FREE TAPATALK APP

EGarrett · 27th June 2008, 10:31 AM

I'm sure this has been referenced already, but it needs its own devotional thread plus this amazing video response.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

technoextreme · 28th June 2008, 08:03 AM

Originally Posted by EGarrett

I'm sure this has been referenced already, but it needs its own devotional thread plus this amazing video response.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Did Ben Stein really say this? Also, the video was hilarious.

JoeEllison · 28th June 2008, 08:12 AM

Originally Posted by technoextreme

Did Ben Stein really say this? Also, the video was hilarious.

Yes, he really did.

Eos of the Eons · 28th June 2008, 03:50 PM

hmph. Letter to the editor today. Proclaiming that ben's movie proves evolution is evil, stupid, and totally never happened. Letter ends by encouraging everyone to see it. Yay.

I hate my city. I'd respond, but I'm incognito lately due to needing to make a living. Hm. Maybe I should write something up anonymously and tape it to all sides of that HUGE parables bookstore in town. That should get some attention.

MattusMaximus · 28th June 2008, 04:41 PM

Originally Posted by technoextreme

Did Ben Stein really say this? Also, the video was hilarious.

Yes, he really did - and it isn't an out-of-context b.s. quote mine either. Here's a reference on this (including a link to video footage): Science Equals Murder

ETA: Eos, you should write a letter in response telling everyone about the Expelled Exposed website and Stein's idiotic "Science leads you to killing people" quote.

Eos of the Eons · 28th June 2008, 04:46 PM

Here is the letter:

Quote:

Recently I attended a private showing of the new controversial documentary titled Expelled.
The full length movie featuring Ben Stein was revealing, saddening, and definitely thought provoking.
I urge all your readers to go and see Expelled when it opens June 27. It becomes painfully obvious, early on in the movie that evolution is a compounded chaotic mess of international lies and deception.
Evolout should be called devil-usion because it is simply not true

They don't teach evolution in any shape or form in schools here, so nobody here (who hasn't taken college biology courses) knows what evolution is anyways. This "documentary" and what they are told in churches will be all they will ever know about evolution, and of course they will never know otherwise. Of course science leads to killing people. And my classmates last year said that scientists were all cold-hearted selfish money hungry monsters.

ServiceSoon · 28th June 2008, 04:47 PM

Crusades?

Doctor Evil · 28th June 2008, 04:48 PM

There is only one appropriate response:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

MattusMaximus · 28th June 2008, 04:54 PM

Originally Posted by Eos of the Eons

They don't teach evolution in any shape or form in schools here, so nobody here (who hasn't taken college biology courses) knows what evolution is anyways. This "documentary" and what they are told in churches will be all they will ever know about evolution, and of course they will never know otherwise.

I would encourage you to write a letter in response. You might be pleasantly surprised to find out that a number of people in your neck of the woods agree with you. If the anti-scientists keep people from speaking out against them, then they win by default. They want you quiet and scared - don't give them what they want.

Eos of the Eons · 28th June 2008, 04:58 PM

Nah. I'm out. I've already been fired once this year. I need my current job, and everyone there is already demonstrating their lack science knowledge. I don't need to stir the pot there any more than I already have about fricken aspartame of all things. I've bitten my tongue so many times on so many other things. It drives me crazy, but my kids gotta eat.

EGarrett · 28th June 2008, 04:59 PM

Originally Posted by technoextreme

Did Ben Stein really say this? Also, the video was hilarious.

Yes. I know it sounds too ridiculous to believe. But it's true. He said it, and he MEANT it. Not out of context, no mistaken or hasty speaking. He meant it all the way.

starts about 53 seconds in...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Originally Posted by Ben Stein

The father would be off on compulsory work. The mother would have already been gassed, so they would take the child and give him or her an overdose of barbiturates to kill him. And that was horrifying beyond words. And that's where, in my opinion, this is just an opinion, that's where science leads you. Love of God and compassion and empathy lead you to a very glorious place. Science leads you to killing people.

Science leads you to killing people.

Science leads you to killing people.

Science leads you to killing people.

Science leads you to killing people.

Science leads you to killing people.

Science leads you to killing people.

