You too could be a ☆ MOVIE STAR ☆

| 58 Comments | 1 TrackBack

Having a hard time finding enough persecution stories, the makers of Expelled! No Intelligence Allowed (background here and here, in case anyone’s forgotten) are now asking students or anyone else they can find to submit their horrible, horrible stories of oppression at the hands of the Dogmatic Darwinist Conspiracy. And if the other persecution stories they’re touting are any guide, little details like being true are not a prerequisite. You too can be a movie star!

Ever sat in class and had your professor straight up challenge your intelligence for suggesting even the possibility of an intelligent design in the universe?

Tired of being labeled merely for questioning aspects of the Darwinian theory of evolution?? Ever been scoffed at or ridiculed in front of your peers?

Well, here’s your opportunity to tell your story on our Website AND possibly be in the movie, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”! Tell the world some of the outrageous things your professors say about your questions.

You and your story just might be chosen by our producers to be in the film, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”! Let your voice be heard!

Oh my, have you been.… scoffed at? Does someone think you’re being foolish? Did they make mean girl faces at you? It’s time to stop taking it like an adult and unleash your inner cry-baby. The tireless defenders of free speech that are the makers of Expelled! will help you denounce those evil professors and anyone else who thinks they have a right to an opinion.

Andy Warhol is now smiling down from heaven (or up from hell) of all the many hours of fame that are about to be created in neat little 15 minute packets. Careful though. Given the loose ethical standards of the filmmakers, you may well end up in an entirely different film than the one you interview for.

1 TrackBack

Those crazy rascals behind Expelled have some new games they want to play: they've put out a casting call for victims of persecution. It's a pitiful plea, but it will probably net a nice collection of complaints — because it's... Read More

58 Comments

Maybe they could also list professors being persecuted and/or fired for accepting the reality of evolution. There have been 2 this summer, both in the midwest, the guy at the CC and one at Olivet.

Plus, Michael Korn, the wannabe terrorist who has threatened a whole department of evolutionary biologists with his “final solution” as well as miscelaneous other scientists. He is now on the run with an arrest warrant out on him. MICHAEL, time for a cameo appearance. How is life in the Xian safe house in N. Carolina?

Then they can end with the torching of Bruno, near torching of Galileo, and the Salem witchcraft trials.

Hmmm, that is a lot. Maybe they ought to retitle their movie, DIE, HERETIC DIE

Once in a Darwinist biology class, the professor turned me into a newt.

I got better.

Well, I think I did.

Oh, me, me!

I’ve been invited to speak up in class, and when I told the professor and other students of the device implanted in my brain by aliens through which they command me to shout in the quad about Dawkins’ Hitler-worship, and the demon possession that makes Dr. Sanders tell us that we evolved from monkeys (I asked him why there are still monkeys, and he didn’t have a good answer–ha ha!), they laughed and called me a nut. The truth is that the aliens want me to save us from the controlling atheists who invented evolution just to destroy our belief in God and his agents on earth, the zplorfs who sent me.

I sure hope that Mr. Ruloff and Ben Stein will listen to me, unlike the atheistic materialists who think I’m stupid just because I know what’s really happening. I’m sure they won’t tell me that aliens are a figment of my imagination, and that Dawkins doesn’t write what he does because he’s prodded by Satan and Nazis. Only materialists and atheistic scientists laugh at the idea of demon-possession and aliens, and revile a person just because he doesn’t have complete proof of it.

Glen D http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7

here’s what i submitted:

Expelled by ID

Due to the stranglehold that the “single designer” hypothesis has on ID theory, multiple designer ID is rejected outright and its proponents subjected to ridicule.

I have been repeatedly and continually ostracized from ID communities for daring to suggest that the evidence supports the idea that life-forms existing today are the result of multiple designers. The notion is dismissed without even cursory consideration of the evidence provided, and the unlucky supporter (me) receives ridicule and derision due to the stranglehold the (poorly supported) “single designer” hypothesis has on ID theory.

anyone think it’ll fly?

How many schoolkids do exactly go ‘you know, I think that the processes of mutation and natural selection aren’t enough to account for the diversity of life on Earth’ when they first meet evolution? I’d guess… zero.

