T
The_Barbarian
Guest
There isn’t any way to justify what Stein did. He lied. And he falsely accused a whole group of people.
It is despicable.
- Status
It is despicable.
D
drpmjhess
Guest
I agree, Barbarian. Fortunately, people of integrity understand the point you are making, which is no doubt why Expelled is fading so quickly into the background. I was at Mass Saturday in a town where I had given a public lecture last Autumn on evolution and theology, and I was pleasantly surprised to hear that no one in the community had even heard of Expelled, much less seen it.
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
(Barbarian points out that Stein lied about scientists sending his relatives to the gas chambers)
Barbarian remarks earlier:
ID/creationists have always viewed the truth as a troublesome complication.
The former is, of course a lie. Scientists did no such thing. The latter is demonstrably true. For example, “Answers in Genesis” has edited the statements of scientists to make it appear they believed the opposite of what they actually wrote. (example on request)
If the “always” bothers you, would a 30-year-old example do? How about 40 year-old?
The difference is truth. A subtle difference for some, I suppose.
Barbarian remarks earlier:
ID/creationists have always viewed the truth as a troublesome complication.
The former is, of course a lie. Scientists did no such thing. The latter is demonstrably true. For example, “Answers in Genesis” has edited the statements of scientists to make it appear they believed the opposite of what they actually wrote. (example on request)
If the “always” bothers you, would a 30-year-old example do? How about 40 year-old?
The difference is truth. A subtle difference for some, I suppose.
B
buffalo
Guest
Gee - guilty of the same thing you are accusing others of.
ID/creationists have always viewed the truth as a troublesome complication.
This is a false accusation.
R
ricmat
Guest
Always means always. Not a 30 year old example or a 40 year old example or a 1000 year old example. A few examples are quite a bit short of “always.”
I have no doubt that there are some IDers and creationists who have lied.
I have no doubt that there are some atheists and evolutionists and scientists who have lied.
Since your statement doesn’t bother you - “ID/creationists have always viewed the truth as a troublesome complication.” -
How about this one - “Atheists/evolutionists have always viewed the truth as a troublesome complication.”
If you can justify the first statement in your mind, then you should be able to justify the second one using the same criteria.
R
reggieM
Guest
Maybe the parallel should be “Atheists/evolutionists never view the truth as a troublesome complication.” There might be some people who believe that.
There’s a sardonic reply that asks why evolutionists care about whether or not someone tells the truth. It’s all a part of the evolutionary process. If telling lies helps the human species survive and evolve, then there will be more lies.
Actually, back to ricmat’s original point – I would agree. Anyone who doesn’t view the truth as both “troublesome” and a “complication” does not understand what the truth is and what it requires. The holy martyrs of the Faith found the truth to be very troublesome – it cost them their lives to speak it. St. Thomas More found that quite clearly. The truth added a lot of trouble and complication to his situation.
R
reggieM
Guest
It is, indeed, given what he intended to say by that clumsy statement. He slanders all the Catholic Saints who were creationists.
R
ricmat
Guest
The last few posts and the links are a bit confusing, so I just want to say here that Ricmat had nothing to do with the production of the above quote…The_Barbarian said:
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
Couldn’t be too many of those; creationism, as we know it today, was invented by the Seventh-Day Adventists in the last century.
Of course, even then, it doesn’t say all creationists. But it is demonstrably true. I notice no one challenged me on my offer to show that it is true. For obvious reasons.
On the other hand, Stein simply slandered an entire class of people with his false accusation.
If you don’t see a moral difference between a truth and a lie, I can understand why you would like Stein.
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
Sounds like a testable claim. I offered you show you mine, and you declined to see the evidence.
But I’d like to see yours.
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
Nope. Stein’s claim that scientists sent his family into the gas chambers was a despicable lie.
Barbarian observes:
ID/creationists have always viewed the truth as a troublesome complication.
It’s quite true. Stein is hardly the first to lie for it. Before it was called “ID”, before it was called “creationism”, the “flood geologists” were faking quotes and misrepresenting what science says.
Notice that even though Stein has been repeatedly caught lying, few ID/creationists have disowned him.
M
MaryJohnZ
Guest
Authentic true religion does not kill but brings life. There are pleanty of false religions or inauthentic interpretations of religion and they lead to death because they are based on lies. I would say you can say the same thing for science which is not rooted in authentic faith, it will somehow be based on a false premise and lead to death in some way.
If there was a sense that God called for the death of enemies in the Old Testament it was because the time before Christ was a time in which mankind did not have the full availability of grace and God’s relationship with mankind had been separated by sin which brought the curse of death. Death is always the fruit of man’s disobedience and separation from God.
God Bless, maryJohnZ
M
MaryJohnZ
Guest
Don’t try to wash the hands of the science community from basic philosophy which brough about the concepts behind the death camps simply because they were theoricists.
