"There are not over a hundred people in the United States who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions, however, who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church, which is, of course, quite a different thing." -Bishop Fulton J. Sheen
Placating terrorists, meeting with dictators, compassion for murderers... but no humanity for the unborn... incredible.
OOT
Re: Review It has actually done well financially for a documentary but it is one of those things where it probably did not meet expectations of how much money it would make. They will probably start pulling it from theaters this Friday when the new releases come out. Just so you know.
Most of you are likely waiting for me to rip it apart, and call it down... but you may be surprised, lol.
At first it seemed like an unfair characterization of the scientific community as a whole - not so as the documentary goes along. Now, important to qualify, Ben Stein is smart, but he deals too much in absolutes. At the same time, though, he does ask a really important question - are we not giving both sides enough of a look to really be fair to such an important issue?
Yes, the idea of veiling creationism in 'intelligent design' is kind of silly - whether you say God, or an intelligent designer of immense power and insight, it is really saying the same thing.
All things told, if it were being approached from an unbiased, and analytical perspective, I think there is actually great benefit to be found within natural designs, whether people believe it will bring forth the creator, or benefit society.
After all, without the hummingbird, we never would have figured out helicopters, they say.
Re: Expelled Thanks for admitting seeing this, Lauchlin. Now I don't feel so alone. It would be good if society could begin the conversation if how science is done today is too lockstep. The only thing that gives a researcher credibility is being published in peer reviewed articles. I am not entirely convinced that that alone is a good measure of accomplishment. I think the questions that ID asks are worthwhile and science does not help itself by squelching them.
I guess one of the fundamental 'strengths' of science is the lockstep method, as you have put it. It ensures that human error is brought to a minimum, and that maximum bias is kept out.
Now, this talk of bias is definitely open to debate, but it still remains that, without that baby step by baby step method for proofing something, the results are open to too much interpretation.
Do you think maybe we need a combined approach, with concepts of ID showing us the possibilities, the wonder of creation, and practical applications that can aid us all, and with science confirming these ideas, finding the whys and hows so that the info can be leveraged to a greater understanding of the overall concepts?
As I have always advocated, the ideas are far from mutually exclusive.
Re: Expelled Lauchlin,
I am not convinced that ID is a valid approach to science and I do believe that the scientific method should be applied to scientific questions. It is a question of authority and competence and I would not expect religious authorities to be competent to make scientific judgments. The thing is, if Evolution is to be successful as a theory it has to be open to being falsified. That openness includes attempts to falsify it from an ID perspective. Those attempts shouldn't be discounted just because they are being made by ID proponents.
The problem with this outlook (that evolution has to be open to be being falsified/disproven) is that it is - when countered with scientific evidence.
The reason that ID is rejected is because time and time again it comes down to veiled attempts by religious people to bring creationism into the classroom. The evidence pointing to genetics and evolution is vast, whereas the supposed evidence for ID is all observational, unquantifiable.
Like religion, it is based on a leap of faith. Faith does not work in science, nor should it, as you have noted. The scientific method should be applied to scientific questions. Whether or not evolution is valid is a scientific question.