Science leads you to killing people.

Travis · 28th June 2008, 05:05 PM

It seems to me that the average human lifespan has been lengthened by science.

Oh, also there are over six billion of us now, I think science might have had something to do with that.

Gord_in_Toronto · 28th June 2008, 08:05 PM

Originally Posted by EGarrett

Yes. I know it sounds too ridiculous to believe. But it's true. He said it, and he MEANT it. Not out of context, no mistaken or hasty speaking. He meant it all the way.

starts about 53 seconds in...

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Science leads you to killing people.

Science leads you to killing people.

Science leads you to killing people.

Science leads you to killing people.

Science leads you to killing people.

Science leads you to killing people.

Science leads you to killing people.

But not right wing, fundamentalist, no nothing, hypocritical, obnoxious blowhards. Fortunately for them.

Yuri Nalyssus · 29th June 2008, 03:31 AM

Originally Posted by Eos of the Eons

Nah. I'm out. I've already been fired once this year. I need my current job, and everyone there is already demonstrating their lack science knowledge. I don't need to stir the pot there any more than I already have about fricken aspartame of all things. I've bitten my tongue so many times on so many other things. It drives me crazy, but my kids gotta eat.

Are you saying you were fired because of your belief in science?

Yuri

Ysidro · 29th June 2008, 09:58 AM

Originally Posted by Travis

It seems to me that the average human lifespan has been lengthened by science.

Oh, also there are over six billion of us now, I think science might have had something to do with that.

Well obviously science did that so there would be more of us to kill!

geni · 29th June 2008, 10:14 AM

The scientific answer to a number of issues is indeed to start killing people unless you decide to specify that killing people is not an acceptable answer. This is true for rather a lot of methods of problem solveing.

Hellbound · 29th June 2008, 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by geni

The scientific answer to a number of issues is indeed to start killing people unless you decide to specify that killing people is not an acceptable answer. This is true for rather a lot of methods of problem solveing.

So, once again, we find that it isn't science that would cause people to start killing; it's a lack or empathy and moral structure that would lead someone to believe it's okay.

Of course, IMHO, it's the exact smae analogy with religion, specifically Protestant Christianity. I believe almost all the non-Catholic sects believe in the innocence of birth (i.e.-children automatically get to heaven, because they haven't had a chance to choose right or wrong yet...they are innocence via ignorance). Logically, then, the best thing to do would be to kill each child immediately on birth, thus ensuring they go to heaven. Also, you make the ultimate sacrifice of your eternal soul for others. Likewise, people should be killed right after they are saved/baptised (depending on sect), as again this is a time when your sins have been "cleansed" and you are, in theory, pure.

It's a non-argument. It's like saying car manufacturing would lead you to drunk driving. IN a sense, yes...but the blame is not on the car manufacturer, but n those using the cars in a unsafe manner.

geni · 29th June 2008, 10:55 AM

Originally Posted by Hellbound

So, once again, we find that it isn't science that would cause people to start killing; it's a lack or empathy and moral structure that would lead someone to believe it's okay.

There are quite a selection of moral structures that allow you to kill people. Empathy doesn't appear to help much either since people tend to kill people they know.

Eos of the Eons · 29th June 2008, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by Yuri Nalyssus

Are you saying you were fired because of your belief in science?

Yuri

I don't understand the question. There is no such thing as "belief in science".

It was more like my calling the Mannatech products being sold by co-workers "interesting" without buying any. Then, upon hearing a co-worker say that "the cancer cure is being suppressed", my asking: "which one? -since there are many types of cancers..." (with co-worker subsequently stomping off after grumbling "don't even get me started"). And then allowing co-workers onto my facebook where I advertised such atrocities as being a "secular humanist" and having articles on why aspartame doesn't actually cause MS and why, and that the iron that ends up in footbath water is not actually toxins from your body, etc. Any of that may have had to do with my getting fired without explanation (after earning the nickname "bitch" for what I felt was a perfectly innocent question about the cancer cure comment) before my probationary period was up. Not sure which one, or which combination. Needless to say, in any way advertising my own viewpoint-no matter how muted, seems to have consequences I'm not willing to deal with again at the moment. You know?
So, when the stupid maltose thing came up at my new work, I bit my tongue and smiled. When the letters to the editor appear in the paper, I grit my teeth and chuck it out.

