Willfully ignorant
2 May 2008 by Stardust
Recently, I had a visit by a 17-year-old snotty creationist high-school junior (she goes to a fundie school, of course and plans to go to fundie college) who came by my personal blog to tell me that I was “ridiculous” in my critique about the IDiotic film, Expelled. After 150 comments, and several educated atheists trying to convince Lauren to round up some real books on evolution, pointed her to some excellent evolution resources, and after we had asked Lauren some very direct questions that she was not able to answer, Lauren said she was far too busy to “waste time” responding to anything we asked her. (Even though she wasn’t too busy to keep coming back to tell us she loves gawd and to tell us we will find out for ourselves one day and it will be too late, yadda, yadda, yadda.) The reality is, Lauren has decided to remain willfully ignorant. This is quite sad, and it happens to millions of fundie kids.
Lauren feels that the Expelled film is brilliant. 
Lauren says she believes the world was created “with all her heart” by an invisible sky daddy. Lauren believes in this sky daddy “with all her heart”. Lauren believes in Intelligent Design. She wants it taught side by side with evolution. So, since Lauren and other IDers want creationism taught side by side with science, then I pointed out that it should be held to the same standards as science. I asked Lauren repeatedly these following questions:
What are ID’s scientific predictions?
What are its unifying principles?
What experiments have been done to support your ID theory? WITHOUT THE MYTHOLOGY BOOK.
I must have asked her a dozen times at my blog, and at her’s. No answer, of course.
I have asked these questions of several IDers in the past several days, and they evade the question, ignore it or just flat out get frustrated and pull out the “you’re persecuting me” card.
Try it yourself. In debates with fundies, ask them these three simple questions and see them get all pissy, frustrated, and even outright angry. They all end up leaving, choosing to remain willfully ignorant.
2 May 2008, on 12:34 am
Oh, and Lauren’s latest post on her blog says she along with the whole school went to see this dumbass movie again and she and a couple others actually CLAPPED at the end of it.
2 May 2008, on 12:57 am
I think “Lauren” was over at Pharyngula not too long ago as a 15 year-old girl. At first, just out of common courtesy, all the science types were patient and polite but, once it became obvious that she was just another rabid cre-tard leaning on the doorbell- leaving flaming bags of dogshit on the stoop- there was an all out shock and awe offensive launched in her direction. She was never heard from again.
2 May 2008, on 1:54 am
I know I posted this before, but I want to ask these IDiots if they’re willing to teach their children that the designer hates them because the designer purposefully designed parts of the human body that do nothing but cause pain, and possible death (see appendix, wisdom teeth, et.al). This, of course, forces the xian who continues to push the “it’s not gawd” thing to agree because they can’t use their typical responses.
But you know what? Of course this world and everything in it are intelligently designed. By extraterrestrials. I mean who else would have the intellectual and technological capabilities to create all of it? And if the IDiots actually want to keep up the charade of “it’s not gawd”, they better have a damn good answer for why it’s not aliens or else they’ll have to agree.
2 May 2008, on 2:21 am
I got into “discussion” with one of my co-workers about a year back. I stated ID had no place in science classes. She replied, with righteous indignation, that “obviously you do not understand intelligent design.”
Obviously–that can be the only possible explanation…
I just let it go at that. Arguing with those who are willfully ignorant is pointless.
Quite frankly, stupid is excusable–you’re born with it. But willful ignorance is to chose stupid and that is irresponsible and unforgivable in every sense of the words.
2 May 2008, on 4:02 am
I do ask IDers those questions and, like Stardust, I never get any answers. But it’s fun to watch them squirm. But like Stardust, I can’t think of a single time that it’s actually changed an IDer’s mind. Facts will not dent that kind of belief.
Still, I think it’s worth doing, hehe. I think it’s important to do because other people are watching and listening, and every time some shrill and nonsensical fundie does their gig we gain another person to our cause.
2 May 2008, on 7:12 am
I’ve been going back and forth with a KKKristian IDiot who pushes Hitler’s views on evolution for being the reason for the holocaust. I think he must have already ordered his dvd of “Expelled”.
Someone offered up a direct quote of Adoldf Hitler professing his christianity as being a big part of why he was going after the jews (1922) and of course this same person says that Hitler wasn’t really a christian. Mmmokeydoke.
2 May 2008, on 9:48 am
What really ticked me off was a troll I deleted at my blog who accused me of attacking a poor, defenseless 17-year-old “child”. I wrote a response back to him and all other lurkers who might be thinking about pulling out the persecution crap and reminded them that Lauren is a YOUNG WOMAN, not a child. And if she is going to go around to atheist sites, or any other sites for that matter and spew out comments in disagreement then she better be ready to back up what she says, and better be able to discuss and hear out other viewpoints and rebut them intelligently, even if she is coming from a theological perspective. He also accused me of cursing at her, but a couple of (gasp) bad words came out when we were getting frustrated with her, but refrained from calling her a stupid dumb bitch like we wanted to do.
This girls says at her website that she is looking for a college that focuses on “the Word” more than academics. I had to read that a couple of times to believe my own eyes. Why go to college then? Just stay in Sunday School your whole life.
She also was so “shocked” and offended by the “many relationships” going on all around her at some colleges she visited. I informed her that this was part of what college is, to have relationships if you are a healthy young adult. Geez!
2 May 2008, on 10:03 am
Boy, are you going to be embarrased. This morning PZ posted a video from GodTube that shows undeniable proof for Intelligent Design. How do you like them apples (or carrots or tomatoes or kidney beans)?
2 May 2008, on 10:30 am
plagiarizing Lewis Black…
Lauren is the reason I keep a pocketful of sedimentary rocks at all times. Every time she opens her mouth, I hold one up in her face and pronounce…
“FOSSILS!”
…then, if- when, that doesn’t work, I start stoning her with the remainder.
