Dunno. Could be traffic overload. It opens today.
Posted on 04/19/2008 9:37:44 AM PDT by oldsaw
Has this site been hacked?
Dunno. Could be traffic overload. It opens today.
????
what do you mean?
I saw the film last night. Packed theater. Rousing applause at the end.
MM (in TX)
It looks like they might not have planned for the volume of traffic they are getting.
The trailers are a hoot. This one looks to be a MUST SEE.
We saw the movie last night. It was well done and thought provoking. I viewed it as a warning of the dangers of the liberal thought police in other areas, not just Intelligent Design.
There have been the typical enraged rants against this movie both here on FR and on the internet. Their hostility just proves Ben Stein’s point over and over again. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if someone did manage to hack that site.
Wikipedia has locked the inaccurate bullsh*t article they have on the film. “It opened to negative reviews”, sighting, of course, a few of the drive-by media. The Yahoo viewer reviews are funny. There are dozens of “F” reviews from people who obviously didn’t even see the movie. None the less it still was managing a B-.
That must be it.A thousand theatres showing a nonsecular documentary based on cold logic and rational thought probally caused some major feedback server crashes.
When 80% of 300 Million see their beliefs confirmed for the first time on the otherwise liberal athiest silver screen, the reaction must have been overwhelming.
Now on to the Oscars—as if!
;)
Evolutionists are no doubt in a tizzy over it, both those who dominate the left as well as our own FRevolutionists. Stein talks to person after person (all from academia/science) who was ruined for daring to even mention ID in the most trivial way. Lots of dialog with Dawkins, who in a stunning circular walk ends up making the point that Earth life was seeded by aliens: IOW, Earth life was intelligently designed. That part’s a real hoot. Lots of it would be funny if the underlying suppression of freedom of thought wasn’t so chilling.
MM (in TX)
Perhaps. Wouldn’t surprise me; the seeming need to shut down any expression that deviates from so-called Scientific Orthodoxy may not have limits on behaviour.
The Dallas Morning News gave it an F. They reserve that rating for politically incorrect movies.
As an academic guy myself, I've come to conclude more and more after studying this that naturalistic evolution can't possible be true. Guess I couldn't say that if I was in science, or I'd be expelled. Some thoughts are not permitted in our society. But, there are so many gaps in the theory of evolution it is silly.
Key point: how did the first DNA and RNA develop and how did the first cell to encapsulate these hundreds of complex chemicals and proteins emerge? THEY HAVE NO IDEA — but still defend the faith that life began as a natural process zealously.
Like Ben says in the Youtube video — people who are confident are not troubled by criticism.
I read Dawkins—he is a briliant author on all things biological.
Unfortunately in his publications he cannot resist inserting anti-Christian bigotry even though the petulant passages are totally irrelevant and unprofessional.
The guy really knows his stuff as far as existing materialistic data can take him or anyone else for that matter.
Otherwise,like Bill Maher and Chris Hitchens,he is a small man with a large mouth when the ultimate responsibility of spiritual reality threatens their little plastic worlds.
Hang on to your hats, the copy and pasters will be out momentarily.
It is rather telling that the ID people spent 10’s of millions of dollars on a movie and promotion of that movie instead of spending it on research.
Perhaps there isn’t a profit to be made in ID research.
‘But, there are so many gaps in the theory of evolution it is silly.’
What are those gaps you speak of?
You know if the ID people bothered to do research in a scientific way they would be welcomed.
This, however, is something they refuse to do.
Oh man!
So he is the one who is “Ben Stein!”
That is what happens when one lives in another country.
I have always loved watching his appearance in commercials but did not know he was Ben Stein.
What would you expect from the Stalinists who enforce evolutionary theory.
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
Remember how the theory that life formed in a cosmic soup and was never challenged. Once it was it became soup.
Isn’t that what science is supposed to do, investigate the holes in the theory??
Pray for W and Our Victorious Troops
Not playing here in East Kanukistan,and absolutely no reviews.
Typical.
I’m surprised that you’ve lasted so long on FR. You really dislike God and Christians. You really, really do.
The problem with ID isn’t its conclusion. It’s that it’s not science.
It’s not science to say, “hey, that’s really complicated, so it must have been designed by the Designer.”
In science, you don’t leap to a default conclusion that you want or like simply because you don’t fully understand something. At least you’re not supposed to.
But ID takes the exact opposite approach. It starts with the favored conclusion, and then attempts to poke holes in any alternative line of thought.
That’s not science. It’s philosophy or maybe religion.
1: I don’t dislike your deity - I just do not think he exists.
2: That you feel that I ‘dislike Christians’ will come as a shock to all my Christian and Jewish friends.
You didn’t respond to my point - instead you are attacking the messenger. Isn’t that one of the things that this movie accuses ‘big science’ of?
Do you believe than anyone who is against ID is against Christians?
I saw it yesterday and the same thing happened. I attended the 11:30 show with about 30 other people.
As our token athiest newbie,I suppose you think you have a point.
Perhaps we can discuss it further in the afterlife—no wait!
You won’t be there.
Nevermind;)
Why was ID so ingrained in the first man?
As with all other early evolutionary traits,it was in response to natural selection—genetic pre-determination finding a successful foothold,as it were.
ID dissent,therefore,is counterevolutionary and damned to extinction sans empiracal proof of God’s nonexistance.
Thus Man,in his natural state,does not have the obligation to prove the existence of God—the outliars of the species,the athiests or the mutated materialists,must prove His non-existance.To expect otherwise is,in truth,unscientific.
Except,of course,to ideologically contrived leftist academic dogma.
I am sure they would be welcomed just like the scientist who let a pro-ID article be published in his peer reviewed scientiffic journal. He lost his office in the Smithsonian over this and was eventually hounded out of his job as a research assistant over the issue.
