http://www.expelledthemovie.com/playgroundvideo3.swf

short video, love the way the guy is writing on the blackboard,

I MUST NOT QUESTION AUTHORITY

Anybody else find it ironic that chemical-licker is trying to use a clip about a movie that is extremely anti-science to make a point about real scientists?

This movie should NEVER be used to infer a THING about science. All the real scientists they interviewed they interviewed under false pretenses and is, frankly, in insult to the word "documentary."

sorry guys all i was doing was just pointing out this guy on the video writing on the board

"i must not question authority" i found it funny, WHAT ARE YOU GUYS ON ABOUT?

nice pluge - I'll watch it -

The movie advertised by that video "Expelled", is creationist propaganda that denounces as much real science as it can.

I think the problem is understanding what the movie is truly about, its about people being trampled into the dust for suggesting an alternate theory.

As for intelligent design, it does not purely mean that a Christian fundamentalist is attempting to hijack the Education system, Intelligent design could even be nano-robots (nice, safe, includes Atheistic thinking...) the point is free speech can lose your job.

But there is NO intelligent design in nature. All of it can be explained through darwinian means. And I would say it is purely the fundamentalist christian approach, because they're the only ones pushing for it in the west, and they dont seem to be welcoming of all the other creation myths that, if we're going to allow seperate viewpoints, have to be taught.

Which is quite acceptable. Now take this point of view... if what you said above (and picture instead a theologists ran education and science system) and they fired you for voicing your "opinion" and ran your name in the mud so you could never get a job in any field of science.


We also see this with scientists attempting to get the scientific community to accept electromagnetic and an electrical based Universe (not one patching things up with black holes and dark matter), which has nothing to do with Intelligent design (or perhaps it may?) but all the same knee-jerk reaction, The scientific is quite Hitler-like when it comes to people coming up with new theories.

Scientists have been wrong before. This ID issue is not about science, it's about destroying science and replacing it with myth. There is a room for creation myths to be taught in school, but not in the science class where they dont belong. I dont see any of these creationist 'scientists' getting their name ran through the mud, they're just excluded because they usually get their diplomas from internet diploma mills. Now if you were a medical scientist, or a geologist, or a biologist, or an astronomer, how could you realistically give a job to a young earth creationist in your lab, when their very beliefs fly in the face of truth? Should we let scientists who would be downright ineffective in a field still work in those fields despite having baseless beliefs that would impose themselves on their work, all in the name of freedom of opportunity?




Dont be ridiculous. There have been plenty of far out theories that were thrown out because there was little or no good evidence. Sir Fred Hoyle was one of the top astronomers of his time, yet he had some far out theories that he clung to despite them likely being wrong. They didn't drag his name through the dirt, they just demonstrated that his theories are wrong (steady state universe for example). Now for a theory to even be given the time of day it has to be in line with our observations. For example, a theory which suggests that the universe is contracting is inconsistent with what we've observed, so it can be thrown out. A theory that takes our observations into account and works on an explaination as to why we see what we see will be given the attention it needs.

Creationism is the same, we know how old the universe is, we know how we got here, how the planets formed etc, to let people in who do not care for the truth into our science classrooms is an afront to hundreds of years of scientific advances. They dont realize that truth is not democratic, if they convinced everyone that the earth was only 6000 years old it wouldn't change the fact that it's closer to 4.5 billion. It's just an attempt to pull a veil over our eyes. Scientific theories that are there to seek the truth are not like that, they're there to pull back the veil of our ignorance.

After a quick skim through the wikipedia entry on the documentary and the entries for individual controversies, it seems to me that the examples in the documentary are perfectly legitimate scientists misusing their employer's trust and leveraging their own pseudoscientific opinions by inserting them into places where they don't belong.

No intelligent design in nature??? They have bought you hook line a sinker

Oh the irony.

There is design in nature, you could call it that, but it is not intelligently designed. It's the creative force known as natural selection at work, and it explains all the diversity in the animal kingdom.

There are unanswered questions, yes, but there may always be unanswered questions, but that doesn't mean we should appeal to anything supernatural.

Well said, Cradle of Fish. In fact, I'd clicked this thread to say the same thing, but you've said it better than I could.

Perhaps not.

Anyone working with the creation of nanites will tell you that they resemble viruses in form, that they are/will be a type of artificially created virus.

