Expelled Debunk - Flunked 1of16

Expelled makes some outrageous claims. But what really happened to the people they claim were persecuted for their views? And what is the real story about evolution and Intelligent Design?
In practically every scene, Expelled insults the science of evolution and the scientists who study it, accepting the long-ago-debunked criticisms and conspiracy theories of the intelligent design proponents as valid. On the contrary, evolution is well accepted in the scientific community, where it is considered the organizing principle of biology and central as well to the field of geology. The notion that scientists have formed an atheistic cabal to keep intelligent design from its day in the sun is ludicrous.




Intelligent design has not produced any research to suppress. When prominent ID proponent Michael Behe was asked about his research, and why "you don't do those tests?" he responded, "I myself would prefer to spend time in what I would consider to be more fruitful endeavors." If even proponents of ID do not think it is a fruitful enterprise, why should the scientific community take any interest in it?




Intelligent design is scientifically unproductive, and this perhaps explains why scientists like Guillermo Gonzalez and Michael Behe publish far fewer papers after they become attracted to intelligent design. Ultimately, intelligent design's lack of success in science departments is the fault of the flawed and unscientific nature of intelligent design itself, not the result of bias in the scientific community.
The issue is not the suppression of ID, but the lack of warrant for its scientific claims. And ultimately, ID has an uphill struggle to demonstrate that it is, indeed, science. The fundamental problem with intelligent design as science is that intelligent design claims cannot be tested. Scientific testing requires that there be some set of phenomena which are incompatible with your idea. No observation could possibly be incompatible with a claim that an "intelligent agent" (whom everyone recognizes as God) acted to, say, introduce information into a system. Untestable claims are not scientific claims. Regardless of their attractiveness as religious ideas (although many people of faith strongly reject intelligent design) intelligent design has not passed muster as science.

Flunked - Expelled Debunked by PrometheusWithLight

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=A3D6C9C847F27E6F

http://www.youtube.com/PrometheusWithLight
http://www.expelledexposed.com

Category:

Education

Tags:

• expelled
• ben
• stein
• intelligent
• design
• creationism
• evolution
• science
• darwin
• dawkins
• pz
• myers
• eugenie
• scott

[q28s1]

@q28s1 Links not working now because of my edit. Just type in "Intelligent design poll" in on Google. The top two should do.

[q28s1]

@seansalvador1 cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22­/opinion/polls/main965223.shtm­l

I'd be nice if you backed up your arguments instead of just asking me the whole time to back up mine.

[seansalvador1]

@q28s1

[Citation needed]

Think before you type.

[pegasusfreedom]

The story of creationism is basically that of flat earth and geocentricism in the rest of the western world it is already on the same level as these even with average people, as they are in the scientific and academic community around the world. It could not be more obvious, the excuses used by creationists are the same ones used by geocentrists, germ theory denialsts and flat earthers.

[q28s1]

@seansalvador1 Just by typing in "how many people believe in.. " I found two figures. 30% of Americans believe in Astrology and 52% believe in ID. And from Wiki 45% for ID and 31% for Astrology. All these are for Americans as well.

[seansalvador1]

P.Z. Meyers on -

Herrel A, Huyghe K, Vanhooydonck B, Backeljau T, Breugelmans K, Grbac I, Van Damme R, Irschick DJ. (2008) Rapid large-scale evolutionary divergence in morphology and performance associated with exploitation of a different dietary resource. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 105(12):4792-4795.

[seansalvador1]

@Hustada "The cecal valves are an evolutionary novelty, a brand new feature not present in the ancestral population and newly evolved in these lizards. That's important. This is more than a simple quantitative change, but is actually an observed qualitative change in a population, the appearance of a new morphological structure."

[seansalvador1]

@Hustada

Their digestive system has 'developed cecal valves (a brand new structure, also lengthened)—muscles between the large and small intestine—that slowed down food digestion in fermenting chambers, which allowed their bodies to process the vegetation's cellulose into volatile fatty acids'

'Along with the ability to digest plants came the ability to bite harder, powered by a head that had grown longer and wider. '

...in 30 years... 30!

Imagine a million. Imagine a billion!

[seansalvador1]

@Hustada "Ive responded MANY times to the idea that this incremental process in that incremental processes you describe cannot lead to the large scale complex and specified changes"

Yes you have responded this way many times, and every time it is simply this same assertion, a bare one, never once have you actually explained yourself!

You simply repeat your incredulity... it's boring.

[seansalvador1]

@Hustada "You seem to think its just some sort of stair like process"

A better analogy would be a ramp.

It's strange you would use examples like the butterfly and gills, as these have all been very well described by evolution. Creationists seem to do this a lot, using well explained examples and simply pretending that their personal incredulity or ignorance of those explanations are enough to overturn a theory!