Ah, well, even at those ridiculous Babel colleges she’s bound to meet some subversive lad- or lass, who’ll take her to bed and show her an entirely different context for, “Oh, God..”
2 May 2008, on 10:47 am
Dirk,
I saw that post. So, what I want to know is, if “kidney” beans are intelligently designed, why didn’t Magic Man make them transplantable as organs rather than fuel for “dutch ovens”?
God, clearly is a redneck. Kidney beans are proof.
2 May 2008, on 10:49 am
The saddest part of reading this Blog (I only made it through the first one so far), is that people who represent “Christians” and Christianity on this blog do so in a way that is opposite of what Christianity is all about. I am a believer, I do believe in Intelligent Design. I believe in a Creator. However, I find no reason why evolution cannot be an option. Back to my point, I apologize that your views of Christianity and God are perverted by folks who let their emotions get the best of them and resort to petty name calling and bickering to discuss what is, in my opinion, an intellectual topic, that, whether Christian or atheist, can cause growth. Please do not let a select few influence your opinion on people who call themselves Christians. There are, believe it or not, Christians who don’t always KNOW the answers… We don’t always KNOW how to even BEGIN to explain how there could be a God… It truly is unfathomable. I offer no concrete explanation. No scientific facts or jargon to try to prove the existence of God. Please do not write all Christians off simply because there are some who are arrogant and cocky, and are unwilling to listen to other beliefs. I hope that you, too, have not completely closed your minds to other possibilities, just as you judge others on their beliefs. I feel that a discussion is possible without judgements, but rather, with respect for someone as a human… as well as their views.
Thank you for your views… I hope that we can possibly discuss in the future.
I will say one thing: I will probably make a fool of myself sometimes… I do not claim to have all the answers… As a matter of fact, I don’t have any answers, but I am willing to listen to your opinions.
Have a good one.
Ben
2 May 2008, on 11:06 am
do so in a way that is opposite of what Christianity is all about.
Ben, How? What is being represented as “opposite” exactly? We get this “they aren’t true believers” all the time. That’s the thing about Christianity, there are so many versions, you cannot even come to an agreement amongst yourselves about what Christianity is, and what a “true Christian” is. The people you are condemning and saying making you look bad say the same exact thing about you. The fact is that you are all deluding yourselves.
We don’t always KNOW how to even BEGIN to explain how there could be a God… It truly is unfathomable. I offer no concrete explanation.
Then you are believing something you want to believe, something made up via the imaginations of humans. At least you admit that you don’t have the answers to support the existence of god because there is none…well, none has been presented yet and there most likely never will be.
2 May 2008, on 11:09 am
Your three question are great and I look forward to trying them out on my fundie cousin soon. It occurs to me that a creationist might ask me the same questions for evolution. I know that the answers exist, but I’m afraid that - even though I’ve read the Origin of Species, I still lack the expertise to answer quickly, clearly and correctly.
Could someone here help out a “non biologist” and come up with a succinct answer to:
What are the theory of evolution’s scientific predictions?
What are its unifying principles?
What experiments have been done to support the theory of evolution?
I know there’s a zillion answers to support evolution… I’m looking for short sharp “zingers”!
thanks.
2 May 2008, on 11:33 am
^^ anyone else suspect that poejavlo is a fundie? If he knows “there’s a zillion answers to support evolution”, then he could answer the above questions for himself, couldn’t he?
2 May 2008, on 11:35 am
Ben said:
The saddest part of reading this Blog (I only made it through the first one so far),
Sigh. Always the superficial reading and then the broad generalization.
Ben, some of us here are Ex-Christians. We actually know quite a bit about Christianity and Christians. Some of us are well read in things theological and biblical. As stardust alludes to, you are pulling the old “no true Scotsman” argument, and it doesn’t wash.
Anyway, as to this:
We don’t always KNOW how to even BEGIN to explain how there could be a God… It truly is unfathomable. I offer no concrete explanation.
Your incredulity is not the basis of my reality, nor is incredulity a basis for science. But that’s what ID/creationism is based on…incredulity. No testable hypothesis. No experimentation. No science.
And if you want respect for Christians, maybe you should spend more time reigning in the legions of Christians out there that are trying to insert their religion into our government and schools. Might be a good place to start.
2 May 2008, on 11:37 am
damn tag. When preview button comes back, I get dibs on kicking its ass.
2 May 2008, on 12:00 pm
Ok, in case poejavlo is serious, I am going to take a stab at providing “short sharp” answers…but poejavlo, it’s going to take actual reading for people to understand evolution. ID doesn’t even provide long,complex scientific answers to these three questions.
What are evolution’s scientific predictions?
Evolution has been the basis of many predictions. From TalkOrigins.com
* Darwin predicted, based on homologies with African apes, that human ancestors arose in Africa. That prediction has been supported by fossil and genetic evidence (Ingman et al. 2000).
* Theory predicted that organisms in heterogeneous and rapidly changing environments should have higher mutation rates. This has been found in the case of bacteria infecting the lungs of chronic cystic fibrosis patients (Oliver et al. 2000).
* Predator-prey dynamics are altered in predictable ways by evolution of the prey (Yoshida et al. 2003).
* Ernst Mayr predicted in 1954 that speciation should be accompanied with faster genetic evolution. A phylogenetic analysis has supported this prediction (Webster et al. 2003).
* Several authors predicted characteristics of the ancestor of craniates. On the basis of a detailed study, they found the fossil Haikouella “fit these predictions closely” (Mallatt and Chen 2003).
* Evolution predicts that different sets of character data should still give the same phylogenetic trees. This has been confirmed informally myriad times and quantitatively, with different protein sequences, by Penny et al. (1982).
* Insect wings evolved from gills, with an intermediate stage of skimming on the water surface. Since the primitive surface-skimming condition is widespread among stoneflies, J. H. Marden predicted that stoneflies would likely retain other primitive traits, too. This prediction led to the discovery in stoneflies of functional hemocyanin, used for oxygen transport in other arthropods but never before found in insects (Hagner-Holler et al. 2004; Marden 2005).