Or do they also go ‘what a crock of shit!’ when faced with the notion of tiny little electrons whizzing around atoms (which, being only a model, is in a sense quite wrong compared to evolution)?

Oddly enough, that second example has the same problem as the first if you’ve seen www.commonsensescience.org. The world weeps.

Ever sat in a fundie Death Cult church and questioned whether:

1. Gays are responsible for all bad weather, earthquakes, pets getting run over, and taxes.

2. When god shows up and murders 6.7 billion people and destroys the earth “soon”, that this happy event is a good example of his beneficial regard and love for his children.

3. Demons roam the earth frequently possessing individuals who then vote for liberals.

4. The earth is 6,000 years old and fossils were planted by god (or satan) to deceive humans.

Anyone who survived one or more of the above should post it on the Expelled blog.

Looks to me like they are secretly planning to change the title of their little doc-flick yet again. Since they haven’t found anybody who has acrtually been “expelled” for daring to question the iron-fisted Darwinian ruling junta, they’re going to call it “Scoffed At!”

If someone has thespian aspirations, maybe they should make up a story about being persecuted and see if they can get into the movie. Kind of like that fellow who wrote the BS article that all the “ways of knowing” people were gushing about ’till they found out it was a hoax. Sure would prove you could act!

This is a cheep way to get a few hundred more people to watch the movie. Every student that gets in to the movie will have a dozen of so friends and parents that will pay to watch it - then buy the DVD too!

That is exactly why I have an IMDB listing and own a copy of a cheep horror DVD.

What they don’t mention is that the creationists are the ones who goad students into asking canned questions.

For example, there is this silly list from Jonathan Wells. (Some good responses can be found at www.ncseweb.org)

I have seen video segments of Ken Ham telling young children to ask the teacher, “were you there?” if the topic of evolution comes up in class.

Say, there’s a place where kiddies can learn about assorted deities creating the world. It’s called…drum roll please…SUNDAY SCHOOL!!!!! Quit bugging the damn science teachers!

I have seen video segments of Ken Ham telling young children to ask the teacher, “were you there?” if the topic of evolution comes up in class.

Stupid logic. Hey Ham. Were you there when they wrote the bible? Were you there when Jesus was crucified? How about for the landing of the Big Boat full of dinosaurs. Of course not. So, if anything not directly observed is questionable, the bible is not to be trusted or taken seriously. So much for your religion.

At this point, the creos seem to be running out of lies. Now it is down to harrass the teachers and cause as many problems to as many people as possible. Not exactly what I call an uplifting and constructive behavior pattern. And if they had a brain, they might notice that there is a backlash happening against Xian wingnut extremists.

“The world weeps.” The world does not weep. You weep because your philosophical indulgences are in no way supported by the demonstrable facts. You and those like you want to continue your dominate positions in defining REALITY!!!!!!! You pack of arrogant as_____s!!!!!

Let these comments be, you shitheads!!!!!

Gosh, you’re absolutely correct, why are we trying to define reality based on the real world?

Can you demonstrate some of these demonstrable facts we weep over?

While you may be stating your actual opinion, it certainly smells like an attempt at a troll. No attempt to engage in intellectual debate of any kind, just an inflammatory comment inviting hotheaded responses.

That said, if you wish to voice your own particular worldview, then feel free to explain it. And be sure to include citations to peer-reviewed articles and rigorous experiments that reinforce your position. And remember, “because the Bible says so” is not a sufficient explanation by the standards of the scientific method, and supernatural shortcuts are frowned upon as lacking observations that can be repeated in controlled experimentation.

Tristero Sez..

Once in a Darwinist biology class, the professor turned me into a newt. I got better. Well, I think I did.

Did he at least make you into a ring species?

That at least, would be satisfyingly ironic.

I have spread the word around. One rather disturbing reply follows;

UUhhhHhh OOhh

I am BEING REPRESSED! Please!!!1111!!!@2ONEONEONE!

Do movie starletts get lots of sex? Like hawt sex like with Mistress Denyse??? DaveTard said Mistress was the “Canadian Cross Dresser with a stick up her butt.” Is Mister-ess Denny a trannie?