So, if you want to elaborate on what "belief in science" actually is, then please do so. Is it asking questions and not buying into things that everyone else is without evidence? To me, that is not "belief". Beliefs make you not question, but I question the nonsense I hear in an almost Knee-jerk instinct that gets me in trouble. It seems just belief wouldn't land me in such troubles. So, instead, I'm learning to shut up to save my skin and ensure I can make some kind of living. Yeah, I'm bitter, since I feel I was NOT rude about it. I just asked a freaking question and let people see my personal side. I stick by my sig. There is discrimination against people who just plain old are not believing everything that is actually not in any way scientific.

I had a hard time facing up to it, but am now. I've learned the hard way again. I only have this place where I can be myself, as anonymously as possible. It's like therapy, it keeps me sane. In real life I will shut up, as the consequences were hard to face. I got fired in January, told everyone I quit, and it took 6 months to face the reality and admit to it. It is not skills and hard work that matters, it is conforming to the culture of the workplace in order to survive.

Just like they tell you in church, don't consort with people that are not like you. Discrimate, segregate, and punish. That is the "moral majority" way of doing things. Reverend Boisson is on the moral highground, and you can read all about it. If you deem someone immoral, then declare war. Get rid of those nonbelievers before they pollute society.

If it were about science, then it would not be about belief. It just simply be figuring out how things actually work to make someone or something different, and then not fearing it will pollute you because you would know why it wouldn't.

Hellbound · 29th June 2008, 11:34 AM

Originally Posted by geni

There are quite a selection of moral structures that allow you to kill people. Empathy doesn't appear to help much either since people tend to kill people they know.

I was paraphrasing for brevity WRT moral structures.

As far as empathy, I'd say whether they know the person or not is irrelevent. Empathy is the ability to see things from another's perspective; I don't believe you'd kill someone if that were true (with the exception of some mental illnesses) Label that as opinion.

Eos of the Eons · 29th June 2008, 11:47 AM

Oh, oops, the quote that used to be in my sig was:
"Discrimination against nonbelievers is the last civil rights struggle in which blatant discrimination is viewed as acceptable behavior."-Herb Silverman

MattusMaximus · 29th June 2008, 07:52 PM

Eos, you have my sympathies. I am fortunate enough not to have to deal with such an oppressive environment. Keep on truckin'...

FreshHat · 29th June 2008, 08:07 PM

Originally Posted by Eos of the Eons

I need my current job, and everyone there is already demonstrating their lack science knowledge. I don't need to stir the pot there any more than I already have ...

Science friction?

gdnp · 29th June 2008, 08:28 PM

I'm a bit confused. Where did this video come from?

Skeptic Ginger · 30th June 2008, 01:17 AM

Originally Posted by gdnp

I'm a bit confused. Where did this video come from?

As Mattus pointed out, the actual event was an interview with the Trinity Broadcasting Network.

I don't know who made use of the real interview to make the OP video but I'm sure someone will tell us.

devnull · 30th June 2008, 02:12 AM

Originally Posted by Eos of the Eons

Oh, oops, the quote that used to be in my sig was:
"Discrimination against nonbelievers is the last civil rights struggle in which blatant discrimination is viewed as acceptable behavior."-Herb Silverman

Move to Australia. Non-belief is the norm here. We simply wouldn't put up with such utter nonsense as you've described.

Madalch · 30th June 2008, 10:40 AM

Originally Posted by devnull

Move to Australia. Non-belief is the norm here. We simply wouldn't put up with such utter nonsense as you've described.

Or even move to Edmonton.

Yuri Nalyssus · 30th June 2008, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by Eos of the Eons

I don't understand the question. There is no such thing as "belief in science".

Quite right, thank you for responding in such detail to my clumsy question.

Your situation is incredible and unjust, I can only agree with your previous sig. line, there is so much it is illegal to discriminate against but it's somehow still ok for this covert anti rational anti-science discrimination to go on. In the UK I don't believe the situation is as bad but even still sometimes it pays to employ an 'indirect approach' when issues involving pseudoscience come up. It doesn't do, in certain circles, to be known as someone who makes waves.

