Pheobe Debates The Theory of Evolution

Original scene from the show... Friends. ^ | NA | NA

[Mr.Atos]

I was just lisening to Medved debating Creationism with Athiests on the air. I found it interesting that while Medved argued his side quite effectively from the standpoint of faith, his opponents resorted to condescension and beliitled him with statements like, "when it rains, is that God crying?" I was reminded of the best (at least most amusing)debate that I have ever heard on the subject of Creationism vs Evolution, albeit a fictional setting. It occurred on the show, Friends of all places between the characters Pheobe (The Hippy) and Ross (The Paleontologist). It went like this...

Pheebs: Okay...it's very faint, but I can still sense him in the building...GO INTO THE LIGHT MR. HECKLES!!

Ross: Whoa, whoa, whoa. What, uh, you don't believe in evolution? Pheebs: Nah. Not really. Ross: You don't believe in evolution? Pheebs: I don't know. It's just, ya know, monkeys, Darwin, ya know, it's a, it's a nice story. I just think it's a little too easy.

Ross: Uh, excuse me. Evolution is not for you to buy, Phoebe. Evolution is scientific fact. Like, like, the air we breathe, like gravity... Pheebs: Uh, okay, don't get me started on gravity.

Ross: You uh, you don't believe in gravity? Pheebs: Well, it's not so much that ya know, like I don't *believe* in it, ya know. It's just...I don't know. Lately I get the feeling that I'm not so much being pulled down, as I am being pushed.

Ross: How can you NOT BELIEVE in evolution? Pheebs: [shrugs] I unh-huh...Look at this funky shirt!!

Ross: Well, there ya go. Pheebs: Huh. So now, the REAL question is: who put those fossils there, and why...?

Ross: OPPOSABLE THUMBS!! Without evolution, how do YOU explain OPPOSABLE THUMBS?!? Pheebs: Maybe the overlords needed them to steer their spacecrafts!

Pheebs: Uh-oh! Scary Scientist Man!

Pheebs: Okay, Ross? Could you just open your mind like, *this* much?? Okay? Now wasn't there a time when the brightest minds in the world believed that the Earth was flat? And up until what, like, fifty years ago, you all thought the atom was the smallest thing, until you split it open, and this like, whole mess o' crap came out! Now, are you telling me that you are so unbelievably arrogant that you can't admit that there's a teeny, tiny possibility that you could be wrong about this?!?

Pheebs: I can't believe you caved. Ross: What? Pheebs: You just ABANDONED your whole belief system! I mean, before, I didn't agree with you, but at least I respected you. Ross: But uh.. Pheebs: Yeah...how...how are you gonna go in to work tomorrow? How...how are you gonna face the other science guys? How...how are you gonna face yourself? Oh! [Ross runs away dejected] Pheebs: That was fun. So who's hungry?

[ALS]

precisely

thanks!

[NewLand]

So I take it you support my amendment in #1134?

Absolutely my friend! And belated THANKS Alamo-Girl for getting into the "fray" and winning the peace.

God Bless both of you.

[Aric2000]

Diversionary? Diversionary?

Come on Newland, he was critiquing a quote, and asked you to verify the quote.

He was asking for verification, and you call it a diversionary tactic?

Come on.....

And yes, I pinged PH over to that thread, I saw that you had taken his quote, changed it around, and used it as your own. As if we had ANY interest at all in disrupting a religious debate, we don't, and have not.

You guys are the ones that like to come into a scientific discussion and start throwing religion around, us going into a religious discussion and start throwing science around would be just as stupid.

He asked you to VERIFY a quote that he found questionable, you couldn't, his point was made, his "diversionary tactic" was to bring you to the realization that someone had played fast and loose with the facts, and making you ask in your own mind, how many other times on that website had they done it.

Nothing diversionary about it, he was questioning the credibility of the site you quoted, and linked to, with facts, that is not diversionary, it is a proper question.

[NewLand]

Diversionary? Diversionary?

Yes, diversionary, just like your post here.

How paramount was that quote to the entire and extreme amount of information in that thread? Like a fly on the Empire State Building...

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you oh so very much for the much needed blessing! I'm praying we'll be able to declare "the major fighting" over within just a few days.

[NewLand]

I'm interested to watch the replies to my earlier post. That could be insightful.

[ALS]

It's simply an agreement between FReepers on behavior towards one another. For those that have decried the lack of such, it amazes me they so swiftly refuse to behave.

I'm thinking at the end of this, real motives will be evident to all.

This agreement is a blessing in more ways than one.

[Aric2000]

You know, we are going to have a major problem with this new venue.

