I watched it.

The Creationists scare the hell out of me. If they dont get their way they threaten people with violence including the judge in the case. Aren't Christians in America wonderful?

I watched it.

I heard a clip of Michael Feldman's What do you know on NPR the other day. The quote is: "2/3 of the American public believe they didn't evolve." "The other third agrees with them". :)

But of course we found out just recently that there are actually people who still believe the earth is flat!!!! Not only did they not evolve, they are actually de-evolving by the minute.

TruthTeller @ 2:

I watched it.

The Creationists scare the hell out of me. If they dont get their way they threaten people with violence including the judge in the case. Aren't Christians in America wonderful?

Indeed, especially since the judge here was a Bush appointee. These people were despicable hypocrites that thought their egotistical, arrogant bleating about their rebranded crackpot "science" would prevail over the truth and rule of law. At least this appointee to the bench had a shred of integrity and decency--thank goodness.

humans that is on the rest of the planet, are evolving. the gop and reichwingnut neocon christians are de-evolving. there are more morons and sheeple in this country than in two galaxies.......opps, they don't believe in the universe either, it's just a black cloth full of holes with a light shinning thru.

Top Ten Pseudosciences with More Credibility than Intelligent Design (aka Creationism)

10. Perpetual Motion - the applied notion of continuous energy has more merit than anything that could come from Creationism.

9. Faith healing - studying the psychological effects of desperate people who fall for this scam is worth more than anything Creationism presents.

8. Homeopathic Medicine - They are at least truthful when they say that there are no side-effects.

7. Seances and Divination of the Dead - Cold reading has more psychological merit than Creationism has scientific merit.

6. Phlogiston Theory - a notion based on actual observation of rusting metal and burning wood.

5. Astrology - Overtly ambiguous readings which are derived from factual Astronomical observations.

4. Alchemy - Intellectually retarded applications aside, the study of basic chemical reactions are still worthy of merit.

3. Parapsychology - At least there are tests to produce direct supporting evidence that ESP and other psychic phenomena exists in people. Those tests haven't produced anything, but at least they have the tests. Creationists don't have that much.

2. Paranormal studies - even a fake photo and odd sounds on tape recordings are more than what Creationism has to support it.

1. Storks delivering babies - a photo of a stork and a photo of a baby is more supporting evidence than anything Creationism has to offer.

I am so glad to see shows, like NOVA, covering this topic.

It is imperative that we bring more dialog about religion to the public's attention. So many of these creationists lock on to a silly doctrine of ideas that they never bother to scrutinize closely simply because no one around them has encouraged them to do so. My guess would be that if religion was spoken about more openly in public discourse, most christians would snap out of their delusion. The bible is full of contradictions, historical inaccuracies, and absurdities of all kinds. Its time to grow up.

PBS did a great job. I was afraid that it would attempt to bring ID to an equal footing with science, but it was very clear on why ID can never be considered science. Of course, the "cdesign proponentists" are saying that it was too biased, but then for those people the truth is always biased against them.

you can also watch an hdtv version of it on bittorrent

Let's consider both sides. If you don't believe in God, you will be tortured for all eternity. Does science threaten to torture people that don't believe in science? So it seems like Intelligent Design wins, because why risk it?

I saw this last week and it was excellent. Thank goodness the judge got it. How could he not???

This is not about the existence of God. This is not about Christians. This is about *FUNDAMENTALISTS* so please don't label these a**holes as Christians when they are not. I believe in God *and* I believe in evolution (and I also happen to not care whether anybody else believes in God). For those of you who are atheists, please don't paint actual Christians like we are all in the crazy/fundie camp.

Science v. religious is a false dichotomy set up by people like those at the Discovery Institute. Science is about "how." Any scientist worth her salt would never claim that science can answer "why." That's where religion/spirituality/or lack-there-of come in.

This entire documentary is available WITHOUT CHARGE off the pbs website. Think about it. Public Broadcasting System. Any wonder why the right wing wants to shut down PBS? Starve the funding?

A good reason to donate to pbs.

Having viewed this, I'm astounded. I'm astounded at how far the wingers will go to ram their views down the throats of the rest of us. When the school board initially rejected the stupid panda book, an "anonymous donor" donated 60 books to the school. Talk about true colors. Ever wonder what a theocracy would like like in the U.S.? 2 generations of it and we'd make the taliban look like a flowering democracy.

Jess @ 22:

I saw this last week and it was excellent. Thank goodness the judge got it. How could he not???

This is not about the existence of God. This is not about Christians. This is about *FUNDAMENTALISTS* so please don't label these a**holes as Christians when they are not. I believe in God *and* I believe in evolution (and I also happen to not care whether anybody else believes in God). For those of you who are atheists, please don't paint actual Christians like we are all in the crazy/fundie camp.

Science v. religious is a false dichotomy set up by people like those at the Discovery Institute. Science is about "how." Any scientist worth her salt would never claim that science can answer "why." That's where religion/spirituality/or lack-there-of come in.

I agree that science will never be able to answer certain absolute questions (such as "why does life exist?"), but it is not true that science does not address the "why" - more generally. e.g. "Why did the flame go out?", "Why does gaseous matter liquify as it is cooled?" - etc. In fact, answering the "why" is a huge part of what it means to be a scientst. Answering the why is a big part of what keeps us going. It is the reason that many of us got into it to begin with.

I do agree that science v religion is a false dichotomy. I'm not an atheist - I'm an agnostic. But I think that my spiritual non-beliefs fill different needs for me and they answer different questions for me. I cringe when I hear the whole science v religion crap too.

Hype-Jersey @ 26:

I agree that science will never be able to answer certain absolute questions (such as "why does life exist?"), but it is not true that science does not address the "why" - more generally. e.g. "Why did the flame go out?", "Why does gaseous matter liquify as it is cooled?" - etc.

