Richard Dawkins and P.Z. Myers on Expelled

Richard Dawkins and P.Z. Myers talk about their experience trying to attend a screening of Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.

http://richarddawkins.net/article,2389,n,n

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Dawkins
• Pharyngula
• PZ
• Myers
• ID
• Creationism
• cdesign
• proponentsist
• Expelled
• No
• Intelligence
• Allowed
• Irony

[CMLawnscapes]

They may be second rate in film making and public relations, which I disagree with, but not in the information they have put forth. I wonder that the best Dawkins and Myers could do was to criticize the quality of the film, rather than give any attention to the concern addressed in the film. Why is there no freedom of inquiry? Why are these scientists and rofessors "expelled" for asking a perfectly legitamate question, i.e., is ID a reasonable anwser to the origin of the universe?

[freiheitsalv]

they are uniformed :lol: XD

[SoldierofGod828]

@SoldierofGod828 I think it's pretty clear he says it's possible when he says, "that is a possibility and a intriguing possibility". Also interesting was the part when he says, "you might find a signature of some sort of designer." Hmm, sounds like a book I heard of called Signature in the cell.

[SoldierofGod828]

@SoldierofGod828Dawkin's words:It could be that at some earlier time, somewhere in the universe a civilization evolved probably by some kind of Darwinian means to a very, very high level of technology and designed a form of life that they seeded onto perhaps this planet. Um. Uh. That is a possibility and a intriguing possibility. I suppose you might find evidence of that if you look at the b-cells, d-cells of biochemistry of molecular biology you might find a signature of some sort of designer.

[SoldierofGod828]

@deBeuk Ok, I misspoke, what I meant to say,which I believe you agree with, is that his theory was mainly based in his observations, just as much of the work done in ID. He did perform experiments. My mistake.

I could also say that the Darwinian definition of natural selection is an unsubstantiated claim and throw it out just as easy because according to Darwinianism natural selection is some sort of superpower of the biological world that has the capability of doing just about anything.

[deBeuk]

@SoldierofGod828 " I'm not trying to say he never did any experiments"

Stop lying please, your comment is right here on this page for everyone to see. You said "He did not do any sort of testable experiments to prove his theory", which is simply false.

Irreducible complexity is an unsubstantiated claim. I don't have to refute it.

I know what Dawkins said in that abomination of a documentary. He did not say it was /plausible/, as you claim.

[SoldierofGod828]

@deBeuk I'm not trying to say he never did any experiments. I'm just trying to show, as I think you would agree, that the major formation of his theory was based upon observation (such as Galapagos or on his estate). Although, I have no problem with that.

It's easy to throw out irreducible complexity without giving any refutation for why its not valid.

Dawkins states within the expelled video that there is a possibility that an alien life form could have initiated life here on earth. Watch it.

[deBeuk]

@SoldierofGod828 Darwin did perform experiments, what on earth are you talking about?

"They observe the irreducible complexity of things such as the bacterial flagellum"

No, they CLAIM things are irreducibly complex. You don't seem to understand the differences between observation, inference and the scientific method.

"or an alien life form as Richard Dawkins admitted"

Dawkins "admitted" no such thing. He said design by aliens was more likely than design by supernatural beings.

[SoldierofGod828]

@deBeuk What I'm trying to explain is that Darwin made inferences based upon his observations of nature. He did not do any sort of testable experiments to prove his theory. He made observations and formed a theory. ID does that same thing. They observe the irreducible complexity of things such as the bacterial flagellum and logically infer that it must have been designed. Now, whether you say it is God like I do or an alien life form as Richard Dawkins admitted is plausible, is up to you.

[deBeuk]

@SoldierofGod828 "The major difference is that ID is based upon scientific observation, the very SAME scientific method that Darwin himself used"

Scientific observation and the scientific method are two different things. What you mean by scientific observation is looking at something and going "ooh, that sure is complicated, it must be designed", which has nothing whatsoever to do with the scientific method.