Showing posts with label atheism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label atheism. Show all posts

Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Atheists are banned from an intelligent design movie

Transcript of today's show:

The banning of atheists from a prescreening of Ben Stein’s film, Expelled No Intelligence Allowed, drew hundreds of postings in the blogosphere this week according to Technorati, a leading blogpost barometer. Producers of the film about intelligent design claim the furor is around the value of their message. Atheists question a film that associates Darwin with the Nazi Holocaust.


Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]

Comment on this story.


Sound Off: What is being said about this story from around the blogging and opinion world.


from a blog post by PZ Myers, who was banned from the film screening:
I went to attend a screening of the creationist propaganda movie, Expelled, a few minutes ago. Well, I tried … but I was Expelled! It was kind of weird — I was standing in line, hadn't even gotten to the point where I had to sign in and show ID, and a policeman pulled me out of line and told me I could not go in. I asked why, of course, and he said that a producer of the film had specifically instructed him that I was not to be allowed to attend. The officer also told me that if I tried to go in, I would be arrested. I assured him that I wasn't going to cause any trouble.

I went back to my family and talked with them for a while, and then the officer came back with a theater manager, and I was told that not only wasn't I allowed in, but I had to leave the premises immediately. Like right that instant.

I complied.

I'm still laughing though. You don't know how hilarious this is. Not only is it the extreme hypocrisy of being expelled from their Expelled movie, but there's another layer of amusement. Deep, belly laugh funny. Yeah, I'd be rolling around on the floor right now, if I weren't so dang dignified.

You see … well, have you ever heard of a sabot? It's a kind of sleeve or lightweight carrier used to surround a piece of munition fired from a gun. It isn't the actually load intended to strike the target, but may even be discarded as it leaves the barrel.

I'm a kind of sabot right now.

They singled me out and evicted me, but they didn't notice my guest. They let him go in escorted by my wife and daughter. I guess they didn't recognize him. My guest was …

Richard Dawkins.

[read full blog post]

a comment posted on PZ Myer's blog Pharyngula:
The strategy of keeping the skeptical and rational sectors of society out of preview screenings of this movie makes a lot of sense. If we can't see it we can't destroy it's credibility before it is widely released, and it follows that they will be able to blindside uninformed people much more easily.



excerpt from a press release issued by the makers of the film Expelled:

Executive Producer Logan Craft noted: “EXPELLED makes it clear that academic freedom is at stake. Yet Dawkins and his friends continue to misrepresent the film and slander the producers. It is obvious that they do not want to debate the real issues raised in the movie. Their only interest is to control the damage their interviews have done to their cause. We are happy to let the public decide where the truth rests on this controversial issue when the movie opens nationwide on April 18th.”

Myers has apparently been asking supporters to sneak into the different private screenings for many weeks. After being denied his chance to see the movie, Myers blogged about his experience and expressed his outrage.

Executive Producer Walt Ruloff responded, “This is the typical reaction of Darwinists and atheists who are so blinded by their own self importance that they fail to understand what is really going on. They yell and scream when one of their friends isn’t allowed to see a movie weeks before it goes public. All this outrage while these same people organize witch hunts to expel those who disagree with them.”

[read complete press release]

Friday, June 15, 2007

South Carolina questions the theory of evolution

Transcript of today's show:

New teaching standards in South Carolina public high schools encourage science teachers to criticize evolution theory. Opponents of this policy argue that this throws the door wide open to inclusion—and perhaps emphasis—on creationism and intelligent design in science classes. Proponents insist that questioning Darwin theory will improve the students’ education by expanding their viewpoints of the origin of life. source: American Institute of Biological Sciences

Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]


Sound Off: Science & Faith. Our point/counterpoint regulars Shelley (the voice of science) and Peter (the voice of faith), comment on the story.

The Voice of Science: Shelley Greene, Ph.D., comments:
It is the duty of education and educators to present students with a wide variety of viewpoints, especially those students with young and developing minds. This would include introducing students to alternatives to evolution theory. Yes, let them learn about and discuss creation theory and intelligent design. However, such discussions belong in a philosophy or religion class, NOT science. Unless a theory is empirically accepted by the scientific community as science, it does not belong in a science class. It especially should not be offered in a science class as a scientific theory, different from but equal to actual scientific theory.

The Brits have given this very issue some careful thought, and have chosen a wise solution. They allow open debate of creation theory, atheism, intelligent design, and Darwin. These debates are held in high school religion classes – banned altogether from science courses. Here, in American, this debate is stirring, like it or not. It will rage in our schools, in our churches, at home, in shopping mall parking lots, whether 'supervised' or not. In the schools, administrators and teachers can provide healthy containers for this debate, in any number of contexts: debate class, religion class, government, philosophy, sociology, ….. But please, keep this debate out of the science class. It will confuse the developing minds of our children.