I agree with this. I meant "why" in the grandest sense, like "Why are we here?"

This is the shear stupidity we have to deal with:

One of the most basic laws in the universe is the Second Law of Thermodynamics. This states that as time goes by, entropy in an environment will increase. Evolution argues differently against a law that is accepted EVERYWHERE BY EVERYONE. Evolution says that we started out simple, and over time became more complex. That just isn't possible: UNLESS there is a giant outside source of energy supplying the Earth with huge amounts of energy. If there were such a source, scientists would certainly know about it.

The original post was here, and when people mentioned, y'know... that big, glowing thing in the sky, here was his response.

No wonder why they don't believe in funding wind/solar energy.

Truthteller, don't spoil it for people who haven't seen it!:) Seriously though, this show was the best courtroom drama I've seen in years. So many great Perry Mason moments and smoking guns. The plantiff side really did their homework. I pointed at the tv and yelled "Ha!!" several times. Also, the Dover creationist dudes: even if you hated them just on principal, you get to hate them even more when you learn how truly slimey they are.

That was a fabulous video. I watched it online. That judge was truly outstanding and should be put on the US Supreme Court

Stephen @ 35:

It was amusing to watch proponents of I.D. attempting to not say "God" but eventually breaking down and throwing it out there anyway. I guess if you wanted to make their heads explode, you could agree with them but use "Allah" instead of "God" or "some intelligence."

Does anyone else not care of PBS's break-down of television shows and how they make it so you can't just turn the episode on and lay back and watch it? It bothers me to get up every 10 minutes or so and click around.

What makes me laugh is when Christians bash the use of "Allah". Most likely Jesus spoke Aramaic, and being a Semitic language (such as Arabic), the word for God is "Alaha".

But hey, what do I know? Jesus spoke in perfect, flowery Elizabethan English... after all, the KJV Bible is the exact, literal Word of God.

Jess @ 22:

I saw this last week and it was excellent. Thank goodness the judge got it. How could he not???

This is not about the existence of God. This is not about Christians. This is about *FUNDAMENTALISTS* so please don't label these a**holes as Christians when they are not. I believe in God *and* I believe in evolution (and I also happen to not care whether anybody else believes in God). For those of you who are atheists, please don't paint actual Christians like we are all in the crazy/fundie camp.

Science v. religious is a false dichotomy set up by people like those at the Discovery Institute. Science is about "how." Any scientist worth her salt would never claim that science can answer "why." That's where religion/spirituality/or lack-there-of come in.

I am an atheist. Having said that, Bless You.

WOW dam. I am from the West Coast of Canada and i can safely say that type of thing would never ever happen here. I don't get it i live like 60km from the US border and we have nothing like that up here. My God we live so close but our country's and culture seam so different. My province, British Columbia for example had a socialist government for most of the 90s in power. I guess we have the extreme left up here and you guys have the extreme right down there.

I think this case demonstrates once again, the danger of belief systems that convince people that their way is the only way, and that it is their duty to change our society by any means available as the "end" is totally justified in their opinion. These folks are dangerous. Look how the judge was treated after his opinion. By the way, 40% of Democrats don't believe in evolution.

http://www.pollster.com/blogs/poll_gallup_evolution_survey.php

Back in the 50's, my mom made four heads representing the various stages of human evolution. So what, you're thinking? She went to an all girls Catholic high school. To be sure, there are some schools out there where this would not be a problem. In a knee jerk reaction, however, most would not think that a school of that type would be open to such art. Back in the 50's, we were in a race with the Soviets to see who could get to space first. We all know who won. Could it be that this lack of urgency which has lead to a diminishing of science education?

I followed this case religiously back in 2005 as I thought it was VERY important to education and to this country. The fundies are so anti-science that it is more dangerous to our country than any terrorist attack because it has long term implications that are hurting us now - like the debate on Global Warming.

The NOVA program let the people involved speak for themselves and did an excellent job of showing why ID is not science. I think any biology teacher or any science teacher should show this film at the start of class so students will know that science is one of the few fields of study where "two sides of every argument" isn't an automatically correct method.

Humans were created by God. We have since that creation become non humans and reflections of Lucifer who peverts God's creations. He also uses creation to create 'aliens' and Satan's device, UFOs.

Evolution is the perversion of what God created by Lucifer. Humans were not meant to see with their eyes closed or hear voices. This is lucifer and his damning. We are forced to do this every night. We have enlarged brains because of lucifer's eye and his damning.

Evolution's value is the time we were damned by Lucifer after God's creation. The ideal thing would be to use Satan's device to go back in time and find out where we got damned, but that would be wrong.

Creationism is a problem because it is confused by Lucifer. Lucifer uses creation. Lucifer has used creation on humans, created clones of humans. Stem cells and cloning. Intelligent design makes sense, but we weren't designed to see with our eyes closed and hear voices that aren't there. God designed us perfectly and we were perverted and also created again by lucifer, so we would need to find our original God's intelligence design. We could go back to that design, but it would be Satan's device to takes use back to our design and that would be lucifer making us what we were created by God; lucifer's creation intelligent design of God. Perversion.

I think the last scene with Buckingham says just about everything. He sits there in his chair full of anger, after he's perjured himself, after his movement has been voted down by the community, and actually has the nerve to call the judge the jackass. Then there's the wedge crap. Fundamentalists have already resigned themselves to the fact that they will never win the hearts and minds of the American people. They're going to have to drive a wedge into the fabric of society, poison the wells of their enemies, and shove it down the throats of those that oppose them. What a bunch of nice cheery assholes. Thankfully up here in Ontario we didn't vote in the opposition leader who declared that evolution was "just a theory" and that we should publicly fund faith based schools.

