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?

[AndrewC]

He was trying to expose the agenda of the so-called 'Brights'-

I'm strangely reminded of this picture when I hear the word "Brights" used as a description for atheists.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for this post!

Indeed, I saw the episode originally and found it quite amusing, and amusing again reading the dialogue here.

The spirit of anti-Christ has become much more active lately as is evidenced by the words and actions of those who hate God - in the world and also on this forum.

This is most troubling because anti-Christs aren't just atheists, they believe God is and then hate Him. The devils believe and tremble. (James 2:19)

On another note, I believe we ought to be praying earnestly before trying to derail these anti-Christians in order to be very sure we are doing God's will in the matter.

The reason is described in Matthew 16:22-23 where Peter, with all good intentions, wanted to prevent the crucifixion. Jesus replied:

But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

If we are living out the end times prophesy, we need to be sure that what we are doing is God's will - otherwise we may be inadvertently also trying to derail the second coming.

My two cents...

[betty boop]

He was trying to expose the agenda of the so-called 'Brights'- an athiest group that has established a goal directed at the removal of all Christian reference and iconography associated with American government.

Mr.Atos, there was an editorial by Daniel Dennett that ran in last Thursday's New York Times regarding this "Brights" movement. He's coordinating this effort with Richard Dawkins in England. (Both men are famous evolutionary biologists/cognitive scientists.) Apparently, these guys are griping that Brights -- atheist intellectuals who gravitate to Left progressive political ideology -- have 'way insufficient social and political power in the West. Notwithstanding that they control our most prestigious American institutions of higher learning, the major mass media (print and electronic), and a huge part of the American political class (e.g., the Democrat party), they still don't have all the "influence" they deserve!!! And all because of those dim-witted, God-believing, patriotic "Dims"!!! (I.e., culturally and politically conservative people.)

Whatta joke!!!

[CobaltBlue]

>>explaining why such a plaque was oppressive of their inalienable rights<<

It has to do with taxes. You're a Republican, you should be able to understand that it's a violation of my rights to have taxes taken out of my pocket in order to promote your religion.

It also has to do with government endorsement of religion. You should be able to understand that it's a violation of my rights for the government to endorse your religion.

These are simple concepts. What's not to understand?

[RedWing9]

In a way I don't care, just give me a chance to talk to her alone.... {yow-zaa}

[hopespringseternal]

These are simple concepts. What's not to understand?

Why none of the arrogant jerks calling Medved could communicate this simple argument, and instead resorted to juvenile taunts and insults.

What if said object was paid for by private money, and none of your taxes were involved?

[Mr.Atos]

What's not to understand?

That religious history in this nation is historical fact and should not be denied nor re-written...

That in absense of a unified philosophy, religion is the firmest path by which man can trace a path toward common civility...

That with the exception of the First, none of the other nine Commandments are in any way antithetical to propriety in secular human behavior. And even the first one can be applied in accordance with ALL beliefs. (ie. One who believes that man is an end in himself, would thus define God as man or himself, and therefore conclude that there should be no other value higher than that)...

That in a society knitted of every variety of humanity on the planet, tolerance of every (sane) belief system must be encouraged, which includes an acceptance OF Judeo-Christian tradition as well as a careful legislative separation from it...

That sarcasm and condescetion have no place in civil discourse and are tools of the ignorant bigot...

For starters...

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for all the insight!

[unspun]

Whatta joke!!!

I wonder if a war was ever started by a joke, before.

[Right Wing Professor]

Apparently, these guys are griping that Brights -- atheist intellectuals who gravitate to Left progressive political ideology -- have 'way insufficient social and political power in the West. Notwithstanding that they control our most prestigious American institutions of higher learning, the major mass media (print and electronic), and a huge part of the American political class (e.g., the Democrat party), they still don't have all the "influence" they deserve!!! And all because of those dim-witted, God-believing, patriotic "Dims"!!! (I.e., culturally and politically conservative people.)

Another powerful secret cabal I haven't been asked to join.

Well, when my destructo ray finally works, I'll show them. I'll show them all! They scoffed at my ideas! Now they will bow before my omnipotence! BwahahahahaHAHAHAHAHA!

[betty boop]

Another powerful secret cabal I haven't been asked to join.... Well, when my destructo ray finally works, I'll show them. I'll show them all! They scoffed at my ideas! Now they will bow before my omnipotence! BwahahahahaHAHAHAHAHA!

Hey RWP, if they're publishing in the NYT, I don't think it's reasonable to conclude this is exactly a "secret cabal."

But if they ever do ask you to "join them," please do have the good sense to just say NO.

Why are you having so much fun, at my putative expense -- with your "destructo ray," etc.? I was not making up any of this stuff.... It's all on the public record, courtesy of the media outlet that prides itself on publishing "all the news that's fit to print."

[js1138]

They can't be allowed to steal what is Rightfully ours. Bright=B Right; Dim=Dem.

[unspun]

"all the news that's fit to print."

...and more! (But this fits the prior.)

[Mr.Atos]

Well, when my destructo ray finally works, I'll show them. I'll show them all! They scoffed at my ideas! Now they will bow before my omnipotence! BwahahahahaHAHAHAHAHA!

Doctor Ferris! There you are. Project Xylophone is ready to go and we are waiting for you to pull the switch. ;-)

Look, this is my first real experience with the CREVO debate on this forum. But, I am getting the feeling that I have stumbled into a maelstrom (or simply turned on the 'mayhem' switch). My first observation would be... that we certainly see now that the term Conservative is invalid to describe those who uphold the concept of Constitutional Primacy and Individual Sovereignty. We vote Republican primarly because it is the closest thing that we have to meaningful representation at this point in time. But there is no real concensus among us that the status quo is a defensible position... especially since the current status of the nation's vector is suicidal chaos at the hands of dimwitted Leftists and their irrational belief in the primacy of feelings and the indefinable concept of human rights.