I really don't understand why sceptics get a hard time, I'm sure there's something fundamental I'm missing. Maybe it's because we have to be critical, casting doubt on things that people really want to be true; I have heard people complain when their favourite branch of pseudoscience is criticised that they feel this is an insult to their intelligence. It's never intended to be of course, whether someone is right or wrong in their beliefs is nothing to do with their intelligence or what they are like as a person. You can be mistaken without being stupid, no reasonable person will hold it against you.

I suppose what I can't understand is why people would want these things to be true even when they can't be. Surely something is either true or it isn't and if it isn't, well that's that and you move on. Why do people lock on to stuff without looking into it first?

Good luck with your fresh start, maybe your new co-workers will be a bit more broad minded.

Yuri

gdnp · 30th June 2008, 12:15 PM

Originally Posted by skeptigirl

As Mattus pointed out, the actual event was an interview with the Trinity Broadcasting Network.

I don't know who made use of the real interview to make the OP video but I'm sure someone will tell us.

Ah. If the original video had been linked rather than a parody based on one phrase, it would have made more sense.

What are we debating here? I think Ben Stein is right on.

Without science, religious zealots would still be killing people with rocks and sticks. Science has made them far more efficient.

technoextreme · 1st July 2008, 06:07 AM

Originally Posted by Hellbound

Of course, IMHO, it's the exact smae analogy with religion, specifically Protestant Christianity. I believe almost all the non-Catholic sects believe in the innocence of birth (i.e.-children automatically get to heaven, because they haven't had a chance to choose right or wrong yet...they are innocence via ignorance). Logically, then, the best thing to do would be to kill each child immediately on birth, thus ensuring they go to heaven. Also, you make the ultimate sacrifice of your eternal soul for others. Likewise, people should be killed right after they are saved/baptised (depending on sect), as again this is a time when your sins have been "cleansed" and you are, in theory, pure.

I don't think you are right from a theological perspective. It should be easy to find out though because copious amounts of babies died right after they were born. The only thing I remember is that there are essentially mass graves full of them in the cemetaries of Boston. I vaguly remember the reason being that they weren't getting into heaven.

Hellbound · 1st July 2008, 07:32 AM

Originally Posted by technoextreme

I don't think you are right from a theological perspective. It should be easy to find out though because copious amounts of babies died right after they were born. The only thing I remember is that there are essentially mass graves full of them in the cemetaries of Boston. I vaguly remember the reason being that they weren't getting into heaven.

Odd, that seems to fit more with the Catholic idea that the children would go to Purgatory.

However, if it was during the times of the witch trials, then that's differnet. It was thought that the child of a withc was demon-spawn, and had no soul. Thus, killing it wasn't killing a person. Without knowing hte specifics I couldn't say.

Do you have a link with some more info, perhaps?

To my knowledge, most modern Protestent sects believe babies get a free pass. Comes from the Biblical text. Jesus's followers are trying to shoo the children away, and Jesus says (paraphrase): Let them come to me, unless you're like them you won't see Heaven.
Matthew 19:13-15, Mark 10:13-16, Luke 18:15-17
And other comments, such as "in evil be as infants" (1 Corinthians 14:20).

In any case, exactly which sects believe it is more of a side issue (and reflection of my speaking without looking up references); I know several do from personal experience, thus my point stands

Chris Haynes · 1st July 2008, 01:37 PM

Originally Posted by gdnp

Ah. If the original video had been linked rather than a parody based on one phrase, it would have made more sense.

What are we debating here? I think Ben Stein is right on.

Without science, religious zealots would still be killing people with rocks and sticks. Science has made them far more efficient.

I looked, but it is no longer on the TBN website, so that would have been kind of useless.

Yes, science has made it easier to kill people... but it also enables you to communicate with strangers from all over the world on this forum. So if you don't like what science has done, you must stop using it now! Get away from the keyboard, unplug all your appliances, do not buy food that was trucked in, or buy any food that was genetically modified in any way (that includes carrots, broccoli and almost every fruit and veg that were made by selective breeding over the past 1000 years).

