This would have made a lovely addition to the Science collective, I'll drop you an invite.

Wow... I have to agree with Penn and Teller on this one.

Religion is not nor ever will be a science. It is a faith. period.

Those fanatics make me so angwy >_

An update:

This program originally aired back in March of 2003, and Cobb County's "intelligent design" policies were stricken down by a federal judge in Atlanta as unconstitutional in 2005.

Thank God.

You always want to think critically about explanations that science offers. The best thing about evolution (and biology, and science in general) is that if anybody can come up with a better answer and show how its better... bingo! Nobel Prize.

Our democracy seems to jump over this problem every once-in-a-while... purposely denying "fair and equal time" to listen to people who are flat-out incorrect.

lmao

When I listen to all these wingnuts who talk about how wonderful it would be if students and parents could discuss and decide which theory of creation they want to believe in, I wonder if they would support including the creation myths of other cultures around the world. I think it's a Japanese myth that says that the world is supported on the back of a turtle, and the Koreans say they're all decended from a bear who ate a lot of garlic. If the fundies are truly in favour of open dialogue about different people's ideas of what's true, then they should enthusiastically support these stories being included in the science curricula.

Well, I sure hate to say this, but i have to once again disagree with penn and teller.

They were wrong on recycling, and by god, they are wrong here as well. They fail to tell the whole story once again. The bible is not a book you pick and choose from, it is the word of our lord, inerrant.

I'm sick and tired of the attitude of hollywood liberals and those in the godless entertainment industry. They must be into goat sex, fisting pixies,and a multitude of other sinful activities such as critical thinking, the pursuit of peaceful resolutions, painting, poetry, dance (gasp!), premarital sex, caffeine laced drinks, tree hugging, and finally bicycling. Well, maybe not bicycling. Penn appears to be pushing 350 pounds, and i'm sure it would cut into his stripper groping time.

I miss having Showtime.

I just spit Mountain Dew all over my monitor, obscenesimian, thanks.

It makes me sad when we need these kinds of programs to 'explain' to people the difference between faith and science.

"it is the word of our lord" << he might be your lord, but he definitely aint mine.

Added to my playlist.

any deranged lunatic can come up with a screwball theory and call it science, such as evolution. I guess the real question should be, Should evolution be taught in schools since it is only a theory and not a fact.

Man, I hope Chaucer's kidding.

Seriously, if you're going to have beliefs that backward, then don't use computers or cell phones or any of the other modern conveniences that those "deranged lunatics" have come up with.

Maybe we were all created by girl who made an experiment with a tooth and a glass of coke...oh no, just wait a sec that's a Simpsons' episode.

The point that Penn made that voting on the sex of the rabbit doesn't change the sex of the rabbit is brilliant!

pen and teller, the guys with the biggest balls ever. i love their show.

I wasnt kidding and your analogy doesnt hold up. Computers and cell phones can essentially be called "facts". You can see how they are made, touch them, and can recreate one on your own. Evolution is just a string of guesswork and speculations, hence why it's called a theory. If you dont believe me what a theory is, here's the definition.

the·o·ry Pronunciation[thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] –noun, plural -ries.
1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3. Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
6. contemplation or speculation.
7. guess or conjecture.

Therefore, we should be asking ourselves whether its the right thing to be teaching our children about a theory when presenting it as a fact. Also, if we teach this theory then we should allow the teaching of creation, intelligent design, or any other theories that might be out there. If we disallow one, we should have to disallow all.

dbalsdon

Please......read the ENTIRE post, it will make more sex.....errr i mean sense.


Pixie fisters unite!

Gravity's a theory, too, moron - as is Einstein's theory of relativity, if you'd read your own definition.

And "intelligent design" doesn't even make it out of the hypothesis stage. My point about computers and cell phones is perfectly relevant, as neither would be possible without science.

God DAMN it I am so fucking tired of stupid people.
It's obvious why you people don't subscribe to evolution; because you stopped evolving a long time ago. Christ.

One ancient Hawaiian myth suggests that Maui, a demi-god living underground, found a crack leading to the surface of the earth and being constantly horny, he stuck his penis through it. An ancient goddess walking past saw the penis sticking out of the ground, had sex with it, and gave birth to the human race. I say we teach that one in class. It could double with the abstinence lecture.