DaveTard has all the luck. He is phat. Really!

Neal trolled thusly:

You weep because your philosophical indulgences are in no way supported by the demonstrable facts.

Neal you ignorant troll…

Did you miss the day in kindergarten when the teacher explained how stating a thing does not make it so? You are talking to many people here who have seen the evidence with their own eyes. Some have actually discovered/produced the evidence (you know, actually doing the science the IDers never get around to doing) themselves. Coming on here and asserting that such evidence doesn’t exist is not going to persuade anyone of anything, save perhaps that you are an ignorant loon, and should get back on whatever meds you have had prescribed for you.

You and those like you want to continue your dominate positions in defining REALITY!!!!!!!

We don’t define reality, we acknowledge it. Try it sometime, it really cuts down on the cognitive dissonance.

You pack of arrogant as_____s!!!!!

My opinion remains that anyone who posts nothing but baseless assertions and obscenities (coded or not) ought to be banned. Allowing dissenting opinions is one thing. They stimulate discussion. Abusive empty ranting like Neal’s only clutters things up.

Stupid logic. Hey Ham. Were you there when they wrote the bible? Were you there when Jesus was crucified? How about for the landing of the Big Boat full of dinosaurs. Of course not. So, if anything not directly observed is questionable, the bible is not to be trusted or taken seriously. So much for your religion.

Automated God-bot Response: “No, I wasn’t there to witness the Creation. But God was. Who are you going to believe? Fallible scientists who weren’t there, or omniscient God who was?”

Automated God-bot Response: “No, I wasn’t there to witness the Creation. But God was. Who are you going to believe? Fallible scientists who weren’t there, or omniscient God who was?”

I see. “Were you there” is a trick question for some more dubious reasoning.

Ham is claiming god wrote the bible. He didn’t. I believe fundies claim Moses wrote the first 5 books. At any rate it was humans that wrote it.

Neal is RIGHT!!!

AND YOU ARE ALL AFRAID OF HIM. WHY DO YOU HATE AMERICA? WHY DO YOU HATE JESUS?

(pause)

This has been a test religious nutbag posting. In the event of a real religious nutbag posting; all letters would have been in capitals. Thank you for participating in this exercise.

We now return to our regular program.

When I went to school, I was convinced that storks brought babies. That is what my mother had told me.

Imagine the ridicule I got in biology class.

Can I have my appearance fee now please, or do I have to wait until after the film appears?

They definitely should put Neal in their movie.

loved the “multiple designers” complaint

ha ha. neal defines reality as “what I wish to be true”

LOL: “Neal you ignorant Troll”. I do hope this is a SNL reference. Point-Counterpoint cracks me up. Neal, you’re supposed to retort with “Science Avenger, you pompous ass”

I volunteer 2 candidates, Kenneth Miller and me.

Dr. Miller not only spoke at length about his belief in an intelligent designer, but even unequivocally identified Him as God (unlike the ID which tried to have it both ways). (begin irony) Look what happened to him. (end irony)

As for me, I have an example that the DI, if not Ben Stein, should like even better, because it doesn’t invoke God. In 1979-81, like those “expelled” anti-evolution “scientists” I had an alternative hypothesis that was shot down. I’d like to forget that mean guy who “expelled” my idea, but I still have to face him every day in the mirror.

I volunteer 2 candidates, Kenneth Miller and me.

Dr. Miller not only spoke at length about his belief in an intelligent designer, but even unequivocally identified Him as God (unlike the ID which tried to have it both ways). (begin irony) Look what happened to him. (end irony)

As for me, I have an example that the DI, if not Ben Stein, should like even better, because it doesn’t invoke God. In 1979-81, like those “expelled” anti-evolution “scientists” I had an alternative hypothesis that was shot down. I’d like to forget that mean guy who “expelled” my idea, but I still have to face him every day in the mirror.

The Truffle Wrote:

Say, there’s a place where kiddies can learn about assorted deities creating the world. It’s called…drum roll please…SUNDAY SCHOOL!!!!!

Of course if they teach, or lead students to infer, that those “assorted deities” used something other than evolution to create species, they’d be bearing false witness.