But, if you watch the videos here:
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=Thunderf00t , especially about one minute into this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihYq2dGa29M (after Ben Stein says that science leads to killing at 1:09, you will see a list like the paragraph above)... you will see that the "bad science" that Stein is going on about is that Darwin led to eugenics... basically killing off people who are considered subhuman. He claims that this led Hitler to want to exterminate Jews, gays, the disabled, etc. etc. Even though killing people for being Jewish, or not the accepted genealogy had been going on centuries before Darwin was born.

gdnp · 1st July 2008, 02:47 PM

My point exactly. Science has allowed the development of incredibly powerful tools. We can use those tools to save lives or destroy them. To be fair, religion is similar. It can be used to promote harmony and tolerance or discord and hate.

Someone should ask Ben Stein: who was responsible for the deaths during the Spanish Inquisition: the scientists and engineers who invented the tools of torture, or the religious inquisitors who used them?

godless dave · 1st July 2008, 02:48 PM

No, it's true. Martin Luther was heavily influenced by Darwin. You see, Darwin had Nicola Tesla build him a time machine and sent "On the Origin of Species" and "The Descent of Man" back in time so Luther could read them before he wrote about expelling Jews from Europe and burning down synagogues.

INRM · 1st July 2008, 02:58 PM

I think Ben Stein's statement is quite extreme in nature and inaccurate...

True, some applications of science and technology *CAN* lead to people killing each other (Bioweapons, Nuclear Weapons, Guns, Missiles, Grenades, etc), but not all applications of science and technology lead to people killing each other, in fact a great many actually save lives (vaccines, X-Rays, MRI's, PET-scans, Surgical Technology being the most notable examples) and make life easier.

INRM

TobiasTheViking · 1st July 2008, 03:04 PM

because i didn't want to derail i've made a separate thread... but it may be of interest

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=117375 <- A solution to the ben steins of the world

MattusMaximus · 1st July 2008, 09:53 PM

And please check out this post I just put on Tobie's thread. It is my response to someone who (unfortunately) seems to be swallowing Ben Stein's b.s.

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...2&postcount=44

plumjam · 1st July 2008, 10:21 PM

Originally Posted by MattusMaximus

And please check out this post I just put on Tobie's thread. It is my response to someone who (unfortunately) seems to be swallowing Ben Stein's b.s.

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...2&postcount=44

Just in case anyone wasn't going to click on the link, it's me who is swallowing the b.s.
It's worth clicking on, though... if only to observe the onset of Mattus getting his panties slightly in a twist.

godless dave · 2nd July 2008, 11:13 AM

Plumjam, do you have anything to support Stein's statement that science leads to killing people?

jj · 2nd July 2008, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by plumjam

Just in case anyone wasn't going to click on the link, it's me who is swallowing the b.s.
It's worth clicking on, though... if only to observe the onset of Mattus getting his panties slightly in a twist.

Speaking as a scientist with a long career in research, I find the very concept deeply inoffensive, and personally insulting. Can you justify this allegation?

28th June 2008, 03:50 PM	#4
Eos of the Eons Mad Scientist Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Alberta Posts: 13,894	hmph. Letter to the editor today. Proclaiming that ben's movie proves evolution is evil, stupid, and totally never happened. Letter ends by encouraging everyone to see it. Yay. I hate my city. I'd respond, but I'm incognito lately due to needing to make a living. Hm. Maybe I should write something up anonymously and tape it to all sides of that HUGE parables bookstore in town. That should get some attention.
	__________________ Motion affecting a measuring device does not affect what is actually being measured, except to inaccurately measure it. the immaterial world doesn't matter, cause it ain't matter-Jeff Corey my karma ran over my dogma-vbloke The Lateral Truth: An Apostate's Bible Stories by Rebecca Bradley, read it!