In the same way don’t wash the hands of the medical professionals today who theorize that a zygote is not a human being. Both put out information or lack of information and lead to the types of conclusions which allow for the subsequent actions of others.
In one case you have scientists doing studies about physical types and saying some physical types are ‘subhuman’ in some way. Their conclusions are carried out by ignorant, stupid or cruel flunkies in the death camps. But the camps would not have existed without the scientis and their theories.
In the other case you have the abortion mills with similiar flunkies willing to carry out death sentences on ‘subhumans’ according to scientists and their theories or definitions. They would not carry out their work without the assistance of the medical field who work at the abortion clinics as well as all the counselors and assistants who in ignorance, stupidity or out of cruelty, help them.
If the scientific community today spoke out in strong union that
human life starts at conception and is a continuum which has speparate stages, each of which is necessary to human develipoment and cannot be extenguished without killing a human life, then perhaps we could have a fact basis for ending abortion.
Science, medicine has failed in both situations, past and present, to live up to its highest calling to protect and nourish human existence.
Even if you don’t believe in God you should be able to see that higher calling. Just out of the secularized golden rule: do unto others as you would have them do unto you…’, without the higher commandment to “Love God with your whole heart, soul and mind”, which is part of the world of Faith —you still should be able to come to the same conclusions.
In the end science has failed in both the past era and the present.
Tha doesn’t mean science hasn’t done some good or that there are not good scientists either in the past or present, but from my observation, many doctors and professionals are collaborators by silence and indifference.The ones that do speak out I have the highest regard for and the greatest esteem, because I am sure it is hard for them.
Scientists should see Ben Stein’s movie as something to be defensive about but rather as something that challenges them to probe their professional conscience.
Every profession can use such reminders at times, so get over it!
God Bless,
MaryJohnZ
M
MaryJohnZ
Guest
M
MaryJohnZ
Guest
Barbarian said:
" Why settle for the little designer demiurge of the Unification Church, when you can have the real Creator?
Please explain to me what you define as a "designer’ vs a "Creator and why you statement seems to imply that the two terms are contradictory or exclusionary to each other.
Also explain why you link the “designer” to the Unifciation Church?
My questions are related to the idea of “Creation” and how you are defining it as a defender of evolution and Darwinism.I am not arguing, just seeking clarification and understanding of your point of view.
MaryJohnZ
" Why settle for the little designer demiurge of the Unification Church, when you can have the real Creator?
Please explain to me what you define as a "designer’ vs a "Creator and why you statement seems to imply that the two terms are contradictory or exclusionary to each other.
Also explain why you link the “designer” to the Unifciation Church?
My questions are related to the idea of “Creation” and how you are defining it as a defender of evolution and Darwinism.I am not arguing, just seeking clarification and understanding of your point of view.
MaryJohnZ
G
Godi
Guest
These scientist are a very arrogant bunch. Stiff necked. You can see the reason for the warning to beware of such. This is perhaps why Liberal Fascism is making such a strong resurgence in America.
T
tonyl
Guest
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
In fact, as you would have noticed, if you were paying attention, by 1920, Darwinists like Punnett (of Punnett square fame) had mathematically shown that the underlying idea of racism was wrong, and that “removing defectives” would take an astonishing number of generations to have any effect. Be realistic. And remember that false accusation is a sin.
You seem to have lost focus here. The issue is Stein’s slander against scientists, who not only did not order his family into the gas chambers, but also destroyed any rational point in doing so.
But that’s a slander, too, isn’t it? No wonder you hate science. If I thought science said that, I’d hate it too.
Rather, they existed in spite of the scientists, who showed that Hitler’s program, even it is was aimed at defective people, was bound to fail.
If you followed God, you would not slander, even out of ignorance. You cannot serve Him that way.
It’s such a foolish lie, no one with any sense takes it seriously. Unfortunately, there are many without much sense.
There are many, many ethical issues facing scientists. Sending people to the death camps is not one of them. Stein just lied about that.
You probably need to do some prayer and reflection on why it is so important to lay all that guilt on scientists. Think about where that guilt actually comes from.
And then you won’t feel this way.
T
tonyl
Guest
That’s like saying that Catholics shouldn’t see Jack Chick tracts as something to be defensive about; they should consider the tracts as something that challenges them to probe their religious conscience.
I really don’t understand why you continue to defend Stein’s dishonesty, while at the same time casting aspersions on a large swath of honest people.
T
The_Barbarian
Guest
A Creator does not plan or figure out things, being omnipotent. This is why IDers claim that a designer need not be perfect or even competent. It’s true. That’s why it’s an insult to God to call Him a designer.
It’s their official doctrine.
I couldn’t do that. Faith isn’t part of science. I’m defending Christianity, and the notion of an omnipotent Creator.
- Status