so instead of talking non sense why dont you tell me why you believe so much in evolution & not in GOD? Can you prove the evolution theory? Dont think like a PINHEAD!!
@Gbiz100 Are you 100% sure that Spiderman doesn't exist? Can you seriously prove it? If not, I don't see why we should be pouring tax dollars into a bunch of loons hopelessly attempting to prove the contrary. Your God isn't any different.
Insult, insult, and more insults. There is one group that I would never want to be apart of, and that is atheism. I do not get any joy out of calling people names, and believing anything someone tells me.
@jokericon00 >I do not get any joy out of [...] believing anything someone tells me.
Is that so? How did you come to being a theist then? Godly insight without ever having contact to any representatives or propagative materials of whatever faith you happen to follow? Oh, I'd say you definitely get quite a bit of joy from believing fancy stories other people tell you.
As for calling names, if that was an atheist-exclusive thing, Ray Comfort would be their absolutely #1. Ever told a lie, mate?
@Yupiyeahs Oh please stop with the re-run theories that you hear from other atheist. I was exposed to a lot of things, and I had the choice to make my own decision. I wasn't forced to believe anything, and I consider myself agnostic. Also, Ray comfort compared to Bill Maher is not even competition. Bill Maher insult more people than anyone else I know combined. Also, what does me telling a lie have to do with anything???? That entire paragraph was all over the place; get to the point next time.
@jokericon00 Maher is a self-righteous asshole and an idiot. So is Comfort, in his own way. Comfort is a more interesting example though, as calling names is the very essence of the majority of his arguments. QED: "Have you ever told a lie? Then you're a liar. Liars go to hell unless they repent. You'll go to hell unless you convert to Christianity." This is the case with most theistic debaters. It's generalised labels, above labels and more labels without any depth whatsoever.
Oh the topic of "agnosticism": It really seems like a way of evading the harsher, less popular, term "atheist". An atheist doesn't believe in a deity because there is no proof for its existence. It's a choice based on mere probability. An agnostic says that he can't know whether a deity exists because it's unknowable. Essentially, the two aren't mutually exclusive. I can't know whether a deity exists, yet I can still decide not to believe in it due to the minuscule probability of its existence.
What is, for the lack of better word, stupid is assuming that because you can't know whether or not a deity exists that the odds of it existing are 50/50. This would be "Comfortian" agnosticism, once again, solely based on "calling names". Convince the individual that he's a liar, thus going to hell, then convince him that he's an agnostic, thus doesn't (or can't) know, then assume that the chances of Abrahamic God existing are at least 50%, profit! It's a fool's trap.
PS: I'm quite surprised that as somebody claiming that Comfort isn't much of a "name caller" compared to the oh-so-vile atheists, you didn't immediately recognise his corniest "Ever told a lie?" argument.
PSS: While we're at it, "atheists" is not a group you can belong to it. I, and every other moderately reasonable atheist, am as prone allying myself to an atheists as I am to Christian, providing their arguments hold equal strength. A Christian is, by definition, bound to his fellow believers.
@Yupiyeahs I'm not trying to offend you when I say this, but you must of had a very hard life dealing with religions people. The debates I have seen didn't include Ray Comfort, and if he does act like that, then he is an extremist just like anyone else. Now saying that god doesn't exist; that is another argument that we can discuss later on another chat site. However, Matthew Maury, the father of Oceanography, discovered Gods existence just by reading Pslams 8.
@jokericon00 No offence taken, although I do not have hard time dealing with religious people. I know many others do, but the few I sometimes run into tend to be MA/MSc/PhD, more deist than theist kind of folks. If they believe in anything, it's usually some sort of vague, often personal, supernatural entity, rather than the usual Bible tales about snakes and whatnot.
On Maury. Sure, could be. Many clever people were theists. Many were slave owners too. It's kind of irrelevant though.
I love the huge claims with no support. The guy just claims Darwin's theories are no good, but supplies absolutely zero reasoning to back it up. Darwin's theories have been verified and reproduced on so many levels that it's simply ridiculous to claim otherwise.
Creationism could be taught, you just need to find evidence to support the claim. There is none, that's why it is not accepted and not in school.
This movie is a big yawn, it doesn't seem to have much intelligent design, I can't work out what audience it trys to target, if its supposed to be a high powered response to the the richard dawkins documentrys.....its not, its like a mogadon but without euphoria...its about as annoying as commercial television...and seems to assume its audience has a five second attention span, wants to people to their mind blinders back on....., yawn...sorry,,,i was hoping the creationists could do better movie
Why is it we cannot all agree that all of this is merely speculative, based on assumption regardless of what it is you believe. Darwinism, Intelligent Design, whatever, the point is we should be focused on finding more answers and evidence, not squabbling over the obvious subjectivity of the current evidence presented on either side of any arguments. This is why people are dumb, they're more concerned with being right than actually trying to find out if they actually are or not.
@Circtus Because Creationism isn't science. All theories proposed by them have been roundly bunked and dismissed. Yet these groups campaign to have the bible taught literally,
Combine that with the fact religious pressure groups can be very powerful, prop 8 passed because around 80% of voters were weekly church goers for example. Religious groups intrude in all areas of life and it's time we left them behind.
I'm not religious. I think that if the evidence points one way than we should follow the evidence. If evolution is the best explanation, and it is obviously accepted as such, than lets follow it, but if there is evidence for an opposing view than we should allow that view a chance to grow. I do not know much about intelligent design, but I am willing hear what these scientist have to say.