28th June 2008, 04:41 PM	#5
MattusMaximus Intellectual Gladiator Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe Posts: 14,204	Originally Posted by technoextreme Did Ben Stein really say this? Also, the video was hilarious. Yes, he really did - and it isn't an out-of-context b.s. quote mine either. Here's a reference on this (including a link to video footage): Science Equals Murder ETA: Eos, you should write a letter in response telling everyone about the Expelled Exposed website and Stein's idiotic "Science leads you to killing people" quote.
	__________________ Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher The Times They Are A-Changin' Last edited by MattusMaximus; 28th June 2008 at 04:43 PM.

28th June 2008, 04:46 PM	#6
Eos of the Eons Mad Scientist Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Alberta Posts: 13,894	Here is the letter: Quote: Recently I attended a private showing of the new controversial documentary titled Expelled. The full length movie featuring Ben Stein was revealing, saddening, and definitely thought provoking. I urge all your readers to go and see Expelled when it opens June 27. It becomes painfully obvious, early on in the movie that evolution is a compounded chaotic mess of international lies and deception. Evolout should be called devil-usion because it is simply not true They don't teach evolution in any shape or form in schools here, so nobody here (who hasn't taken college biology courses) knows what evolution is anyways. This "documentary" and what they are told in churches will be all they will ever know about evolution, and of course they will never know otherwise. Of course science leads to killing people. And my classmates last year said that scientists were all cold-hearted selfish money hungry monsters.
	__________________ Motion affecting a measuring device does not affect what is actually being measured, except to inaccurately measure it. the immaterial world doesn't matter, cause it ain't matter-Jeff Corey my karma ran over my dogma-vbloke The Lateral Truth: An Apostate's Bible Stories by Rebecca Bradley, read it! Last edited by Eos of the Eons; 28th June 2008 at 04:55 PM.

28th June 2008, 04:47 PM	#7
ServiceSoon Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 999	Crusades?
ServiceSoon Muse Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 999

28th June 2008, 04:54 PM	#9
MattusMaximus Intellectual Gladiator Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe Posts: 14,204	Originally Posted by Eos of the Eons They don't teach evolution in any shape or form in schools here, so nobody here (who hasn't taken college biology courses) knows what evolution is anyways. This "documentary" and what they are told in churches will be all they will ever know about evolution, and of course they will never know otherwise. I would encourage you to write a letter in response. You might be pleasantly surprised to find out that a number of people in your neck of the woods agree with you. If the anti-scientists keep people from speaking out against them, then they win by default. They want you quiet and scared - don't give them what they want.
	__________________ Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher The Times They Are A-Changin'

28th June 2008, 08:12 AM	#3
JoeEllison Cuddly Like a Koala Bear Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Florida Posts: 7,276	Originally Posted by technoextreme Did Ben Stein really say this? Also, the video was hilarious. Yes, he really did.

28th June 2008, 04:58 PM	#10
Eos of the Eons Mad Scientist Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Alberta Posts: 13,894	Nah. I'm out. I've already been fired once this year. I need my current job, and everyone there is already demonstrating their lack science knowledge. I don't need to stir the pot there any more than I already have about fricken aspartame of all things. I've bitten my tongue so many times on so many other things. It drives me crazy, but my kids gotta eat.
	__________________ Motion affecting a measuring device does not affect what is actually being measured, except to inaccurately measure it. the immaterial world doesn't matter, cause it ain't matter-Jeff Corey my karma ran over my dogma-vbloke The Lateral Truth: An Apostate's Bible Stories by Rebecca Bradley, read it! Last edited by Eos of the Eons; 28th June 2008 at 04:59 PM. Reason: speeling

28th June 2008, 05:05 PM	#12
Travis Misanthrope of the Mountains Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Tuolumne City, CA Posts: 18,101	It seems to me that the average human lifespan has been lengthened by science. Oh, also there are over six billion of us now, I think science might have had something to do with that.
	__________________ "Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com Zingiber Officinale The Humor blog of some not crazy guy

29th June 2008, 03:31 AM	#14
Yuri Nalyssus Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: The Ancient Isle of Avignuon Posts: 1,083	Originally Posted by Eos of the Eons Nah. I'm out. I've already been fired once this year. I need my current job, and everyone there is already demonstrating their lack science knowledge. I don't need to stir the pot there any more than I already have about fricken aspartame of all things. I've bitten my tongue so many times on so many other things. It drives me crazy, but my kids gotta eat. Are you saying you were fired because of your belief in science? Yuri
	__________________ "The test of democracy is freedom of criticism." -David Ben-Gurion Peasant: Now we see the violence inherent in the system. King: Shut up! Peasant: Come and see the violence inherent in the system, help, help! I’m being repressed! King: Bloody peasant! Peasant: Ooh, what a giveaway, did you hear that... that’s what I’m on about, d’you see him repressing me? You saw it didn’t you... - Monty Python and The Holy Grail