AndrewK @ 50:

I think the last scene with Buckingham says just about everything. He sits there in his chair full of anger, after he's perjured himself, after his movement has been voted down by the community, and actually has the nerve to call the judge the jackass. Then there's the wedge crap. Fundamentalists have already resigned themselves to the fact that they will never win the hearts and minds of the American people. They're going to have to drive a wedge into the fabric of society, poison the wells of their enemies, and shove it down the throats of those that oppose them. What a bunch of nice cheery assholes. Thankfully up here in Ontario we didn't vote in the opposition leader who declared that evolution was "just a theory" and that we should publicly fund faith based schools.

That scene did it for me too. I thought in the beginning, "Wow.. here's this guy.. very religious, just the salt of the earth type, trying to do what's right..." and by the end, his true colors were being displayed in spades. In the end, even looking at that guy disgusted me.

Jess @ 22:

I saw this last week and it was excellent. Thank goodness the judge got it. How could he not???

This is not about the existence of God. This is not about Christians. This is about *FUNDAMENTALISTS* so please don't label these a**holes as Christians when they are not. I believe in God *and* I believe in evolution (and I also happen to not care whether anybody else believes in God). For those of you who are atheists, please don't paint actual Christians like we are all in the crazy/fundie camp.

Science v. religious is a false dichotomy set up by people like those at the Discovery Institute. Science is about "how." Any scientist worth her salt would never claim that science can answer "why." That's where religion/spirituality/or lack-there-of come in.

Ah, another Christian dismissing his fellow believers as a**holes and fundamentalists. You cannot even get Christians to agree on what their religion is, even with the inerrant word of God in the form of the Bible to guide them.

As for science not answering why, but spirituality providing such an answer, I would have to disagree. Belief in the supernatural, and specifically in a deity, does not answer anything. I might as well believe that the why behind children receiving gifts on Christmas is the existence of a fat bearded man, and his team of magical reindeer. That has not explained anything as to why children receive gifts. It is just fantasy, and wishful thinking. If you want to hold such a belief, then more power to you. Spirituality may be the crutch you adopt to get you through this "veil of tears" but it has not answered anything meaningful with regard to our existence.

We will probably never know "why" we are here. At least, I assume that is the full question you were addressing. The question may not even make sense. After all, who says there has to be a "why"? We simply are.

Who ever did this ID, it was not very intelligent to design all species fitting perfectly on 1 evolutionary tree!
Like: Why did God put Austrolopiticus bones in the ground? To test us? Whoa!!

BTW, I think evolution does directly contradict Christianity and other mainstream religions. Evolution does not imply attiesm but certainly the most you can get from it is deism.

Barrett D @ 58:

BTW, I think evolution does directly contradict Christianity and other mainstream religions. Evolution does not imply attiesm but certainly the most you can get from it is deism.

Thats the whole point. The one completely contradicts the other. So discussion between the 2 makes no sence.
However, Cathololics don't seem to care so much..

K for all you 'physics' junkies here is 'the truth':

It is not called gravity but 'Intelligent pulling'.
The earth does not pull you down.. but god holds you down.

Not to mention what a dumb name gravity is. Starts just like gravy and that is just dumb.

And if you do not believe the facts you are just hate filled person that hates everyone and supports the terrorists.

J/K

Barrett D @ 61:

Cas @ 60:

Barrett D @ 58:

BTW, I think evolution does directly contradict Christianity and other mainstream religions. Evolution does not imply attiesm but certainly the most you can get from it is deism.

Thats the whole point. The one completely contradicts the other. So discussion between the 2 makes no sence.
However, Cathololics don't seem to care so much..

I don't see it quite liek that. I see it as Science begins where religion ends. Science has a much better chance at answering "why" satisfyingly than any religion.

I've been reading christopher hitchens and richard dawkins lately... very inspiring thoughts towards religion and science and morality. every highschool student should be given their books.

But Dawkins will never convince "true" believers in a God.
The "why" question is a philosophic one, and as far as I see, an extension of the “how” question which is science.

Religion does not answer any question; it’s a childish solution, and only makes stuff infinite more complex then “needed with a bit of imagination”.

proud atheist @ 63:

Barrett D @ 61:

Cas @ 60:

Barrett D @ 58:

Thats the whole point. The one completely contradicts the other. So discussion between the 2 makes no sence.
However, Cathololics don't seem to care so much..

I don't see it quite liek that. I see it as Science begins where religion ends. Science has a much better chance at answering "why" satisfyingly than any religion.

I've been reading christopher hitchens and richard dawkins lately... very inspiring thoughts towards religion and science and morality. every highschool student should be given their books.

If you enjoy Dawkins and Hitchens, you will definitely enjoy Robert G. Ingersoll. Many of his works are available online for free. Check out this site for more information:

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/robert_ingersoll/

I'm not sure that anyone can say that they "enjoy" Hitchins.
Let's be honest here, I may agree with some of what Hitchins has to say, but the guy is a real prick and does not help the Skeptical movement.
Dawkins is a brilliant man, far more intelligent than Hitchins, but he too has a personality deficit not nearly as abrasive as Hitchins but he still carries that condescending Brit attitude that is repulsive to many Americans.
Neil DeGrasse Tyson says that there is no personality test to become a scientist, and a damned good thing too. The evangelical movement is stacked to the ceiling with narcissistic sociopaths that thrive on power and money that promote a feeling of community around a gregarious leader.
Science and Scientist will never fill a stadium with with 50,000 worshipful mules that will go forth to bray the latest .....ahem..."revelation" in science.
However, there is a very real need to keep Science out there in the public realm with a clearly understood format that the un-initiated public can grasp.
The Fundies have no interest in understanding evolution, scientific method, inquiry,understanding,universal origins, but there are far more Americans that do understand pie charts,graphs,bullet points,abstracts and are thirsty for more info.
My point is that when it comes to science it should be the message NOT the messenger, but apparently humans need that larger than life leader to bring the message(information) to them.
What a dichotomy..............f%%k it! I'm going to bed!

