Remember how I told people to Vote "no" on Bill Wenmark, the creationist school board member in the Minnetonka school district? Well, you did. Or at least that subset of you eligible to vote in that local election did. Bill Wenmark is out, and good people have been elected. The last vestiges of Intelligent Design creationism have been, ahem, expelled from one school district.
I think it was intended to be an unfavorable comparison, but the ambiguity of the phrasing does leave open the possibility that Ben Stein is accusing Einstein of having a closed mind.
What we see below are two views of Intelligent Design’s place in science. One quote is from a brilliant, open minded and humble man…the other from a man typical of those who believe that they know better, but who don’t have much to offer, other than a closed-mind.
“My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God.”
Albert Einstein (Nobel prize for Physics in 1921)
"Those crazy rascals behind Expelled have some new games they want to play: they’ve put out a casting call for victims of persecution. It’s a pitiful plea, but it will probably net a nice collection of complaints – because it’s true. We do reject Intelligent Design from the academy, from science, and from science education, and there’s a very good reason for that: it’s the same reason we reject astrology, alchemy, creationism, haruspication, necromancy, ornithomancy, and witchcraft from our science courses. Because they aren’t science."
PZ Myers, Neo-Darwinist, blog author and Wisconsin professor
A post from "EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed" spokesperson Ben Stein follows; it continues in the wondrously open – science view of Einstein, and provides an important perspective regarding academic freedom, and the right of every scientist, educator and researcher to pursue the evidence wherever it may lead, free from the persecution of The State, "Big Science" or lesser men wishing to impose an anti-theistic, materialistic worldview on our students, under the guise of “science.”
OK, not really. They’re trying to say mean things about me. I did have a couple of quick impressions about Stein’s remarks, though.
I hate to say it, but Einstein sure could talk like an airy-fairy ditz at times.
It was very nice of them to include enough of my quote to get the full meaning.
The quote is actually from a post where I commend a college student for speaking out against creationist B.S., which makes it a bit ironic.
I stand by my words. Good for me!
WISCONSIN!?!! Damn you, Ben Stein. Damn you to hell.
Perhaps you haven’t noticed, but we’ve got a serial spammer in the comments. This twit, calling himself Peter Moore (also known as Ken DeMyer, or Kdbuffalo, as he was known on Wikipedia before being banned there), is repeating himself over and over again, asking the same stupid question, never satisfied with any answer anyone gives him. Forty nine insipid comments in three days is enough.
I will answer him one last time. Any further attempt to spam multiple comment threads with his demands (and this alone makes him an ass: an incompetent, unqualified hack like Moore is in no position to make demands) will result in his immediate banning.
Don’t you just love how Mike Behe is getting a serial reaming from a ‘mere’ student?
How can you not believe in creationism when such famous authorities in biology and human anatomy accept it?
No three words are more pregnant with the promise of error in a conversation with a creationist than to hear them say “what evolution predicts…”. It’s practically a guarantee that you’re going to hear something bizarre and fundamentally erroneous — but it is at least a good start on identifying basic misconceptions. Orac has found a doozy, a creationist who goes on at remarkable length, building a house of cards on a few flimsy premises. He’s dealt with it thoroughly, so I just want to focus on one piece of Pat Sullivan’s deeply flawed understanding of evolution.
I mentioned that Eric Hovind, son of Kent, was lecturing lying at Shakopee this weekend. A reader, Evan Olcott, made the trip and has reported back.
You guys are so unlucky. You don’t get to regularly read the glory that is the awesome creationist Neal. I shall be generous and share a few of his latest rants with you.
Note: the language in these comments is about what you’d expect from a potty-mouthed 8-year-old. You have been warned.
Those crazy rascals behind Expelled have some new games they want to play: they’ve put out a casting call for victims of persecution. It’s a pitiful plea, but it will probably net a nice collection of complaints — because it’s true. We do reject Intelligent Design from the academy, from science, and from science education, and there’s a very good reason for that: it’s the same reason we reject astrology, alchemy, creationism, haruspication, necromancy, ornithomancy, and witchcraft from our science courses. Because they aren’t science.
Taylor Kessinger gets it. He’s a junior at the University of Arizona who wrote a nice, lucid opinion piece for the school paper.
What an amusing find: a grad level course taught by creationists that claims it is impossible to write out 10262 in decimal notation, which prompts Tiny Frog to immediately commit heresy by writing it out. You’ll burn in hell for that, Tiny Frog!
That’s not the only lunacy on the creationist page. Try these:
Probability experts point out that if the chances are greater than 1 in 1050, it will never happen.
There is absolutely no chance that the creation could have happened by chance (as you point out in your mathematical computations). Although, if there is theoretically a one in 10262 chance that the world could have happened this way, then in the everlasting eternity of time this (the current universe) could be that one in 10262 chance. In order for probability to be put in effect, there needs to be an actor. E.g., in order for a set of dice to come up snake eyes, someone needs to shake and throw them. If I place the dice on a table, what are the chances that I will get snake eyes? None. That is, none until someone acts on the dice. God needed to be present as an actor in the beginning or nothing could have happened.
The truth is that God made you and me. One day we will all give an account to Him of our lives. Why is it important to believe in the Creator and not in evolution? What impact will that have on our eternity?
Evaluation: Students will be monitored by teacher observation during the classroom discussion, group work and answering the appropriate questions. Reflection paragraphs will be collected. The teacher will try to determine the students’ new courage and ability to defend their belief in the Creator.
Right. This is what creationists consider to be good science.
