I always find it interesting how people get so freaked over views that differ from their own. Expecting 6 billion people to align their thinking in a scientific, logical manner is a bit much.

Now, a 6k yo earth is a bit out there, in my opinion, but it really is of no matter to me if some people believe this. And so I would expect the same respect of my beliefs.

The uproar over creationism has nothing to do with it merely being a "different view" or even a crackpot view (which it is). If that were the case, people would be "freaking" over the fact that some people believe in astrology. The essential factor here is that many creationists want their baseless, unscientific ideas taught to all children in public schools. That is, they want to force their beliefs on the rest of us. That deserves no respect; it deserves condemnation.

Expecting 6 billion people to align their thinking in a scientific, logical manner is a bit much.
Well, at least the smarter ones will.

Now, a 6k yo earth is a bit out there, in my opinion, but it really is of no matter to me if some people believe this. And so I would expect the same respect of my beliefs.The problem is that some folks are confusing "beliefs" with "facts". Evidence does not support ID; evidence supports evolution. Therefore, that should be the theory taught, at least until discoveries are made to repudiate or re-evaluate it. The home and the church are still bastions of sanctuary for those who want to persist in myth and fallacy.

This movie could bring some understanding to their theory on this. They don't have a theory, at least not in the scientific sense of the word. This site has tons of good information on the debate:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/

mwickens, I hope you didn't mean that religion and creationism deserve condemnation... I'm going to assume you meant only that forcing it on other people deserves condemnation.

I agree with your comparison to astrology. That is how I feel about all religious/supernatural beliefs. Ideally I'd prefer that people not need such beliefs because they may be mislead by them, but if they are harmless... ok, believe whatever it takes for you to deal with life. However, don't expect everyone else to follow your beliefs... and certainly don't try to apply those supernatural beliefs in the management of public institutions (government, schools, courts, etc).

Science is not anti-creationism or anti-ID. Scientists follow the evidence and use experiments and empirical results to determine which theories are worth further pursuit. If/when that methodology leads them to pursue creationism or ID, they'll be all over it. But until that happens, these types of supernatural beliefs have no business in the world of science.

The essential factor here is that many creationists want their baseless, unscientific ideas taught to all children in public schools. That is, they want to force their beliefs on the rest of us.

I agree completely with you on with this point mwickens. The public school system should remain completely secular.
Technut... you also put it quite well... to each their own, believers or non-believers, to be respectful and tolerent, they should not be trying to convert each other.

Of the movie: This is what I would find interesting: the details of why the universe exists according to their literal Bible interpretation.
I can understand intelligent design (God creates our universe as it is and as science sees it)....it has an intuitive blend of resolving the spiritual and science. However as I understand it, the 6Krs say man and dinosaur existed at the same time. I just can't see how that 'theory' could be resolved, given the overwhelming scientific evidence that says this cannot be.

I am also curious about Ben Stein's involvement in this... this project seems so completely off base to my previous impressions of him.

I'm going to assume you meant only that forcing it on other people deserves condemnation.

Yup, that's what I meant.

I'm not sure where you get the idea that science is not anti intelligent design. It deserves outright condemnation, and has been condemned.

Hugh, that quote you posted pretty much sums up my opinion on intelligent design. It's okay to consider it, but you'd better back it up with some credible and verifiable evidence, otherwise it's totally meaningless.

There was an excellent PBS documentary series about evolution a while back. It went into great detail about our origins and how just a few minor changes to a DNA sequence can spawn an entirely new species. But when I started watching the last episode of the series which discussed religion, I had to stop after a few minutes because it was no longer a valid scientific debate.

As for the movie, I should see it before forming an opinion. After all, if I condemned it without seeing it, I'd be just as guilty of ignorance and bias as religious leaders who condemn movies without even so much as having seen them.

Francois, there is no credible evidence on ID. I am unapologetic on this: you have the right to be assertive on condemning any aspect of Intelligent Design without seeing the film.

If you need some further information on how ID can be refuted, look at this:


15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense:

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=15-answers-to-creationist

I also am unforgiving when it comes to creationism.

A discussion about the absence or existence of God can be a separate issue, since there are not objective facts to prove or disprove the existence of a God. However, since many past tenets about God and the Bible have already proven to be false, and I believe the onus is to prove the existence of something rather then prove the nonexistence of something (WMD's come to mind!), I lean heavily towards the absence of God as has been historically defined by major religions.

But discussion of creationism is ludicrous, given that it is provably and demonstrably false. If someone chooses to believe in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy in their own home, fine - if they choose to express those beliefs elsewhere, then they should expect ridicule and strong recommendations of counseling. Although arguably the Tooth Fairy has not been disproven (to my knowledge) anywhere near the extend that ID has.

jpaik, that's a good link, but since it's from 2002, their point #12 is actually weaker than the current evidence allows. That is, evolution has since been observed in action:

This is one that comes to mind, the mute cricket in Hawaii:
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/061201_quietcrickets

I'm not sure where you get the idea that science is not anti intelligent design. It deserves outright condemnation, and has been condemned.Your statement that ID deserves condemnation is just your personal opinion. Science does not say any such thing.

There's a pretty big difference between saying that Science has not found evidence to support creationism or ID... and saying that Science is anti-creationism or anti-ID.

Good science should have no bias, either pro- or anti- anything. Science should be objective, and saying it is anti-something is incorrect and anti-scientific. ;)

Well, technut, that depends. I think it's safe to say that science is against theories that are proven and demonstrably false. Therefore, isn't science anti-flat earth or anti- sun revolves around the earth?

It's unfortunate that ID still has enough believers that it can't be lumped into the above categories...

Here are some reviews, and reactions to one of the "stealth screenings" of Expelled.

http://www.expelledexposed.com

I just saw part of a documentary on volcanoes in the Pacific rim, and it seems that volcanoes, billions of years ago, are responsible for creating our atmosphere by the gases they released. Wow.

I guess Expelled opens this weekend. I've always enjoyed Ben Stein, I'm curious to see what he's done with this movie. That there are many left wingnut sites actively campaigning to keep people from seeing it only makes me more curious.

Can anyone find if it will open in the lower mainland or Vancouver area?

left wingnut sites

What's a left wingnut site?

it seems that volcanoes, billions of years ago, are responsible for creating our atmosphere by the gases they released. Wow.

Indeed. It's much more reasonable to believe that a bearded ghost created everything a few thousand years ago.

A left wingnut site is one that is far left of the political spectrum and the 'nut' part is where they support ideas such as aids being developed by the government to control the black population or that 9/11 was a secret plot brilliantly carried out by the government("Who benefits people, WHO BENEFITS!!!!", as drool slips down the chin).

If you want to believe that our atmosphere was created by volcanoes, timmy, I will not berate you as both sides tend to do to each other. I just want to know if anyone can find out if Expelled will be shown in my area.

cheers

where they support ideas such as aids being developed by the government to control the black population

hmm, can you point out one of those "left of centre" organizations that say this?

Who benefits people, WHO BENEFITS!!!!", as drool slips down the chin

What are you talking about?

What's a left wingnut site?

A site where left-wing wingnuts hang out. As opposed to sites where right-wing wingnuts gather. :)

Issues of religion and politics bring out the extremes of both sides. I see the dicussions in this thread heading down that path.

I would be surprised if it opens.


It is apparently running into law suits involving stolen animated content, Music etc.

This, combined with a no review screenings policy (always an indiciator of a high quality film, can you say Battlefield Earth). will probably set this bad boy up for next years Razzies.