It unbelievable how the darwinists like Dawkins are getting away with such lies making out ID is the same as biblical creationism which is clearly not . There are as shown here many intelligent scientists who support the ID idea because of the finding of science. Students should demand a fair playing field.
lv4ev5 1 month ago
Poor Michael Mooresque presentation.
AceofDlamonds 2 months ago
Inteligent Design just hinders real science in the way they just plug in a creator to scientific unknowns, it is truly absurd.
dominatorN4 3 months ago in playlist Expelled no intelligance allowed
@dominatorN4 If you believe that matter created mind you are a committed evangelical atheist. If you believe life came from non life you believe in miracles and you are a Darwinist. You can not give a single example of anything you use on a daily basis, from your computer to your cell phone to your t. v. or anything else that was not created by intelligence. But the 2 most complex things we observe, the human body and the universe came into existence from nothing. Evangelic Atheist = Retarded
redeyetime 2 months ago
@redeyetime evangelical atheist? That term doesn't even make sense, and Darwin ,he doesn't say life came from non-life , that is abiogenesis so your terminology doesn't even make sense.
dominatorN4 2 months ago
@dominatorN4 Darwin believed life came from life? Explain please. If you believe that life came from non life and that matter created mind and that everything came from nothing you are an irrational "evangelical atheist."
redeyetime 2 months ago
@redeyetime There is that 'evangelical atheist' term again, I am not quite sure what exactly what you're trying to say. I suggest looking up the term evangelical because it is a direct contradiction when you apply atheist to it. Darwin didn't believe that, I was talking about Evolution which Darwin is most known for he however did not create the idea of abiogenesis. I am beginning to think you are trolling me.
dominatorN4 2 months ago
@dominatorN4 Did Darwin believe life came from life or life came from non life? Hegel believed that god is what ever a man thought about all day long... 40 of the most influential scientists of all time all believed in God including Sir Francis Bacon who formulated the scientific method... Did Mind create matter or did matter create mind?
redeyetime 2 months ago
@redeyetime Darwin believed in abiogenesis, ok who cares if they believed in god.You also must understand that if mind created matter,who created the mind?who created that?Who created that? Or why who? Why not a what? There are infinite possibilities that could be labled as 'god', is there justification? No.
dominatorN4 2 months ago
@dominatorN4 Who cares if they believed in God? You said it hinders true science so apparently you care but without a reason. Does abiogenesis teach life came from life or life came from non life? If you concede that Mind created matter what would you label the Mind as?
redeyetime 2 months ago
@redeyetime Ok those scientists believe in a god, but it does NOT hinder their scientific research. These creation 'scientists' however propose an idea that is scientifically absurd. Abiogenesis teaches life came from non life. Lets teach you the definition of the word: A( without) bio( life) genesis( beginning ). Therefore abiogenesis is the theory that life came from non life. Does that make sense?
dominatorN4 2 months ago
@dominatorN4 It does hinder their research if they believe in creationism, especially in the field of genetics
ScottishCaledonian 2 months ago
@ScottishCaledonian Yes creationists do , but some Christians don't believe in creationism, so it is ok to a point. The more religous, the less credible in scientific research.
dominatorN4 2 months ago
@dominatorN4 If you believe life came from non-life you believe in miracles... Life only comes from life.
redeyetime 2 months ago
What created the 'god' then?
dominatorN4 2 months ago
@dominatorN4 Why do you believe God is finite?
redeyetime 2 months ago
@redeyetime What makes you think I believe in any god? Why do you believe a god is infinite, what are your reasons? What evidence do you have to do so?
dominatorN4 2 months ago
@dominatorN4 It's more logical to believe that life came from life and that Mind created matter rather than life came from non life (abiogenesis) and that matter created mind. The Teleological, Cosmological, Ontological, ect... are all good arguments against the "nothing x no one = everything" fairy tale. The cause must be sufficient to explain the effect. Everything you use on a daily basis had a creator...
redeyetime 2 months ago
@redeyetime everything I use is from a creator, yes. However you still refuse to answer my question and this is the main problem with biogenesis. If you say everything has a cause, what created the creator? If nothing created it then not everything has a cause, do you understand? If this is the case then why even say that the universe was created? When it could have always existed?
dominatorN4 2 months ago
@dominatorN4 We know the universe hasn't always existed from the "Big Bang" and it won't always exist from the 2nd Law of therm-o-dynamics. I'm dealing with the universe that is and not the fantasy world of the evangelical atheists It's not a problem for me but it is a problem for you... Why do you believe in a finite God? The cause must be sufficient to explain the effect.
redeyetime 2 months ago
@redeyetime Why do you think there has ever been a first cause? If everything has a cause then your 'god' requires a cause, then that thing requires a cause and so on. You also just seem to be repeating your statements and you still don't answer my questions, also learn to use a dictionary for evangelical.
dominatorN4 2 months ago
@dominatorN4 Evangelical ; "marked by ardent or zealous enthusiasm for a cause". Think about Kim Jung IL or Christopher Hitchens they were evangelical atheists. I don't believe in a finite God if you don't either why make the argument? If their is a knock at your door what is a more reasonable explanation, that some one knocked on your door or that nothing knocked on your door? Since there was a Big Bang is it more reasonable to believe that there was a Big Banger or that nothing did it?
redeyetime 2 months ago
@redeyetime I am simply asking why do you believe in an infinite god? If there was a god then why does that god not need a cause if everything has a cause? why does it have to be a god anyways?
dominatorN4 2 months ago
@dominatorN4 It's irrelevant whether God is finite or eternal as long as you acknowledge that the most reasonable explanation is God.
redeyetime 2 months ago
Why did Berlinski leave all those colleges? Was he fired, ostracized?
