EXPELLED! NO INTELLIGENCE ALLOWED.

WingClips ^

[BillyBoy]

>> Here is the documentation on Ben Stein’s donation to the Al Frankin Campaign. <<

Between pimping for empty-suit failed talk show host Al Franken's Senate candidacy and lumping mainstream evolutionary scientists with NAZIs, Ben Stein really seems to have jumped the shark lately. Though on the plus side, maybe it will hurt Frankenfraud's candidacy when voters learn his top contributor thinks the world is only 6000 years old.

A shame really, Ben Stein used to be one of the good guys. He was one of the few big name conservatives in the media to expose Schwarzenegger for being a RINO while others were proclaiming Arnie was a "fiscal conservative" who would "deliver California to Bush"

[philetus]

Between pimping for empty-suit failed talk show host Al Franken’s Senate candidacy and lumping mainstream evolutionary scientists with NAZIs,”

You don’t want the truth and the truth is not in you.

[aNYCguy]

As "evidence" that evolutionary theory is insufficient to explain the diversity of life on Earth, you have offered "DNA is miraculous!" and "The ear helps you balance!"

I think it's no wonder that you people aren't making inroads to science. You're simply not interested in doing the actual, hard work involved.

[Jim W N]

As "evidence" that evolutionary theory is insufficient to explain the diversity of life on Earth, you have offered "DNA is miraculous!" and "The ear helps you balance!"

No, that's two of trillions of examples of evidence of Intelligent Design.

I think it's no wonder that you people aren't making inroads to science. You're simply not interested in doing the actual, hard work involved.

That's your brand of science. Intelligent Design had been around for centuries. Even your beloved Darwin couldn't reconcile ID with his flawed theory of evolution. Evidence of ID is everywhere, while there is NO evidence of species jumping , essential for evolutionism.

ID has taken a back seat to Darwinism of late because you liberals don't believe in open intellectual inquiry and rather indoctrinate our children and students rather than teach them how to learn. That's what this movie is all about.

[Fester Chugabrew]

First, intelligent design is religiously based . . .

Intelligent design is based chiefly upon logic and evidence. Only when the intentions and person of the designer of all things comes into question might things turn to revelation or religion. At bottom there is nothing unnatural or supernatural about intelligent design, any more than it is unnatural or supernatural for one to think or communicate information. Besides, science cannot make a distinction between science and religion, let alone natural vs. supernatural, without being arbitrary.

[Tramonto]

That’s evidence that intelligent design is possible, not Intelligent Design.

If id is possible then ID is certainly also possible.

Read Darwin's Black Box if you want to learn about some of the supporting evidence for ID. Behe makes a compelling argument and already addressed most of the points that his critics raise in the book. There is an anniversary edition that has some counter arguments to the Darwinists as well.

[hepatoma]

“If id is possible then ID is certainly also possible.”

id is verifiable using the scientific method and can be tested. ID is not verifiable and cannot be tested.

ID is faith.

[hepatoma]

Is there anyone here with a background in biology who can provide more specific evidence of ID?

One point I would like to make:

endogenous retroviruses

Why would God insert thousands of ERVs into the genome? Did the ERVs suddenly pop out after the “fall” and become pathogenic?

[Sun]

I wonder how the evos explain why some apes became human, while others remained apes.

I guess they have yet another THEORY to explain that one.

[Jim W N]

I wonder how the evos explain why some apes became human, while others remained apes. I guess they have yet another THEORY to explain that one.

Right - and NO evidence of one species jumping to another. The many instances of "evidence" found later to be fraudulent also reveals how sorry this theory is.

The greatest argument for a Creator however is Intelligent Design itself. It is a self-evident truth, just like our God-given, unalienable rights as our founders wrote. I try to let Intelligent Design speak for itself rather than go down the millions of variant paths they'll take you while trying to disprove Darwinism.

Even Darwin had no answer for ID. Neither do these folks. It's God's evidence (Rom 1:19-20) and the simple, correct understanding of it cannot be refuted.

[aNYCguy]

As "evidence" that evolutionary theory is insufficient to explain the diversity of life on Earth, you have offered "DNA is miraculous!" and "The ear helps you balance!"

No, that's two of trillions of examples of evidence of Intelligent Design.

So in other words, yes, "DNA is miraculous!" is one data point out of trillions which support Intelligent Design. And that's your idea of science.

How can you surprised that you're the laughingstock of those familiar with actual science?

[Jim W N]

How can you surprised that you're the laughingstock of those familiar with actual science?

Again, that's your brand of science. True science addresses facts. What's a laughingstock is that you people ignore the facts - things like the information encoded in DNA, the design of the ear, and the intricate construction of the eye, a leaf, the elements of your body, or just about any living organism - that point to an intelligent designer.

You have no rebuttal to this. Only a cynical swipe at the one presenting this to you. When people are out of answers, they often turn to personal attacks. Intelligent Design offers more evidence, as I have said, than the sand of the sea. You along with your buddy Darwin, have no cogent answer to this.

Stick with your fraud-filled, flawed evolutionist theories (what you call science) that have NO evidence of species jumping to another species. The only reason this idea still exists is because of those that fear the reality of the truth and the existence of God. It would mean a radical change in their life and world view. This is not a bad thing although their fear is that this is a terrible thing.

[BillyBoy]

>> Between pimping for empty-suit failed talk show host Al Franken’s Senate candidacy and lumping mainstream evolutionary scientists with NAZIs,” <<
>> You don’t want the truth and the truth is not in you. <<

Well since you don't think that's "the truth", why don't I quote Ben Stein's EXACT WORDS on these two subjects.

BEN STEIN ON FAILED LIBERAL TALK SHOW HOST & ADMITTED "FORMER" COKE ADDICT AL FRANKEN
"Al is a close friend and one of the smartest people I have ever met. I'm struck by what an incredibly capable, hard-working guy he is. He's a thoroughgoing patriot, and I would feel better with him in the Senate."
SOURCE:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,303383,00.html
http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Franken_wins_Ben_Steins_m oney_for_0620.html

BEN STEIN ON MODERN SCIENCE ACCEPTED OVERWHEMINGLY IN THE U.S. TODAY:
" I also started reading more about a subject that had long interested me, the connection of Darwinism with Nazism, and the fact that Nazism had rested in large part on the idea of Darwinism. Love of God and compassion and empathy leads you to a very glorious place, and science leads you to killing people. The [holocaust] horrifying beyond words, and that’s where science — in my opinion, this is just an opinion — that’s where science leads you."
SOURCE:
http://conspiracyfactory.blogspot.com/2008/04/quote-of-day_30.html
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NWRmOTU2YzZlN2RhMzhjNzEwNzQ3MzFiZDE2NjM3NWE=

So that's Ben Stein's OWN WORDS being quoted. Ben Stein himself says Al Franken is an "incredibly capable thoroughgoing patriot" and that "following science leads you to killing people"

Surely Ben Stein speaks the truth, right? Do you agree with those "truths"?

[philetus]

The only relevant info in:
BEN STEIN ON FAILED LIBERAL TALK SHOW HOST & ADMITTED “FORMER” COKE ADDICT AL FRANKEN

Is “Al is a close friend”.

Next
“science leads you to killing people”
There’s no doubt in my mind that science has led to people being killed.
Saying “science leads you to killing people” is not saying Science leads scientists to killing people.

In any new discovery, the first thing the military wants to know is can it be used as a weapon?

I think Stein’s right.

[Sun]

Gonzalez said” if they value their careers, they should keep quiet about their ID views”

http://www.expelledthemovie.com/playground.php