RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (121) < ... 31 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 41 ... >   
  Topic: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed., Sternberg, Gonzalez, Crocker - A film< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Henry J



Posts: 4792
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 06 2008,19:06   

In short, our interests dictate that the presence of a given area of the wall of the cooker, and countless other facts about the physics of the explosion, take their places as background conditions rather than causes of the explosion.

Or, one could compare the attributes of the one that exploded to the larger majority of pressure cookers that didn't. ;)

Henry

  
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 06 2008,21:14   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,April 06 2008,15:14)
kevin and the rest of his fellow travellers care nothing about philosophy nor science. †they are simply concerned with constructing the narrative that is most appealing to the particular audience at hand at any particular moment. †He comes by here for kicks, since he knows himself to be deeply and fundamentally dishonest, he doesn't care what the science is or about arguing for his points. †It's the Gish Gallop all over again, with an AC/DC album cover.

FTKevin and his ilk don't even know what a Gish Gallop is. He came here and made an ass of himself just as creationists do, because they fall into the same patterns out of ignorance. These people have no clue how cookie cutter their "freedom of [same] speech" is, but they have the arrogance to take on legitimate scientists (like Wesley again) when they have little education and obviously no idea how to get one.

I find it astonishing that people like him repeat the same old refuted crap as if they actually thought of it themselves. Next we'll being hearing about how "NASA found the missing day." *yawn*

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,07:49   

Quote (Kristine @ April 06 2008,21:14)
Next we'll being hearing about how "NASA found the missing day." *yawn*

Kristine - Kevin is @ 2 posts away from posting this:

Future Kevin Posts:  Because it was all the wimmens fault.  They let the dust get too deep on the moon, and the Lost Day got buried.  If them womens were better with the house cleanings, that Day would never have been lost.  That's why GOD gave Man dominion over womens.

And how's that diner coming along ?

Kristine Responds:Kevin:  &^%$#99 You %^&^#$%$^&, and *&^$^&, so, in conclusion, &&&^%$%^&&^&!!!!

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,09:45   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ April 05 2008,00:35)
Wesley: You could probably have saved yourself a lot of time (and a lot of words) by simply saying, "I'm going with the majority." But you of all people should know that consensus science is like patriotrism--the last refuge of a scoundrel.

By your logic, it was right for Galileo to be persecuted for his views, because the overwhelming majority of astronomers were certain that geocentrism was right and heliocentrism was wrong. The evidence was just so overwhelmingly obvious. †The same goes for virtually any other scientist that revolutionized his discipline.

On a related note, on my blog, Kristene said, "Try this on for size: It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet someone who claims not to believe in heliocentrism, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that.)"

I think she believes this refutes my point. But she's merely proven it instead. Prior to Copernicus, no one would have agreed with her statement, even though they were studying the same body of evidence that led Copernicus to conclude that the earth orbited the sun and not the other way around. Heliocentrism was just so obviously wrong. Wrong, because even though people were examining the same data as you, they brought a completely different worldview to their study and completely different methods, which led them to completely different conclusions.

Is that so? Wrong to whom, FTKevin?
†  
Quote
The heliocentric concept, which followed the geocentric one, did not originate with Copernicus. He became aware that in the third century B.C. the Greek natural philosopher Aristarchus had proposed the Sun as the center of planetary motion. In his treatise, On the Sizes and Distances of the Sun and Moon, Aristarchus estimated that the Sun is 20 or so times farther from the Earth than the Moon (the actual value is about 400), and since both have approximately the same angular size, the Sun must be 20 times larger than the Moon or, he reasoned, about 7 times the Earth's diameter (the actual value is almost 109 times). From these estimates he apparently thought it natural to put the largest and only self-luminous body in the Solar System, the Sun, at the center of the system. Additionally, Aristarchus attributed the daily movement of the heavens to the rotation of the Earth on its axis. Annual changes in the sky and the planet`s motions could be explained if they and the Earth then revolved about the Sun. Even prior to Aristarchus, the Greeks were aware that the Moon, and possibly the planets, "shine" by reflecting sunlight, a notion they probably came to by observing lunar eclipses. It is also possible that Aristarchus recognized that the stars were self-luminous and conceivably like the Sun only farther away, but this is speculation.