Honestly, what would the ID lecture be like anyway? "OK class, our first theory on how we all came to be here: God did it. How do we know? The Bible says so. OK...that's about all we have on that one. Now on to evolution."

Personally, I went to a public high school, and we studied the Bible...in English class as literature where it belongs (right after we studied Greek mythology).

Very good point, digitalbombdog, we studied the bible, breifly, along with the teachings of the jewish, muslim, hindu and buhddist faiths, in English class (or social studies). Imagine in science class being taught the hindu version of creation?? As science?? The christian right would go nuts, everyone would go nuts.

And that whole thing about evolution being just a theory? That is not even an arguement because in science, a theory is a very strong, proven method or mechanism by which to explain phenomina. Quantumn theory. Particle duality has been proven, yet the theory part remains... and as theo said, the theory of gravity is pretty rock solid. The theory of evolution might not explain the exact origin of life as a single celled orgainsim, though it looks like the early atmosphere on earth was very condusive to the production of amino acids and phospholipid layers necessary for single celled life, evolution does provide a very logical and observable mechansim for species diversification and specialization. Don't try and tell me that Noah rounded up two of every single of the 8 million or so species of beetle for the ark.

"Theory of evolution" is one of those phrases that the average person doesn't actually understand, like "circumstantial evidence".

But, scientifically speaking, creation is not a theory. It's not even a hypothesis. It can't be disproven. Hell, I'm not sure it can even be tested. Evolution was a hypothesis. Supporting evidence was gathered and it became a theory. For nearly 150 years it's been tested and has not been disproven. Sure we've made adjustments and corrections, but the core concept remains.

Evolution will never advance beyond a theory in science, because it's impossible to prove. That's how the scientific process works. The more we fail to disprove a theory, the more likely its accuracy. People are free to believe in creation, but it can't be a scientific theory because you can't devise an experiment to disprove it. It cannot be tested. This makes it useless, whether true or false. Evolution theory can be used to make predictions and advances. So long as those predictions and advances hold up, the truth of the theory is actually fairly irrelevant, though it is obviously strengthened each time it is successfully used.

It's always possible that something will come along and throw a wrench in our ideas on evolution and we'll need to *ahem* evolve new ways of thinking.

What I don't think ID/Creationism proponents ever really contemplate is this... Do you believe in survival of the fittest? Do you believe that an animal that is better suited to its life and environment will produce more successfully/frequently than one that is less well suited? To me, that's just simple logic and observation. Of course it will. It's no different than the best college basketball team making it through March madness and taking the NCAA championship. Yes, in any given season the best team might have a bad game at a bad time, but on average over the course of years, the best teams come out on top.

Now if you've accepted that, the logical next step is that those animals with advantages will pass those advantages on, and over time that can shift the attributes of the species.

We see evolution happen all the time, but opponents choose to ignore it. New strains of influenza pop up every year, for example.

Sorry for being so long-winded. This is just one of those things I can't keep quiet about.

Here's to you, Chaucer.

Wikipedia's summarization of "Theory"

The word theory has a number of distinct meanings in different fields of knowledge, depending on their methodologies and the context of discussion.

In common usage, people often use the word theory to signify a conjecture, an opinion, or a speculation. In this usage, a theory is not necessarily based on facts; in other words, it is not required to be consistent with true descriptions of reality. True descriptions of reality are more reflectively understood as statements that would be true independently of what people think about them.

In science, a theory is a mathematical description, a logical explanation, a verified hypothesis, or a proven model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theory which explains why the apple behaves so is the current theory of gravitation.

Dictionary.com's definition of "Theory"

Main Entry: the·o·ry
Pronunciation: 'thE-&-rE, 'thi(-&)r-E
Function: noun
Inflected Form: plural -ries
1 : the general or abstract principles of a body of fact, a science, or an art <the theory and practice of medicine>
2 : a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain natural phenomena —see ATOMIC THEORY, CELL THEORY, GERM THEORY
3 : a working hypothesis that is considered probable based on experimental evidence or factual or conceptual analysis and is accepted as a basis for experimentation —the·o·ret·i·cal

What a scientific theory is NOT:
Guessing
Conjecture
Speculation

Wikipedia's summarization is more than enough to get the point across, but there are those who do not accept the validity of Wikipedia as a source material. For that reason and that I don't like to just grab stuff off the internet and submit it as my own idea, I wrote this.