It would not surprise me that most non-fundamentalist Sunday Schools are even more afraid of misrepresenting evolution than public schools. It’s not fun to be “expelled” for eternity.

Do you ever wonder if trolls like Neal are actually voyeuristic masochists who love to be verbally abused?

“Oh, please, castigate my logic again. (ouch) More…more…(ouch) …more!”

I mean…where else could they get quality post graduate abuse?

Do you ever wonder if trolls like Neal are actually voyeuristic masochists who love to be verbally abused?

“Oh, please, castigate my logic again. (ouch) More…more…(ouch) …more!”

I mean…where else could they get quality post graduate abuse?

The Truffle Wrote:

Say, there’s a place where kiddies can learn about assorted deities creating the world. It’s called…drum roll please…SUNDAY SCHOOL!!!!! Quit bugging the damn science teachers!

Of course it they teach, or lead students to infer, that those “assorted deities” created species by something other than evolution, they’d be bearing false witness.

It would not surprise me if most non-fundamentalist Sunday Schools were even more afraid that public schools to misrepresent evolution. It’s not fun to be “expelled” for eternity.

Our sophmore biology teacher often made jokes about genesis and evolution.

This goes on is big city high schools, if not small towns.

Why are you pretending it doesn’t. Its better to face it and deal with it, people know whats going on. Its out there . Deal with it.

Neal’s childish comment #133071 ought to be removed.

Our sophmore biology teacher often made jokes about genesis and evolution.

OMG, he joked about it!! Help, help! I’m being repressed!! While one can argue about the diplomatic prudence of certain rhetorical responses, it remains a fact that some ideas really are absurd.

Besides, the question was not about Genesis, it was about ID. Didn’t you get the memo about never discussing the Bible in a context where it could be linked to ID? The DI’s equivalent of the Men In Black will be along presently to mend this security breach.…

This is intellectual porn, since the movie makers invite people to show their bare opinions on stage. Inviting possible underage persons to participate is an atrocity IMO. Perhaps after this US has to instate some form of eXpelled-rating. :-\

Greg:

Our sophmore [sic] biology teacher often made jokes about genesis and evolution. … Why are you pretending it doesn’t.

Um, we are discussing the very fact that the movie is another joke, in itself and on science.

Or did you mean teachers make jokes on behalf of science? The thread covers that too:

Since they haven’t found anybody who has acrtually been “expelled” for daring to question the iron-fisted Darwinian ruling junta, they’re going to call it “Scoffed At!”

Scientists ridicule denialists of all sorts, and I fail to see why it would be a problem if science teachers do the same. Denialists like creationists are denying observable facts and verified science, and deserve everything they get in science class.

If you imply that science teachers are discussing “genesis” in science class, I doubt it. Why should they discuss religion in general, and christian religion specifically? Creationism is often covered in the historical perspective at the start of basic biology among other debunked explanations, at least it was so in my class, and that should be enough.

I wouldn’t want to be a secondary school biology/science teacher these days. The bible also claims that the sun goes around the earth, a not-fact that claimed one life, that the earth is flat, and a lot of other goofy false science.

I suppose these days when some kid claims that Copernicus and the Iron fisted Galileo/Heliocentrism establishment are contradicting the word of god, the thing to do is just smile and nod and leave it at that.

John Calvin one of the leaders of the reformation had a simple answer to these questions 400 years ago. The bible wasn’t meant to be a science textbook.

How sure are we that was really Neal? It was uncommonly concise and grammatical for him. And no parentheses.

Hey! Speaking of ridicule, go over to the Discovery Institute’s Media Complaints Division and see what they are doing:

www.evolutionnews.org/2007/10/where_do_dogmatic_darwinists_c.html

A student at Arizona University, Taylor Kessinger, wrote a nice anti-ID article based on Ben Stein’s forthcoming unintentional comedy:

wildcat.arizona.edu/home/index.cfm?event=displayArticle&ustory_id=676838ec-92d8-4aca-adcc-61507e2616b0

Now the DI flacks are accusing him, based on nothing at all, of using Wikipedia to do his research for him.