Wrong again, Kevin. *eyeroll*

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,10:08   

Quote (Jason Spaceman @ April 05 2008,12:24)
A review of Expelled here claims:

Quote
Executive Producer Walt Ruloff said scientists also told them that federal health and science institutions and universities have instructed them to stop conducting publicly funded genomic, microbiological and other research into intelligent design.


Uhhh, what research would that be?

This kind of research, apparently.
† †
Quote
Some Christians interpret diseases such as SARS as a judgement from God against the sinfulness of the world. Others see them as attacks from Satan. Still others regard SARS and other diseases as the natural consequences of living in a fallen world.

Whatever the true cause of SARS, we do know one thing: No matter how deadly the disease is or how far it spreads, God is still in control, and his will, will prevail.

Where is God in all of this? Heís right where he always is: living in the hearts of every believer. We have no reason to give in to the fear and gloom that the rest of the world feels when confronted with such epidemics. Thus, rather than cower in fear, secretly celebrate the imminent demise of the world, or sit in smug judgement on the worldís sins, it is our duty to be agents of grace, love and hope to those who do not share the same assurance in God that we have. In the face of a threat such as SARS, it is always wise to take precautions. But we should never respond in fear.

Bwa ha ha! :D So I guess people shouldn't be alarmed at all the Nazis in Expelled, eh?

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,10:17   

Kevin and ilk seem incapable of realising that no matter how hard or often we vote we cannot repeal the law of gravity. (Just to satirise this nonsensical accusation of consensus once more)

I also have to mention that I LOVE IDCists invoking Galileo. If Galileo was persecute then who was this persecution one by? Could it have been by some religious body on the basis of dogma?
Galileo, for all his flaws, made the case for heliocentrism on the basis of the evidence available to him. It wasn't some doctrinal or dogmatic shift that demonstrated the earth orbits the sun rather than vice versa, it was the evidence.

So we appear to be right back to where we started! Got any evidence Kevin? Do bear in mind that others, vastly better informed than you, have already seen all the claimed "evidence" that IDC is touted as having, and sorry but these things have been found wanting. They do not do the job they claim to do, nor are they the "evidence" they claim to be. Anything new? Perhaps an ISCID paper...no?

Didn't think so.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,10:32   

Is Ben Stein "God Crazy"?

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,10:41   

QUOTE]It wasn't some doctrinal or dogmatic shift that demonstrated the earth orbits the sun rather than vice versa, it was the evidence.[/QUOTE]

If it's all a matter of interpretation, perhaps Kevin could make the case for geocentrism, based on the evidence available at the time of Galileo.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Bob O'H



Posts: 2196
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,11:04   

midwifetoad - didn't Feyerabend do that?

--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,11:11   

I'm having a ball in this Tard Mine

Constructing narratives and what not.  Good old Feyerabend

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.†Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4902
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,11:21   

A geocentric, geostatic model coupled with the restriction that nothing goes faster than the speed of light yields the observation that the universe is a sphere of about 27.5 astronomical units radius, maximum.

That is, if I managed not to shift any decimal places on the back of my envelope here.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
tacitus



Posts: 118
Joined: May 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,11:42   

Ben Stein's been spewing the word about Expelled again this morning, this time to the faithful of James Dobson's flock at Focus on the Family.  Here is a link to the broadcast:

http://focusfamily.edgeboss.net/wmedia-....211.asx

(or go to family.org and follow the links to today's broadcast if that doesn't work).

Short critique -- it's the usual drivel. No time to provide a longer critique, I'm afraid, though in his potted explanation of ID Stein mentions something about "inorganic cells" being impossibly complex.  I Googled the term and found nothing but scifi and woowoo references -- is it even a real biological term?