What are evolution’s unifying principles? (From What is Life, Principles in Biology)
The theory of evolution states that modern organisms are descendants of ancient organisms and that modifications accumulated over time explain the apparent changes and differences among modern forms of life. This ‘descent with modification’ theory was central to Charles Darwin’s argument of biological evolution, an idea spearheaded by Jean-Baptiste Lamarck (1744-1829). The idea of evolution proposes that animals and plants can change over time, and are not static forms created at once and independent of each other. Lamarck and Darwin proposed different explanation of how these changes may occur. Darwin’s proposal of natural selection has proved correct and evidence from biology, earth science, and cosmology all corroborate the basic mechanism of natural selection.
The last question, “what experiments have been done?” Well, here are some just for an extremely brief example.
Ahearn, J. N. 1980. Evolution of behavioral reproductive isolation in a laboratory stock of Drosophila silvestris. Experientia. 36:63-64.
Boraas, M. E. 1983. Predator induced evolution in chemostat culture. EOS. Transactions of the American Geophysical Union. 64:1102.
Callaghan, C. A. 1987. Instances of observed speciation. The American Biology Teacher. 49:3436.
Crossley, S. A. 1974. Changes in mating behavior produced by selection for ethological isolation between ebony and vestigial mutants of Drosophilia melanogaster. Evolution. 28:631-647.
del Solar, E. 1966. Sexual isolation caused by selection for positive and negative phototaxis and geotaxis in Drosophila pseudoobscura. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (US). 56:484-487.
Dobzhansky, T. and O. Pavlovsky. 1971. Experimentally created incipient species of Drosophila. Nature. 230:289-292.
Knight, G. R., A. Robertson and C. H. Waddington. 1956. Selection for sexual isolation within a species. Evolution. 10:14-22.
Weinberg, J. R., V. R. Starczak and P. Jora. 1992. Evidence for rapid speciation following a founder event in the laboratory. Evolution. 46:1214-1220.
As you can see, poejavlo, there are no “zinger” answers to the above questions. And we aren’t asking for “zinger” answers from IDers, we just are asking for them to answer the questions, and they cannot. Because theology is theology, and science is science. Two different things.
Just point fundies to TalkOrigins.com and tell them to read. If they aren’t willing to do so, no “zinger” answers are going to change their minds.
2 May 2008, on 12:27 pm
Ok, here’s one thats REALLY throwing me for a loop. Recently, my fionce and I read about footprints in sedimentary layers that were tested to be 3.6 million years old. There were a few other bizarre examples of humans appearing much further in our past than the generally-accepted 100,000 years or so (I may be wrong on that number, but it’s really just for reference’s sake).
My point is this…what if the human species really is much older than we think? I totally accept evolution as a plausible explantion for the diversity of life, but since we all know it doesn’t attempt to explain the *origin* of human existence, what should we, as non-delusional, rational adults conclude?
I hope from my contributions to this blog you all know I am totally critical of ID, religion, dogma, gawd, etc. But I dont know what to think anymore about the actually origins of our species. Its quite unsettling
I want to find the most logical, rational answer to this issue but so far, I don’t know where to even begin looking. Any suggestions?
2 May 2008, on 12:37 pm
Whenever a Xian comes after me with the “without God/Jesus there is no morality” line, I counter with the fact that if that were true we would not exist today. Since the God of Abraham didn’t exist in the human brain till only a few thousand years ago, Why didn’t man destroy himself in the preceding 10,000 years of existence or 20,000 years? If only belief in this particular desert god can produce moral behavior then how can they explain it.
Good People do Good Things
Bad People do Bad Things
But you need religion for Good People to do Bad Things.
2 May 2008, on 12:46 pm
Ben,
Christianity is so monstrously complicated and contradictory, that I have long since given up trying to figure out who the true Christians are, because Christianity is anything and everything you want it to be. Jesus Christ is the ultimate blank canvas god. Whatever you want him to be, that’s what he is.
In the end, I’ve come up with a very simple rule for determining who the real Christians are. They are the ones who call themselves Christians. Now I know what you are going to say. They can’t all be true, because some don’t read the same parts of the Bible as you do. That’s not my problem, it’s your problem. Christianity is your religion, not mine or any other atheist. If you don’t like what is done in the name of Christianity, don’t whine to us, we don’t give a crap. You need to take it up with the people who are giving it a bad name, not us.
2 May 2008, on 1:14 pm
Ben, poejavlo, where’d you guys go? lol!
2 May 2008, on 1:27 pm
Ben, poejavlo, where’d you guys go? lol!
I bet my instincts were right…poejavlo is a fundie.
2 May 2008, on 1:31 pm
*sighs* Lauren needs to get it through her thick skull (I was once a 17-year-old girl and I also have two younger sisters; yes, we can have thick skulls just as much as anyone else) that ID is not a scientific theory. Therefore, it does not belong in the public science classroom.
In fact, ID is a blatant sabotage of science, for it cuts short all experimentation and progress. If the answer to every scientific question is “goddiddit,” then the incentive to find out is nipped in the bud. Human curiosity is suppressed, and scientific (and eventually, probably even scholarly) study and research will eventually die out.
So no, Lauren, and if you agree with her that ID should be taught alongside ToE in the public science classroom, Ben, we will not let superstition and magical thinking corrupt science education. By all means, sabotage your children’s and own brains by indulging in all the woolly-headed mental masturbation that passes for thinking for you at home, Sunday school, and babble college, but don’t expect to be taken in any way, shape, or form seriously by real scientists.
If you don’t want your willful ignorance about and corrupt agenda in regards to science publicly aired, mocked, and slapped down, then form your own neo-Amish community or run away to the wilds of Alaska and leave rational, reasonable, critical, reality-based thinking behind.