The Voice of Faith: Peter Williamson, M.Div., comments:
The scientist or teacher who oppose an open criticism of evolution theory not only betray their integrity, they are dancing to the Double Standard two-step. It is a matter of integrity (or lack thereof) to abide (or not) by one's professional code. In the science community, that code is based on open-minded investigation and hypothetical inquiry. One is willing not just to question anything and everything, but to be questioned, with a willingness to be proven wrong and let the light of truth prevail.

It is a tremendous act of double standard when one chooses to selectively ignore or reject their own ethical code. The bottom line: scientists are afraid of truths they cannot explain. They relegate such truths to ignorance, immature thinking, religious blather, or the gibberish of foolish idealists. Secular scientists have claimed for themselves a holy ground of atheistic, materialist predetermination. They have drawn a neat and tidy circle around a realm of what is possible. They carefully guard its perimeter, lest any stray and questionable ideas enter and taint the purity of science.

They fear the loss of their science as they determine it to be. They fear it so much that they have turned their back on the very founding principles of scientific inquiry. It is an act of grave double standard and an unconscionable disservice to our children, who deserve to explore and discover the truth for themselves.


Monday, May 28, 2007

Baby Dinosaurs in Noah's Ark!

Transcript of today's show:

Yes, there were baby dinosaurs in Noah's Ark, according to Australian evangelist Ken Ham, whose Creation Musuem opens this Memorial Day. The Baby Dinosaurs were in the Ark because they were small enough to fit and co-existed with mankind on an Earth that is only 6,000 years old, according to Answers in Genesis, the organization responsible for the Museum opening May 28th near Cincinnati, Ohio. Source: Dylan T. Lovan/Associated Press

Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story (mp3)

Sound Off: Science & Faith. Our point/counterpoint regulars Shelley (the voice of science) and Peter (the voice of faith), comment on the story.

The Voice of Science: Shelley Greene, Ph.D., comments:
Sure, Ken, go ahead and rewrite anthropological history. Hey, your guess might be as good as anyone elses'. Though it's too bad you don't like that carbon dating thing. I understand how it completely throws off your biblical data vis-à-vis the age of the earth, the time of the dinosaurs and the date of Noah's voyage. So, yeah, if the empirical tool doesn't support your theory, hell yes, throw it out! (And don't let the scientists' vehement disapproval of that practice deter you. What do they know? Most of them are atheists!).

And Ken, if you're going to ditch a precision scientific tool, carbon dating is the perfect choice: now you can date historical events to your heart's content! For a Biblical literalist, you can get a lot of mileage out of this one. Brilliant, Ken, you've done it again.

The Voice of Faith: Peter Williamson, M.Div., comments:
They said it couldn’t be done. By “they” I mean the godless Darwinists who claim that Biblical knowledge cannot be reconciled with science. Ken Ham has done so seamlessly, elegantly and with a child-friendly presentation. He has not left science behind, as the unbelieving naysayers insist. The quality of the exhibits and the science from which they were conceived and created rival the best natural history museums in the world. It is not what Ken Ham 'left out' that makes this museum so controversial, it’s what he has revealed -- the Gospel truth about our origins, which incidentally, hundreds of millions of Christians and Jews have accepted for thousands of years. This museum is for their edification and pleasure. And for you who cannot handle the Truth, take the kids to DisneyWorld.


Friday, April 13, 2007

Britain pulls the evolution controversy out of science classes

Transcript of today's show:

British students may soon be debating creationism and intelligent design alongside Darwinism and atheism in their high school religion classes. New government guidelines will pull this topic out of science classes, hoping to avoid the contentious debates that have pitted religion against science in the US. The British school officials endorse neither side of the debate, but they do believe that creationism and intelligent design should be understood and openly discussed by students. [source: Paul Majendie/Reuters]

Listen to the 1-minute broadcast of this story [mp3]

Sound Off: Science & Faith. Our point/counterpoint regulars Shelley (the voice of science) and Peter (the voice of faith), comment on the story.

The Voice of Science: Shelley Greene, Ph.D., comments:
What a disastrous state of affairs when scientists have to band togther to defend the validity and legitimacy of science itself. Scientific method and understanding have produced most everything we enjoy and take advantage of in the living of our daily lives. I dearly hope this protest sends a signal to school board administrators that Biblical allegory is not equivalent to science and does not belong in our science classrooms.


The Voice of Faith: Peter Williamson, M.Div., comments:
Half or more Americans -- spanning every religious denomination -- say they do not believe we have descended from apes. Our children want to know where they came from, where the world they live in came from. They ask these questions. Are our children in fact silently crying out for an alternative explanation to their own origin? Do they not deserve to hear other viewpoints and possibilities? Sadly, the scientists who make this protest, and others certainly, are satisfied to offer only one account of the origin of life on earth, and it is neither a compelling nor inspiring one.