It might be nice to go to the AU site and leave an encouraging comment.

The same incompetent designists are repeating Behe’s nonsense that Kenneth Miller is an IDist like Behe:

Behe to Miller: You’re an Intelligent Design Proponent Like Me

Micheal [sic] Behe has a three-part post titled Kenneth R. Miller and the Problem of Evil (part 1, part 2, part 3)on his Amazon author’s page in which he makes a pretty bold assertion about one of his loudest critics:

Kenneth Miller is an intelligent design proponent. Behe is serious, adding that “with respect to design, he and I differ only on degree, not on principle.”

Behe’s posts come as a response to a second, needless to say negative, review of his new book The Edge of Evolution by Miller in the Catholic magazine Commonweal.

Despite Darwinist’s efforts to affect a sort of crib death by attacking the book relentlessly, The Edge of Evolution is doing well in terms of sales to those interested in science:

#1 in Books > Professional & Technical > Engineering > Bioengineering > Biochemistry #2 in Books > Science > Evolution > Organic #3 in Books > Science > Agricultural Sciences > Biochemistry

www.evolutionnews.org/2007/10/behe_to_miller_youre_an_intell.html

Uh, yeah Ben Stein, the persecution of theists proceeds apace, and we shall soon have intimidated and/or killed our way to a Godless America. Meanwhile, Behe’s identifying with a darling of the anti-IDists, Catholic Ken Miller.

I’d like to ask if they ever cross-check any of their articles, but I think that’s pointless. Let’s just say that ID rots the brain and makes any kind of thought in the areas of biology, politics, and religion, impossible, or at least absurd.

Just a small comment on the rankings: They’d be meaningful, if there were any reason to list Behe’s fiction in the science section. I’ll bet that in the “metaphysics” or fiction categories, where his book should be, he’d be ranking quite low.

Glen D http://tinyurl.com/2kxyc7

Glen Davidson Wrote:

Let’s just say that ID rots the brain…

Years ago the metaphor of ID being a “universal base” popped into my head. If “Darwinism” is a “universal acid,” and strong base saponifies tissue…you get the picture.

I think it came to me in 2001 when Dembski said that ID can accommodate all the results of “Darwinism,” and various DI folk tried to have it both ways with Stuart Kauffman (“Darwinist” and fellow dissenter). With ID a “one stop” guide to having everything both ways I guess it was just a matter of time when one of them would fantasize that ID’s enemy #1 was one of their own. Ironically the “TE = ID enemy #1” is itself a bait-and-switch that they only use when they can’t get away with Dawkins-bashing.

I may have a reverse-discrimination tale.

The graduate student committee chairperson at my graduate institution was a creationist. In this position, this person had the ‘power’ to distribute departmental funds to graduate students - essentially to decide who was to receive assistantships pending our acceptance into a PI’s lab. When I started, I was told that the department had no more assistantships to give out that year. I ended up having to take out a loan, and was given the same story the following year.

I found out a few years later that, in fact, there HAD been money available, but the chair decided to hold on to it. The reason? The first year, it was because the chair had a “mission” to “save” as many Godless Chinese students as possible, and so heavily recruited Chinese students to come to study there, and they were enticed, in part, with promises of student assistantships. So, even though there were funds available for me, she held onto them in hopes that another Chinese student would come. When it was clear that no more were signing on that year, it was too late for me to get one. The second year, I was working in the lab of the only person in the department that studied evolution. I was told that he had grant money, so he should be able to pay me. Well, OK, but the other PIs in the department ALSO had money, yet THEIR grad students received departmental funds for two full years.

I never really thought much of it at the time, but now that I look back on it, it was pretty obviously, IMO, anti-Darwinist discrimination that ended up costing me quite a bit of money…

I should make a movie.…

Actually, a fun response to Ken Ham’s “Were you there?” silliness is to look right back at the person and say, “Yes, I was there!” Then when they splutter, “What! You couldn’t possibly have been there!” you say, “How do you know? Were you there?”

The fundamentalist brain is a small toy to play with, but still fun.

Ever sat in class and had your professor straight up challenge your intelligence for suggesting even the possibility of an intelligent design in the universe?