2 May 2008, on 2:55 pm
I used to love Ben Stein… I’ll never watch Ferris Buellers Day Off again!
2 May 2008, on 3:29 pm
I just adore it when Christians come by and say that the other guy’s miracles aren’t the good ones, hehe.
“Oh, no, don’t lump all us Christians in with those people! I believe in evolution, too! Well, yes, I believe in magical people . . .”
Part of me knows that religion dying off will be a multigenerational thing, and I know that religious people abandoning concepts like their god created them specifically is part of that, but whenever Christians attack IDers and fundies as not being proper Scotsmen or whatever I can’t help think it’s miracle bigotry. The miracles of IDers are bad miracles, but Jesus rising from the dead is a good miracle. Never getting that our problem is, in part, because we don’t believe in miracles. That’s at the bottom of this. We think that ID is a perversion of science because we don’t believe in miracles.
2 May 2008, on 3:46 pm
“I’ll never watch Ferris Buellers Day Off again!”
Why? I mean, he was a total clueless dork in that movie too, after all.
But in the same vein, I will probably pass on Clear Eyes products from now on, however.
2 May 2008, on 6:04 pm
But, JJR, a good squirt of Clear Eyes is just what you need after viewing the burning stoopid of his new movie. Talk about a product tie-in, you probably are given a dosimeter at the door as that stoopid is flat-out radioactive.
2 May 2008, on 6:05 pm
Plus, I’ve heard that if you put it into someone’s Coke, they’ll have uncontrollable explosive diarrhea. Or was that Murine?
2 May 2008, on 7:52 pm
Thank you Stardust for your great reply. I’m glad someone with real academic knowledge of biology replied.
While there’s no denying the strength of your points, I still don’t think we have the knock out punch that I was fishing for, but it’s certainly a great foundation to build upon when trying to enlighten creationists.
BTW - I’m over in Europe hence the delays in posts. I tell ya… I’m going to be chuckling for quite some time imagining people mistaking me for a creationist! Thanks all for the good laugh!
2 May 2008, on 10:22 pm
Thank you Stardust for your great reply. I’m glad someone with real academic knowledge of biology replied.
poejavlo, I do not have an outstanding academic knowledge of biology, I just know where to look, I know how to look things up and do research which is pretty damn easy on the internet, and in places called LIBRARIES.
While there’s no denying the strength of your points, I still don’t think we have the knock out punch that I was fishing for, but it’s certainly a great foundation to build upon when trying to enlighten creationists.
“knock-out punch”??? This is the kind of statement that leads me to believe you are a fundie and know very little about evolution or the way science works. And then you tell me that you are looking for a “knock out punch” then tell me that it’s a “great foundation” to build on. I’m confused about what the heck you are looking for if you are not a creationist.
BTW - I’m over in Europe hence the delays in posts.
You are referring to the time difference, I would hope.
I tell ya… I’m going to be chuckling for quite some time imagining people mistaking me for a creationist! Thanks all for the good laugh!
Well, you still come across as a creationist with the way you want evolution summarized in a “knock-out punch” and it seems you know very little about it and hopefully you will take it upon yourself to read the links I provided and also go to TalkOrigins.com and read there. They provide other resources, also.
2 May 2008, on 11:15 pm
Looks like Lauren has pulled out the persecution card, not to mention writing a bunch of lies on her blog claiming she was discriminated against because of her age. Give me a break!
Oh boo fucking hoo!
What a little lying brat! We didn’t criticize her for her age, but because of her refusal to answer questions asked of her. And she leaves out the part that Bruce was a drive-by troll who happen to slip in through the crack in the door when I allowed anonymous comments for a couple of hours in case a friend wanted to jump in on the discussion. I now have my moderation back on again.
My guess is that Lauren’s blog post is in retaliation because I wrote a blog about her willful ignorance.
2 May 2008, on 11:25 pm
Very consice stardust; if ID is a science it should be held to the same standards as science.
If you can’t play with the big dogs don’t get off the porch.
2 May 2008, on 11:56 pm
If you can’t play with the big dogs don’t get off the porch.
I love this saying PYRETTE! Good one.
I really, really hate when fundies cry persecution and LIE. That really pisses me off. I wrote a couple of comments over at Lauren’s blog even though she told me never to post there again. But I can’t stand lying. I told her I thought Christians held the moral higher ground. I guess this proves once again they don’t.
3 May 2008, on 1:44 am
Stardust…
Just a tidbit that might have gone totally unnoticed in all the verbiage at your Site…
Jason H. Bowden said…
” Austin Cline is a fag btw.”
4/22/2008 11:03 AM
“fag”? Meaning, I presume, the derogatory reference to being homosexual.
Do you know this to be a fact, Jason? Or, are you, perhaps, slightly biassed, and assuming something you have no direct evidence for? As a frequent and longtime reader of Austin’s Site, my impression based on occasional references made by Austin, that he’s married, might argue for the contrary. It may be that because he writes quite often in defending homosexuals against numerous attacks on their sexual nature; that one might ASSUME, without evidence exactly what your little remark expressed.
I have no problem, personally, with anyone being homosexual; but I definitely DO resent the use of such derogatory terms…especially RE a respected fellow atheist.
It seems, that comments like that, mixed into ANY discussion which is purporting to maintain a purely objective, evidential standard, is rather out of line. Especially on Stardust’s respectable Site.
I’m not bringing this up to get into another argument, by the way; and I’m an old heterosexual. It’s just a matter of principle.
I suggest you might think a bit more carefully about those kinds of remarks, when applying them to people you really don’t know. Personally, I have high respect for what Austin Cline has done for so many years; and I assume Stardust probably feels the same.
‘Nough Said, I guess. No hard feelings either, Jason!
3 May 2008, on 2:41 am
Benjamin:
That’s pretty much a load of crap. Read this post, where I pretty much covered that area.