Intelligent Designers argue that Evolution is just a 'Theory', not a fact. This is true. The fact that beings evolve is not under debate; the process by which they evolve is the question. It has been scientifically proven that evolution occurs. As xxovercastxx rightly pointed out, new strains of influenza appear all the time. The thing is, There is no ladder from observing to fact. This is not a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to theory to hypothesis to guess. What you have is a failure to understand the terms that are used to describe evolution, as well as other theories. A fact is a data, some quantitative or qualitative expression of something that is true. A theory is a description of an idea that interprets and explains those facts.

I shall further explain via example.

In layman's terms, gravity is a physical interaction through which all masses attract each other. Gravity can be observed and tested. In fact, go ahead and test it right now. Stand up and jump. You should find that you return to the ground at a rate of acceleration roughly equal to 9.8 m/s/s. You have just proven a fact: You are attracted to the Earth upon which you rest by an attractive force we call gravity. How does that work, you might ask? Well, Issac Newton's description of gravity went something like this: “I deduced that the forces which keep the planets in their orbs must be reciprocally as the squares of their distances from the centers about which they revolve; and thereby compared the force requisite to keep the Moon in her orb with the force of gravity at the surface of the Earth; and found them answer pretty nearly.”

That means every single point mass attracts every other point mass by a force pointing along the line combining the two. The force is proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between the point masses.

Thus,
F=G(m1m2/r2)
Where
F= the magnitude of the gravitational force between the two point masses
G= the gravitational constant
m1= the mass of the first point mass
m2= the mass of the second point mass
r2= the distance between the two point masses
One could plug in the numbers and actually find the magnitude of gravitational force of your jump.

What I have just described is a Theory explaining the fact that when you jumped, you returned to the Earth (It might be wise to add at this point that newton's theory was later found to be inadequate to describe more than simple interactions between masses, such as the experiment you just performed, as well as interactions at great distances, such as more than 1 or so astronomical unit. More complex interactions require The Theory of General Relativity).

It is with this relatively brief comment that I hope to clear up any confusion for further viewers. Hah, and you though YOU were long-winded, xxovercastxx! If anyone wishes to argue with me, go ahead and shoot me an e-mail at RSRegisterPass@Gmail.com, and I'll be happy to shoot you back a compilation of reasons why you're wrong. Have a nice day!

Excellent post C-Mart.

Misdirection at it's finest and from whom? Illusionists!!!

Hey I love these guys... their talented and the make me laugh but that's about it... if they are here trying to enlighten me about the history of earth they should try again... but I do see that they have swayed a few ears from the few comments I did happen to read.
If you think it's hard to make others look bad from afar as they are doing, it's not. They themselves have an "agenda" here and it can be seen very easily if you haven't been dazzled be their critical viewpoint of the interviewed people here (which were picked well for that agenda).
It would be a better film if it weren't filled with soooo many mis truths.

*science , *religion

Adding video to channels (Religion, Science) - requested by BicycleRepairMan.

*promote

Promoting this classic video back to the front page; last published Monday, February 19th, 2007 10:36pm PST - promote requested by Fedquip.

obscenesimian, 'word of our lord'??!? PAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!!
that line of thinking only comes from the uneducated.

does anyone know where we can view the recycling episode?

gah!!! learn what a scientific theory is, please!!! read the good post above. learn it! creationism should be thaught in school when it has gone through every step that real science has to before it is acknowledge (which it cant). sigh. america in 2007, believing this? you had people on the moon in the last millenium!! stay ahead as the coolest science country on the planet isntead of stepping way back into a religious infused state of denial and misguided fundamentalism.

penn and teller are great

*1stTube

Adding video to channels (1sttube) - requested by Grimm.

It is clear to me that people on either side are not willing to concede the mere possibility their view/paradigm could be imperfect. I submit that the truth does not depend on our imperfect and thus obviously somewhat flawed understandings. Does that say we know nothing, that is correct. No. Does that say some on either side could not be correct? No, it does not.

The Bible itself actually states that the only "religion" that God himself actual believes, is the "religion" of helping windows and orphans. If you look at the text that states how God is willing to "adopt" you (but not against your choice) then you may see that we are all windows and/or orphans. We are all the proverbial prodigals son (the self-god one) and his other son(the jealous one).

