INFORMATION
This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used.
For further information, see our Privacy Policy.
Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.
We are not accepting any new registrations.
This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used.
For further information, see our Privacy Policy.
Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.
We are not accepting any new registrations.
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
-
- Posts: 22
- Joined: February 23rd, 2008, 9:48 pm
Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
I found this on YouTube for a new movie, called Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGCxbhGa ... re=related
In an interview with Ben Stein he actually said he thinks the holocaust would not have happend if it wasn't for Darwinism. By which can only assume he is refering to "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life". I'm sure Hitler's catholic upbringing had nothing to do with his persecution of the Jews.
Let us not forget that Darwin is not alone and Walace also came to the same conclusions independently at the same time. Huckerbee is backing the documentary also (big surprise).
The comments are even more disturbing.
Rob
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGCxbhGa ... re=related
In an interview with Ben Stein he actually said he thinks the holocaust would not have happend if it wasn't for Darwinism. By which can only assume he is refering to "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life". I'm sure Hitler's catholic upbringing had nothing to do with his persecution of the Jews.
Let us not forget that Darwin is not alone and Walace also came to the same conclusions independently at the same time. Huckerbee is backing the documentary also (big surprise).
The comments are even more disturbing.
Rob
Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
Did you see the parody of this: Sexpelled?
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
Abstinence Makes the Church Grow Fondlers.
Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
Brilliant!
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
I got this in an email from the Center for Inquiry:
Expelling All Reason
CFI’s Paul Kurtz Joins the Chorus of Critics Dismissing Ben Steins “Expelled” as Anti-Science Propaganda
Paul Kurtz, founder and chairman of the Center for Inquiry, has called the new anti-evolution film “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed” featuring Ben Stein, “anti-science propaganda” and an “exercise in anti-intellectualism at its worst.”
Kurtz went on to say that "the social and scientific progress we take for granted has been advanced by a basic scientific and philosophical point of view. As this new film makes abundantly clear, the methods of the sciences, and the assumptions upon which they are based, are being challenged culturally in the United States with a renewed fervor. Despite its success in providing us with unparalleled benefits, anti-intellectual extremists seek to inhibit free inquiry and misrepresent the tested conclusions of scientific inquiry. This is a highly charged political issue, as science is under political attack. Regrettably, we seem not to have come far culturally since the Scopes "monkey" trial."
CFI is particularly troubled by the fact that Stein and his producers apparently engaged in a shameless array of dirty tricks and dishonest tactics, among which many are detailed here by Scientific American. Even FOX News has felt compelled to wax critical about the film, saying that the film is "a sloppy, all-over-the-place, poorly made 'expose' of the scientific community....showing that Stein, who’s carved out a career selling eye drops in commercials and amusing us on sitcoms, is either completely nuts or so avaricious that he’s abandoned all good sense to make a buck."
In response, CFI's Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI) has published a devastating critique of the film in the latest issue (May/June 2008) of Skeptical Inquirer magazine.
Recently, CFI published an extensive position paper authored by Barbara Forrest demonstrating convincingly that the ID movement is simply a continuation of creationism.
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
What I'd like to know is how these people explain the anti-jewish pogroms of the medieval ages. One of the things that held up the first crusade (and subsequent ones) was that christians got sidetracked into killing European Jews (why go all the way to the middle east to kill infidels when you have some right on your doorstep!) Expelled from England and from Spain. Large anti-jewish riots and pogroms in Germany (long tradition there). Oh, and what about Martin Luther on Jews and Their Lies...Robert Ede wrote:I found this on YouTube for a new movie, called Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGCxbhGa ... re=related
In an interview with Ben Stein he actually said he thinks the holocaust would not have happend if it wasn't for Darwinism.
- Emma Woolgatherer
- Posts: 2976
- Joined: February 27th, 2008, 12:17 pm
Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
Well, presumably he's talking about so-called Social Darwinism, which, although it isn't proper Darwinism, might well not have happened without Darwin (or Wallace). According to Mike Hawkins, who wrote Social Darwinism in European and American Thought in 1997 (and who used to be a lecturer of mine [---][/---] lovely man, solid Darwinist), there is a fair bit of evidence that Nazi racism was "legitimated by a Social Darwinism of a particularly deterministic ilk" (p. 291).Robert Ede wrote:In an interview with Ben Stein he actually said he thinks the holocaust would not have happend if it wasn't for Darwinism. By which can only assume he is refering to "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life"...
They don't need to. They don't have to claim that Darwinism created anti-Semitic hatred and violence; rather that it was used (indirectly, through Social Darwinism) to legitimate existing hatred and violence. And it is possible that that was enough to tip the balance and set off a chain of events culminating in the holocaust. Of course, that wouldn't mean that Darwinism is itself wrong [---][/---] in the sense of either immoral or inaccurate. Social Darwinism, however, is another matter entirely.Tom Rees wrote:What I'd like to know is how these people explain the anti-jewish pogroms of the medieval ages.
Emma
Re: Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed
In today's Guardian:
********************************************************************************
Stephen Bates: People | Comment is free | The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/apr/25/1
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
People
* Stephen Bates
* The Guardian,
* Friday April 25 2008
* Article history
About this article
Close
This article appeared in the Guardian on Friday April 25 2008 on p7 of the UK news section. It was last updated at 00:06 on April 25 2008.
Another day, another lawsuit for Yoko Ono. Hard on the heels of yesterday's litigation against a company over ownership of a home movie showing Ono and John Lennon in 1970, she's also suing the makers of an anti-evolution film for using the song Imagine without her permission. The film, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, is fronted by the US lawyer and gameshow host (there's a combination!) Ben Stein, and it uses the song as "part of a social commentary in the exercise of free speech and freedom of inquiry", according to the producers' lawyers. Ono, perhaps stung by internet bloggers accusing her of selling out, objects to the song's use because it might imply endorsement of Stein's views.
[email protected]
[Captured: 25 April 2008 18:18:35]
###################
Alan Henness
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:
1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?