3 May 2008, on 5:12 am
There must be a way of showing even stupid people how stupid they are. If someone could invent that…
3 May 2008, on 8:33 am
Just a tidbit that might have gone totally unnoticed in all the verbiage at your Site…
ChuckA, yes I saw that. Jason has a beef with Austin because they got into a thing awhile back. And I and my regular commenters are not biting that flamebait again.
I guess “fag” is supposed to be some kind of insult. :roll” But I feel Austin is right on the money with his commentary on most things concerning atheism.
3 May 2008, on 8:48 am
Raindogzilla, nice comment you left over at Lauren’s blog, I wonder if she will bother to read it. She most likely will ignore it and blather instead about how you are picking on her.
And I suspect since she had a copy of “Bruce’s” comment, I am betting that Bruce is Lauren. Looking at the writing, same writing style.
3 May 2008, on 10:52 am
Quote from Lauren’s site (at the bottom of her main page #17)…
I seriously doubt that. Lauren goes to a school that is “comfortable” for her and her very small worldview. She cares about “sweet” teachers instead of ones who will challenge her and tell her the truth about things. She goes to a school where the teachers will only reinforce her already established beliefs, and not challenge her to think outside the box. She may as well not bother going to school at all and just stay at home watching “amazing” Ben Stein films.
3 May 2008, on 11:47 am
I dunno…Stardust and RDZ…youse guys deserve some kind of atheist merit badges for all the time and effort spent in your outstanding, seemingly relentless verbal “Jousting” with so many…erm…bone density testers?
]
[What!...cue the old swing tune: "Joust (Just) in Time"?
I feel a bit exhausted, at my age, even just TRYING to keep up mit youse.
Especially being that it’s Saturday…or…another weekend.
Yeah…”Remember thou keep Holey the Sabat”?…Like…
“Please pass the sacred donuts?
Ummm…Make mine a chocolate frosted one!”
[I know...Lame!]
Now, where was I?
[My philosophical question for this morning.]
Oh yeah…time to take my blood pressure med.
“And have a nice day!”
3 May 2008, on 1:04 pm
So a large part of Stein’s argument against the validity of evolution as a scientific theory is that Hitler used it as a rationale for the holocaust? That argument is as tired as a fat man’s car seat after a cross-country drive.
Even if this is true (the evidence is scant) so what? This is a logical fallacy. It does nothing to address the actual VALIDITY of evolutionary theory. It just says you don’t like the conclusions that some bad people jumped to as a result of the theory. It’s akin to stating that E=MC2 can’t be true, because it led to the eventual construction of the nuclear bomb.
I’m astonished that the intellectual reprobates of ID continue to trot out this non-starter–I believe it actually causes IDers to look more like knuckle-draggers every single time they regurgitate this non-sense–to the point that even the more intelligent IDers out there can see the problem with this argument.
And there’s people out there that accuse us of intellectual dishonesty for refusing to shill out $10 of our hard earned, recession-raped American dollars to suffer through two hours of this intellectual offal? Please.
3 May 2008, on 1:33 pm
On Rotten Tomatoes.com Expelled got a mere 9% rotten!
“Expelled is a classic bait-and-switch, presenting itself as a plea for freedom in the scientific marketplace of ideas, while actually delivering a grossly unfair, contradictory, and ultimately repugnant attack on Darwinists.”
Embracing evolutionary theory will turn you into a close-minded, God-denying Nazi — that’s the upshot of this ludicrous propaganda piece.
Surely the film’s greatest offense is the utter shamelessness with which it exploits the Holocaust.
It shows us bogus security files, as if some cabal is spying on everyone. It shirks the facts. And it madly edits images to equate Darwin with Hitler, and Ben Stein with — yes — Ronald Reagan. Typical of all propaganda, it also distorts language.
Either the filmmakers suckered these [pro-Darwinist] participants under false pretenses, or the evolutionists are more open to debate than Stein suggests.
3 May 2008, on 1:36 pm
KA:
Thank you for pointing that out. I missed that post originally. I knew there had to be some sort of contradictory explanation for those footprints, but alas, I got lazy.
As for “Lauren”, I just think back to what my grandfather called me at that age: a smart-ass, know-it-all teenager.
3 May 2008, on 1:40 pm
Dammit, what the hell is it with that “Darwinist” title? Since we all agree that gravity is an accepted concept should we call ourselves “Newtonists”?
3 May 2008, on 2:12 pm
what the hell is it with that “Darwinist” title? Since we all agree that gravity is an accepted concept should we call ourselves “Newtonists”?
Good point benjamin, everything and everyone in today’s world has to be labeled.
3 May 2008, on 2:24 pm
Well, Lauren banned me. LOL! She zeroed in on me while totally ignoring Raindogzilla and other’s who posted comments at her blog.
Here is her last comment to me. She writes “I am correct” and dismisses me. Typical…
3 May 2008, on 2:44 pm
Isn’t this part a hoot? I think this might just be our new fundie quote of the year!
I know that I am right and that is why I do not have to question anything.
3 May 2008, on 3:11 pm
Spirula said, to Ben,
And if you want respect for Christians, maybe you should spend more time reigning in the legions of Christians out there that are trying to insert their religion into our government and schools. Might be a good place to start.
I, myself, have been saying this for years. It strikes me as odd when some Christian says to me that, y’know, they’re not all whack jobs. Clearly, a large portion of them are whack jobs and their time and energy would be better spent trying to convince them to stop being that way - defending a woman’s choice about her body, ending intelligent design, the ridiculous extent to which politicians have to kowtow to fundie clerics - than trying to tell us that they’re not all a bunch of nutters.
On the other hand, an atheist isn’t going to come over to your house and shoot you in the head. You can’t be sure about that with a fundie. They are nutjobs. With guns.
3 May 2008, on 4:18 pm
“Isn’t this part a hoot? I think this might just be our new fundie quote of the year!”