I note that good science clearly states that scientific findings may be later disproved. I also not that the Bible claims to be THE truth and the God does not change. It seems to me that science would then have an easy time PROVING the bible untrue. Why is this not the case?

I am a scientist. I find that science without godless opinion, far more supports that God is truth. I find "science" that suggests God does not exist, quite unscientific.

Just because your eternal existence is determined by whether you accept God's gift of eternal life over eternal death and that is by faith (not works) does not prove God is not truth (and logic) as well.

You see, you can not PROVE God to someone but they can prove God to themselves. Even with an honest scientific method.

What's missed is that God is spirit and now unseen, but by His effect. Like the wind. Would you say you do not believe in wind. What unscientific BS. So the His Holy Spirit calls us and if we answer accepting Him that is the real way we "know". You can not "try" God, without accepting His love.

I tell you, there is knowing. There is believing and then there is accepting.

Accepting what? God loves you personally and He has a specific and good plan for your life. There's a reason we can not know all, in this time. It gives us freedom of choice and freedom is universally good. Is it not?

Then, "For all a have missed the mark and fall short of the glory of God." God is perfect. He is the truth. He is love and He is life. Consider that. What mere man is perfect? We are all in this same boat. Is the Pope(s) perfect? No. Was Mary perfect? No. Was Mohammad perfect? No. Have you broken ANY of the 10 commandments? Guess what? In a way they are all the same thing. Guess what? We have all broken them. No one can measure up. The problem comes when we vainly attempt to measure up; by our own understanding. Think about it? What makes you good? How good are you? Are you flawed? You know that mistake in your life that you *KNOW* was wrong, and holds you back? It's time to let it go. You can not do it without God's forgiveness. Only then, can you move on.

How then can we be with God personally (living His love and plan) without corrupting His perfection. How can God overlook our penalty for our own evil and be good? He can't.

The good new is that by (only) Christ, God did something greater than our understanding. Are you surprised? He lowered himself into this "valley of the shadow of death" and became the one and only, mind blowing, God-man. This is stated as true in His word. Would you expect science to explain that? Is that smart? Who's science? Is our science unlimited? Jesus is the Christ(Our savior). Jesus is the risen Holy Spirit of God Himself. Christ fulfilled this promise to come into the world and take away the penalty/price due our sins/evil/selfish choices. Merry Christmas! Promise done.

As I'm sure you may have heard, Christ allowed Himself to be hung and go through death, to pay your way. Think about it. How else could we be reconciled to God but through Himself? There's no way for you to do it. We simply must deny our stubborn, (false justifying) and selfish will and choose life. "I tell you this so you may know. Those who believe in the Son of God have eternal life."

Don't forget. Christ is risen. Risen so that His Holy Spirit can be in your heart and also surround you with His love. Do you know and actually experience God's love and plan for your life? It's not about "religion". It's about the choice to be a child of God. The most awesome King. The King of Kings. The Lord of lords. Your perfect Father. The most mighty love himself.

Now, a word to younger persons. You will be persuaded to go with what works for the short term. You will be tempted with good pleasures that are not lasting. You will wish you had someone to tell you, go for the long term solutions instead. Pleasures are a gift from God but not our twisted ways. Beware the short term temptations. The rewards (and pleasures) are great. Both in the here and now and eternity.

We all have a daily fight (day by day) because we have choices to make. Old habits are hard to break but not with God instead of your "strength". You see, ALL our strength (energy) in many forms, comes from God in the first place. Our Earth, our breath, our life, our immunity, our all. God "knit you in you mothers womb"(The Bible is cool.) Therefore turn from evil and know that God ONLY asks you to do what is truly good. It's literally insane, to not follow God's word.

Simply say something like (in you own words) God, I am a sinner. I ask your forgiveness for my sins. I accept your love. Make me the person YOU want me to be.

I respectfully suggest that you give over every area of you life to God's will; according to the good you see by His word. If you don't, you will need to later and you will wish you had not wasted your (limited) time here on earth.

Young people. You may think (possibly) 100 years is a long time, but it is a mere vapor. Like grass. Here today. Gone tomorrow. You know (scientifically), 100 out of every 100 people die. Not everyone dies of old age.

