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?

[gore3000]

One of the most important administrative provisions is the Errors clause because it provides that each side should police their own.

Well they are not.

As to the rest I laid out explicit charges and furthermore, Vade agravated the situation by saying I was drunk. Let's see enforcement instead of excuses for the evolutionists who have been using this thread to pick fights and attack opposing posters. And let's stop the lawyering, all have seen the evidence. Whatever evidence I present is never enough. Let's stop the evasions, let's stop the hypocrisy. Vade broke the rules of civility, he insulted me and it is all here. So stop the nonsense and stop ATTACKING ME AND ATTACK THE GUILTY ONE - VADE RETRO Enough is enough.

To: VadeRetro; Alamo-Girl; PatrickHenry; All The poster you consider to have been "unjustly besmirched" is not responsible for posting taunts to Aric. No, that is not what I said or what occurred. They were engaging in mutual taunting. If you want to accuse one, you have to accuse the other. Further, it was you who was guilty of the absolutely unconscionable, and immoral act of publishing a personal e-mail - a day or so after signing an agreement that you would engage others in a civil manner. So, in fact, you are the guiltiest one in this whole affair and I hereby accuse you of being out of compliance with the agreement and ask to have you removed as being in compliance for not only acting in a totally despicable manner in releasing private e-mail but also for your trying to excuse your totally inexcusable behavior. Further, as your actions have continued this discord which was in great part due to your behavior and whereas this discord had been healed amicably in posts# 2501 and 2503, I accuse you of trollish behavior and ask that all those who signed on to the agreement indicate their disapproval of your actions.

2,536 posted on 08/13/2003 8:06 PM PDT by gore3000 (Intelligent people do not believe in evolution.)

To: VadeRetro; Alamo-Girl; PatrickHenry; All If you're sober, take a drink. If you're drunk, sober up.

You have broken so many rules that I guess one more does not matter. I therefore hereby add the above to the charges made against you of trollish behavior and willfully breaking the agreement.

2,538 posted on 08/13/2003 8:25 PM PDT by gore3000 (Intelligent people do not believe in evolution.)

If the rules apply to only one side, this agreement is a farce. If I am going to be insulted and attacked as you have done here Alamo-Girl for asking that disruptive behavior be stopped, this agreement is a farce. Further, I will not have my integrity attacked here or anywhere else by you or anyone else.

It is therefore up to all who have signed on to this agreement to enforce it against disruptors or have it proven to be a farce.

[Alamo-Girl]

I support some of your complaints against VadeRetro and do not support others.

I agree that the remark “If you're sober, take a drink. If you're drunk, sober up.” particularly addressed to a known Christian is belittling under the Language Restraint clause because you are a complying poster. An apology would be helpful, Vade.

I do not support your allegations regarding the email disclosure. The assertion contained in that email went to the integrity and credibility of the agreement itself and to me personally as mediator - and thus had to be aired and resolved so that if there were any doubts, the agreement could be nullified, a new mediator appointed and re-voted. Accusations cannot be made without evidence on the same post, thus the email had to be shown and Vade was justified under the agreement.

Additionally, private emails are not specifically addressed in the guidelines. If you believe they should be, then please bring it up with the new mediator when the agreement comes up for review in 30 days or sooner.

I also do not support your assertion that VadeRetro’s actions have continued this discord. That distinction is shared by several parties. Although the disagreement was settled by post 2503, it was renewed by jennyp at 2504. You followed with an accusation at 2508. Vade came back into the discussion at 2516.

Although VadeRetro’s use of the word “sub-adult” on 2516 would be inappropriate if addressed to a complying poster, there is no harm/no foul in using such language when referring to a previously politely warned non-compliant under the Language Restraint clause.

As I mentioned in the previous post, your duty and mine – as belonging to the Creationist/Intelligent Design camp – is to first cleanup our own side of the house. If we continue to make on-thread allegations at the other side with our house in the mess that it is in today, a flame war will surely result.

[AndrewC]

If we believe that the other side is failing in their responsibility on this clause but do not yet have our own side of the house clean, we ought to inform someone on the other side privately by Freep mail.

What is the purpose of private email when it has been flaunted here?

[Alamo-Girl]

If the rules apply to only one side, this agreement is a farce. If I am going to be insulted and attacked as you have done here Alamo-Girl for asking that disruptive behavior be stopped, this agreement is a farce. Further, I will not have my integrity attacked here or anywhere else by you or anyone else.

I regret that you have been offended by my comments, gore3000. I did not mean it personally and for that I apologize.

In no way does this agreement only apply to one side, but as the people you have pinged can see by reading this thread - if one side tries to find fault in the other without first cleaning up their own, there will be flame wars.

Yes, I have been hard on our side, the Creation/Intelligent Design side. Not just you gore3000 - I've been hard on f.Christian, Elsie, TerrierGal and anyone on our side involved in a provocation. That is the intent of the Errors clause.