If a website uses a quote, that is questionable, then how questionable are it's other quotes etc.

NOTHING diversionary about it, when a website is criticized because of it's use of a questionable quote, you A: should have tried to come up with a retraction of some sort, Which you did by the way, after he had a lengthy discussion with AnnaZ, or B: given him a another site with the same information but without questionable quotes, so that he could compare the 2 and make sure that 1 indeed verified the others, OTHER information.

Dimensio is a very logical thinker, and when a questionable quote is found on a website it puts a light on in his head, and he says something. It is a siren to those of us that see such things, that perhaps the rest of the information on the site is just as questionable.

It was a very logical question, and a genuine askance of information.

He attacked no one, he asked a very direct question, that should have received a very direct answer, it took you a few times to finally quit attacking him and actually answer it, but you finally did.

It may have been diversionary in your mind, but you were waiting for an attack, and I guarantee, that Dimensio is the last person who is going to attack you over your religion.

He may say that he is an atheist, but he is tolerant of other's beliefs.

You were on the defensive from the get go, and I set you up for that, I am afraid, by my comments to PH. But again, you were that one that got defensive, NOT Dimensio.

"Hey you moron, I conceded both the potential and actual 'falseness' of that quote. You have no interest in truth, just challenging people for the sake of challenging them and avoiding answering any questions yourself."

Is not the way to endear yourself to someone.

You jumped him for asking an honest question, and it should have been short and sweet, but you lengthened it out by attacking him, instead of answering the question.

[AndrewC]

He was asking for verification, and you call it a diversionary tactic?

Well, let me recount a few times where I asked for information or had a comment and was called worse than merely diversionary. Pakicetus skull, Nereid Worms, Hardison's genetic program, test data for cubic generator, etc. etc. In each of those cases I had to find the information as I was being insulted. In each case, I was correct. Pakicetus skull was a model, Nereid worms did not speciate, Hardison's program won't run and is a bust if it would run(It is still cited as a refutation to a creationist argument), Cubic generator was a model only, so on and so forth. BTW here is what is on the site for what George stated--->

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them. A volume could not trace all their connections with private and public felicity. Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.

It is substantially true that virtue or morality is a necessary spring of popular government. The rule, indeed, extends with more or less force to every species of free government. Who that is a sincere friend to it can look with indifference upon attempts to shake the foundation of the fabric?

I don't think he meant Wiccans when he referred to religion. This is what he said about knowledge.(I believe it is necessary)

Promote then, as an object of primary importance, institutions for the general diffusion of knowledge. In proportion as the structure of a government gives force to public opinion, it is essential that public opinion should be enlightened.

One appears absolutely necessary to George and the other in proportion to something.

Finally this bears repeating

In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank y'all for your posts!

I'm thinking at the end of this, real motives will be evident to all.

To paraphrase betty boop, knowledge is a process not a possession. We are all learning as we go through this.

[ALS]

"endeavor to cause source websites to correct their mistakes."

I'm missing the connection between what you just said and the only thing in the agreement regarding websites, directly.

[Aric2000]

I believe that my behavior toward Newland has been very good.

I believe that what he claims is false, and I have used what I consider very good manners to show him why I believe that is the case.

I even admitted that I could have set him up to go on the defensive as soon as one of the "other side" actually posted something, with my post to PH.

I believe that he jumped Dimensio for no other reason then the fact that he was expecting an attack, and thought that there had been one, when in fact, that was not at all the case.

It was a GENUINE question for a verification of a quote.

I do not believe that that is an attack of any sort, and if such questions are to be viewed as "attacks" from your side, this little agreement is NOT going to work at all.

[NewLand]

Lets end this discussion topic...please. It's irrelevant and you may not like the end if I have to do another reconstruction.

It's just not worth it. Give it up.

[ALS]

good luck
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/952079/posts?page=716#716

[NewLand]

I know. I have requested at least twice for Aric to keep me on his virtual ignore list which he keeps telling me I am on...but he insists on inserting himself into my posts when I never address him.

As they say in NYC..."Go figure!"

[Aric2000]

Good, then let's drop it, because you do not want a reconstruction.

I have read the entire thread, and know when he asked and how he asked. AnnaZ was very considerate and they figured it out between the 2 of them rather handily.

It's worth it, because if you are going to drag this back out, and try to attach motives to it, that were OBVIOUSLY not there, then we are going to have a problem with this new agreement.

That is the only point I was making.

[NewLand]

Note he "dropped it"...then took his shots.

[Tribune7]

That was a good thread and a good post.

[ALS]

like clockwork "tick tock"

[Aric2000]

Same old ALS, agreement or no agreement.