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?

[Aric2000]

OK you guys, I can agree with this in principle, but when it is something that effects ALL of us, I expect such a thing to be announced.

I felt that I needed to spread that freepmail to certain posters, and Vade felt that it was important enough to be shared with everyone. I agree with his assessment, because THAT Freepmail HAD to be discussed in the open.

It was an announcement of intent and a done deal to decieve, and therefore effected EVERYONE on the agreement thread.

I feel that most Freepmail is for my eyes and for my eyes only, and I keep that in mind, UNTIL something like this comes along to disrupt that thinking. I used my discretion, and I feel that that should be the rule.

A Freepmail is considered private, unless the recipient feels that it is important enough to be shared.

I trust the discretion of the recipient of the freepmail to do with that freepmail that which he feels is most appropriate to the situation.

If it is important enough that recipient feels that it needs to be shared, the recipient can do it one of 2 ways, privately, send it to those he feels have a need to see it, and if he feels it is important enough to share with everyone, he should do so in a public thread.

When a sender sends me an E-mail, that E-mail becomes MINE, to do with as I feel is necassary. I will never discuss an e-mail with anyone else, unless, as this one was, something that SHOULD HAVE been shared to all particapants, so that everyone would understand exactly what happened and why.

Again, at the discretion of the recipient, the Freepmail is theirs to do with as they see fit, once it hits their mailbox.

[VadeRetro]

... "Dear John" letters tacked to bulletin boards for peer-group comments ...

OK, that somewhat tacky custom is something that can happen when you get a bunch of young guys living together in a dorm or barracks. Not the best example.

[RadioAstronomer]

And how has that been disproven?

The best fit we have today is that a gravitational wave propagates at the speed of light. Two experiments that validated General Relativity over Newton's theory (Law) were the measurements of the deflection of light by our sun and the precession of the orbit of the planet Mercury.

[Stultis]

Further, I am not talking about theories, I am talking about facts.

I don't wish to waste time with a purely sematic debate. I mean by a "scientific fact" a "well confirmed observation". BTW I don't consider evolution to be a "scientific fact," but then neither is heliocentrism. Both are too complex and too general. The facts are that the planet Mars is observed at such and so a polar coordinate at one time, and at different specific polar coordinates at other times. Heliocentrism (and other relevant theories) explains those facts. That's what theories do -- explain facts.

Scientists do not sit around thinking up stuff. They spend their time proving or disproving things by experimentation, observation, and any other way which can help them determine the truth of a situation.

Actually scientists DO "think stuff up". There would be no point in doing the experiments or making the observations otherwise. Those are tests. There has to be some kind of theory, hypothesis, or a generalization of some kind, or there is nothing to test, and no way to determine the signifcance of the result of an experiment or observation. Facts simply are, as they are, as they are. They bear no scientific significance, apart from their sheer reality of being, in and of themselves, but only as they are shown to be consistent, inconsistent or artifactual wrt to some theory about them.

[Nataku X]

Glad you didn't need proof... LOL. Anyway, yeah, it was the TLBSHOW thread... anyway, thanks for #2288, and hopefully the recent developments can end the cause behind the need for the agreement.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your post and for letting me that you wouldn't have taken it out on me! Hugs!

[VadeRetro]

Again, at the discretion of the recipient, the Freepmail is theirs to do with as they see fit, once it hits their mailbox.

Right. We have a rule and we have a customary expectation. The custom is that gentlemen/ladies keep private correspondence private. The rule is that it's the recipient's call.

The way it tends to work with me is that I'm all for the courtly niceties if you are. If not--if you want to get down and dirty with me--do it in a medium that leaves no evidence, or be willing to get down and dirty in public.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you oh so very much for your support for the agreement and your vote of confidence in me! Hugs!!!

[Alamo-Girl]

You are so kind to me! Thank you! Hugs!!!

[Nataku X]

Indeed, he's a darling. Come on, do you really think men would post pictures of their kittens on their FR pages? ;-)

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for sharing your concerns!

[gore3000]

Where, for instance, were your protests upon this earlier outrageous revelation of private correspondence?

Excuse me, I did read that post, I thought it was funny. I was not aware that it was a private correspondence from anyone and it was not personal in any way so I do not see why anyone would object to it. People send each other jokes in e-mails and sometimes you get your own back! This is not disclosure of personal information and I did not think it in any way reflected badly on anyone.

I must repeat, what I have said before, it is improper whether it is specifically forbidden by the site or whoever. You can go on till doomsday saying otherwise, I will never agree that it is proper.

[VadeRetro]

You can go on till doomsday saying otherwise, I will never agree that it is proper.

Well, now you know to watch what you freepmail me, anyway. I recommend the same discretion with anybody else, any other medium.

[ALS]

To: js1138

If not, I'm afraid the contract is toothless.

Not only toothless. It's counterproductive. All the "evildoers" will joyfully sign on and continue their merry ways, emboldened by a document that will be used to legitimize their behavior.


1,221 posted on 07/30/2003 9:43 AM CDT by Nebullis
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/952079/posts?page=1221#1221

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for your post and for your question!

Is this considered to be in violation of the agreement? That is, responding to non-trollish aspects of an offending user's posts? Or treating claims by offending posters matter of factly for the purpose of dispassionate refutation or dispute (effectively removing them from the context of attempted disruption, if even they might have been put forward in that context)?

There is nothing in the agreement which prohibits posting to a disruptive poster, but there are recommendations not to engage when disruption is the most likely outcome.

I see no problem with posting a rebuttal to non-trollish aspects, though it may be a good idea to be particularly detached in tone. Even so, a flame might ignite.

[Aric2000]

I am happy to see that you have a good sense of humor, I thought it was quite funny as well.

It was of course NOT the reason that I sent it to him, but I still thought that it was a funny joke.

[gore3000]

I think that he means that gravity travels at the speed of light, it is not instantaneous from one point to another.

I think that is what he means also. I think I read that they were trying to prove it one way or another a year or so back but did not catch the results. I am interested in how such a thing could be proven that is why I asked him how it was proven.

[Aric2000]

Yes, when I was in the Army, posting dear Johns was quite a pasttime. We would laugh our butts off at the poor woman, and her education level, her writing style, mass misspellings etc.

It used to get rather Goshe, (I hope I spelled that right), and free for allish. And quite hilarious too...;)

Then we would tack her picture up on the board next to the letter, with a piece of plastic over it, and have contests to see who could make her look the most ridiculous.

Yeah, it was cruel, but she never knew what we were doing, and we were all in our early 20's. LOL

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you oh so very, very much for your vote of confidence! Hugs!!!

[gore3000]

Popper might say it's silly to pretend that our knowledge of nature, even our best knowledge, is certain when it isn't, or that the value of that knowledge is dependent on it being so.

The problem I have with the skeptical view is not that I think we know everything we need to know. We certainly do not and it would be a silly claim to say so. However, what I disagree with is that we cannot have certainty about anything. Scientists go through great trouble, sometimes working decades to prove one little point. I think it is a disservice to such seekers of truth to say that nothing is ever proven.

Further, while we have gone into some interesting side issues as a result of this question no one yet has been willing to deny that the Earth goes around the sun or that the parent's genes are the source of the child's (that of course would be an absolute contradiction of evolutionary theory if denied!). I mean, does anyone here really believe that in a hundred or a thousand years such will be proven to be false?