|
Help defend science: flunked not expelled
Author: cbit on April 18 2008 Viewed 7005 times. 29 people liked this blog. You can rate it below if you haven't already.
People who enjoyed reading this: EsromCole, yghartsyrt, bodo, Zanf, Analog, Logo, hecanjog, crabster, bleen, license, Otterfan, minisystem, mlbot, Jetsom, subset, 11t1, zach, monty, Spark, SenorFrio, Fredo, ignatius, delete, tantan, p, tylth, jp, sAMsKi, flies
-->
Apologies, a completely non-music related post.
The creationist/ID friendly pseudo documentary called Expelled will be screening near you soon. In the film, Ben Stein claims that scientists critical of the theory of evolution are being silenced by the powers behind "big science". Through ham fisted montages the film also tries to establish a link between the theory of evolution and Nazism and other genocidal ideologies.
Christian fundamentalists are lobbying hard to promote this film, even offering incentives to school groups to go and see it.
A counter site has been launched by the national center for science education that lists, and refutes, the lies and important omissions of the expelled film.
Publishing hyperlinks to the expelled exposed site, using 'expelled' as the visible link text, will help make the counter site more visible in search engines, and help ensure that people really do hear 'both sides' of the story. If you can, please help out.
Here's a review of the film:
link
Digging this page will help spread the word too (there's a subtle digg link beneath this blog post)
edit: "help defend science" == shorthand for 'help protect people from being robbed of the chance to understand the scientific method, to understand the crucial importance of evidence based reason in evaluating truth claims, to understand the principles or critical thought, to appreciate the enormous weight of evidence in support of evolutionary theory.' | |
Comments
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
eevvrr
yo i'm calling cbit out on his image of defending science. you're not defending science, science doesn't need defending. it speaks for itself. it doesn't need people advocating it's supposed "opponents" - which is what you're doing by calling SO MUCH attention to it. i don't know what your aims are, but this is not the way to come to a new plateau where people are more intelligent, more sophisticated within their physical worlds, and can understand their realities more betterer (it'll be in the grammar books next decade)...
we can have those things, but in my opinion this is a waste of your time. in my eyes (mind) you are not some heroic knight of the noble league of scientists nor a scientist. so what are you?
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
eevvrr
i take back that it's a waste of your time, tho, cuz i don't really believe that. everything else sticks. have a nice day.
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
sAMsKi
cheers for posting this cbit. heard all about it. will add a link to my site.
i must also commend you on your hard work throughout this thread. i have little to add other than this excellent link : link and the fact that by chance i am wearing my hoodie as i type : link
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
eevvrr
cheers to a world where people do not grant power to external forces through dogmas mass orchestrated as "right." bypassing their own "rightness," in a way, for a world as hegemonious as mass religion.
this is why i maintain that this sort of dogmatic reasoning through science at the sake of all other thoughts and notions is as much a religion as anything else.
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
crabster
eevvrr: Would you like to give an example of a line of reasoning or quote that you find dogmatic?
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
sAMsKi
eevvr: i'd be interested to read such a quote to. i assume you were referring to the article i posted? or was it in reference to my beliefs? if so, i am stunned that you managed to pick so much up from what i posted – incorrectly i might add.
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
crabster
eevvrr: I don't mean it as a challenge, I'm genuinely interested.
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
dylan
fuck ben stein. anyone who defends nixon as a peacemaker can only be full of shit. (he wrote speeches for the guy too).
i guess he didn't know about the little known fact that it was nixon, along with kissinger, who bombed the fuck out of cambodia during the late 60's-early 70's, eventually leading to the formation of the khmer rouge, and we all know what comes next.
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
cbit
eevrr said: "yo i'm calling cbit out on his image of defending science. you're not defending science, science doesn't need defending. it speaks for itself."
yo. I hoped the meaning of the blog title would be clear: people's (esp children's) chance to understand science, and to avoid being fed bullshit, and to develop faculties of critical thought in general, is under threat. This film is part of that. Did anyone else feel confused about it?
eevrr said: "it doesn't need people advocating it's supposed "opponents" - which is what you're doing by calling SO MUCH attention to it."
Reflect on this for a moment: all criticism draws attention to its subject. So is all criticism counter productive? Does this mean that all criticism should be abandoned? If not, can you explain why you imagine this particular example is such a case, and what distinguishes it from effective criticism.
eevvr said: "this is why i maintain that this sort of dogmatic reasoning through science"
What sort of dogmatic reasoning would that be exactly? More hot air? Quote or stfu.
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
eevvrr
nah i guess that's too much then. sort of like ur title, i still say, because science isn't something that needs defending. i understand what you're saying about bringing attn to issues such as lack of (what ur culture) deems proper education
i didnt mean to imply anyone was using dogmatic reasoning... okay, maybe i was LOL but i wasn't referring to any1 in particular, sorry samaski, cbit...
shutting the fuck up
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
ShaunRyder
cbit said: "Quote or stfu."
STFU yourself.
cbit said: "I'm not aware of any such evidence. Instead i hear accounts of kids raised in atheistic homes being gently introduced to the idea of gods and replying 'that's silly!' or similar. In these cases at least it seems safe to assume that the kids are implicitly atheistic, ergo: implicit atheism exists."
Because anecdotal eveidence is fine for your own POV. ergo: You are a prick.
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
jdg
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
jdg
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
mlbot
funny how people seem to create new accountrs just to say mean shit anonymousluy.
srsly ,who is this jdg moran????????????????????
04/19/08
+
PM |
QUOTE |
PERMALINK |
REPORT
jdg
i dont need to say shit unanimously, im the king moran
Register / login
|
^
EM411 is Copyright 2001-2008 EM411.com
All rights reserved. | Contact | RSS
|