Why would God send you to hell? He wouldn't. He died for you; to live eternally. Although, you may send yourself to that eternal death. I'd be careful about that. Is it reasonable to you (scientifically) that NOTHING comes after our passing? If you don't choose God, what's left? God clearly gives you until you die and He may do that because He is "not a mere man that He should lie". Would you have a truly good and perfect God, then accept those who do not accept Him, before they die? After this life and it's choice is OVER, would you have God violate your freedom of choice? Would you think a God that gives no respect to your choice is a good one? God does not change. God is Love AND He is mighty and respectable. Would you have a judge let proven law breakers go free, without a price? Would that be good or bad? God is good.

"I have set before you this day, life and death, choose life..."

Woah, profound. The sift needs more people like neovideo!

People who take the bible literally would do well to read other books concerning ancient history, early religion, and the history of the Christian church. The bible, as we know it today, was assembled by bishops centuries after the time of Christ. It has since been translated and edited by other religious and political figures, always for one agenda or another. And much of the tales and teachings are derivatives of older 'pagan' religions from the Mediteranean and Near East. It is a product of history, and as such possesses great merit as a historical document, just like the works of Homer and Virgil provide insight into Greek and Roman history. But it is essentially myth. Nearly all academic historians would agree with me on this. If taken literally, one would be faced with sorting out the myriad of contradictions contained within it. Oh, and you'd have to learn Greek, Latin, Aramaic, and Hebrew in order to really understand the text anyway. The relationship between language and thought is such that certain concepts and ideas can never be translated properly...you know, "Lost in translation." Anyway, I'm an atheist, but I try to be respectful of all people of faith. Believe what you want, but please, I beg you. Use reason. We are all rational beings, and if you believe in a God, than you must believe that he or she or it gave you a brain for a reason. Use it! Ask questions, don't just listen to what you're told.

Oh, and as for evolution. In this case, the use of "theory" should be restricted to the scientific community. For the non-scientific, the word "fact" would be an excellent supplement. Yes, there is debate in the field of human evolution (paleoanthropology), but by now we have the chronology fairly well figured out. At least enough to guarantee that humans were around long before 6,000 years ago. Unless you can prove that the decay constant of a radioactive isotope is not constant after all (good luck with that).

I think people should receive medical treatment based on what they believe. If someone believes that viruses and bacteria can evolve resistance to treatments, they should be treated accordingly. If someone doesn't believe that microorganisms can evolve resistance to drugs, they should be given some posey, a jar of leeches, and sent on their way.

Survival of the fittest - save the vancomycin for people who aren't going to pass rampant stupidity on to the next generation. Natural selection will let MRSA and other germs that have evolved resistance take care of the rest.

Let me say this one more time - viruses and bacteria EVOLVED into forms that are resistant to antibiotics and antivirals. Tuberculosis, staphylococcus, HIV, influenza... they have all EVOLVED resistance. By going through the process of EVOLUTION they have gained adaptations that make them more virulent and more dangerous.

Not sure how many more times I'll have to say EVOLUTION and the varying forms of the word to drive the point home.

People can believe whatever the hell they want to believe, but if they intend to be passionate about it and make a shitstorm about it that pisses everyone else off, they should at least practice what they believe. By rejecting evolution, one is essentially saying that they reject the PROVEN FACT that drug resistant strains of TB, staphylococcus, influenza, HIV, and other suberbugs exist. Why waste the effective drugs on people who don't even believe the disease they have exists?

*dead

This published video has been declared non-functional; embed code must be fixed within 2 days or it will be sent to the dead pool - declared dead by snaremop.

*undead

I mean, *notdead.

This dead video has been deemed functional; it must have been accidentally declared dead - declared notdead by messenger.

That's right guys! You got it right. Everything follows laws of nature. Nature was made by...??? Everything was made by??? Including the 'Laws' which govern physics and nature. Think it over. Did nature make itself? If there was a big bang, what caused it? Nature? There was no Nature if there was nothing before. Some call it meditation...but please don't jump on the first bandwagon because we don't understand. The only one who can understand God is...God! The only thing I can know for sure is we didn't create ourselves...at least I didn't. I surely don't serve a theory which offers a partial explanation of nature, which was created by??? Let's stop pretending to know so we can learn. Not knowing is scary, but error is a finality. Oh, and did you hear light is not a constant. Yeah, light can travel faster than light! Amazing! So Einstein, someone who I admire, is not...100%...correct? Darn! And just when I thought I knew something. Scary, huh?