MisterMcKinney 5 months ago
Yes, even scientist who may not believe God have enough sense to know that Darwinism is a mistake. Maybe long time ago Darwinism was a appealing curiosity, but as science progressed as today with a fossil record that turned out to be nothing but a failure, we know they are not 1000's and 100000's of intermedite species between kinds. Yet, Darwinism is still teached as a fact.
xsandsnowx 6 months ago
@xsandsnowx Teached? Eh, grammar aside, you clearly have a misconception about evolution. Every animal is an "intermediate species", or, more commonly, a "transitional form." All evolution really comes down to mutations in the DNA; this so called lack of fossils is irrelevant. This would be why the most forward proponents of evolution are generally biologists, not archaeologists. In reality there is no distinction between micro- and macro- evolution, if that is what you were getting at.
firebirdthecody 2 months ago
Oh! Don't ya just love the redneck music in this movie! Nice touch!
BigFatHeretic 7 months ago
Yeah! I know Jesus! He's the janitor in my apartment building here in El Paso Texas. He once unclogged my toilet, and he scrubs the hallways in the building.
BigFatHeretic 7 months ago
we are capable of intelligently designing genetically engineered food. Should we believe we are the only beings or thing in the universe capable of doing that?
rustyscrapper 7 months ago
everyone knows everything stands or falls on evidence, evolution mutation theories are strictly based for fundings.
1billion1deaths1 7 months ago
4:45 - the gayest song ever!!!
XMisanthropyPureX 7 months ago
Secular historians have confirmed the birth of Jesus, they have confirmed several of his miracles, and have confirmed that Roman soldiers who blatantly opposed Jesus Christ before is death claimed he rose from the dead. If you don't want to accept that God is real its because you are afraid that your world and your destiny are not in your control. You can live in ignorance if you want to but don't try to tell me that humans came from monkeys
TwolfStud 8 months ago
@TwolfStud
Nothing from so long ago can be 100% confirmed. People have claimed miracles across all religions. Lets face it, witnesses tend to see what they want to see. Witness testaments are commonly inacurate. Why did you site Jesus rising from the dead as evidence? A lot of people rose from the dead in the bible.
27CDruid 7 months ago
@27CDruid Your ignorance is legion.
ClyneDDW 3 months ago
@ClyneDDW
How so? Care to elaborate?
27CDruid 3 months ago
@Oreceo That's fascinating. Let's apply the same argument to the other side. R.Dawkins, E. Scott, PZ Myers, W. Provine, ... = evolutionist R.Dawkins, E. Scott, PZ Myers W. Provine, + virtually all prominent evolutionists = atheists (except for a handful of "useful idiots" like Ken Miller).
Therefore evolution = atheism.
Jesrael1986M 8 months ago
@TAO462
I totally dig evolution. but there is no real theory that has been proven with evidence of how life began. So let them go and try to prove it, whatever the hell it may be, because you can't prove it does NOT exist and like Edison said "every wrong attempt is another step forward"
stabbed12 8 months ago
Comment removed
TheVofR 8 months ago
science cannot accept any transcendent (i.e. immaterial), god-like beings. This is no atheist conspiracy but a very useful limitation (which may sound like a contradiction). Here's why
what causes lightning bolt? God does.
what causes the movement of the planets? God does.
what causes earthquakes? God does.
of course , we now know that these phenomena have a perfectly natural explanation and history has learned us that God is really no explanation at all. So God, as an explanation, is excluded
TAO462 8 months ago
this is so stupid how could i watch 10 parts like this.....omfg ben stein ur a shit.
wertyty 10 months ago
@dionysius09
Ur heart doesn't tell or do anything for you rather than pump blood.
Take a damn biology class and stop preaching your ignorance.
rattlehead66666 10 months ago
The man at the Discovery Institute mentioned evidence... I'd like to see some for Intelligent Design. Because Darwin's "failed theory" has all the evidence backing it.
mymatryoshka 10 months ago
I like how Ben Stein tries to act as a neutral by-stander when he's actually a fundie who wants church in the schools.
mymatryoshka 10 months ago
The movie starts off with nazi imagry without even explaining it, claims that intelligent design is Unfairly shunned in the scientific community (making more unsupported paralells to violent repression by dictators) but it hasnt explained 1)what intelligent design even is! 2)why it should be taken seriously in the scientific community in the first place .Is it going to answer either of these questions or should i just stop watching now?
MjXllcommando 11 months ago
@MjXllcommando Intelligent design: "The theory that life, or the universe, cannot have arisen by chance and was designed and created by some intelligent entity." There, that's what it is. And if you were listening, it is simply the alternative to macroevolution or Darwinism, which is the explanation of the origin of life as we know it that is accepted as fact and taught in schools.
TheDowntown86 3 months ago
@TheDowntown86
An "alternative" to a scientific theory would likely be another scientific theory, something with substantial evidence. Intelligent design is not a scientific theory and does not contain any substantial evidence. So, you're wrong here. Intelligent design is not the alternative to abiogenesis or the theory of evolution.
TheSeventhSon 3 months ago
@TheDowntown86 There is no real difference between micro- and macro-evolution. Also, evolutionary theory does not at all claim to explain the origin of life, that'd be abiogenesis, which is still more or less an unknown.
firebirdthecody 2 months ago
Teaching the "debate" between evolution and creationism is teaching a false-fuck dichotomy--there is NO real debate that existed before the Intelligent Designers came along seeking to create this wedge issue to teach children the efficacy of irreconcilable differences and theosophy, which is not scientific inquiry, it's just stupidity.