Stein also smugly recounts his supposed bamboozling Richard Dawkins with his startlingly audacious "1%, 49%, 51% chance of ID being real" argument.  It sounds even more lame here than it does in the movie.

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,11:43   

Quote (Bob O'H @ April 07 2008,11:04)
midwifetoad - didn't Feyerabend do that?

He seems to have argued that the Church had the better argument, but I haven't seen how he would account for the dynamics of a geocentric system. I suspect it took Newton's dynamics to put heliocentrism on firm rational ground.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
JohnW



Posts: 2835
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,11:54   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ April 07 2008,09:21)
A geocentric, geostatic model coupled with the restriction that nothing goes faster than the speed of light yields the observation that the universe is a sphere of about 27.5 astronomical units radius, maximum.

That is, if I managed not to shift any decimal places on the back of my envelope here.

That's what I got, Wesley. †I look forward to Kevin's explication of other worldviews, with different, equally valid interpretations of the speed of light, the length of a day, and the circumference of a circle.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,12:01   

Quote (tacitus @ April 07 2008,10:42)
Ben Stein's been spewing the word about Expelled again this morning, this time to the faithful of James Dobson's flock at Focus on the Family. †Here is a link to the broadcast:

http://focusfamily.edgeboss.net/wmedia-....211.asx

(or go to family.org and follow the links to today's broadcast if that doesn't work).

Short critique -- it's the usual drivel. No time to provide a longer critique, I'm afraid, though in his potted explanation of ID Stein mentions something about "inorganic cells" being impossibly complex. †I Googled the term and found nothing but scifi and woowoo references -- is it even a real biological term?

Stein also smugly recounts his supposed bamboozling Richard Dawkins with his startlingly audacious "1%, 49%, 51% chance of ID being real" argument. †It sounds even more lame here than it does in the movie.

Yeah, they're really stuck on him, aren't they? From Bill Dembski to Ben Stein, the whole intelligent design movement is just an expression of Dawkins envy.

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,12:30   

Quote (Bob O'H @ April 07 2008,17:04)
midwifetoad - didn't Feyerabend do that?

Erm in a wurd: No.

Feyerabend is a baddy and a big old meanie poobumface. I know cos I done a fillosfy of psienz course at university one day and that's what mah instructor done said. So there.

I splain in teh pickchures:









See?

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Venus Mousetrap



Posts: 201
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,12:40   

Quote (JohnW @ April 07 2008,11:54)
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ April 07 2008,09:21)
A geocentric, geostatic model coupled with the restriction that nothing goes faster than the speed of light yields the observation that the universe is a sphere of about 27.5 astronomical units radius, maximum.

That is, if I managed not to shift any decimal places on the back of my envelope here.

That's what I got, Wesley.  I look forward to Kevin's explication of other worldviews, with different, equally valid interpretations of the speed of light, the length of a day, and the circumference of a circle.

I'd actually quite like astrology to be taught in science*. I read this book, you see, about Pagan astrology, and it had all these diagrams and calculations, so there's something to teach already. It'll fill the gap nicely while we wait for ID to be finished.

*no, honestly. I much prefer magical fairies and elemental monsters to the weird dominatrix bloodlust of Christianity. And if it comes to all-worldviews-are-equal, Paganism has the upper hand - after all, it's already based on nature.

  
kevinmillerxi



Posts: 92
Joined: Feb. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,12:49   

Hey Wes: For the record, I'm not ticked off with you. If you'll notice, I also put myself (and all other Kevin Millers on imdb) into the mofo category. It's a tongue in cheek thing. I may not agree with a lot of what people like Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins or PZ Myers have to say, but I still admire their chutzpah, and Iíd gladly have a beer with them (and you) any time. So wear it as a badge of honor. I'm just trying to have a little fun here.

