Anti-evolution movie making liberal reviewers furious!

FluffyMcDeath said:
Just check out this clip of Ben on Hannity and Colmes and wait for Ben's final comment which tells you exactly what the agenda is.
Click to expand...
Clearly Ben Stein does NOT understand the Theory of Evolution. Ben Stein makes the correct statement that Darwin has nothing useful to say about how life began, or how the universe began, or how gravity began, or physics, or fluid dynamics. Then he asks the question of why attribute those to Darwinist causes? The answer is simple the Theory of Evolution attributes NONE of those to Darwinist causes. He somehow thinks it does. He's certainly not undertanding the Theory of Evolution.

The film is a plea for Academic Freedom. Academic Freedom is all good in theory. But even more important is Academic Standards. Stein failed to make any case that his rejected throngs of IDiots were able to show they lived up to Academia.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Just check out this clip of Ben on Hannity and Colmes and wait for Ben's final comment which tells you exactly what the agenda is.
Click to expand...
Clearly Ben Stein does NOT understand the Theory of Evolution. Ben Stein makes the correct statement that Darwin has nothing useful to say about how life began, or how the universe began, or how gravity began, or physics, or fluid dynamics. Then he asks the question of why attribute those to Darwinist causes? The answer is simple the Theory of Evolution attributes NONE of those to Darwinist causes. He somehow thinks it does. He's certainly not undertanding the Theory of Evolution.

The film is a plea for Academic Freedom. Academic Freedom is all good in theory. But even more important is Academic Standards. Stein failed to make any case that his rejected throngs of IDiots were able to show they lived up to Academia.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Just check out this clip of Ben on Hannity and Colmes and wait for Ben's final comment which tells you exactly what the agenda is.
Click to expand...
Clearly Ben Stein does NOT understand the Theory of Evolution. Ben Stein makes the correct statement that Darwin has nothing useful to say about how life began, or how the universe began, or how gravity began, or physics, or fluid dynamics. Then he asks the question of why attribute those to Darwinist causes? The answer is simple the Theory of Evolution attributes NONE of those to Darwinist causes. He somehow thinks it does. He's certainly not undertanding the Theory of Evolution.

The film is a plea for Academic Freedom. Academic Freedom is all good in theory. But even more important is Academic Standards. Stein failed to make any case that his rejected throngs of IDiots were able to show they lived up to Academia.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Just check out this clip of Ben on Hannity and Colmes and wait for Ben's final comment which tells you exactly what the agenda is.
Click to expand...
Clearly Ben Stein does NOT understand the Theory of Evolution. Ben Stein makes the correct statement that Darwin has nothing useful to say about how life began, or how the universe began, or how gravity began, or physics, or fluid dynamics. Then he asks the question of why attribute those to Darwinist causes? The answer is simple the Theory of Evolution attributes NONE of those to Darwinist causes. He somehow thinks it does. He's certainly not undertanding the Theory of Evolution.

The film is a plea for Academic Freedom. Academic Freedom is all good in theory. But even more important is Academic Standards. Stein failed to make any case that his rejected throngs of IDiots were able to show they lived up to Academia.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Just check out this clip of Ben on Hannity and Colmes and wait for Ben's final comment which tells you exactly what the agenda is.
Click to expand...
Clearly Ben Stein does NOT understand the Theory of Evolution. Ben Stein makes the correct statement that Darwin has nothing useful to say about how life began, or how the universe began, or how gravity began, or physics, or fluid dynamics. Then he asks the question of why attribute those to Darwinist causes? The answer is simple the Theory of Evolution attributes NONE of those to Darwinist causes. He somehow thinks it does. He's certainly not undertanding the Theory of Evolution.

The film is a plea for Academic Freedom. Academic Freedom is all good in theory. But even more important is Academic Standards. Stein failed to make any case that his rejected throngs of IDiots were able to show they lived up to Academia.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
Just check out this clip of Ben on Hannity and Colmes and wait for Ben's final comment which tells you exactly what the agenda is.
Click to expand...
Clearly Ben Stein does NOT understand the Theory of Evolution. Ben Stein makes the correct statement that Darwin has nothing useful to say about how life began, or how the universe began, or how gravity began, or physics, or fluid dynamics. Then he asks the question of why attribute those to Darwinist causes? The answer is simple the Theory of Evolution attributes NONE of those to Darwinist causes. He somehow thinks it does. He's certainly not undertanding the Theory of Evolution.

The film is a plea for Academic Freedom. Academic Freedom is all good in theory. But even more important is Academic Standards. Stein failed to make any case that his rejected throngs of IDiots were able to show they lived up to Academia.
 
faethor said:
Clearly Ben Stein does NOT understand the Theory of Evolution. Ben Stein makes the correct statement that Darwin has nothing useful to say about how life began, or how the universe began, or how gravity began, or physics, or fluid dynamics. Then he asks the question of why attribute those to Darwinist causes?
Click to expand...

The answer is so that he can criticize evolution in those terms. This is the classic strawman. Set up a parody of that which you criticize and then knock down the parody.