TaimaDjinn 11 months ago
You don't want God to exist regardless of any evidence case or argument no matter what you would not except because you like the idea of there being no God to judge you and hold you accountable for your life don't admit it to me but in your heart you know this is true.
soufmpls 11 months ago
@soufmpls
Ur right , I do like the idea of there not being a God that judges us based on what we have to work with.
I'd also like to not believe in cancer , plane crashes, pre-mature death and many other tragedies that ppl face from day to day, but unfortunately there is plenty of evidence to prove they are real. There is none for god and for that I am truly grateful.
rattlehead66666 10 months ago
@dionysius09
And thus shows the absurdly obvious double-talk. This movie was made by a Jew (gasp!) and you sorta kinda wanted to say he as in a false religion, too, didn't you? But you couldn't because he made a movie that supports your claim.
That's the dishonesty of people like the Discovery Instutute and you have expertly illustrated this in real world example. Congratulations.
By the way, atheism (a-theism) is not a religion. Der!
VideoMenu 11 months ago
Cieszy mnie jak ewolucjoniści sapią i zgrzytają zębami pod tym filmikiem... ;-]
Paabloo175 11 months ago
What is so bad about the hypothesis of God? Evolution can't tell us EVERYTHING about the universe, so whats so bad about guessing that God may have done it?
Scientists are arrogant, and very close minded. If the would stop being so arrogant, and if they were more open to new ideas, then it's almost guaranteed that we would be much further along in science than we are now.
Synicade 1 year ago
@Synicade
God is supernatural. By definition, science seeks to understand the natural. Therefore, by definition, science does not include god as a valid option for explaining natural phenomenon. This has nothing to do with being "closed-minded".
TheSeventhSon 1 year ago
@Synicade What is bad about it is that you cannot test it, you cannot make experiments, and you cannot reproduce them. In the traditional definition of a hypothesis, god cannot be test, therefore there cannot be a hypothesis about it. This isn't some war with religion vs science, it's not an issue of arrogance, it's an issue of you hearing things that goes against your beliefs.
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@trippinlikegod Wow, by far one of the most immature responses I have ever gotten. Please, grow up, and learn to debate.
Synicade 1 year ago
@Synicade Please enlighten me to what was so immature about my response to you. I'm not sure what part of that offended you so deeply but you should thicken up a little or don't start conversations regarding things you do not understand. You were right about one thing though, evolution cannot tell us everything about the universe, mostly because it has nothing to do with the universe. It only relates to the development of life AFTER it began, nothing of the cosmos at all.
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
So hypocrite "we gonna put christ back in the classroom" So that means only ONE religion is going to be teach.... Not jewish believes, Not Moslims believes, Not the Hindu believes..... Damn religilious people are sooo shallow..
Ben1987X 1 year ago
@Ben1987X uh you must not stereo type beilefe systems i am a christian yet i am not religios i am open to my belief being wrong howevr evolutionist scientists who claim to be credible are not there for they have no credibility and i bieleve that although we should not force one religion on everyone in our public schools in middle schools and highschools how ever lets make an elictive in for each bieleife there for we arent being indoctrinated tworeds evolutionism
sixwingproductions 1 year ago
@sixwingproductions explain why evolution is wrong. Religion say's this: God send two people on earth who have sex and there child have sex (that's incest). Anyway and now the world is full of people of all color.. Now we know that man evolved out of different man. We found different skeletons of those man who have different sizes of structure that envolved. But the bible never say;s that... How do just say ow well....never mind that fact..I just overlook that
Ben1987X 1 year ago
@Ben1987X let me say this in response wale there children did sleep with each other God allowed it becuase of enough genetic diversity even in that small group. it became a sin when down the line our genes became so few that it could cuas diginerat side efects. adam and eve had all the genes in humans in them. and there is complete lack of intermediat fossils if you have evedence to suport your side of the debate site your source and email me a video for my pages debate playlist
sixwingproductions 1 year ago
@sixwingproductions Except there cannot be enough genetic diversity in a group that only includes 2 individuals. That's a fact. You are just making up things to support your claim. There are countless transitional fossils. Not all living things become fossilized by the way. You, right now, as you breathe, are a transitional creature, every single living thing is. YouTube videos aren't evidence either friend, anyone can say anything on YT, maybe read some peer reviewed literature.
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@trippinlikegod if the first 2 humans had all the genes needed there would be and i subscribe to the idea that God created man else were on earth as whell as in eden
sixwingproductions 1 year ago
@sixwingproductions You have absolutely no understanding of genetics, not even the most basic level. What is your degree in sir?
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@trippinlikegod im an inventor and i like teoretical physics but i dont have a degree only an opinion. but i can say this ive been around for 3 trilions years. and being im not human i have more knoledge about the past than you. my race is at a level of civilization were we rule 75% of the universe and i could not dumb down our science enogh for you to understand. + i cant transilate our data to human terms im not a transilator. our science works on a level of multi space layer dimintional phy..
sixwingproductions 1 year ago
@sixwingproductions Wow you really are completely off the deep end aren't you? Did someone forget their meds this morning?
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
*without, obviously.
chazmundoful 1 year ago
What the FUCK is neo darwinism? This isn't a fucking cult.
j03y2fly 1 year ago
The single most reiterated argument against Intelligent Design is "It's stupid." Depressing that the most "advanced" people among humans(at least by their own opinions) resort so frequently to name-calling.
studentofthegospel 1 year ago
@studentofthegospel But it is stupid to bring something to the table with absolutely no evidence whatsoever and claim it is science. That is stupid, completely and totally stupid.
