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?

[<1/1,000,000th%]

I've always wondered about these Lurkers. Are there really people who sit around and read ther people's slanging matches, without joining in?

Mysteriously, this is true. I lurked for a year before registering. I personally know a couple dozen people who visit here who haven't even registered. They're afarid to have information about themselves on the internet.

I don't know anyone personally who is registered that doesn't post, but periodically you can see people dropping in on these threads that aren't usually around, to drop in a naive comment or two.

[conservababeJen]

If I say: "Someone in this room hasn't taken a bath all week," and I get a response from someone who tells me that his personal hygene is none of my business ... well, what are we to think?

Oh? Is that how it works? So if I try this tactic, do you promise that you and yours won't whine?

Now I can veil provocation by simply not attaching anyone's name to it?....And I get immunity, right? Tell me, did you learn that from a Liberal? Your games are completely transparent....

Since we're insulting one another's intelligence... Maybe the only reason NewLand pinged you to his post was to flatter you.

[Nebullis]

Rome had irresistible political motives for consolidating and strengthening the institutional Church. Galileo had to "fall in line" (or be excommunicated, which he chose not to do). This was all about "political discipline," not science.

I'm of the opinion that science did have something to do with it. But I agree that Church politics were also looming large in the Galileo affair. Galileo threatened a popular appeal to the people that the church was powerless to overcome. Galileo comes up once in a while and I don't stand "pat" with some of the other science-minded on FR on that issue.

[longshadow]

If I say: "Someone in this room hasn't taken a bath all week," and I get a response from someone who tells me that his personal hygene is none of my business ... well, what are we to think?

OR if someone hollers: "Watch out for the pickpockets!" on a subway train, and a small group of people respond by saying: "I'm offended by that remark!" would you stand in front of them without putting your hand on your wallet?

I've been fascinated for weeks with the compelling, repeated, and frequent acts of self-incrimination with regard to trolling, when none of my comments ever specified who the trolls were. But by their own self-incriminating responses, we now know that deep down, they know what they are doing is trolling.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

I'm just ranting here. Back on point: The one thing I simply can't stand -- the one really unforgivable thing -- is when I post an "argument," and, no matter what its subject may be, my "respondent" changes it into an argument about me: My motives are questioned! Or worse, motives that I do not have at all are gratuitously attributed to me. I can handle outright personal attacks (which really are quite rare); but I hate it when people put words in my mouth, rather than read -- and understand -- what I have actually written.

I think this is part of the discussion. This is a regular tactic on the part of the anti-evolution crowd. Just look a couple of posts up at f.Christian's remarks. Saying I'm not a Christian? Saying I'm not a conservative? Saying all I've ever posted are personnel attacks?

Worse than the personnel attacks is watching Christians feeding on one another. It's not supposed to be this way and it's definately wrong no matter which Bible one reads.

I will say that this is one of the weirder threads I've ever seen. But a very interesting "evolution" of the forum. I wonder if we'll be successful at self-policing? I personally believe that if you two "philosophy sisters" can't do it, it can't be done. ;)

[exmarine]

I have a new method of dealing with namecalling and insults. Rather than reciprocate in kind, I just send the post to the Admin Moderator and let them deal with it. I won't put up with any namecalling or verbal abuse from these evos. In this way, the law of reciprocity can be nudged to bear fruit even sooner than might otherwise be the case.

[conservababeJen]

To all the lurkers,
There are certain arrogant, evolutionists on these threads that spend their time posting veiled Christian insults (particularly toward "fundys"). They mock Bible believers and suggest that their "scientific" theories are superior to the Word of God. When they're not doing this they are busy posting stupid blue placemarkers, "don't feed the trolls"/"virtual ignore" graphics and pompous suggestions that the opinions of people who believe that God created ALL should take their thoughts elsewhere. When they get bored with the above, they then take on the innocent role. They get that "deer in the headlights" look about them and cry that the Christians are being mean to them.