Radically Moderate @ 66:

proud atheist @ 63:

Barrett D @ 61:

Cas @ 60: I don't see it quite liek that. I see it as Science begins where religion ends. Science has a much better chance at answering "why" satisfyingly than any religion.

I've been reading christopher hitchens and richard dawkins lately... very inspiring thoughts towards religion and science and morality. every highschool student should be given their books.

If you enjoy Dawkins and Hitchens, you will definitely enjoy Robert G. Ingersoll. Many of his works are available online for free. Check out this site for more information:

http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/robert_ingersoll/

I'm not sure that anyone can say that they "enjoy" Hitchins.
Let's be honest here, I may agree with some of what Hitchins has to say, but the guy is a real prick and does not help the Skeptical movement.
Dawkins is a brilliant man, far more intelligent than Hitchins, but he too has a personality deficit not nearly as abrasive as Hitchins but he still carries that condescending Brit attitude that is repulsive to many Americans.
Neil DeGrasse Tyson says that there is no personality test to become a scientist, and a damned good thing too. The evangelical movement is stacked to the ceiling with narcissistic sociopaths that thrive on power and money that promote a feeling of community around a gregarious leader.
Science and Scientist will never fill a stadium with with 50,000 worshipful mules that will go forth to bray the latest .....ahem..."revelation" in science.
However, there is a very real need to keep Science out there in the public realm with a clearly understood format that the un-initiated public can grasp.
The Fundies have no interest in understanding evolution, scientific method, inquiry,understanding,universal origins, but there are far more Americans that do understand pie charts,graphs,bullet points,abstracts and are thirsty for more info.
My point is that when it comes to science it should be the message NOT the messenger, but apparently humans need that larger than life leader to bring the message(information) to them.
What a dichotomy..............f%%k it! I'm going to bed!

Heh, you can enjoy an author without agreeing with everything they say. Hitchens is not very well received within the progressive community for primarily his views on the mess in Iraq that has made strange bedfellows of him and the neocons. Well, that is another subject altogether. As for his views on religion, most atheists will agree with his major points, even if we think his arguments are a little extreme or purposively provocative (such as "God is not Great - How Religion Poisons Everything", great book by the way). Bed sounds like a good idea. G'night~

frank @ 62:

Not to mention what a dumb name gravity is. Starts just like gravy and that is just dumb.

But I like gravy. :(

Edwin @ 67 :
Now Hawkins claims he doubts there could be such a nasty god to allow what happens in the world..

but to be as nasty as to create the Republicans?

Enough of a reason to doubt the existence of a god.

Ryan @ 40:

WOW dam. I am from the West Coast of Canada and i can safely say that type of thing would never ever happen here. I don't get it i live like 60km from the US border and we have nothing like that up here. My God we live so close but our country's and culture seam so different. My province, British Columbia for example had a socialist government for most of the 90s in power. I guess we have the extreme left up here and you guys have the extreme right down there.

Are you kidding me? Have you been to the Fraser valley lately? It's just full of "Christians". In Canada, we try not to let the crazies run the place. They keep trying though. It's heading rightward though. Our Prime Minister is a lap dog for King George, gratefully panting at his feet and licking his palm.

I forget where I read it and who wrote it, but it was an essay suggesting that the scientific stop using the term "Theory of Evolution" and start referring to it as the "Law of Evolution". I think it's a brilliant idea.

There are too many dishonest people who exploit the "theory" word to promote their religious agendas.

Scientists need to take the gloves off and speak in more absolute terms.

There are a couple of problems I have with ID proponents.One is their religious agenda and evangelical qualities lead them to deliberately sacrifice their intellectual integrity in order to promote their preordained views regarding creation and science.They literally paint themselves into a corner by tying their scientific views to a very unscientific Bible.Another is they truly believe that they are right and morally entitled to espouse their views which leads to some pretty shady behavior in the name of a greater cause.The combination of arrogance and insecurity exhibited by ID adherents is troubling.

Blue Buddha @ 36:

Stephen @ 35:

But hey, what do I know? Jesus spoke in perfect, flowery Elizabethan English... after all, the KJV Bible is the exact, literal Word of God.

He also had blue eyes, an aquiline nose, and long soft Aryan hair.

I was disappointed with the shows attempt to portray each side as rigidly adhering to extreme positions . Yes , some who consider Intelligent Design are also "creationists , but not all . Science is supposed to proceed in a manner towards the truth . Reasonable criticism should be welcome, because actually this can help to solidify the other "sides" parameters and concepts .

It could be argued that a ninth grade science class is not the place for such an in depth evaluation and that it is more appropriate in a university setting , but this is really a reflection on the system presently employed in state run schools - one of memorization and regurgitation , than one where critical thinking skills are taught .

There's a simple, scientific test for the validity of the 'Intelligent Design' theory.

Ask yourself this question:

'Would any Intelligent Designer create the kind of brainless boobs who would proffer, promote and support 'Intelligent Design'?'

Dan S , if that comment was directed at me , I am not at all religious -just trying to form a knowledgable opinion .

Dan S @ 83:

Inherit the Wind II: The Fundies Strike Back!

Inherit the Wind III The collapse of the Mega-Churches, Charles Darwin Day becomes a national holiday!

I'll me these people half way. You see, they say teaching creation^H^H^H intelligent design is to for more well rounded education of our children. It's for the children don't you know.

Fine, I'll go alone with teaching intelligent design in school, if you start teaching evolution in Sunday school. It IS after all, for the well rounded education of the children.