Yeah, it happens all the time. It usually ends with a marine punching the professor in the face, then the professor says: “Why the hell did you do that?” and the marine says, “God was too busy looking after my buddies in Iraq, so he sent me.” Wait a minute, am I in the right joke?

Never once at several different universities have I seen the issue of cretinism come up. Never once have I seen a student or crazed fundie religious fanatic try to disrupt a class. Nor have I ever heard of such.

Really why would a creationist take biology? They already know what science says about their mythology. All they would get out of intentially disrupting a class is looking like a moron to their peer group, the other students, and kicked out of class or school if it was egregious enough to violate university rules and regulations.

Anyone have or had similar experiences? I can imagine it is different in secondary school (never saw it there either) but by the time the students hit college, they are expected to act like adults and besides, it costs them a lot of money these days.

It usually ends with a marine punching the professor in the face, then the professor..

Calls the cops and has you arrested for assault and battery. After a fair trial you are sentenced to prison.

Not smart. Your street cred in prison will be minor. All the other inmates are murderers, bank robbers, car thieves, burglars, drug dealers and the like. You, OTOH, beat up a 5 foot tall female Chinese professor for teaching biology.

Sigh, where is Michael Korn when you need him. ID should get rid of their present fleet of loser trolls and try to get a better bunch.

John,

Thanks for the nice catch on Kessinger’s article. It looks like he appreciated your input, and it seems every science article nowadays need someone going after the creationist attack dogs.

A brief reminder that at the university I retired from, all students take a semester of biology. In which evolution is taught. Even the creationists (there are some among the students) must take this class.

There is a psychology professor who studies how the creationists can hold onto their creationism, despite having learned enough about evolution to pass the class.

Raven wrote:

“Anyone have or had similar experiences?”

Well, I teach Introductory Biology almost every semester and almost every semester I run into creationists who are at least vocal enough to make their beliefs known in class. So far I have gotten:

The second law of thermodynamics disproves evolution Symbiosis disproves evolution Archaeopteryx was a hoax If you don’t have the actual fossils here for me to look at I don’t believe you

Usually the students are respectful and only speak up when I ask if there are questions. Usually there is some laughter from the other students who seem to know what is going on and maybe have even seen it before. Generally, I try to be respectful and point out the logical flaws in their arguments without ridiculing them.

I usually also get at least some creationists showing up at talks and seminars that I give on the subject. Most are usually well behaved. I always let them have their say and then try to deal with the substance of their arguments. I generally find that this increases interest in everyone else. Of course if they start shouting and stomp out of the room, that’s fine as well.

The general impression that I get is that these students have been coached (perhaps by their pastors). Thier arguments are always predictable and usually easily dealt with. I gues they are hoping that you are not aware enough to answer their questions. Like the time the guy started going on about Judge Jopnes and how he “copied” his decision. Too bad for that guy that that one was covered extensively here on the Thumb, so I was ready for it.

The second law of thermodynamics disproves evolution Symbiosis disproves evolution Archaeopteryx was a hoax If you don’t have the actual fossils here for me to look at I don’t believe you.

Those are dumb, softball questions. Obviously if the creos were coached by a minister, he was ignorant too. Questions like that actually make the questioner-creo look like an idiot. There are now 10 independently discovered fossils of Archaeopteryx found over a 100 year period. A nice transitional species, a bird with teeth and a reptilian tail.

I got into creationism, the attack on science for several reasons. One was running into a wild eyed old guy not at a school who claimed humans could not be related to apes because: 1. Humans are the only animals with a 4 chambered heart. 2. Only animal with trichromic vision. 3. Humans don’t have muscles in their feet and apes do.

All 3 of these characteristics are shared with apes and some monkeys as well.

He had some other really bogus points as well. Talkorigins.org was very useful in debunking his claims.

If you don’t have the actual fossils here for me to look at I don’t believe you.

This is silly. Who walks around with several kilos of fossils in their pockets. Not to mention the larger dinosaurs weigh into the tons. I would just shrug and say OK, whatever and point out that the important specimens are usually found in museums.