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
@trippinlikegod Dawkins himself says Creation (existence) has the "overwhelming appearance of design." What has no evidence is evolution! Look for some solid, tangible evidence for evolution, and direct me to it. The hypocrisy in the evolutionist arguments is that you demand proof from believers, and demand none of yourselves.
studentofthegospel 1 year ago
@studentofthegospel The process of science does not operate on discrediting the scientist. I'm sure you aren't aware of that but it's the truth. The proof is available you just refuse to look. Genetics quite clearly demonstrates evolution from common descent. There is no controversy, none, zero. You can try to make it one but you're simply wrong. We ask for proof from creationist because we have proof of change over time, you have absolutely none in regards to creationism. None.
trippinlikegod 1 year ago
i dont understand.
Who says Islam as a religion has a problem with evolution?
adnanahmad23 1 year ago
@adnanahmad23 is that supposed to defend islam? islam is a major cause of hatred and ignorance. but if there okay with evolution they're cool.
D4K0T4375 1 year ago
@D4K0T4375
Stop listening to corporate media and actually start reading history. Listen to some of your own specialists like former director of CIA Bin laden Unit Michael Schuer etc.
Such statements only show your own ignorance and an inability to introspect.
Stop blaming others for problems that your politicians have created.
adnanahmad23 1 year ago
@adnanahmad23 no no no. as long as they're fine with evolution its okay if it stunts the growth of science and breeds hatred?
D4K0T4375 1 year ago
lol, ben stein is funny
sk8freak51392 1 year ago
Intelligent design is not creationism?????????
Who is it that designs the world but doesn't create?
Anyone who can design worlds or intelligent life must be
A: a god
or perhaps
B: a ultra-hyper, uber-powerful intelligent life form that EVOLVED
and since the whole point of this exercise is to prove that evolution doesn't happen, who designs (but does not create) worlds and lifeforms but a god?
swilson3d 1 year ago
@swilson3d
i think intelligent design is facing stereotype. May be because the Christians burnt Galileo alive, the whole concept now is facing biased analysis? Please remember there were other communities as well like Muslims under whom science flourished and played major part in western renaissance as well in terms of science and technology. There were never incidents like Galileo rather scientists were prized. hope you wont freak out at the name of Islam. I'd welcome your objective analysis.
adnanahmad23 1 year ago
I actually somewhat agree with Dr Nelsons statements...
Stevil3113 1 year ago
Why can't we fund yetti-design? Whats wrong with research to find whether or not big foot is the creator of the universe? What are the blood-thirsty, organ-hungry scientists trying to keep from us? Why are they trying to quiet the yetti-design community?!?!
mackles 1 year ago
how is it their was life on this planet befor humans, who greated that life form is their a god that is a dinosaur.
bob1978amon 1 year ago
Johnny Cash would be ashamed
000DarkNite000 1 year ago
So let me see what Bien is saying, because 10-11 professors say evoultion is not true it discredits all the evedience,and all the great sciencetists who do think it is true. Am I the only one getting that impression?
615Deathdealer 1 year ago
'Intelligent design is the study of patterns in nature that are best explained as a result of intelligence.' So they look for observations that they don't understand and then they claim that is must have been designed by some external intelligence. This is not science. Once you properly study the patterns in nature, and gain an understanding, you don't need an external 'intelligence' to explain what you don't understand. Intelligent design is not interested in understanding.
gerandomiseerd 1 year ago
deadbutbreathing-----i also sent you a message.first i said god is a spirit.i never said its god if the person you are thinking of calls you at the same moment you are thinking of that person.2nd my point was that like the phone call that there many [crazy things]things that have happen to people and what happen to them people left a powerful impact on them and its something science will not and can not prove but to the people it happens to its real. very real and it is real.thats my point.
chuckspanda 1 year ago
Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world His invisible qualities have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, both His everlasting power and Mightiness, for them to be without excuse,
ChrisnStarry 1 year ago
they teach both the heliocentric AND geocentric theories, all 3 views of the big bang theory, the theory of the origen of heavy elements, black holes that have never been seen, supernova explosion that date back only 10,000 years ago the theory of relativity that proves that the distance of stars are only that far by the presumptions of man, all technological data was made by man.
but they cannot teach intelligent design AND evolution?
theREALiceveela 1 year ago
@theREALiceveela
Intelligent design has no empirical evidence to support it.
TheSeventhSon 1 year ago
@theREALiceveela Everything you just pointed out has been discovered due to evidence pointing towards it, studies done of how it could be possible, it's been proven to be a valid sciencetific thoery after a lot of empirical evidence. Intellegent design is nothing more then "a feeling" some people have, thinking that everything is too complex to have come about from mother nature. Therefore it is no science, it could be taught in Thoery of knowledge class but not in science.
DeadButBreathing 1 year ago
@theREALiceveela no in a science classroom you cannot prove something with evidence.
chazmundoful 1 year ago
look iam a very spiritual person some things can not be proven some things are what they are.for instance have you ever thought of someone and the phone rings and its the person you are thinking of .no science can prove that but u know what just happen because u just had it happen to you.god is a spirit .in fact if we acted more like god wanted we wouldnt be in half the trouble this world is in.
chuckspanda 1 year ago
@chuckspanda If you're thinking of someone and the phone rings there is always a chance it will be the person you were thinking of. However most of the time when the phone rings you will not be thinking of that person or have any idea who is calling. Just because it happens a couple of times, doesn't mean God exists and is senting you messages.