These people are a detriment to this website, and to the Conservative cause. Please carefully note who these people are and DO NOT respond to them.

[general_re]

In keeping with the spirit of naming names, I offer my own record before the jury. I have reason to suspect that there are those who would take issue with my conduct, and I offer all a chance to air their grievances here and now, that I may defend myself on this thread.

Let the charges be laid.

[conservababeJen]

Based on your contributions to these crevo threads, I could easily call you a troll. But I wouldn't do that.

**Have a nice day PLACEMARKER**

[Nebullis]

Let the charges be laid.

Back in '02, you made a spelling error that you didn't correct. I admit that I've been holding a grudge against you ever since.

[PatrickHenry]

I offer all a chance to air their grievances here and now, that I may defend myself on this thread.

How about the time you dunked little Alice's braids in the inkwell? Go ahead, defend yourself!

[general_re]

I plead guilty, and throw myself on the mercy of the court ;)

[general_re]

Boyhood crush - I still plan to make restitution ;)

[js1138]

Some monsters look to the Bible to justify their monstrosities, and some look to Darwin. In either case, the problem is neither the Bible nor Darwin, but the monsters themselves.

That's at least two us who believe this. I would go further and say that monsters in general have no interest in ideas at all, but simply do focus groups to determine what ideology will promote their hold on power. This can differ from place to place and decade to decade.

It is a mistake on both sides, however, to think their ideas can't be hijacked.

Now I offer this as an olive branch, risking being creamed by my own "side": Right now, the only legal public ideology in America is science, so that is the ideology being appealed to by statists of all kinds, not because anything they advocate will improve life, but because it helps them consolodate power. I can see how evolution can be seen as a symbol of all the excesses of social engineering in public schools.

[f.Christian]

Evolution is only compatible with liberal statist socialism ... what it is founded upon and the militant variety is fascist - communist and all of conservatism and fundamentalism is at ennity to its core issue and base belief sytem!

They are irrevocable opposites ... anti thetical ... unassimilable !

I read a favorite story of Abraham Lincoln was asking people if we called the dog's tail a leg ... how many legs would the dog have ?

When thay answered ' five' ... he would smile wryly and say no ... ' only four ' --- the fifth leg is a lie !

Obviously he took his oath of office seriously to the reality of severe sacrifice - PRINCIPLE and not compromise !

[Right Wing Professor]

Funny thing is, science has been under attack from the multiculti left as much if not more than it has from the fundamentalist right, and the two have sometimes cooperated. One example is Vine Deloria's 'Red Earth, White Lies', which disputes radioactive dating and the migration of Indians from the new world, and embraces Velikovsky, much as we've seen YECs do. Deloria is an icon of the multiculturalists (he wrote 'Custer died for your sins')

Here's one review of a very good book on the subject

http://www.mugu.com/cgi-bin/Upstream/Issues/science/HIGHER7.html

And here's an old friend some of you will recognize

http://access.digex.com/~medved/Catastrophism.html

[CobaltBlue]

When speaking of the federal government, separation of church and state is as old as the Republic.

The incorporation of the Bill of Rights through the 14th amendment applied it to the states, as well.

[f.Christian]

Until the cult - church of darwin LIBERALS took over !

[js1138]

I would like to make my position clear on something. When totalitarians and statists use science or religion to consolidate power, they warp and corrupt the ideas. There is no athority in the words of Jesus that would justify killing or torturing anyone over heresy. Yet it was done.

You have to stand on your head, hold your breath, and read through 25,000 letters to accumulate a few scraps of ethnocentric mumblings from Darwin, yet "social darwinism" and eugenics did rule the roost for a few decades.

It's just silly to blame ideas for behavior. No Western religion has ever placed such an explicit prohibition on violence and vengence as Christianity, but it didn't seem to prohibit. Ideas seem to melt away in the face of desire.

[balrog666]

That last one might be a little overloaded right now.