The human race was separated from the other primates by a virus that invaded it and wiped out the original DNA mastergenes and and replaced them with themselves.

We know this as fact. The human species is the design of this virus.
It is entirely logical that nanites created our species, not as part of evolution but as part of a creative design.

I think it is only a matter of time till the obvious becomes noticed. How they will react to it I am not so sure.
I think they may put forward that a dying race sent out the nanites in the ancient past, that they entered the atmosphere by chance, and that whoever created them died long ago. There is a big sense of security in that belief for those who would feel horrified and threatened from realizing they are not at the top of the food chain after all so to speak.

???????

In what way is this "known as fact" and "obvious"?? Honestly, this is one of the weirder things I've heard. There is nothing in the human genetic makeup to suggest anything other than standard natural selection of mutations is responsible for our genome...

Your damn right there are unanswered questions. Like how did the first life form, the first living cell (which is FAR more advanced than any super computer man has ever made) come to be??? Fully completed with DNA, RNA, A digestive system, reproductive system, circulatory system, male and female counter parts, with no will to do so, or no brain to even know it exists? Maybe we shouldnt rely on the supernatural, but no more than we shouldnt be relying on fairy tails.

How did it do it ?

Gradualy.

Meow Purr.

Time doesnt make the impossible, possible.

None of that started fully completed. You start small and work your way up, the Earth has been at it for at least 3 billion years. DNA would probably have been very simple in the beginning, but by the time the jump from single-celled to multi-celled organisms about a billion years ago it would have been quite complex. All those systems are found elsewhere in nature in different levels of complexity, the unanswered questions about evolution and abiogenesis are being answered every day.




It's never been shown to be impossible for life to form naturally, so it's not a matter of time making it possible.

But we are talking about Science, not speculation. What we know to be fact, is this planets life forms are dominated by DNA. We have no evidence what so ever to say that life could form without it in its full complexity, NONE. Even the simplists forms of life we know of today are completly dominated by DNA.

Yea, through already existing life. We have NEVER witnessed life forming from elements, not in nature, nor in a lab. And you are right, this has nothing to do with time. The first living cell had just a few short hours to complete its amazingly complex design, then reproduce. All the while knowing elements have no such will to even begin to come up with such a blue print to create life, let alone set it into motion.

Master Genes of Humans = Virus

Nanovirus

There is a lot more on this if you do a search.

What ever happened to "We only know 1 1000th of 1% of what nature has revealed to us- Albert Einstien.

Anyone who says they know anything about nature know only a very little. And that little can't say much as yet i believe. Not yet.

Science = completely incorrect.

Take gravity. According to gravity there is no reason why the planets should be in the alignment they are in currently, they should be going around the sun in a helter-skelter fashion in all varying directions.

This is not what we see. We see perfect alignment(along the horizontal magnetic poles of the sun) between all the planets, asteroids, and comets.

Why? Why you ask? this does not make sense according to gravity, and just because authority said it, it was "official" and thus "truth".

electricity and magnetism were put together, forming electro-magnetism as one force, rather than two. The strong and weak nuclear forces were next, and then finally these two were put together, and a scientific model evolved that made sense. This model is called quantum mechanics.

According to this model we have protons, neutrons, and electrons. The protons and neutrons make up the center of every atom(with the exception of neutron stars, which are the remnants of supernova, and their entire structure is neutrons packed together with no other particles whatsoever), the electrons orbit the outside of the nucleus.

why is this different from gravity? Because gravity define's mass as an "energy" who's dispersal is equal in every direction.
Quantum mechanics, on the other hand, being the study of the smallest scale(bar string theory, but F that...) we know about.
These particles are all electrically charged. This is why the theories of gravity and quantum mechanics do not work together, and why we cannot understand black holes, blah blah blah.


There is a much simpler explanation. It is an alchemaical expression that states "as above, so below"

There you have it... As above(moons orbiting planets orbiting stars orbiting ??? orbiting ??? orbiting galaxies?) So below (particles orbiting particles orbiting particles)

That is why galaxies stay together, because everything in the end is electromagnetism.

and here is a really great list of things the scientific and laymens communities fail to clarify, by design ofcourse.

I recommend bookmarking that page for quick reference, BTW it has no conspiratorial information, just facts from a hobbyist who knows his stuff, and i implore anyone with a general interest of electricity to study up on Tesla.

As Edison put it "God said let there be light, and Tesla was born."

How do you figure, sports fan?