Personally, I'm still not sure why these two sides have to be mutually exclusive. So, God created everything in 6 days? Who said that Gods days were 24 hours long? Maybe they were 1 million years long? ;-)

Religious people are nothing but zombies.

"Don't think, don't question, don't ask, just put your hands in the air and wiggle them around a bit. And for effect, blather on incoherently and we will tell the non-believers you are talking in gods language! Whew! Oh, by the way, your son sure is a handsome little boy, you think he might like to be an alter boy? Does he like statues of nude men?"

Just a bunch of ef'ing morons....

The case made a monkey of Pennsylvania.

a person @ 70:

frank @ 62:

Not to mention what a dumb name gravity is. Starts just like gravy and that is just dumb.

But I like gravy. :(

Here in Texas don't blaspheme gravy.

Everything is baptised by immersion in gravy.

ysbaddaden @ 96:

a person @ 70:

frank @ 62:

Not to mention what a dumb name gravity is. Starts just like gravy and that is just dumb.

But I like gravy. :(

Here in Texas don't blaspheme gravy.

Everything is baptised by immersion in gravy.

I can't wait for Thursday when I can immerse my turkey and dressing into that callagen rendered brown gravy.......YUM! ;-)

Radically Moderate @ 98:

ysbaddaden @ 96:

a person @ 70:

frank @ 62:

But I like gravy. :(

Here in Texas don't blaspheme gravy.

Everything is baptised by immersion in gravy.

I can't wait for Thursday when I can immerse my turkey and dressing into that callagen rendered brown gravy.......YUM! ;-)

Isn’t callagen what Angelina Jolie uses to plump her lips?

Oh by the way Angie, I’m adoptable.

God I hate block quoting.

Good thing life didn't evolve from turkeys.

Chris @ 90:

I'll me these people half way. You see, they say teaching creation^H^H^H intelligent design is to for more well rounded education of our children. It's for the children don't you know.

Fine, I'll go alone with teaching intelligent design in school, if you start teaching evolution in Sunday school. It IS after all, for the well rounded education of the children.

Personally, I'm still not sure why these two sides have to be mutually exclusive. So, God created everything in 6 days? Who said that Gods days were 24 hours long? Maybe they were 1 million years long? ;-)

That's bad religion and worse science.
"Don't pray in my school, and I won't think in your church."

Jess @ 22:

For those of you who are atheists, please don't paint actual Christians like we are all in the crazy/fundie camp.

Don't take this the wrong way. I'm not trying to be a dick or bust on your religion or anything. Even being an Atheist I go by a 'believe whatever the fuck you want' policy. As long as your belief doesn't start infringing on my rights I don't give a damn.

But these people you are talking about who call themselves Christians. They claim to believe the literal and inerrant truth of the Bible ( which is a lie ). They claim to act according to what the Bible says ( which is a lie ) and what Jesus wants ( which is also a lie ). They're not Christians. They're theocratic fascists and they want everyone else to be theocratic fascists just like them. It's not like this hasn't happened before in history. It's just that this time around they glommed on to your religion as a means of promoting their own agenda. It's happened before and it'll happen again.

Calling yourself Christian isn't like calling yourself a Brittney Spears Fanclub member. All you gotta do to be a Christian is claim to follow Christ. There isn't a license. There isn't a test. There isn't a union meeting. There isn't a chief high muckity muck you all get your marching orders from. ( Yeah there is leadership but like there isn't a Pope for Protestants ). Hell, I can call myself a Christian right now and there's not a bloody thing you can do about it to stop me. I could go save fetuses, and burn books and toss rocks at 'sinners' all day long and all that will happen is make the decent folk in your religion look bad because you guys generally don't stand up and say "That asshole Fred Phelps isn't my kind of Christianity" in any really public way. So Freddy laughs and condemns people about gays burning in hell (Which if you guys are right he'll be burning in hell for) and gets all the press. You guys essentially sit there and let him do it. I'll take that statement back the first time I see a few thousand Christians protest Phelps's church.

So all these douchebags out there trying to take over the country and turn it into The United States of JesusLand are gonna get lumped in with you anyway. Just like the asshole Atheists get lumped in with guys like me who just want to live and let live.

I know all of two ( count 'em - one... two ) Christians personally I consider worthy of the name. They didn't go to church or tithe or handle snakes or hate gay people or preach to me. They lead by example. When I was up a creek they took me in and let me live with them for like 4 years rent free, refused to let me do any house work, refused to let me pay for food. Even helped me out with transportation until I was about to get my own car. Hell, they would have literally given me the shirt off their backs if i needed it. Why? Because they were good people and they would have been good people even if they had been Witches or Atheists or Satanists. Because it's not the banner you fly or the church you go to, it's who you are and what you do that matters..... and even though I don't believe in invisible sky wizards I try as best I can to emulate them because I want to be a decent human being too. Life is too short, too hard and too miserable as it is without making it any more difficult for people than it already has to be by the very fact you're all drawing breath.

It's just like that dickhead Dawkins, and that prick Hitchens. Yeah I agree with them that there is no god or gods... but you don't need to be an adversarial know it all unholier than thou jackass about it so you can sell some books. Because you can logic or faith it up all you want. But at the end of the day when you go to bed - none of us actually KNOW what the fuck is going on in this universe. For all we know maybe god DID plant all those dinosaur bones and is sitting there laughing at us because this place is all just a big ass cosmic joke. It's like playing an obscure game of poker in the dark with an infinitely sized deck, and a rulebook the size of an encyclopedia. Except that you only get to read one line of the rules at a time and the dealer who chuckles a lot. Whether that dealer happens to be 'god' or our own limited human lifespans and senses doesn't matter. We don't get the big picture so nobody can claim to really know what's going on.