Would you consider the SETI project to be science. Because the government has spent huge amounts of money on the SETI project where they scan space looking for any coded information coming in from space. The idea being that if they can find intelligent information coming in from space that this would be proof that extra-terrestrial life exists. Well, DNA is a much more complex code than they could dream of finding through SETI.
Would you consider the SETI project to be science. Because the government has spent huge amounts of money on the SETI project where they scan space looking for any coded information coming in from space. The idea being that if they can find intelligent information coming in from space that this would be proof that extra-terrestrial life exists. Well, DNA is a much more complex code than they could dream of finding through SETI.
hilarious...’why dont they spend it on ID research...?’
why bother spending all that money on research if it RULED OUT before it is even considered research???
you make no sense.
the amount of research that has been done in the normal course of ID work points to intelligent design...THAT IS WHAT IS BEING RULED OUT before it gets anywhere...
the deck is stacked in favor of anti God types such as yourself in favor of the faith of humanism...
when you rule out AHEAD OF TIME ANYTHING THAT CONTRADICTS your humanist faith...
then anything outside that is not valid. viola’
evilutionism wins by default..
how utterly stunning that must be....
Ben proves his point by proxy in this thread when folks you you chime in....
Sorry for the double post.
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=six-things-ben-stein-doesnt-want-you-to-know&page=2
4) The ID-sympathetic researcher whom the film paints as having lost his job at the Smithsonian Institution was never an employee there.
One section of Expelled relates the case of Richard Sternberg, who was a researcher at the Smithsonian Institution’s National Museum of Natural History and editor of the journal Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington. According to the film, after Sternberg approved the publication of a pro-ID paper by Stephen C. Meyer of the Discovery Institute, he lost his editorship, was demoted at the Smithsonian, was moved to a more remote office, and suffered other professional setbacks. The film mentions a 2006 House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform report prepared for Rep. Mark Souder (R–Ind.), “Intolerance and the Politicization of Science at the Smithsonian,” that denounced Sternberg’s mistreatment.
This selective retelling of the Sternberg affair omits details that are awkward for the movie’s case, however. Sternberg was never an employee of the Smithsonian: his term as a research associate always had a limited duration, and when it ended he was offered a new position as a research collaborator. As editor, Sternberg’s decision to “peer-review” and approve Meyer’s paper by himself was highly questionable on several grounds, which was why the scientific society that published the journal later repudiated it. Sternberg had always been planning to step down as the journal’s editor—the issue in which he published the paper was already scheduled to be his last.
The report prepared by Rep. Souder, who had previously expressed pro-ID views, was never officially accepted into the Congressional Record. Notwithstanding the report’s conclusions, its appendix contains copies of e-mails and other documents in which Sternberg’s superiors and others specifically argued against penalizing him for his ID views. (More detailed descriptions of the Sternberg case can be found on Ed Brayton’s blog Dispatches from the Culture Wars and on Wikipedia.)
Are my Jewish and Christian friends who happen to be evolutionary biologists ‘anti God types’ because they practice ‘evilutionism’?
The gap that shows an ape became a man.
Thanks for the link. I really look forward to taking the family to see it.
We saw it...and we usually never go to the movie, but were anxious to see this one. Theater was packed. We were glad we spent the $$$ (paying 18 bucks for two people to see a movie IMHO is usually a waste of money when you can wait awhile and see it on DVD) but this was the exception.
It was more of a discussion on freedom of speech and thought in academia than a defense of ID.
You’re welcome. We’re looking forward to seeing it as well.
DNA shows us that.
Or is all of DNA science incorrect?
So-called Darwinian science starts the exact same way. They start with presuppositions such as uniformitarianism and (if you are to be truthful) that an intelligent designer could NOT have created all we see, then, in a totalitarian fashion, they try to shut down anyone who has a dissenting view by saying it isn’t science. Poppycock! You all assume a uniformitarian point of view. Why? 1) Because you have been taught it. 2)Because many of you don’t want to believe the alternative. NONE of you were here to observe what life was like 6000 years ago. You don’t know that the rate of decay was the same as it is today. You assume such. If atmospheric conditions were far different, however, you don’t have a uniform leg to stand on. You won’t even consider anything outside of this narrow little box - and as such, paint yourselves as the emperor with no clothees. You throw up straw men against Creationists and Intelligent Design folks - such as your statement in the post I am replying to that says we believe “hey, that’s really complicated, so it must have been designed by the Designer” when the reality of what is behind the I.D. movement is far different. Fact is that you all DO leap to a default conclusion and have been spending almost 150 years trying to make the facts fit your theory. That’s not science. That’s religion of the worst kind. The completely man-made and man-centered variety.
The Gestapo wants to shut down ANY conversation that does not agree with what they believe.
I have read portions of the Congressional Report. I agree that he didn’t lose his journal editor’s position over this case. However, it is clear that he was moved out of his office and denied after hour access to exhibits as a result of his publishing this letter. There are also many emails from his associates which came out during the Congressional investigation which prove that the reason that his office was taken away and he was denied access to the exhibits was to try and force him to leave (and punish him for embarrassing them by allowing a pro-ID article to be published). As to the publication of the article, it was somewhat unusual but not unprecedented for him to approve the article himself and he did follow the peer review process by sending out the article for blind peer review as required.
To that point, Dawkins, in an interview with Stein said that he could agree with the idea that there might have been ID, but after he explained, it seems his idea of ID would be aliens who seeded life on this planet.
The 2% difference in human DNA vs. chimp DNA is what separates humanity from animals. Where did that 2% difference come from?
How did life begin? Please explain scientifically.
Small changes over a large amount of time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.