Also I liked the way that he conflated evolution with Hitler and then denied that he had done so and claim it's Colme's interpretation. Slippery and reprehensible. I guess Ben has problems with accepting responsibility. It's not really a great advertisement for his principle thesis to wit: You can't be moral without god but having god, conversely, imparts morality. Either the thesis is thus disproved or Ben don't got God.

The third alternative is that it is moral to lie and trick and scheme if it is in the name of God, which is a pretty relative bit of moralism.
 
faethor said:
Clearly Ben Stein does NOT understand the Theory of Evolution. Ben Stein makes the correct statement that Darwin has nothing useful to say about how life began, or how the universe began, or how gravity began, or physics, or fluid dynamics. Then he asks the question of why attribute those to Darwinist causes?
Click to expand...

The answer is so that he can criticize evolution in those terms. This is the classic strawman. Set up a parody of that which you criticize and then knock down the parody.

Also I liked the way that he conflated evolution with Hitler and then denied that he had done so and claim it's Colme's interpretation. Slippery and reprehensible. I guess Ben has problems with accepting responsibility. It's not really a great advertisement for his principle thesis to wit: You can't be moral without god but having god, conversely, imparts morality. Either the thesis is thus disproved or Ben don't got God.

The third alternative is that it is moral to lie and trick and scheme if it is in the name of God, which is a pretty relative bit of moralism.
 
faethor said:
Clearly Ben Stein does NOT understand the Theory of Evolution. Ben Stein makes the correct statement that Darwin has nothing useful to say about how life began, or how the universe began, or how gravity began, or physics, or fluid dynamics. Then he asks the question of why attribute those to Darwinist causes?
Click to expand...

The answer is so that he can criticize evolution in those terms. This is the classic strawman. Set up a parody of that which you criticize and then knock down the parody.

Also I liked the way that he conflated evolution with Hitler and then denied that he had done so and claim it's Colme's interpretation. Slippery and reprehensible. I guess Ben has problems with accepting responsibility. It's not really a great advertisement for his principle thesis to wit: You can't be moral without god but having god, conversely, imparts morality. Either the thesis is thus disproved or Ben don't got God.

The third alternative is that it is moral to lie and trick and scheme if it is in the name of God, which is a pretty relative bit of moralism.
 
faethor said:
Clearly Ben Stein does NOT understand the Theory of Evolution. Ben Stein makes the correct statement that Darwin has nothing useful to say about how life began, or how the universe began, or how gravity began, or physics, or fluid dynamics. Then he asks the question of why attribute those to Darwinist causes?
Click to expand...

The answer is so that he can criticize evolution in those terms. This is the classic strawman. Set up a parody of that which you criticize and then knock down the parody.

Also I liked the way that he conflated evolution with Hitler and then denied that he had done so and claim it's Colme's interpretation. Slippery and reprehensible. I guess Ben has problems with accepting responsibility. It's not really a great advertisement for his principle thesis to wit: You can't be moral without god but having god, conversely, imparts morality. Either the thesis is thus disproved or Ben don't got God.

The third alternative is that it is moral to lie and trick and scheme if it is in the name of God, which is a pretty relative bit of moralism.
 
faethor said:
Clearly Ben Stein does NOT understand the Theory of Evolution. Ben Stein makes the correct statement that Darwin has nothing useful to say about how life began, or how the universe began, or how gravity began, or physics, or fluid dynamics. Then he asks the question of why attribute those to Darwinist causes?
Click to expand...

The answer is so that he can criticize evolution in those terms. This is the classic strawman. Set up a parody of that which you criticize and then knock down the parody.

Also I liked the way that he conflated evolution with Hitler and then denied that he had done so and claim it's Colme's interpretation. Slippery and reprehensible. I guess Ben has problems with accepting responsibility. It's not really a great advertisement for his principle thesis to wit: You can't be moral without god but having god, conversely, imparts morality. Either the thesis is thus disproved or Ben don't got God.

The third alternative is that it is moral to lie and trick and scheme if it is in the name of God, which is a pretty relative bit of moralism.
 
faethor said:
Clearly Ben Stein does NOT understand the Theory of Evolution. Ben Stein makes the correct statement that Darwin has nothing useful to say about how life began, or how the universe began, or how gravity began, or physics, or fluid dynamics. Then he asks the question of why attribute those to Darwinist causes?
Click to expand...

The answer is so that he can criticize evolution in those terms. This is the classic strawman. Set up a parody of that which you criticize and then knock down the parody.

Also I liked the way that he conflated evolution with Hitler and then denied that he had done so and claim it's Colme's interpretation. Slippery and reprehensible. I guess Ben has problems with accepting responsibility. It's not really a great advertisement for his principle thesis to wit: You can't be moral without god but having god, conversely, imparts morality. Either the thesis is thus disproved or Ben don't got God.

The third alternative is that it is moral to lie and trick and scheme if it is in the name of God, which is a pretty relative bit of moralism.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top