As for your responses to my statements, despite appearances to the contrary, I'm not coming into this discussion with the assumption, "Everything Wes Elsberry says is wrong." I am listening, and pondering. And I am open to revising my views in light of new and better information. So you'll have to excuse me if I don't dive into a line-by-line response to your posts right away. Itís not an admission of defeat. I just need time to process the various arguments. (Plus, it's been a busy weekend, we have a new baby in the house, and I'm just plain tired.) But even if it turns out that everything youíve said is right and everything Iíve said is wrong, Iím okay with that, because for me, this has never been about winning or losing. It's about learning. The only thing that really matters to me is getting at the truth, because the truth benefits everyone no matter what side of the debate theyíre on. Contrary to how some critics have depicted the film, Expelled is not about promoting a singular point of view, namely, Intelligent Design. Itís about ensuring that all points of view receive a fair and adequate hearing. We made this film because we had good reason to believe that this was not the case with ID, and I stand by that assertion. In addition, my hope is that the film will prompt people on all sides of the issue to engage with one another. Because what I've observed over the past two years is complete polarization. The various camps sit in their respective corners cackling about how stupid the other guys are, but they rarely talk to each otheróexcept to hurl insults. Very few people engaged in this debate seem open to an honest pursuit of the truth. Most are more interested in scoring debating points, looking clever, and promoting their own agenda.

So what Iím trying to do both here and on my blog is engage. In the process, I may say some things that come off as stupid, ignorant or inflammatory. I may hurl a few insults from time to time, and I may needle a few people who need to be needled. After all, Iím only human. But the learning process is often messy and confused. So youíll have to excuse me if I cack up the joint from time to time.

In light of the above, I do want to ask Wes (and anyone else who cares to respond) a couple of questions:

1) How does science distinguish between a paradigm problem and a research problem? In other words, when a researcher encounters an anomaly, how does he/she determine whether the anomaly is a result of a problem with the data rather than a problem with the theory under which the data is being examined?

2) I understand that you're a Christian, Wes. And yet I get the sense that you believe divine influence is not something that should be factored into your study of the natural world. Fair enough. So my question is, if God doesn't influence the world through natural processes, such as evolution, how does he engage with nature? For example, I assume that you pray. How does God answer your prayers? Does he do so in any scientifically detectable way? Or do you take the Ken Miller approach and say he influences things on the quantum level in a way that we are unable to observe?

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,12:54   

Somehow I think I'm never going to hear Kevin's rationalization for lying to 'undesirables' to keep them from seeing Expelled.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,12:58   

shhhhhh Tarden he's trying to act smart. †Don't make him blow it.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell.†Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
JohnW



Posts: 2835
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,13:06   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ April 07 2008,10:49)
Because what I've observed over the past two years is complete polarization. The various camps sit in their respective corners cackling about how stupid the other guys are, but they rarely talk to each otheróexcept to hurl insults. Very few people engaged in this debate seem open to an honest pursuit of the truth. Most are more interested in scoring debating points, looking clever, and promoting their own agenda.

So what Iím trying to do both here and on my blog is engage.

How does associating the theory of evolution with Naziism further "an honest pursuit if the truth," Kevin?  To me, that looks a lot more like "scoring debating points, looking clever, and promoting (your) own agenda."

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,13:08   

I was going to ask Kevin a few questions of my own. I realised I was wasting my time.

Enjoy the concern trolling. It seems this is the "latest" IDCist ploy.

Just remember Kevin, sometimes people are "mean" because they are annoyed at the idiocy/mendacity of someone else, not because they are frightened by them or occupying an equally entrenched but opposed position or trying to advance some dogma. Perhaps, just perhaps, the people you've chucked your lot in with are the bozos we claim them to be.

Why is it creationists and their stooges are so fond of projection?