Raven,

Thanks, that’s exactly what I did. It helped that we were less than 100 miles from the Natural History Museum at the University of Michigan and that I had recently been to the whale fossil exhibit there. Knowing exactly where the fossils in question were actually located was very helpful. It certainly did make the questioner look silly. And you are right, those questions were pretty simple to answer. I wonder why they never come up with anything new or more challenging? Maybe they need better tutors.

Re “1. Humans are the only animals with a 4 chambered heart.”

Isn’t that typical of all mammals, not just primates?

Re “3. Humans don’t have muscles in their feet and apes do.”

Ask somebody to take off their shoes and wiggle their toes, then ask the questioner to explain it. ;)

Henry

In my experience in geology and earth sciences, since we deal with the concepts of geologic time and cosmology, I get creationist comments on average probably once or twice a semester, usually during office hours. Interestingly, I think that since I’ve begun discussing the nature of science at the beginning of the semester, and discussing Archbishop Ussher during Geologic Time, comments have significantly decreased.

Only once have I had a disruptive student, a couple of years ago. Every time I’d mention geologic age, she’d give a big sigh (audible to the class), and theatrically roll her eyes. Finally, when discussing the origin of the earth (in context of its structure) she couldn’t contain herself, and said something to the effect of, “if the earth is made of rocks, how can life come from rocks?” I simply pointed out that that question wasn’t really the topic of the lecture or the class. She continued with the eyerolls and the sighs over the next few classes, and finally at the end of one class I pointed out that (1) this was a science class, (2) that I had treated religion (in the person of Ussher) respectfully, and that I expected that she would treat me and the class with the same respect. She denied that she was sighing or rolling her eyes, but when pressed, said that it wouldn’t happen again!

As far as Martin’s comment goes:

Actually, a fun response to Ken Ham’s “Were you there?” silliness is to look right back at the person and say, “Yes, I was there!” Then when they splutter, “What! You couldn’t possibly have been there!” you say, “How do you know? Were you there?”

This could actually be a teachable moment. If the creastudent insists on continuing, he/she’ll probably comment on how people can’t have lived back that far, my response would be something to the effect of, “Oh, so you agree that we can use present day observations to make inferences about the past?”

With respect to the “Were you there?” question, my usual response is

No, but my good friends U235, U238, K40 and Rb87 were.

Another good response to “Were you there?” would be to ask if the person thinks that convicted criminals who committed crimes without witnesses should be set free because they had no eyewitnesses.

Dawkins et al. consented to interviews for “Expelled,” and later complained about misrepresentation. Watch what happens when the shoe is on the other foot. Here is an excerpt from an interview with Paula Apsell, producer of the Nova dramatization of the Dover trial on Nov. 13:

“Q: Of the three expert witnesses who testified on behalf of Dover—Michael Behe, Scott Minich, and Steve Fuller—only Steve Fuller appears in the program. Why did you not interview the other two, who are among the country’s leading proponents of ID?

“Apsell: Michael Behe and Scott Minich, as well as other proponents of ID, were invited to participate in the program. We were committed to presenting the views of the major participants in the trial as fairly as possible. And our preference would have been to have their views presented directly, through firsthand interviews.

“However, Michael Behe, Scott Minich, and other ID proponents affiliated with the Discovery Institute declined to be interviewed under the normal journalistic conditions that NOVA uses for all programs. In the midst of our discussions, we even offered to provide them with complete footage of the interviews, so that they could be reassured that nothing would be taken out of context. But they declined nonetheless.”

here’s what i submitted: Expelled by ID Due to the stranglehold that the “single designer” hypothesis has on ID theory, multiple designer ID is rejected outright and its proponents subjected to ridicule. …… anyone think it’ll fly?

Heh heh.…. it flew! And it’s still flying!

you really inspire me to make more of my own trade. your creative spirit is contagious. many thanks

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Steve Reuland published on October 26, 2007 2:04 PM.

Intelligent Design flunked: Denyse O’Leary What exactly is the “design” part of “intelligent design”? was the previous entry in this blog.

Science v Intelligent Design: Miller v Behe is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

Categories

Archives

Author Archives

Powered by Movable Type 4.361

Site Meter