DeadButBreathing 1 year ago
stop pretending to be scientifically skeptical Ben
Mister0Alexi 1 year ago
thiss shyt is boring can someone explain me this bull shitt
andersen781 1 year ago
i can see why the scientist hate the intelgeint design because it sounds like some thing that will never be proven wrong or right and therefore it will allways be naging thorn in the side just like the ufo subject never disproven never proven....... there is another option that both darwin and Inteligent design are both wrong.....but one thing is ofr shure that there still space for another theroy ..........
InkDropFalls 1 year ago
Amazing, as of yet, no evidence for intelligent design, and why it is credible has been presented. I'm sure if I hold me breath, it will be presented soon. Right?
ponyboy316 1 year ago
It is simple and utter propaganda to claim that "Academic Freedom" means that every hypothesis deserves to be taught in public schools.
If Intelligent Design wants official recognition, it needs to fight through the scientific method, publishing data from experiments which support their model, developing a model in the first place, and winning a consensus.
That's how real science works. Why doesn't ID want to go through this?
FiverBeyond 1 year ago
can it be? really? an intelligent design video that isn't cencored?
roeldata 1 year ago
This well-put-together documentary actually makes you think. ;)
ps: 56 people missed the "like" button
Eye2EyeIIIV 1 year ago
@Eye2EyeIIIV Did you really have to put that in every part of it?
oznerflexo 1 year ago
props to SittingDuckDK. you said it dude.
kalo555 1 year ago
"because the evidence is being distorted" ....... is anyone else sitting there watching this going ... How ... Please explain what you mean by distorted before you skip over to the next Psuedo scientist for 20seconds of talktime
Edwarddoom 1 year ago
you know if he cut out the montages and the getting lost schtic this movie would be at least 30 minutes shorter
overlordcacius 1 year ago
sorry but this "documental" is so stupid that i can not see it to the end, it is just too much for me. It is just a bad creationist copy from religulous with no jokes , no fun and no evidence of anything
kaiser1977ful 1 year ago 2
How dare they have opinions!!
XtianFreak 1 year ago
Psalms 19:1 "The heavens declare the glory of God. The skies proclaim the work of His hands."
ParasiteQueen1 1 year ago
Muslims say Allah, Christians say God/Jesus, Hindus say Vishnu, Buddhist say No God, etc etc. My God is the man, your God sucks, my God my God my God.
A scientist will say "NO NO NO, NATURE DID IT".
Jeez you all are just as bad! Stuck to ONE belief and not being capable of accepting other possibilities. If we were to combine ideas instead of separating them we'd come to a better conclusion and understanding.
crackercookies 1 year ago
@crackercookies
Easily the dumbest fucking thing I've ever read.
EatMyPwn 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@EatMyPwn no. You are an idiot.
Savyn333 1 year ago
@crackercookies There's a huge difference though.. Scientists PROVE IT and USE IT! You can't say this for any of the others.. and science is NOT a belief, any more than fire is!
ScholarlyGentleman81 1 year ago
There's plenty of good evidence out there for Intelligent Design, and the theory should be accepted as another way to look at things.(especially since their obviously isn't any proof against it)
ShiftingFeet 1 year ago
@ShiftingFeet
There is actually no evidence for it. It's a philosophical point of view, not a scientific one.
TheSeventhSon 1 year ago
@ShiftingFeet
Disprove of intelligent design? Become pregnant and give birth. That's as much of disproofe anyone ever needs
giliellthesecond 1 year ago
Darwin. Darwin. Darwin. DARWIN! he was only the BEGINNING. why is he always the one to be mentioned? why not quote/speak about someone else who has provided evidence in support evolution, there are hundreds- go check them out. these ignorant Neanderthals are really starting to sound like a Brocken record now, they're acting like evolution hasn't progressed since Darwin published the origin of species!
h6hfelie 1 year ago 2
@h6hfelie Because no one has been able to add the reams evidence to Darwin's theory that were expected when he came up with his reinterpretation of morphology which has nothing to do with information science.
fashklash 6 months ago
Bullshit that's not the discovery, Google image it.
DSD1v57BG32 1 year ago
How can he say that ID does not imply a God? You need an entity as unlikely as that at least. Even if it was correct it would still not explain origin, it would expose an origin of which origin you 'cannot' explain. How 'in'convenient, isn't it?
yeezil 1 year ago
This is not a religous question. There are agnostics who support ID. These annoying evolutionist people need to quit speaking lies and realize this. They are using the Red Herring fallacy.
jrichard1977 1 year ago
So, where is your scientific evidence for ID? There is none. Otherwise people'd have been all over it. Stop acting like the kid nobody wants to play with. Change your act. There's a reason people don't want to play with imaginary friends.
AernoutMJC 1 year ago
If you like we can chat some where else, because Youtube isn't really a chatting site.
jokericon00 1 year ago
@shazzbot007 oh, you're open minded?
kerrie1234567890 1 year ago
To Stein-haters:
U hate this documentary EXPELLED? Great! U've just shown everyone, quite blatantly, that YOU folks are really the ones abusing free speech. WE are losing the right of free speech, not u.
U guys' motive. "DON'T question Darwinism."
Eye2EyeIIIV 1 year ago
@Eye2EyeIIIV Dude you completely misunderstand the concept of free speech! Free speech does NOT mean that everyone are equally right in their claims, it does not even mean that everyone should be heard! It means that everyone has the right to express them selfs without any kind of persecuting (within limits)! But in doing so you expose yourself for criticism... if people (in this case Stein) speek nonsence they will get hammerd by their critics... accept it or dont go public with your opinion!!