So anyways, because I happen to agree with the spirit ( get it? ) of one point of the Dawkins or Hitchen's arguments I get lumped in with the godless atheists warring against Christmas and trying to force secularism down everyone's throat. Which isn't true ( and is actually all just projection anyway). As long as you let me do my thing you can do your thing I could give two shits if you worship watermelons. "It neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket to say there is no god." as it were. But if you want god in school he/she/it has gotta stay out of science class and everybody else's god has ( and our boys with no god at all ) gotta get some play time too.

So, what all this long winded shit means keep on saying just that: "I don't believe the same as these assholes." but do it loud, do it public and do it often. These fuckers have consolidated power too long and frankly if the Dominionists and Millenialists take over it's gonna be the shitstorm of the century for all of us. They need to be pushed back to the margins of society where they were twenty years ago before they hijacked the Republican party.

Oh, and I wouldn't worry too much what Atheists think about your religion anyway. You just do what's right by you and by your belief system and it'll be ok. It's not like we know what's going on either. For all we know we're all plugged into a giant video game and are all just software waiting for someone to load a save game. We just look around us methodically and pick the most reasonable rational explanation for things. We can yell "There is no God" all we want, but we can't know it and we can't prove it. Because scientific observation just can't answer that question. So basically either way you look at it the proposition comes on faith. Faith that there is a god or faith that there isn't. I've accepted that little quirk of the universe and ultimately the universe really doesn't give a shit what we believe. It's just gonna keep on chugging regardless.

Bottom line is, we're all in the same boat here. If we work together and kick the assholes trying to capsize us into the water we'll all be way better off.

Seems to me creationists don't really have faith in God. If they did, they wouldn't need proof of his existence.

Good people do good things.
Bad people do bad things.
It takes religion to make good people do bad things.

Does anybody wonder why Jesus hasn't been seen for over 2000 years. And why "god" has NEVER shown his face... in a verifialbe manner.

Relgion and its supportive documentation -the bible- is in reality folklore replete with participating rituals to create false delusional reality.

Religious organization have the best marketing ploy of all... If you don't follow me and do what I say you are going to burn for eternity in hell... Jesue saves!
and NOBODY can ever prove them wrong. What a crock of shit!

Christians and fundies (yes, BOTH) do this all the time. They think their BELIEF equals TRUTH. Then they hide behind the Constitution and the Bible, both of which they’ve never read. This is one of the other large glaring problems in the US. Christians don’t actually read the Bible much less understand what is told to them with regard to what’s in it. And, most Christians rely on others to tell them what is supposedly in it. That’s why Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Dobson and the rest of them have so many followers. They regularly (with the exception of Falwell, of course) make false claims about what’s in the Bible. Their sheep never bother to check references or sources, so they get sucked right in. Their false assumptions -TOLD to them - then become their opinion, which is simply uninformed.

Some Christians - please. Some. Robertson/Falwell/Dobson and their ilk represent a subset of Christendom. The Dobsons and Robertsons certainly don't reflect the views of mainline Christians in the US or anywhere else.

I was raised in a Christian home and my Dad was a clergyman for 40 years and still reads the Bible everyday. As children, we were raised to know that the Bible was not meant to be taken absolutely literally, including the creation myth in Genesis, and that there is no conflict between the science and religion.

I personally know far more Christians - real Christians (as in actually followers of Jesus) who are not mindless sheep that do what their dubious Pastors tell them without question, as opposed to the Christianists who use the Bible to beat people with and turn their personal temples into dens of thieves (and ignore those inconvience Gospels in favor of angry Old Testament scriptures).

The purpose of faith and science may be different, but they are not mutually exclusive for everybody. Christians may universally believe that "God" is the force that caused the Universe to form, but it is not universally true that they cannot accept evolution or that the Universe was created in 6 days, about 6000 years ago.

I agree that some people do indeed want order and to be told what to believe and there are plenty of people who believe claims that sound scientific without checking to see if there's any scientific peer review. How many people buy products that promise some kind of result with spiffy looking scientific drawings and then find out they've been defrauded? How many people fall for get rich quick schemes that turn out to be bogus? The gullible exist among religious and non-religious alike.

The best part is, if you read the wedge document, it says one of the 5 year goals is getting ID treated fairly on shows such as Nova. How'd that work out?

I've seen myself in the morning with what's left of my hair all skewed, by eyes puffy and blood shot, and my face all stubbly.

This is a divine design?

Alan @ 85:

If evolution is the method , How did life [b]first[/b] originate ?
The Miller-Urey experiment has been greatly criticized .
What do others think ?

Good question. However declaring "God made it" when there is no evidence of such is much worse than admitting we just don't yet know.

Book of Numbers. Chapter 5. Verses 27 - 29

GlenNJ @ 69:

As a muslim we are not asking people to believe in God but we are saying that the complex nature and the incredible structure of the DNA molocule could not have come into existence by chance as the evolutionist have alleged. Steven Miller the top evolutionist in America at one time has admitted that living matter can not be taken from non living matter.In the religion of Islam you find Allah(GOD) through science.

Well then you must have Muslims just like there are Christians. Because I know many Muslims who believe in evolution. Believing that evolution itself is Allah ordained.

Intelligent Design is proof of evolution.

It clearly shows that some people still have the less developed mind of someone from Medieval times or earlier, or the brain of an individual who has never received more than a 3rd grade education.

Eric Almighty @ 104:

Chris @ 90:

I'll me these people half way. You see, they say teaching creation^H^H^H intelligent design is to for more well rounded education of our children. It's for the children don't you know.

Fine, I'll go alone with teaching intelligent design in school, if you start teaching evolution in Sunday school. It IS after all, for the well rounded education of the children.