Moreover, it is a principle right out of the Sermon on Mount (Matthew 7) - we cannot tell others to get the mote out of their eyes, without first getting the beam out of our own.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your post and question!

What is the purpose of private email when it has been flaunted here?

There are very few instances that I know of where private emails have been posted on Free Republic. Fewer still with cause.

In this case, the email alleged that I had conspired with the sender in such a way as to trick the evolutionists into signing an agreement. That allegation undermined the integrity of the agreement and had to be aired because if any person who signed onto the agreement believed it to be true, then the whole agreement had to be dissolved at once, a new mediator appointed and re-voted.

Ordinarily, I'd be the first to agree that private emails ought to be kept private but when such an allegation is made with so great an implication - it had to be aired.

[AndrewC]

we cannot tell others to get the mote out of their eyes, without first getting the beam out of our own.

Whom do you see as your counterpart on the "other" side? I see no one.

[ALS]

"That allegation undermined the integrity of the agreement and had to be aired because if any person who signed onto the agreement believed it to be true, then the whole agreement had to be dissolved at once, a new mediator appointed and re-voted.

Ordinarily, I'd be the first to agree that private emails ought to be kept private but when such an allegation is made with so great an implication - it had to be aired."

Bullcrap

You have no power to dissolve anything. Each signer may sign off individually. There is no provision or power given to you to make such declarations.

"The agreement will continue even if any one or more of the following guidelines are found untenable. Any person joining in this agreement may withdraw at his own discretion without explanation. All remaining parties to the agreement agree to be bound even if one or more parties disavow their agreement."

2. Parties: The agreement binds only those Free Republic posters who voluntarily agree to the terms.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Some decades ago, my parents told me that all mail (and by extension e-mail) should be addressed:

Dear Recipient and Gentlemen of the Jury:

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your post!

Whom do you see as your counterpart on the "other" side? I see no one.

Several on the other side have been aggressive in support of the agreement, but the main "speaker" so far has been PatrickHenry.

However, in these first 5 days of the agreement, most of the disruption has originated from our side, in particular from the sender of the above mentioned email.

On the other side, there has been at least one apology on-thread and compliments sent to me to be passed on to specific others on the Creation/Intelligent Design side.

I am not aware of any on that side yet posting a polite warning to one of their own or documenting an instance of non-compliance among their own. OTOH, I haven't been reading all of their posts either.

[Alamo-Girl]

LOLOL! I'm sure I'll use that one in the future.

[ALS]

"However, in these first 5 days of the agreement, most of the disruption has originated from our side, in particular from the sender of the above mentioned email."

"OTOH, I haven't been reading all of their posts either."

How can you make the above accusation if you haven't been reading their posts?
Imputing are we? And while we are at it, where's the proof along with the accusation? Oh wait, I'm not worthy.

[AndrewC]

I am not aware of any on that side yet posting a polite warning to one of their own or documenting an instance of non-compliance among their own.

This is what I meant.

[Alamo-Girl]

If you believe such a polite warning is in order and were to ask me to post it, I would first contact PatrickHenry (if online or another if not) to see if he would care to do it before posting it myself.

I would do it this way because of the Errors clause (which I probably should have labeled "Good Faith") and to keep it peaceful so that those on our side could see that the other side is equally committed to the peace.

[ALS]

Well there's a first. You actually said something was something you would do personally as opposed to proclaiming it a new ruling within the agreement.

btw - shows us where in the agreement it gives you the power to dissolve the agreement.

[AndrewC]

If you believe such a polite warning is in order and were to ask me to post it, I would first contact PatrickHenry (if online or another if not) to see if he would care to do it before posting it myself.

I just moseyed back to this thread to see what was going on(I did get a hint that something was going on) to discover a somewhat muted copy of the pre-agreement shenanigans. The impression I got from a slight perusal of the comments was a reinforcing feedback to the flames from the other side and not a feedback that would abate the rising temperature. The agreement was among the willing. If you have to initiate the peacemaking for both sides, it appears to me that one side is not willing.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your post! But I don't understand what you mean by " somewhat muted copy of the pre-agreement shenanigans." So I don't know how to read the rest of the paragraph either.

[Aric2000]

I believe that gore is being a bit oversensitive as well, but I believe you should have said that instead of what you said.

So consider this a slap on the wrist for being an insensitive poophead!!

There, you have been chastised, now apologize, and tell him that he is being oversensitive and that he ought to chill out instead.

Now I am going to bed, Good night!! ;)

[Aric2000]

I apologize for calling you a poophead, I just lost it there for a minute....

[Aric2000]

NOW, I am going to bed....

Good night all!!

[AndrewC]

somewhat muted copy of the pre-agreement shenanigans

Name-calling. ALS argument tying Marxism and Darwinism together, was used as an excuse. The troll epithet was used exactly by "whom" I expected it would be. I was called a troll for stating that a transistor was in a sense two diodes back-to-back and not stating that a transistor was in reality two diodes back-to-back. Now I bring this up because it illustrates the flaw in the agreement. I have not mentioned who or where.