SittingDuckDK 1 year ago 36
I can already see where this is going - Start by pretending you believe in evolution, then end by pretending the interviews have changed your mind. How annoying.
DroogieSteve 1 year ago 21
@DroogieSteve You weren't paying much attention to this documentary, were you? He's pretty clear on his beliefs, while trying to remain unbiased during interviews.
HighOnPaint 1 year ago 28
The only part of this clip worth viewing was the blonde at 0:18.
Jazza66 1 year ago 2
I thought Ben Stein was smarter than this.....
buckfushes 1 year ago
If it is the case that the evidence doesent point towards evolution, wouldnt this video be way more effective if it merely presented the evidence for either side?
affablegiraffable 1 year ago 2
@affablegiraffable
The "evidence" from the other side never seems to come up when people inquire about it.
TheSeventhSon 1 year ago
@TheSeventhSon
this is precisely my point
affablegiraffable 1 year ago
@affablegiraffable
Yeah, I'm just agreeing with you. It's funny that the Discovery Institute was created to research intelligent design and yet it still hasn't produced a valid research paper that supports ID.
TheSeventhSon 1 year ago 2
@toddghall
Im going to pray for your soul before i go to bed tonight, because you need lots of help. Since the beginning of recorded history has anyone ever documented or seen a creature evolve & change into something else? of course not. Dont you think it takes alot more faith to believe in such non sense? is your brain working ok? you might need to get it checked out.
Gbiz100 1 year ago
@Gbiz100 BAHAHA. I've never read anything so contradictory. You tell him your going to pray for him... acting like a believer in Christ... and then you make fun of him and make outlandish claims against him... tod i think you have a beautiful mind. maybe it needs correction... all brains do. but Gbiz... i think you might need to get your soul checked out? I'm a christian, and its people like you who make Faith unattractive. Hypocrites.
kylehalltimbest 1 year ago
Thanks little buddy. Take care of yourself.Hope you have a good day!
I forgot you are perfect right? I'm sure you can walk on water right? & by the way i did pray for him, but if someone says something foolish they need to be corrected. The WORD does say "A fool says in his heart says there is no God" any ways may God Bless you brother
Gbiz100 1 year ago
have you ever seen an intelligence create everything in six days?
I think that takes a lot more faith, considering that, unlike evolution, it has NO evidence whatsoever
BluJugganaut 1 year ago
@BluJugganaut
I know that it takes "intelligence" to create something complex & make it work. the universe is complex right?
Gbiz100 1 year ago
Well, it doesnt...
This is why you come across as ignorant, because you make stupid assumptions like that without actually reading and finding out things yourself....
Answer me these: How did God make the Earth out of nothing?
What made God?
BluJugganaut 1 year ago
yes prayer is what we all need the most. We, the atheist, have been brainwashed by the devil, we are taken over by his demons and we drink christians blood, please help us. Arrgghhh, the sun is coming out...must...escape
xxxrrrxxxrrr 1 year ago
@toddghall
Are you 100% sure God doesnt exist?
Can you seriously prove that? & if you can which i'm sure you can't would you bet your little ape life on it? since we came from monkeys right?
Gbiz100 1 year ago
@Gbiz100 The burden of proof is on you... You dumbass. You say some magic man in the sky exists, so YOU have to fucking prove it. It's not up to us to disprove every batshit crazy religious claim that you shit stain christians make. And no, we didn't come from monkeys. You're ignorant about evolution and clearly have only heard bullshit from right wing religious morons like yourself. How about you read a book other than your fairytale bible for once, and pray to jesus some more, tool.
CharismaticRecluse 1 year ago
@Charismaticrecluse
Thank you very much for the nice comment you posted. I really appreciate the foul language.You seem to know everything there is to know, so instead of talking non sense why dont you tell me why you believe so much in evolution & not in GOD? Can you prove the evolution theory? Dont think like a PINHEAD!!
Gbiz100 1 year ago
@Gbiz100 Are you 100% sure that Spiderman doesn't exist? Can you seriously prove it? If not, I don't see why we should be pouring tax dollars into a bunch of loons hopelessly attempting to prove the contrary. Your God isn't any different.
*facepalm*
Anyway, enjoy the trolling. ^_^
Yupiyeahs 1 year ago
@Yupiyeahs
Insult, insult, and more insults. There is one group that I would never want to be apart of, and that is atheism. I do not get any joy out of calling people names, and believing anything someone tells me.
jokericon00 1 year ago
@jokericon00 >I do not get any joy out of [...] believing anything someone tells me.
Is that so? How did you come to being a theist then? Godly insight without ever having contact to any representatives or propagative materials of whatever faith you happen to follow? Oh, I'd say you definitely get quite a bit of joy from believing fancy stories other people tell you.
As for calling names, if that was an atheist-exclusive thing, Ray Comfort would be their absolutely #1. Ever told a lie, mate?
Yupiyeahs 1 year ago
@Yupiyeahs Oh please stop with the re-run theories that you hear from other atheist. I was exposed to a lot of things, and I had the choice to make my own decision. I wasn't forced to believe anything, and I consider myself agnostic. Also, Ray comfort compared to Bill Maher is not even competition. Bill Maher insult more people than anyone else I know combined. Also, what does me telling a lie have to do with anything???? That entire paragraph was all over the place; get to the point next time.
jokericon00 1 year ago
@jokericon00 Maher is a self-righteous asshole and an idiot. So is Comfort, in his own way. Comfort is a more interesting example though, as calling names is the very essence of the majority of his arguments. QED: "Have you ever told a lie? Then you're a liar. Liars go to hell unless they repent. You'll go to hell unless you convert to Christianity." This is the case with most theistic debaters. It's generalised labels, above labels and more labels without any depth whatsoever.
