Instapundit Glenn Reynolds speaks plainly

…on Ben Stein’s new movie Expelled. It seems both sides of the ‘debate’ have forced Glenn into some candid frankness

MORE: I hate writing about this stuff because — pardon me while I speak plainly — the people on both sides of this issue are assholes. I mean, even by the low standards of Internet discussion. I’m getting email calling me a “theocon shill” for mentioning Stein, and email telling me I’ll burn in hell for calling Intelligent Design “pernicious twaddle.” Frankly, the rabid atheists and the rabid creationists seem an awful lot alike, and no proper hell could be truly hellish without the both of them yammering away at each other. Feh.

[linkages MINE…a local twodigit, and the smart one, Nishi]

I’ve a strong science background, and a strong religious background. I’ve no problem at all reconciling belief and excitement for one with similar emotions for the other. If only scientists could answer that one burning question, then I suppose there would be no need for further questions. Or movies

I’ve not yet seen the movie. Usually I won’t watch a movie in a theater, preferring to wait for the DVD. In this case, I have to see what the fuss is all about.

After I use up the stack building materials I bought Saturday, and framed up this morning. Every nail you drive takes away from your resale value…my Realtor.

But…but…I use Intelligent Design!

;D

13 comments:

  1. WIlliam, 20. April 2008, 18:00

    Glen Reynolds, another cowardly conservative blogger that doesn’t accept comments.

     
  2. Serr8d, 20. April 2008, 21:07

    Hey, this might be William’s kid!

     
  3. Jeffraham Prestonian, 21. April 2008, 6:31

    I wonder if Mr. Robot Sex was behind the upcoming “empty holster protest” at UT-K.
    .

     
  4. Doc, 21. April 2008, 10:23

    The question “How did life begin” is nice, but the more pressing concern is “how did the Universe begin?”, as it’s obvious life is a derivative of this universe. As scientists have postulated that the universe will expand until it’s “done” and simply burn out, that then implies a start (big bang to most), and the inevitable question of “What caused the big bang, and what was there before the big bang?”

     
  5. William, 21. April 2008, 21:10

    Doc, as with most humans, can’t seem to accept the concept of infinity. Infinity in time, space, matter, possibilities, etc…

     
  6. happyfeet, 22. April 2008, 4:58

    That’s stupid what you said about Reynolds being cowardly. You should not be so stupid. Why would people open comments for stupid?

     
  7. Doc, 22. April 2008, 7:58

    Willy, as with most idiots, can’t accept the concept of theromdynamics.

     
  8. H.B. Keats, 22. April 2008, 9:51

    I’ve seen some excerpts, and heard an interview with Stein.

    This movie is complete and utter bullshit, I assure you.

    I’m sorry, but one would have to be almost legally brain dead to swallow this crap.

    Just one example, Stein claims that the scientific method is contingent on the concept of falsification, therefore the scientific community should welcome being questioned.

    The problem is, Stein is not attempting to scientifically falsify anything. All he does is create some horror he calls “darwinism”, which is supposedly the root of all evil.

     
  9. H.B. Keats, 22. April 2008, 10:11

    Oh, and “intelligent design” is not some vague notion that the universe was created with a purpose of some kind; it is biblical creationism in disguise, which means it has zero business in any science curriculum whatsoever.

    The problem is, one it can be established that science can provide the means to cultivate a credible understanding of a known natural order (regardless of if and when the mysteries of the origins of life and the universe can be resolved), any slob can use that information, in conjunction with the human capacity to reason, to figure out that much of the [insert religious dogma here] just doesn’t hold up that well to critical scrutiny. So we have this absurd war on science, and language as well.

     
  10. William, 22. April 2008, 10:55

    Doc (Mike), unlike most scientists, believes in the supernatural and is an advocate of intelligent design. Unlike most scientists, he apparently doesn’t believe in the law of conservation of matter. Must of been those years of Catholic school.

     
  11. serr8d, 22. April 2008, 12:00

    “Must of”, William.

    While you wallow in your dim-witted denial of anything other than pure ’science’, remember that the ‘life originating from a lightning-struck puddle of carbon-imprinted by a few random molecules of methane water‘ is just a model. Not even a theory, a model.

    Whilst I subscribe wholeheartedly to the Theory of Evolution (a tool of The Architect), I will not simply deny the concept of The Architect just to satisfy the egos and fears of a few simple modelers.

    Or guitarists.

     
  12. Doc, 22. April 2008, 18:30

    The law of conservation of matter? You have to be kidding me. You’re such a dunderhead, Willy.

    1) Big Bang started the universe.

    2) It was a hugely energetic event, but the energy of the universe has sent the matter off in many directions, and what’s left is a expanding universe which will cool and end as nothing but drifting, cold matter.

    3) If that’s the end of the Universe, then the beginning of the universe could not have initiated from a similar event.

    4) If that’s the case, what started the Big Bang? And if the universe was evenly distributed matter, then how did it gain enough mass to become an uncontrolled gravitational attraction?

    5) And if the universe was full of matter, then how come we don’t see that matter? There must have been residual cold matter, especially between galaxies, and enough in such concentrations to disturb light traveling between galaxies. (Dark matter, which has been theorized to be not enough to allow for universal collapse (the Big Squeeze).)

    6) if that’s the case, then how could the universe have possibly started as THERMODYNAMICS shows that the universe is continually expanding and offers no cyclical explanation?

    7) Intelligent Design. God created Earth 6000 years ago. (I have to say it, because Willy somehow thinks I’m an ID nut.)

     
  13.  

    […] They’re discussing it (the movie) over at TennesseeFree.com. […]

     

Write a comment: