Darwin Disproved--Unlocking the Mystery of Life

masterjoe
Posts: 6
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
Darwin Disproved--Unlocking the Mystery of Life


good film that proves intelligent design

Darwin Disproved--Unlocking the Mystery of Life

Often called the most researched and documented case for Intelligent Design, "Unlocking the Mystery of Life" features state-of-the-art computer animation to explain the origins of life via Intelligent Design by challenging Darwinian evolution.  The speakers are a who's who in the Intelligent Design movement such as Phillip Johnson, Paul Nelson, Dean H. Kenyon, Michael J. Behe, Stephen C. Meyer, William Dembski, Jonathan Wells, Jed Macosko and Scott Minnich.

http://stage6.divx.com/Outlaw-News/video/1454914/Darwin-Disproved---Unlocking-the-Mystery-of-Life


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
Whoa! My bullshit detector

Whoa! My bullshit detector is clanging off the hook right now!


BGH
BGH's picture
Posts: 2772
Joined: 2006-09-28
User is offlineOffline
Masterjoe,

Masterjoe,

Please do not spam the boards by posting the same thread in multiple locations. This is against the rules, please consider this an official warning to refrain from this activity.

Your duplicate thread in the Freethinking Anonymous forum has been deleted. 

 


neptewn
Silver Member
neptewn's picture
Posts: 296
Joined: 2007-06-25
User is offlineOffline
They got the Theo-meter

They got the Theo-meter working yet?

Your mind will answer most questions if you learn to relax and wait for the answer. - William S. Burroughs


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
hmmm... masterjoe.... that

hmmm... masterjoe.... that rings a bell.

Didn't I ban you a few months ago under another name with Joe in it?  You were posting the same kinds of shit and not responding to any criticism.

Could be wrong, I suppose, but this looks really familiar.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


MrRage
Posts: 896
Joined: 2006-12-22
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: hmmm...

Hambydammit wrote:

hmmm... masterjoe.... that rings a bell.

Didn't I ban you a few months ago under another name with Joe in it? You were posting the same kinds of shit and not responding to any criticism.

Could be wrong, I suppose, but this looks really familiar.

 

Yeah, there was a totally asshat troll using the account joeparker. Was totally ripping off creationist writing...fun time was had by all.


D-cubed
Rational VIP!
D-cubed's picture
Posts: 715
Joined: 2007-01-04
User is offlineOffline
masterjoe wrote: good film

masterjoe wrote:

good film that proves intelligent design

Darwin Disproved--Unlocking the Mystery of Life

Yeah, it must be right because it has some neat graphics and music and is sandwiched between 9/11 conspiracies and stories about how Atlantis is real.  If it's on the internet it must be true.

The pathetic thing is that when the Discovery Institute represented by Behe was asked at the evolution trial in Dover, PA if the creationists had any scientific evidence supporting creationism his answer was no.

But I guess if you don't have any scientific evidence you can just put a flashy movie on the internet and waste every intelligent's person's time but gives ample pleasure to knuckle dragging moron creationists to promote it on rational websites.


ABx
Posts: 195
Joined: 2007-02-26
User is offlineOffline
I can't believe anyone

I can't believe anyone actually believes this stuff. Absolutely incredible, in every sense of the term.


kellym78
atheistRational VIP!
kellym78's picture
Posts: 602
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
MrRage wrote: Hambydammit

MrRage wrote:
Hambydammit wrote:

hmmm... masterjoe.... that rings a bell.

Didn't I ban you a few months ago under another name with Joe in it? You were posting the same kinds of shit and not responding to any criticism.

Could be wrong, I suppose, but this looks really familiar.

 

Yeah, there was a totally asshat troll using the account joeparker. Was totally ripping off creationist writing...fun time was had by all.

Yeah - here he is bitching about it somewhere else where he is (apparently) also not well liked. Also admitting that he has registered under multiple usernames. Let the investigation begin.

http://www.speakout.com/forum_view.asp?Forum=Religion&MID=106476&mMID=106476

 


marcusfish
Superfan
marcusfish's picture
Posts: 676
Joined: 2007-05-11
User is offlineOffline
kellym78 wrote: Yeah - here

kellym78 wrote:
Yeah - here he is bitching about it somewhere else where he is (apparently) also not well liked.

Obviously a real top notch communicator, that one.

"You suck, You're stupid, I'm right, you're wrong, let's have a conversation..."

Good luck with that Smiling 


Slimm
Superfan
Slimm's picture
Posts: 167
Joined: 2007-03-15
User is offlineOffline
LOL

Listening LOL Listening


robakerson
robakerson's picture
Posts: 94
Joined: 2007-08-07
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Evidently the

Quote:
Evidently the freethinkers at Rational Response were intolerant of any of my viewpoints.
other than there own. Having only posted on the site for less than two weeks I was
unceremoniously given the boot.
Of course to hear them tell it I was a troll called plagiarism and spamming.who deserved to be booted.


Seriously. Am I the only person in the world that gets pissed off at this blatant disregard for basic grammatical syntax?
"Other than there own." is

1) not a sentence and 2) the wrong fucking "their".

"Of course to hear them tell it I was a troll called plagiarism and spamming.who deserved to be booted."

1) Try to be more clear in the phrase "to hear them tell it",
say something like "their side of the story was".
2) You cannot be "called plagiarism". I think I know what you mean, but seriously only because I know the context in which you are speaking.
3) Separate your ideas more clearly.
4) There belonges a space after the period.
5) "who deserved to be booted." is not a full sentence.

Seriously just fucking express yourself more clearly so we can know what they hell you are talking about.
I really hope this is the same guy so he can read this post and be inspired to:
1) Read something other than creationist, bullshit literature.
2) Take an english class seriously.

Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
George Orwell.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
masterjoe wrote: good film

masterjoe wrote:

good film that proves intelligent design

Darwin Disproved--Unlocking the Mystery of Life

Often called the most researched and documented case for Intelligent Design, "Unlocking the Mystery of Life" features state-of-the-art computer animation to explain the origins of life via Intelligent Design by challenging Darwinian evolution. The speakers are a who's who in the Intelligent Design movement such as Phillip Johnson, Paul Nelson, Dean H. Kenyon, Michael J. Behe, Stephen C. Meyer, William Dembski, Jonathan Wells, Jed Macosko and Scott Minnich.

http://stage6.divx.com/Outlaw-News/video/1454914/Darwin-Disproved---Unlocking-the-Mystery-of-Life

 Given that Behe admitted under oath that ID has about as much scientific validity as astrology, I won't take you all that seriously.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


todangst
atheistRational VIP!
todangst's picture
Posts: 2811
Joined: 2006-03-10
User is offlineOffline
  Quote: Evidently the

 

Quote:
Evidently the freethinkers at Rational Response were intolerant of any of my viewpoints.

 Intolerant, here, means "they ruthlessly applied critical thinking to my claims, and pointed out the various blunders in basic logic as well a failure to grasp the basics of biology or the scientific method."

 

 

Those who know the good, do the good. - Socrates

Books on atheism.


silentseba
silentseba's picture
Posts: 131
Joined: 2007-07-19
User is offlineOffline
This movie says: Because

This movie says:

  • Because organisms are small, they can't be complex
  • If we don't know the answer, then the solution is probably intelligent design
  • A complex "biological machine" cannot evolve from a less complex machine
  • There is no way wind and erosion can randomly modify a rock to make it look like a face (or anything else recognizable) - Yeah they used that example *shrug*
  • Small probability + specification = designed
  • Small probability + specification = information
  • Because DNA is more complex than binary code, it must mean that it was intelligent designed.
  • If we can't explain things by natural law, then it must be intelligent design
There, I saved you 1 hour 7 minutes of your life.


robakerson
robakerson's picture
Posts: 94
Joined: 2007-08-07
User is offlineOffline
silentseba wrote: This

silentseba wrote:

This movie says:

  • Because organisms are small, they can't be complex
  • If we don't know the answer, then the solution is probably intelligent design
  • A complex "biological machine" cannot evolve from a less complex machine
  • There is no way wind and erosion can randomly modify a rock to make it look like a face (or anything else recognizable) - Yeah they used that example *shrug*
  • Small probability + specification = designed
  • Small probability + specification = information
  • Because DNA is more complex than binary code, it must mean that it was intelligent designed.
  • If we can't explain things by natural law, then it must be intelligent design
There, I saved you 1 hour 7 minutes of your life.


Wow you totally didn't watch the whole movie. This is pure science. The devil must have you. Keep in mind that evolution is just a theory, not a fact (did they say that one too?).

Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
George Orwell.


silentseba
silentseba's picture
Posts: 131
Joined: 2007-07-19
User is offlineOffline
The only reason why this

The only reason why this movie is better from all that trash that crationist usually talk about is because they don't reference the bible, they don't completely deny darwin's theory of evolution, and they don't talk about God every 5 seconds. I think they really tried hard to avoid mentioning that taboo word in the science context. Of course... at the end of the movie they unleashed and started talking about god.


D-cubed
Rational VIP!
D-cubed's picture
Posts: 715
Joined: 2007-01-04
User is offlineOffline
silentseba wrote: A

silentseba wrote:
  • A complex "biological machine" cannot evolve from a less complex machine

I always loved this hole in creationist reasoning.  Life is complex therefore it needed a creator.  As a result the creator, god, is so simplistic that he didn't need a creator.  God is so simple yet he cannot be understood by us mere complex organisms.  Regardless of our complexity we are inferior to god's simplicity.

In really makes no sense.

However if god is more complex than us then it refutes the notion that complex beings need a creator.

And creationists wonder why nobody takes them seriously. 


silentseba
silentseba's picture
Posts: 131
Joined: 2007-07-19
User is offlineOffline
Their major point towards

Their major point towards supporting creationism is that there is this micro organism that has something that looks like a boat motor. They say that there is no way nature could have done this because a motor needs to be assembled in the right sequence and some other bullshit.


robakerson
robakerson's picture
Posts: 94
Joined: 2007-08-07
User is offlineOffline
silentseba wrote: Their

silentseba wrote:
Their major point towards supporting creationism is that there is this micro organism that has something that looks like a boat motor. They say that there is no way nature could have done this because a motor needs to be assembled in the right sequence and some other bullshit.


That's the centuries old "bacteria flagellum" invocation.
http://www.talkdesign.org/faqs/flagellum.html
It's about as useless as the bombadier beetle or the human eye, to 'prove' any ID theory.

Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.
George Orwell.


MrRage
Posts: 896
Joined: 2006-12-22
User is offlineOffline
silentseba wrote:

silentseba wrote:
Because DNA is more complex than binary code, it must mean that it was intelligent designed.

Wow. As if we didn't know it already, this is an extremely ignorant thing to claim.

DNA is what a base 4 code? It's encoded with 4 different molecules. Binary is simply base 2. These are all just different representations of numbers, i.e. you can represent the same data in both encodings. It isn't like binary "code" can represent less things. All you need to do is group binary code in groups of two bits and you've got base four code. Actually a lot of computer scientists will represent binary code in base 16 numbers, i.e. they group binary code in groups of four bits.

silentseba wrote:
There, I saved you 1 hour 7 minutes of your life.

Shoot, I owe you like $28.


Ashe
Ashe's picture
Posts: 6
Joined: 2007-08-10
User is offlineOffline
silentseba wrote: This

silentseba wrote:

This movie says:

  • Because organisms are small, they can't be complex
  • If we don't know the answer, then the solution is probably intelligent design
  • A complex "biological machine" cannot evolve from a less complex machine
  • There is no way wind and erosion can randomly modify a rock to make it look like a face (or anything else recognizable) - Yeah they used that example *shrug*
  • Small probability + specification = designed
  • Small probability + specification = information
  • Because DNA is more complex than binary code, it must mean that it was intelligent designed.
  • If we can't explain things by natural law, then it must be intelligent design

There, I saved you 1 hour 7 minutes of your life.

 

You know, I wish I had looked at this before I tried to watch that video. Thanks for summing it up before I had to waste another hour and five minutes.


JeremiahSmith
Posts: 361
Joined: 2006-11-25
User is offlineOffline
I, too, remember the movie

I, too, remember the movie that Einstein made to support his theory of relativity instead of just writing it all down and sending it to fancy journals.

Götter sind für Arten, die sich selbst verraten -- in den Glauben flüchten um sich hinzurichten. Menschen brauchen Götter um sich zu verletzen, um sich zu vernichten -- das sind wir.