Yupiyeahs 1 year ago
Oh the topic of "agnosticism": It really seems like a way of evading the harsher, less popular, term "atheist". An atheist doesn't believe in a deity because there is no proof for its existence. It's a choice based on mere probability. An agnostic says that he can't know whether a deity exists because it's unknowable. Essentially, the two aren't mutually exclusive. I can't know whether a deity exists, yet I can still decide not to believe in it due to the minuscule probability of its existence.
Yupiyeahs 1 year ago
What is, for the lack of better word, stupid is assuming that because you can't know whether or not a deity exists that the odds of it existing are 50/50. This would be "Comfortian" agnosticism, once again, solely based on "calling names". Convince the individual that he's a liar, thus going to hell, then convince him that he's an agnostic, thus doesn't (or can't) know, then assume that the chances of Abrahamic God existing are at least 50%, profit! It's a fool's trap.
Yupiyeahs 1 year ago
PS: I'm quite surprised that as somebody claiming that Comfort isn't much of a "name caller" compared to the oh-so-vile atheists, you didn't immediately recognise his corniest "Ever told a lie?" argument.
PSS: While we're at it, "atheists" is not a group you can belong to it. I, and every other moderately reasonable atheist, am as prone allying myself to an atheists as I am to Christian, providing their arguments hold equal strength. A Christian is, by definition, bound to his fellow believers.
Yupiyeahs 1 year ago
@Yupiyeahs I'm not trying to offend you when I say this, but you must of had a very hard life dealing with religions people. The debates I have seen didn't include Ray Comfort, and if he does act like that, then he is an extremist just like anyone else. Now saying that god doesn't exist; that is another argument that we can discuss later on another chat site. However, Matthew Maury, the father of Oceanography, discovered Gods existence just by reading Pslams 8.
jokericon00 1 year ago
@jokericon00 No offence taken, although I do not have hard time dealing with religious people. I know many others do, but the few I sometimes run into tend to be MA/MSc/PhD, more deist than theist kind of folks. If they believe in anything, it's usually some sort of vague, often personal, supernatural entity, rather than the usual Bible tales about snakes and whatnot.
On Maury. Sure, could be. Many clever people were theists. Many were slave owners too. It's kind of irrelevant though.
Yupiyeahs 1 year ago
8:45-8:49 he says the evidence of Darwinism is being distorted...
What evidence is being distorted? You have to back up your claims. How can I validate his claim if he gives no support. This is STUPID!
toddghall 1 year ago
I love the huge claims with no support. The guy just claims Darwin's theories are no good, but supplies absolutely zero reasoning to back it up. Darwin's theories have been verified and reproduced on so many levels that it's simply ridiculous to claim otherwise.
Creationism could be taught, you just need to find evidence to support the claim. There is none, that's why it is not accepted and not in school.
There is NO GOD! DEAL WITH IT!
or, simply prove it, as Darwin did evolution.
toddghall 1 year ago
This movie is a big yawn, it doesn't seem to have much intelligent design, I can't work out what audience it trys to target, if its supposed to be a high powered response to the the richard dawkins documentrys.....its not, its like a mogadon but without euphoria...its about as annoying as commercial television...and seems to assume its audience has a five second attention span, wants to people to their mind blinders back on....., yawn...sorry,,,i was hoping the creationists could do better movie
Brettyification 1 year ago
If u think the Christians are the ones who are guilty for the stagnant, anti-Science Dark Ages, or the Inquisition, u oughtta check this out:
chick[.]com/reading/tracts/5023/5023_01[.]asp
Eye2EyeIIIV 1 year ago
What's that song at minute 9:00?
designedsayer 2 years ago
Why is it we cannot all agree that all of this is merely speculative, based on assumption regardless of what it is you believe. Darwinism, Intelligent Design, whatever, the point is we should be focused on finding more answers and evidence, not squabbling over the obvious subjectivity of the current evidence presented on either side of any arguments. This is why people are dumb, they're more concerned with being right than actually trying to find out if they actually are or not.
Circtus 2 years ago
@Circtus Because Creationism isn't science. All theories proposed by them have been roundly bunked and dismissed. Yet these groups campaign to have the bible taught literally,
Combine that with the fact religious pressure groups can be very powerful, prop 8 passed because around 80% of voters were weekly church goers for example. Religious groups intrude in all areas of life and it's time we left them behind.
norsef 2 years ago
I'm not religious. I think that if the evidence points one way than we should follow the evidence. If evolution is the best explanation, and it is obviously accepted as such, than lets follow it, but if there is evidence for an opposing view than we should allow that view a chance to grow. I do not know much about intelligent design, but I am willing hear what these scientist have to say.
Strategy5659 1 year ago 2
hes totally copying michael moore's style, perhaps wisely, as it does work! pitty its for such an appauling purpose...
moogus8000 2 years ago
Ben Stein should issue an apology for this garbage dump. Notice how they only beat down evolution but they never explain intelligent design theory...
TheNorthernObserver 2 years ago
watch this from 3:57 ....he explains it perfectly
mazdamike25 2 years ago
@mazdamike25, The theory as stated in the video is a poorly worded sentence and