Ben Stein Expelled

[Xakk]

Originally Posted by Eomer

My last post had one personal attack in it. One. And technically I said the statement was retarded, not you.

If its aggressive and contains curse words he'll probably consider it a "personal" attack.

[Smocca]

Originally Posted by Xakk

If its aggressive and contains curse words he'll probably consider it a "personal" attack.

Also, if it disputes what he believes and he can't come up with a retort, he'll probably consider it a personal attack.

[Jedah]

Originally Posted by Screamfeeder

You're right. The Geology Cabal in unholy concert with the 4th Paleontology Reich got together back in 1896 and created radioactive isotope decay.

I'm normally a pretty ardent defender of religious belief (more accurately the cultural beliefs in an ordered universe that foment them) and a really big detractor of positivism, but I can't for the life of me conceive of how someone could think there's any emotional investment in evolution whatsoever.

[Aamina]

Originally Posted by Tea on tuesday

I believe in logic and reason, and following those to their ultimate conclusion leads to a disbelief in the likelyhood of God.

Well that just solves it right there.

[Arakkis]

Are you guys done having your little circle jerk?

Look how fucking rabid you people get when I try and get some answers for things I have been wondering from a person that seems qualified to answer them. I posted some creationist arguments, that as much as you guys want to believe have simple answers, they do not. See, this is neat little trick people do when they are presented with dissenting opinions, they attack the person giving them and claim that the person is stupid for having those opinions. It's called ad hominem, look it up. The most vehement of you can eat a dick, because frankly your opinions are laughable. You are not adding to the debate the adults are trying to have, you are simply throwing around insults like children. Now the folks that responded to my call for civility are the true academics and I thank you for your restraint.

To answer some questions, yes I am quite knowledgeable in genetics. I don't like to throw my credentials around because I think it is pompous. But since some of you have asked, I am a PhD student in Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology with a comajor in Neuroscience at a Big 12 school. I did my undergraduate at a SUNY school in NY. That is as much info as I would like to give out thanks. So while my knowledge of genetics and molecular biology is pretty good, my knowledge of comparative anatomy and paleontology is gleaned only from one or two undergraduate classes and my own reading. So yes, I will throw creationist links at people to see what they can come up with to refute them. It is unfortunate, but most of the evolutionist sites do the same bullshit that many of you are doing.

And I have seen MANY scientific debates and none of them get as personal and nasty as this one. I have witnessed first hand professors denied tenure because of their beliefs when they were not even in the biological sciences. So yes Tea, as much as you think this is simply you defending science from the scary unwashed masses, it is much deeper and darker than that.

Now Screamfeeder, calm the fuck down. I will hold your goddamn hand and VERY SLOWLY walk you through my thought process.

From Seymouriamorpha

Small aquatic larvae bearing external gills are known in some seymouriamorphs

Amphibians.

From DIADECTOMORPHA

Diadectomorphs is a group of tetrapods characterized by an amniote like skeleton, but extremely plesiomorphic, they are derived in having a single median postparietal, otic trough in the ventral flange of opisthotic, axial intercentrum with strong anterior process and humerus short and robust without shaft. Till today their amniote nature is still debated, and in general they are considered the sister group of all the other amniotes, but Berman suggested a possible closest relationship with synapsids.

Not amphibians.

From Introduction to the Synapsida

These pre-mammalian groups of synapsids have at times been called "mammal-like reptiles".

Reptiles? Mammals?

From Diadectomorpha - Biocrawler, the free encyclopedia

Diadectomorpha are a clade of large reptile-like amphibians

Amphibians? wtf? Transitional fossil?

See how these classifications can get fucking confusing? Maybe they seem simple to someone who has studied them for quite a while and can remember all the 8 syllable Latin names, but it is not easy to wade through all this without some help. So get off your high horse and educate this humble dolt, oh great high bone digger.

[Screamfeeder]

Originally Posted by Website

Small aquatic larvae bearing external gills are known in some seymouriamorphs

Some should really read "very few".

Seymouriamorphs are classified as reptilemorphs and are not amphibians. They have amphibian like characteristics but are most certainly reptiliomorphs.

Diadectomorphs are just plain confusing and I do apologize. As of RIGHT now, they are not considered reptiles or amphibians but rather they hang in tetrapod/amniote limbo where they have stayed for the last 8 years or so.

The over riding point behind all of this talk of ancient lizard/fish/frogs is that Duane Gish incorrectly stated that Seymoria and Diadectes are being touted as ancient transitions of Hylonomus and Paleothyri. There may be a massive debate over whether or not certain biological parts of one or the other are present in other forms, but the article you originally linked was wrong for the reasons I have been stating.

I had some link to a huge peer-reviewed taxonomy website that I know might give some insight but I can't for the life of me remember it.

[Indiana]

Originally Posted by Arakkis

Are you guys done having your little circle jerk? Look how fucking rabid you people get when I try and get some answers for things I have been wondering from a person that seems qualified to answer them. I posted some creationist arguments, that as much as you guys want to believe have simple answers, they do not. See, this is neat little trick people do when they are presented with dissenting opinions, they attack the person giving them and claim that the person is stupid for having those opinions. It's called ad hominem, look it up. The most vehement of you can eat a dick, because frankly your opinions are laughable. You are not adding to the debate the adults are trying to have, you are simply throwing around insults like children. Now the folks that responded to my call for civility are the true academics and I thank you for your restraint.