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
kevinmillerxi



Posts: 92
Joined: Feb. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,13:10   

Here's my response, Arden: I was involved in writing the film, not marketing it. The decisions about who does and who doesn't get to see a pre-screening of the film are entirely in the hands of our producers and our marketing team. If you sincerely want an answer to your question, I suggest you contact Motive Marketing or Premise Media.

  
kevinmillerxi



Posts: 92
Joined: Feb. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,13:15   

JohnW: Like it or not, Hitler was influenced by Darwinian science and philosophy. So it's not about scoring points, looking clever or promoting an agenda. It's about setting the record straight. Whether Hitler hijacked Darwinian science for his own purposes or merely followed it to its logical ethical conclusions is a matter of debate. As I've said elsewhere, Expelled didn't invent these arguments. So if you want to quibble over them, I direct you to the people who make them in our film.

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,13:20   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ April 07 2008,12:49)
... a paradigm...

PARA-DIG-UM!

LOL! FAIL!

Louis-- We had a visiting lecturer last week, one of the big dogs at the NIH.  Very nice fellow (I couldnt bully him into a fight either, where are these mean scientists I keep hearing about?), loved to talk about languages.  He was amazed I knew the history behind 'Abigail'.  Anyway, he said that when you start thinking in a language, thats when you are officially fluent.  I think/dream in lol-speak.  I just thought you should know that.

  
JohnW



Posts: 2835
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,13:22   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ April 07 2008,11:15)
JohnW: Like it or not, Hitler was influenced by Darwinian science and philosophy. So it's not about scoring points, looking clever or promoting an agenda. It's about setting the record straight. Whether Hitler hijacked Darwinian science for his own purposes or merely followed it to its logical ethical conclusions is a matter of debate. As I've said elsewhere, Expelled didn't invent these arguments. So if you want to quibble over them, I direct you to the people who make them in our film.

Hitler was influenced by a lot of things.  If you're claiming that Darwinian science and philosophy was the primary, or even a major, influence on his ideas, I'd like to see some evidence.

And on a related note, what are the "logical ethical conclusions" of Darwinian science?  Are they different from the logical ethical conclusions of the atomic theory of matter, Bayes' Theorem, or any other branch of science?  If so, why?

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,13:23   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ April 07 2008,13:15)
As I've said elsewhere, Expelled didn't invent these arguments. So if you want to quibble over them, I direct you to the people who make them in our film.

You dont know who made your animation, you dont make any arguments about Darwin-->Hitler, you were just a writer, you didnt have anything to do with promoting the film, etc etc etc...

LOL! PARA-DIG-UM FAIL!

  
kevinmillerxi



Posts: 92
Joined: Feb. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,13:28   

JohnW said, "If you're claiming that Darwinian science and philosophy was the primary, or even a major, influence on his ideas, I'd like to see some evidence."

I'd highly recommend you read Richard Weikart's book, "From Darwin to Hitler." In it, Weikart presents loads of evidence that Darwinian science had a significant influence on Hitler.

"And on a related note, what are the "logical ethical conclusions" of Darwinian science?"

Essentially, that humans are not qualitatively different from any other animal, that ethics and morals only exist in the human mind, that they are merely evolutionary adaptations as opposed to universal truths, etc. Weikart goes into full detail on this in his book as well.

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,13:31   

Quote (kevinmillerxi @ April 07 2008,13:15)
As I've said elsewhere, Expelled didn't invent these arguments. So if you want to quibble over them, I direct you to the people who make them in our film.

You know as a writer working on a film called "Crossroads", that explores the intersection between science and religion, I would have thought that you might feel some responsibility to ensure that such bold statements were supported by the facts. Of course, you are just the writer. We probably can't hold you responsible, since it is the producer who is, ultimately, in charge. You were probably just following orders.

But, fear not, friend. When you and the Expelled team start feeling beseiged by all those nasty evolutionists, just get together and remind each other that "Gott Mit Uns."

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it. †We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 07 2008,13:32   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ April 07 2008,12:54)
Somehow I think I'm never going to hear Kevin's rationalization for lying to 'undesirables' to keep them from seeing Expelled.

It's a mistake to think you can get anywhere in HWood by sleeping with the writer.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
  3612 replies since Aug. 12 2007,07:23 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (121) < ... 31 32 33 34 35 [36] 37 38 39 40 41 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]