Personally, I'm still not sure why these two sides have to be mutually exclusive. So, God created everything in 6 days? Who said that Gods days were 24 hours long? Maybe they were 1 million years long? ;-)

That's bad religion and worse science.
"Don't pray in my school, and I won't think in your church."

I disagree with you. It's not just an attmept to marry religion and science (which there is nothing wrong with that). It is also an understanding and admission that we don't know everything yet.

If, for instance time is actually non-linear, but "circular" or never ending - a higher being, which we don't know yet whether or not they exist (think 4th dimension) could interact with 3rd dimension beings (ourselves) in various paces of our time. Time has a difference perception than just the linear or earth bound expression of the Biblical Day.

That understand is actually one of an open, scientific mind. Not the mind that is fixed on religious dogma or bound and tethered to "what we know now is all there is" science as Zenrage @ 12 displays. Both those kinds of minds a closed doors.

Years ago the concept of "sub space" didn't exist or was poo pooed by some watching Star Trek, but it's what our cell phone communications exist in.

Don't be so quick to write off a higher power, supernatural, paranornal or science fiction.

"There are more things in heaven and earth that are dreamt of in your philosophy."

Symes @ 15:

The IQ of this country has fallen below room temperature.
I have friends that were pretty sharp when we were in high School 25 years ago who can't think their way out of a parking spot now. The only difference between them and me is diet. I eat better.

So what are we eating/drinking? What is being done to reduce the intelligence and more importantly, why?

It is way past time to see what is happening here, we used to be a nation of innovators and problem solvers. Now we are a nation of low brow morons with anger management issues.

I'll remove my foil hat now...

I too think that most people's issues stem from lack of nutrition in our diet. Even when we're eating "healthy" food, it's been radiated, hormone-injected, pesticide sprayed, and genetically modified, in addition to being grown in over farmed nutrient depleted soil. Our entire diet has changed radically in forty years. I can't imagine that any other society in history has ever survived such a monumentous alteration of their food source.

An Open Letter to the Discovery Institute

To whom it may concern,

I am dismayed by the Discovery Institute's rebuttal to the PBS Program, "Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial". I have read your reactions and have even taken the time to read the pdf briefing pamphlet to educators offered by intelligentdesign.org.

Point 1. In the pamphlet, "The Theory of Intelligent Design: A Briefing Packet for Educators to Help Them Understand the Debte between Darwinian Evolution and Intelligent Design" the question is posed, "Is Intelligent Design the Same as Creationism?" The pamphlet's answer is a resounding, "No" in bold letters and goes on to present its argument:

Point 2. The response by the Discovery Institute has, by and large, to a) attack the judge for ACLU material for his judgement [thereby implying a bias even though he's a Republican and appointed by President Bush], b)repeat the standard "if evolution is wrong, we're right" mantra, and c)pushing "irreducible complexity" as valid scientific theory ("the bacterial flagellum 'bespeaks' design," to paraphrase Mike Behe).

Now, at no time since the airing of the PBS program, in either blog form, print or video have I seen anyone from the Intelligent Design side of the argument provide an explanation for the 'cdesign proponentists' edits in a draft of "Of Pandas and People". This is physical, hardcopy, hold-in-your-hands proof directly linking Creationism with Intelligent Design. It's not a theory. It's a fact.

You can try very hard to convince people that your particular take on the creation of life is a valid scientific theory (which speaks volumes of the levels of scientific training lacking in our country), that's your right. But the evidence presented by the various "Pandas" drafts and the fact that your literature makes very stark claims that no relationship exists between Creationism and Intelligent Design combine to show an intent to deceive. To lie. To purposely misrepresent facts to push an agenda. An agenda that is in violation of the Constitutional Rights of every American citizen.

You have every right to believe what you want to believe. But if you have to lie to convince other people to believe it, then you have to ask yourself if it's worth believing.

Concerned American,

The last rime religion ruled the world there was a phrase for it; THE DARK AGES.

Why some people think going back to those days is the answer is absurd.

Lofion @ 48:

Humans were created by God. We have since that creation become non humans and reflections of Lucifer who peverts God's creations. He also uses creation to create 'aliens' and Satan's device, UFOs.

Evolution is the perversion of what God created by Lucifer. Humans were not meant to see with their eyes closed or hear voices. This is lucifer and his damning. We are forced to do this every night. We have enlarged brains because of lucifer's eye and his damning.

Evolution's value is the time we were damned by Lucifer after God's creation. The ideal thing would be to use Satan's device to go back in time and find out where we got damned, but that would be wrong.

Creationism is a problem because it is confused by Lucifer. Lucifer uses creation. Lucifer has used creation on humans, created clones of humans. Stem cells and cloning. Intelligent design makes sense, but we weren't designed to see with our eyes closed and hear voices that aren't there. God designed us perfectly and we were perverted and also created again by lucifer, so we would need to find our original God's intelligence design. We could go back to that design, but it would be Satan's device to takes use back to our design and that would be lucifer making us what we were created by God; lucifer's creation intelligent design of God. Perversion.

Whoa!
Time for another layer of tin foil.

Chris @ 90:

I'll me these people half way. You see, they say teaching creation^H^H^H intelligent design is to for more well rounded education of our children. It's for the children don't you know.

Fine, I'll go alone with teaching intelligent design in school, if you start teaching evolution in Sunday school. It IS after all, for the well rounded education of the children.

Personally, I'm still not sure why these two sides have to be mutually exclusive. So, God created everything in 6 days? Who said that Gods days were 24 hours long? Maybe they were 1 million years long? ;-)

Fundamentalists. That's who. The same people who believe that the bible is the unchanging word of almighty god, (which needs to be "interpreted" by their local preacher). These are the people who will argue that evolution is wrong because god created the universe in 6, 24 hour days.