Why is it it the pro-logic peoples fault, that they are in absolute majority? Your views are in the extreme minority, on this board and thankfully in most of the world. You have been absolutely carpet bombed by reason by some very smart, well informed and above all patient people for months. Very rarely has anyone launched anything remotely like a personal attack on you. You're playing the martyr role, because deep down you know you're on the losing end of an argument,

[Xakk]

Originally Posted by Arakkis

Are you guys done having your little circle jerk?

NOPE.

Originally Posted by Arakkis

Look how fucking rabid you people get when I try and get some answers for things I have been wondering from a person that seems qualified to answer them. I posted some creationist arguments, that as much as you guys want to believe have simple answers, they do not.

It doesn't matter if they had the most complex answers ever, its still wrong. Modern biology wouldn't exist today without evolution through natural selection.
To believe that evolution doesn't take place is intellectually degrading and at many times is as bad as Kent Hovid/Young Earth Creationist theories.

Originally Posted by Arakkis

See, this is neat little trick people do when they are presented with dissenting opinions, they attack the person giving them and claim that the person is stupid for having those opinions. It's called ad hominem, look it up.

I never called you stupid, are you delusional?

Originally Posted by Arakkis

The most vehement of you can eat a dick, because frankly your opinions are laughable. You are not adding to the debate the adults are trying to have

Originally Posted by Arakkis

So get off your high horse and educate this humble dolt, oh great high bone digger.

Originally Posted by Arakkis

Dawkins can suck my cock.

[Arbitrary]

Originally Posted by Arakkis

Are you guys done having your little circle jerk?

You keep that up and we'll call don our mystical white lab coats and blessed safety goggles and channel dark powers through a biochem lab to sculpt the Unified Theory of Arakkis Had Got Ass Cancer.

[Arakkis]

Originally Posted by Indiana

Why is it it the pro-logic peoples fault, that they are in absolute majority? Your views are in the extreme minority, on this board and thankfully in most of the world. You have been absolutely carpet bombed by reason by some very smart, well informed and above all patient people for months. Very rarely has anyone launched anything remotely like a personal attack on you. You're playing the martyr role, because deep down you know you're on the losing end of an argument,

Bullshit. I clicked on all the links Screamfeeder posted and most of them were just pics with no explaination. The ones that did have text sounded silly to me so I pointed out a few examples. Immediately, people started questioning my intelligence. Clearly if I dare to point out some creationist arguments I must be a moron. Or maybe the people that are calling me stupid don't know enough to rebut those arguments and should just let the educated people talk.

Originally Posted by Arbitrary

You keep that up and we'll call don our mystical white lab coats and blessed safety goggles and channel dark powers through a biochem lab to sculpt the Unified Theory of Arakkis Had Got Ass Cancer.

It's ok, I got my armor, lol.

[Millie]

Once again I'm going to step in and ask people politely not to attack each other on this thread. Please attack each other's arguments, not each other personally.

Thanks.

[Screamfeeder]

Originally Posted by Arakkis

Bullshit. I clicked on all the links Screamfeeder posted and most of them were just pics with no explaination.

That entire post was addressed to Actovus and then I reposted it in reply to Eliyahu FoR.

I simply included pictures with my own dumbed down commentary because both of those people claimed there is no evidence of transitional fossils. That entire post was simply an explanation of what a transtitional fossil is, and then example after example of transitional fossils(which remember, they both said did not exist).

Originally Posted by Arakkis

The ones that did have text sounded silly to me so I pointed out a few examples.

You commented on only one of them(Paleothyris) and your comment was simply a link to a Creationist website that listed false claims made by discredited Creationist biologist Duane Gish.

You are more than free to google all 24 of the other listed fossils and see if any of the other text sounds silly to you.

The one that you did comment on I hopefully cleared up for you.

Originally Posted by Arakkis

Immediately, people started questioning my intelligence. Clearly if I dare to point out some creationist arguments I must be a moron.

It comes down to this.

I say the sky is red and post a link that says the sky is red.

Tea for Tuesday gives some information about atmospheric light scattering and posts a link that gives more detailed evidence that the sky is not red and only THEN does he call me intellectually lazy for not looking out the window.

There is NO Creationist argument. There never has been one and I am 99.9% sure there never will be one(at least on the subject of the biological evolution of species). So your persistence that Creationist arguments have validity in a discussion of biological evolution is what causes people to question your schooling and your level of critical thinking. I can see where you are coming from having witnessed a peer being academically ostracized for whatever reasons concerning the subject of Creationism, but frankly, if he was trying to seriously tackle the issue of "Intelligent Design", his research should have lasted about 4 hours and his conclusion (if it was based on evidence) should have been that "Intelligent Design" is not science and not worth the academic treatment it has been lucky to get.

Millie: I find your ideas retarded. You are a cherished member of the human species, but your ideas warrant no scrutiny for they are the most debased and pedantic I have ever encountered. I provide no evidence for these claims.

[Arakkis]

I don't think you are giving creationist scientists enough credit Screamfeeder. Behe's book, Darwin's Black Box was very well thought out and written when it came out. It actually inspired quite a bit of research by people who wanted to prove it wrong. Now granted, most of Behe's examples have been rebuked, but only after people went back to the lab to find answers. I think that this is the essence of scientific debate and progress and should be encouraged. Just think how much better off we would be as a species if churches funded research.

And the professor that was denied tenure was in an astrology department. Pretty fucked up huh?

♥ Millie

[voodoochile78]

Originally Posted by Arakkis

And the professor that was denied tenure was in an astrology department. Pretty fucked up huh?

I hope you mean Astronomy. It would be pretty fucked up if any school had an astrology department.

[Millie]

Originally Posted by Screamfeeder

Millie: I find your ideas retarded.