“”I know that I am right and that is why I do not have to question anything. “”
Endemic, as you probably are aware Star, of being either a 17 year old, or a fundamentalist Christaholic. Double-whammy in poor Lauren’s case.
And yes, I am implying that the average fundie is as emotionally and intellectually stunted as a particularly intellectually and emotionally-stunted 17 year old. I personally have known too many fundies that fit this mold to think otherwise. While admittedly, extrapolation from anecdote is not particularly scientific, I think we see too many examples in the public eye to come to any other conclusion.
As for Stein, he has either drank the kool-aid, whole heartedly buying into the ludicrous and baseless arguments in his movie, or he is a cynical man who knows his audience well. That makes him a banal pseudo-intellectual, or a shameless opportunist. I’m not sure which is worse.
3 May 2008, on 4:21 pm
benjamin, if you are the same benjamin who paid Lauren a little visit, very good comments at the end there.
RDZ, great point about Johnny Depp being an atheist. I bet she didn’t know she was “worshipping” the spawn of Satan. LOL
3 May 2008, on 4:26 pm
Willful ignorance is fine so long as they keep to their little tribe and let the rest of us live without their interference.
But they don’t.
The willfully ignorant don’t do ‘logic’ so there is no ‘arguing’ with them. I find “shut the fuck up” is as effective as the three hours of arguing I would have to do just to get them to the point where they might start listening.
And as an added aside I’d like to say that I’m really getting sick of hearing ignorant airbags waffle on and on about how atheism = communism. And the how the evil atheists want to take us back to communist russia of the 50’s.
I mean have they looked around? I’d say the fundies and their golden chimp god have done a good job of it all by themselves.
3 May 2008, on 4:37 pm
yes Stardust, that was me
3 May 2008, on 6:27 pm
The title “Expelled” is misleading. “Flunked” would have been a more *informative* title.
3 May 2008, on 6:49 pm
The title “Expelled” is misleading. “Flunked” would have been a more *informative* title.
JHBowden…exactly. Lauren, too would flunk out of a real school.
3 May 2008, on 7:43 pm
for the record Stardust, still no response from Lauren…
3 May 2008, on 7:56 pm
Stardust wrote:
“Well, you still come across as a creationist with the way you want evolution summarized in a “knock-out punch” and it seems you know very little about it and hopefully you will take it upon yourself to read the links I provided and also go to TalkOrigins.com and read there. They provide other resources, also.”
Jesus H. Fucking Christ! The invisible magical sky pixie of the bible can suck my ever lovin’ cock for all I care! Drop the fundie accusations already!
There…I hope that I have significantly lowered your estimation of probability that I am a fundie.
Now then… perhaps “knock out punch” is the wrong phrase. I’m only referring to the fact that the ignorant religious types who are inclined to think that I.D. makes sense and evolution doesn’t are not the types of people who would spend two seconds looking up any of those excellent sources you quoted.
A memorable and informative sound bite is possibly the only thing that has a chance with moving them forward on the subject.
Here’s one that I like to use: “Do you believe in dog breeders?”
That gets their attention.
They eventually have to say yes and then I ask them if they believe that people can do “artificial selection” with dogs, then why wouldn’t they believe that, given a little more time, the environment could have a similar effect on those living things that possess different physical/genetic advantages or disadvantages?
I’ll go on to say to them something like: For example, if there were two animals born in a cold environment - one born with a short coat of fur and one with a long coat of fur, wouldn’t the one with the longer coat of fur be more likely to reach maturity and breed successfully?
Well… that’s pretty much all there is to natural selection. What exactly don’t you believe about it?
This occasionally makes them stop and think.
That’s a good thing.
Can anybody else think of any other good, simple examples like this?
cheers!
3 May 2008, on 8:58 pm
Lauren still refuses to acknowledge the Xian argument I presented against ID. ID using “evidence” by definition rejects the word of god. Fundies are too proud to even see that.
3 May 2008, on 9:35 pm
I don’t believe in god or evolution.
3 May 2008, on 9:39 pm
for the record Stardust, still no response from Lauren…
benjamin, no response because she knows everything already and she is just right about whatever subject so no point in her straining her pea brain to think about anything. Her parents are probably coaching her to just say the pre-programmed responses…”I believe, I don’t need to think about it, because what I believe is the only truth”. sigh…
Did you happen to see what this Heather girl wrote . . . she’s an 18-year-old god botherer, but at least she has a bit of common sense (unlike Lauren.) I am not going to comment anymore, as tempting as it may be. But I will check back to see what others have to say. Now that she is linked on my blog and here, she will probably continue to get a lot of commenters for a short while till this whole thing dies down. Then she can fantasize in peace once again.
3 May 2008, on 11:07 pm
Jesus H. Fucking Christ! The invisible magical sky pixie of the bible can suck my ever lovin’ cock for all I care! Drop the fundie accusations already!
poejavlo, ok, I believe you…sorry, but we often get fundies pretending to be atheists and then we find out after a couple of comments that they are Xian whackadoos.
Can anybody else think of any other good, simple examples like this?
I can think of a good quick easy answer for them…”grow a fucking brain”.
3 May 2008, on 11:11 pm
Lauren still refuses to acknowledge the Xian argument I presented against ID. ID using “evidence” by definition rejects the word of god. Fundies are too proud to even see that.
DB, she ignored that Xian Heather girl, too. She hasn’t acknowledged comments by anyone else but me. (Except for responding to RDZ that she doesn’t care if Johnny Depp is an atheist.) She probably focuses on me because she came to my blog originally to “put me in my place” and I and others put her in hers’.
I don’t know how her parents can encourage her to willful ignorance.
4 May 2008, on 12:50 am
Sorry to have not responded…
I really am not coming on here trying to defend anything.
It is not my goal in life to try to prove to you anything, or disprove you… I really would like to have a decent conversation.
I am sorry if it came across as whining to you, when really I was “whining” to people that are mentioned in your blog… I.E.-Lauren.