Clytemnestra @ 126:

Eric Almighty @ 104:

Chris @ 90:

I'll me these people half way. You see, they say teaching creation^H^H^H intelligent design is to for more well rounded education of our children. It's for the children don't you know.

Fine, I'll go alone with teaching intelligent design in school, if you start teaching evolution in Sunday school. It IS after all, for the well rounded education of the children.

Personally, I'm still not sure why these two sides have to be mutually exclusive. So, God created everything in 6 days? Who said that Gods days were 24 hours long? Maybe they were 1 million years long? ;-)

That's bad religion and worse science.
"Don't pray in my school, and I won't think in your church."

I disagree with you. It's not just an attmept to marry religion and science (which there is nothing wrong with that). It is also an understanding and admission that we don't know everything yet.

If, for instance time is actually non-linear, but "circular" or never ending - a higher being, which we don't know yet whether or not they exist (think 4th dimension) could interact with 3rd dimension beings (ourselves) in various paces of our time. Time has a difference perception than just the linear or earth bound expression of the Biblical Day.

That understand is actually one of an open, scientific mind. Not the mind that is fixed on religious dogma or bound and tethered to "what we know now is all there is" science as Zenrage @ 12 displays. Both those kinds of minds a closed doors.

Years ago the concept of "sub space" didn't exist or was poo pooed by some watching Star Trek, but it's what our cell phone communications exist in.

Don't be so quick to write off a higher power, supernatural, paranornal or science fiction.

"There are more things in heaven and earth that are dreamt of in your philosophy."

I agree with you 100% that nobody knows it all.
My problem (I have many, but I'll stay specifically to the 7 days = 4 billion years) is the non sequitur of making the mythology flexible when it becomes demonstrably false. From what I can tell, most creation mythology comes from written or verbal accounts that are mutually exclusive. Do I have to pick one? If only one is the true word, I'm going with the titans. They sound cool.

To honor the spirit of the approaching Yule Festival (the winter solstice, for all you non-pagan infidels ;-) ), I would like to propose a scientific theory to explain, once and for all, the mystery of Christmas presents.

It is understood that the Theory of Purchasing Parents has many gaps, most prominently that of irreducible prices. The sum of presents worldwide is obviously far too plentiful for parents to afford; and no amount of haggling could conceivably change that. Hence, I propose the Theory of Plentiful Design; whereby a plentiful designer agent places presents under the Christmas Trees just before Christmas Eve.

This, of course, is in no way related to Chimneynism.

Clytemnestra @ 126:

Years ago the concept of "sub space" didn't exist or was poo pooed by some watching Star Trek, but it's what our cell phone communications exist in.

ROTFLMAO! Who told you that load of bunk?

Who says evolution ain't religious. Look at that painting again of the decent of man.

They're all nekkid and yet somehow still not showing a wang.

johnx @ 117:

GlenNJ @ 69:

As a muslim we are not asking people to believe in God but we are saying that the complex nature and the incredible structure of the DNA molocule could not have come into existence by chance as the evolutionist have alleged. Steven Miller the top evolutionist in America at one time has admitted that living matter can not be taken from non living matter.In the religion of Islam you find Allah(GOD) through science.

The problem is that you lack any evidence that DNA is the design of Allah. Furthermore, if Allah designed DNA, who designed Allah. You've basically made up an answer inside your head based on a centuries old desert myth.

Evolution is not a random process and is not dependent on "chance" and good fortune. The DNA molecule did not just spring into existence, just like the eye did not just spring into existence. The building blocks developed over time, gradually becoming more and more complex. Do we have the complete picture as to how life emerged from the primordial soup? No, but saying "God" did it and expecting any thinking person in this day and age to take you seriously is absurd.

I am sure there is much good in the teachings of the Koran and the Hadith, but just like the Bible, there is a lot of useless crap too. Some like to believe that Islam is really compatible with scientific thought and discovery but one only has to look to the fundamentalist nations of the middle east to see the truth in that. Allah is apparently very wicked to allow his chosen people to suffer the shame and humiliation of playing second fiddle to the West in every significant scientific advancement of the past 500 years.

Eric Almighty @ 147:

Weaseldog @ 145:

Peoples Front of Judea @ 143:

greg white @ 120:

"NUM 5:27 And when he hath made her to drink the water, then it shall come to pass, that, if she be defiled, and have done trespass against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her, and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall rot: and the woman shall be a curse among her people.

What's the relevance?

Don't sleep with monkeys?

I think it has something to do with the hygiene products they used to advertise during my mom's soaps.

Oh, like in Stephen King's, 'Carrie'?

Peoples Front of Judea @ 134:

Lofion @ 48:

Humans were created by God. We have since that creation become non humans and reflections of Lucifer who peverts God's creations. He also uses creation to create 'aliens' and Satan's device, UFOs.

Evolution is the perversion of what God created by Lucifer. Humans were not meant to see with their eyes closed or hear voices. This is lucifer and his damning. We are forced to do this every night. We have enlarged brains because of lucifer's eye and his damning.

Evolution's value is the time we were damned by Lucifer after God's creation. The ideal thing would be to use Satan's device to go back in time and find out where we got damned, but that would be wrong.

Creationism is a problem because it is confused by Lucifer. Lucifer uses creation. Lucifer has used creation on humans, created clones of humans. Stem cells and cloning. Intelligent design makes sense, but we weren't designed to see with our eyes closed and hear voices that aren't there. God designed us perfectly and we were perverted and also created again by lucifer, so we would need to find our original God's intelligence design. We could go back to that design, but it would be Satan's device to takes use back to our design and that would be lucifer making us what we were created by God; lucifer's creation intelligent design of God. Perversion.

Whoa!
Time for another layer of tin foil.

And they laughed at Darwin.