My second observation is that there is a great schizm in the belief system of the defenders of man that can not be overcome because the two will NEVER be able to make each other agree. This begs the question... Do we need to agree on this? Really! Ask yourselves that. Because if the answer is no, then the Leftists Dem's will continue to feed on our struggle for eternity. The left represents the worst of both worlds... Slavery to mystic collectivism on the one hand, and the chaos of relativity in an irrational universe on the other. Yet if WE (the defenders of man - including as a primary part woman) agree on one concept... that here and now man exists and deserves to exist by the fact of his being and creation, regardless of how that happened, then we can forever be unified on the primacy of the concept that man deserves to exist for his own sake, to pursue his own goals, in accordance with his own values, on behalf of whatever God he chooses to acknowledge, and that a government by the people and for the people protects each accordingly in their quest for life and liberty and happiness. Then we will all be unified under a common armor that will never be penetrated. the Leftists will be crushed for eternity... banished to the rotting carcasses of Western Civilization that remain in Europe and elsewhere on the Earth feeding off of individual prosperity when and where they can find it within the realm of the Hell that they will create by means of their own debaucherous nothingness.

And we can simply and peacefully discuss Aristotle and Christ.

Which world do you want?

[Dataman]

Apparently, these guys are griping that Brights -- atheist intellectuals who gravitate to Left progressive political ideology -- have 'way insufficient social and political power in the West.

There you have it:

Another piece of information linking rabid evolutionists to anti-American leftists. As time goes on, it becomes clearer why evolution zealots feel the need to infiltrate a conservative web site.

[exmarine]

We are no strangers to the ridicule that Medved endured are we? Neither was William Jennings Bryan - who more than held his own during the questioning in the Scopes trial. In fact, no evolutionist would dare take the stand in that trial. Cowards that they were. Since then, the story of that trial has been twisted to portray Bryan (a principled and intelligent Statesman) as a BUFFOON (read any evolutionists revisionist veersion of that trial for more info). The actual transcript is available for anyone to read and it is in stark contrast to the evolutionist myths. A stereotype has been created (based on pure mean-spirited bigotry) that creationists are buffoons and unscientific (as if evolutionists have a corner on science). I simply don't see that in modern debates between the two sides. Phil Johnson has done a great job of exposing materialists for the the self-refuting philosophers that they are, and people like Lee Spetner have exposed the flaws in the darwinian model.

[rwfromkansas]

lol.....that was funny.

[Mr.Atos]

EDITORS CATCH... VERY IMPORTANT CORRECTION!!!

"Because if the answer is YES (we must agree or cooperation is not possible), then the Leftists Dem's will continue to feed on our struggle for eternity."

My apologies for the confusion, but I get tunnel vision when I am recording a thought. I know what I mean, but the editing (and spelling) suffer. Apologies for any confusion, but I think it was clear what was meant. My second observation is that there is a great schizm in the belief system of the defenders of man that can not be overcome because the two will NEVER be able to make each other agree. This begs the question... Do we need to agree on this? Really! Ask yourselves that. Because if the answer is YES (we must agree or cooperation is not possible), then the Leftists Dem's will continue to feed on our struggle for eternity. The left represents the worst of both worlds... Slavery to mystic collectivism on the one hand, and the chaos of relativity in an irrational universe on the other. Yet if WE (the defenders of man - including as a primary part woman) agree on one concept... that here and now man exists and deserves to exist by the fact of his being and creation, regardless of how that happened, then we can forever be unified on the primacy of the concept that man deserves to exist for his own sake, to pursue his own goals, in accordance with his own values, on behalf of whatever God he chooses to acknowledge, and that a government by the people and for the people protects each accordingly in their quest for life and liberty and happiness. Then we will all be unified under a common armor that will never be penetrated. the Leftists will be crushed for eternity... banished to the rotting carcasses of Western Civilization that remain in Europe and elsewhere on the Earth feeding off of individual prosperity when and where they can find it within the realm of the Hell that they will create by means of their own debaucherous nothingness.

[f.Christian]

the concept that man deserves to exist for his own sake, to pursue his own goals, in accordance with his own values, on behalf of whatever God he chooses to acknowledge, and that a government by the people and for the people protects each accordingly in their quest for life and liberty and happiness. Then ...

FR evos insist on a monopoly ... it's all domination - manipulation and control --- brown shirt armband FASCISM !

To: Alamo-Girl

ag ...

That pretty much sums up the problem I have with scientific materialism. It is a belief - a bias - and thus, myopic.

g3 ...

Indeed, it is myopic because it refuses to see what it does not want to see. It's logic is very faulty. It says that whatever cannot be studied by it, is not science and therefore it does not exist. This is a very false conclusion and tries to 'prove' something by excluding everything that contradicts their conclusion. It is thus rhetoric, not science.

2,751 posted on 07/24/2003 10:01 PM PDT by gore3000 (Insults are the way the Devil praises the Truth.)

[Mr.Atos]

FR evos insist on a monopoly ... it's all domination - manipulation and control --- brown shirt armband FASCISM !

Let me get this straight. The conclusion you develop about me, after the statement that I just made, is that I am a FR Evo Fascist? Understandably, I may have misunderstood. But I would like clarification before I consider a response.