I am out of town, and will write a longer response to some of your comments tomorrow or Monday, but please keep in mind I am not here in order to disprove you. We have different views, but in the end, no matter our views or beliefs- the same thing is going to happen to all of us. I don’t think I can prove the existence of God. It is a belief, much like a belief or hope you have in your favorite team to pull through in the end… That was probably one of the worst analogies I have come up with, but in my head, it makes sense. I am no whack job. I am not any less of an intellectual, or respectable person just because of my views on God, or the lack thereof. I apologize for grouping and assuming alot of you to be simply “non-believers…” I did not entertain the possibility of ex-christians being here… Honestly, I would really like to hear your thoughts and views on why you decided it to be a falsification…
Like I said in my first post…
Please do not judge me immediately because I am a self proclaimed “fundie” or Christian… My mind is open, and is yearning to find out different schools of thought.
Please, keep your minds open to my views, even though you may disagree with them… It does not mean I am not a person… You jump all over me, or “fundies,” for thinking we are right and you are wrong… and the same can be said for “us.” And that is where the problem lies. That is why common ground cannot be found… it becomes an “us” verus “them” type of battle, and too often the Christian approach is to attempt to “save” the lost atheists… and perhaps not all the time, but in alot of my experiences, the atheistic approach is to write Christians off as nut-jobs with a lack of evidence for their beliefs. My guess is, you “believe” or put trust in things that you have no idea how they work. You assume the sun will rise, correct? That is an everyday trust… that the world is going to keep spinning. Cheesy, perhaps… but we all have beliefs that cannot be explained. Hey, I am not attacking anyone…
Just asking for open minds, yeah?
Seriously, I respect your views. Not because I agree with them, but because they are held by people… whom I believe are respectable.
Ben
4 May 2008, on 9:36 am
I was once 17 and pigheaded. I believed in God, the Pope, the Catholic church, miracles and talking snakes. Lauren’s indoctrination by “sweet teachers/nannies/babysitters” (holy shit, WTF…I taught and was called many things by my students but not “SWEET”) will collide with reality as soon as she is out in the world unless she isolates herself in a West Texas compound and decides to play pioneer dress-up and birth Bible-style using a hydraulic pump and a revolving door. Christianity is in its death throes. As to quoting “Antigone”…sigh…even the IRONY eludes her. But, I was once 17 and pigheaded as well.
4 May 2008, on 9:52 am
Please, keep your minds open to my views, even though you may disagree with them
Ben, please keep in mind that nearly all of us here have been Christians of various denominations. We get frustrated with fundies who come here and try to “inform” us about their various versions of sky daddy beliefs as if we haven’t heard it before. Fundies on the other hand…most of them have NOT heard the other side and refuse to, like Lauren.
Seriously, I respect your views. Not because I agree with them, but because they are held by people… whom I believe are respectable.
I, for one, cannot respect your views. I can respect the person but do not have to respect the beliefs or viewpoints. I can respect your right to believe whatever hocus pocus you want (as long as it doesn’t involve me), but I cannot respect the belief itself. I am sure that most here will agree with me.
And also keep in mind, disagreeing with you is not persecuting you. And yes, believers and non-believers can come to some common ground on things where religion is not involved.
4 May 2008, on 12:29 pm
Ben…(wow, I don’t find myself writing to “myself” very often, lol)…here is a good start: Watch a movie called Zeitgeist. It’s not easy at first, but wake-up calls usually never are.
We don’t “beleieve” the sun is going to rise anymore than you “believe” your car will start when you turn the key. It’s based on emperical evidence. There is no faith involved, because we understand the basic principles of our solar system. We know that the sun rises because of the circular motion of our planet.
The first thing you must do is understand the definition of belief. Everyone is so quick to say “you atheists have beliefs too!” but unless you’re talking about how I believe that my wife is attractive or my cat is the cutest feline on Earth, it’s an incorrect assumption.
Let me sum it up for you like this: when you “believe” something in the traditional sense of the word, you’re subscribing to an idea, theory, doctrine, etc without solid proof. If there is proof, you are no longer believing, you’re knowing.
One final thing…we didn’t DECIDE that religion is false, we came to the conclusion because of overwhelming evidence that it’s bunk. It wasn’t like one day I woke up and said, “nope, I don’t wanna believe in you anymore, Jesus.” I can’t speak for anyone else, but it was a long process of discovery for me, as slowly all the *beliefs* I held about the Catholic church, god, the Bible, etc eroded.
4 May 2008, on 12:53 pm
Ben:
I came out of my religious delusion through reading history…not through science since my background was in the humanities. I am only now educating myself on issues in science. There are many roads in the questioning process. It has never been about finding common ground. It is about a daisy chain built on disinformation and aggressive censorship and power structures.
http://questioning.org/sep04/irrelevant.html
4 May 2008, on 5:07 pm
“Seriously, I respect your views. Not because I agree with them, but because they are held by people… whom I believe are respectable.”
Ben, I agree with Stardust and probably just about everyone else here–I would go further to add to that since respecting someone’s beliefs is quite different from respecting the person, your position is potentially quite dangerous. Respectable people can have very immoral ideas and come to awful conclusions–you don’t just automatically respect the idea because it comes from someone worthy of respect. If my best friend has the idea that it is OK to rape children, his idea garners the very opposite of respect from me (and hopefully all other people of conscience.)
Benjamin–yeah, my experience was pretty much the same–my loss of god was a gruelingly long and painful process, but it came about as a result of trying to prove the existence of god to myself, simply by observing the world, listening to others ideas, then contemplating what I took in. In the end, there just wasn’t anything, in my mind, to lend credence to the notion of any supernatural being–at least not one that cared about the affairs of humans anymore than I care about a benign strain of bacteria. I guess that’s why it amazes me that anyone that honestly goes through the same process I did does not come to a conclusion similar to mine.
5 May 2008, on 1:09 am
Nice link, Barbiebrains!
Something popped out at me right from the start of that interesting page…
The reference to that old, totally MIS-quoted, line, albeit, unbeknownst, from Shakespeare…
” Ignorance is bliss, they say…”
The oft misquoted line is actually:
“IF ignorance is Bliss…’tis folly to be wise!”
A whole opposite concept, indeed! When I found that out, it highlighted my awareness of just how often people glibly, ignorantly, and HABITUALLY distort the truth.
It seems to me that many people actually WANT to remain ignorant; so they don’t have to actively take responsibility for their actions, etc.
Not only that, but the “Truth” so often requires a person to actually make drastic changes in their thinking and actions; which, of course, takes some honest effort and…”hard work”…to accomplish.
It’s also a bit “scary” to go down an unexpected and unfamiliar road; which threatens, perhaps, to lead one to a relatively “unknown” destination.
Yeah…the “Vast Unknown”…which is the common realm so familiar to us “outcast atheists”.
Personally, I think it rather forces us to bravely face and eventually overcome a lot of long held, even cherished, originally brainwashed notions; which we fearfully held on to for so long a time in our lives.
Indeed, “Wisdom” comes with actual learning through hard won experience; and does, in a way, also lead to a kind of semblance of “Bliss”.
Which reminds me of one of Joseph Campbell’s favorite, and often quoted sayings:
“Follow your Bliss!”
I also, personally, like that link’s reference to the surprisingly practical notion of…
“Lateral thinking”!
5 May 2008, on 8:50 pm
ChuckA: Glad you liked it! I use it with my students when teaching the kiddoes how to do research.
6 May 2008, on 8:30 am
Yes, I agree… There is a difference between respecting beliefs and respecting persons. My wording was awful there. Thank you for your responses.
6 May 2008, on 12:08 pm
HAHAHA, how typical…Lauren deleted the ENTIRE blog and discussion that followed. I called her out on being a juvenille brat and it would seem that she couldn’t deal with it, lol…
6 May 2008, on 1:59 pm
benjamin, I totally expected her to do that, and I was right. I knew she wasn’t going to leave it there, especially after some Steve guy made some excellent points about what scientific theory is. It was an excellent explanation about the difference between the way the word “theory” is used.
Nope, she just couldn’t deal with it. She is just a brainwashed child living in La-La Land.
6 May 2008, on 4:18 pm
I’m still chuckling over this one, Star; I totally agree with you that Lauren swanned onto your site thinking that all the little atheists there were going to gape in awe and wonder at her precocious wisdom.
Whoever these “sweet” so-called educators she so adores are, they are absolutely doing her no favors in encouraging this sort of woolly-headed thinking and outright arrogance. No wonder she had to delete the entire history of her swat-down; because of the way she’s been brain-washed, she simply can’t handle any substantial challenge to her programming.
Oh, and just in case you’re lurking here, Lauren (because so many bleevers do, no matter what they say), Expelled! absolutely meant to imply that “Darwinism” (not a true designation, by the way; it’s a dead giveaway you know nothing of real science) leads to Nazism in that segment of the picture. That’s the whole point of comparison: you’re being led to the conclusion that Darwinism leads to Nazism by being shown the alleged similarities between the two. Otherwise, why bring up this supposed resemblance in the first place?
What a good sheeperson you are…
6 May 2008, on 10:25 pm
Lauren has now shut down her whole blog,probably made it a private little tea party for all of her friends.
Note: she now has it back up again. I think the poor girl doesn’t know what to do with what she has started. People should just leave her alone now. She has enough to think about, if she so chooses. If not, too bad for her.
7 May 2008, on 7:50 am
I was wondering what happened to the expelled thread on her blog…so she deleted the whole thing, eh? Too funny!
7 May 2008, on 8:05 am
Yep Karen, she wasn’t as smart as she thought she was. I get the impression that her “classic Christian” school is a tiny one. I get the impression that the girls in the picture are all that is in her high school class. She talks about the “secondary school” as if it is a division in a whole school, therefore is probably a very tiny school that secludes itself and stays separate from the real world and other influences. She and her friends would benefit from a secular university, or at least one where other views are allowed to be expressed and not just someone telling her what the other side thinks with a fundie bias. Oh well, we tried.
7 May 2008, on 9:03 am
At the risk of letting my perv flag fly, the tall one in the black dress, how much for her?
From the unfinished “50 Tidbits about Lauren” thing at the bottom of her blog;
12. My kindergarten class had around thirty children, while my eleventh grade class had three.
And, if you look real close at one of the dark, dance pictures, you’ll see the girls dancing with each other. Ah, it must be a convent school.
Also, there was an ad on the right hand side that announced that her blog was at a “Junior High Level”, which means she’s already way behind.
7 May 2008, on 11:31 am
Also, there was an ad on the right hand side that announced that her blog was at a �Junior High Level�, which means she�s already way behind.
I saw that too. Why would she want to advertise that?
And I too saw that the girls were dancing with girls. She wrote in another thread about when she visited some colleges that it disturbed her to see “all the relationships” going on. We knew of a fundie family who overprotected their daughter so much that when she did finally have to go to a public high school (there were no fundie high schools in their vicinity), she had a complete nervous breakdown and had to be tutored at home, then dropped out completely at age 16.
7 May 2008, on 11:37 am
Since she took the Expelled post down, the above links don’t work, but the blog is still there. Apparently she only wants her Uncle Rocco and her Auntie to comment on her blog and for people to praise her and tell her how sweet and good she is.
I still find it ironic that she is so “devout” but worships Johnny Depp who is an atheist. Apparently regular atheists are evil, but if they are movie stars then that’s ok.
7 May 2008, on 2:46 pm
Here’s where Lauren is planning to go to college. She apparently chose one to keep her forever and soundly brainwashed. No wonder she deleted the post when we tried to pry her mind open.