29th June 2008, 09:58 AM	#15
Ysidro I'm watching you Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 5,334	Originally Posted by Travis It seems to me that the average human lifespan has been lengthened by science. Oh, also there are over six billion of us now, I think science might have had something to do with that. Well obviously science did that so there would be more of us to kill!
Ysidro I'm watching you Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 5,334	__________________ This is a sig file. Does anyone even read this stuff?

29th June 2008, 10:14 AM	#16
geni Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: UK Posts: 26,642	The scientific answer to a number of issues is indeed to start killing people unless you decide to specify that killing people is not an acceptable answer. This is true for rather a lot of methods of problem solveing.

29th June 2008, 10:48 AM	#17
Hellbound Abiogenic Spongiform Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: In a handbasket Posts: 9,031	Originally Posted by geni The scientific answer to a number of issues is indeed to start killing people unless you decide to specify that killing people is not an acceptable answer. This is true for rather a lot of methods of problem solveing. So, once again, we find that it isn't science that would cause people to start killing; it's a lack or empathy and moral structure that would lead someone to believe it's okay. Of course, IMHO, it's the exact smae analogy with religion, specifically Protestant Christianity. I believe almost all the non-Catholic sects believe in the innocence of birth (i.e.-children automatically get to heaven, because they haven't had a chance to choose right or wrong yet...they are innocence via ignorance). Logically, then, the best thing to do would be to kill each child immediately on birth, thus ensuring they go to heaven. Also, you make the ultimate sacrifice of your eternal soul for others. Likewise, people should be killed right after they are saved/baptised (depending on sect), as again this is a time when your sins have been "cleansed" and you are, in theory, pure. It's a non-argument. It's like saying car manufacturing would lead you to drunk driving. IN a sense, yes...but the blame is not on the car manufacturer, but n those using the cars in a unsafe manner.

29th June 2008, 10:55 AM	#18
geni Anti-homeopathy illuminati member Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: UK Posts: 26,642	Originally Posted by Hellbound So, once again, we find that it isn't science that would cause people to start killing; it's a lack or empathy and moral structure that would lead someone to believe it's okay. There are quite a selection of moral structures that allow you to kill people. Empathy doesn't appear to help much either since people tend to kill people they know.

29th June 2008, 10:59 AM	#19
Eos of the Eons Mad Scientist Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Alberta Posts: 13,894	Originally Posted by Yuri Nalyssus Are you saying you were fired because of your belief in science? Yuri I don't understand the question. There is no such thing as "belief in science". It was more like my calling the Mannatech products being sold by co-workers "interesting" without buying any. Then, upon hearing a co-worker say that "the cancer cure is being suppressed", my asking: "which one? -since there are many types of cancers..." (with co-worker subsequently stomping off after grumbling "don't even get me started"). And then allowing co-workers onto my facebook where I advertised such atrocities as being a "secular humanist" and having articles on why aspartame doesn't actually cause MS and why, and that the iron that ends up in footbath water is not actually toxins from your body, etc. Any of that may have had to do with my getting fired without explanation (after earning the nickname "bitch" for what I felt was a perfectly innocent question about the cancer cure comment) before my probationary period was up. Not sure which one, or which combination. Needless to say, in any way advertising my own viewpoint-no matter how muted, seems to have consequences I'm not willing to deal with again at the moment. You know? So, when the stupid maltose thing came up at my new work, I bit my tongue and smiled. When the letters to the editor appear in the paper, I grit my teeth and chuck it out. So, if you want to elaborate on what "belief in science" actually is, then please do so. Is it asking questions and not buying into things that everyone else is without evidence? To me, that is not "belief". Beliefs make you not question, but I question the nonsense I hear in an almost Knee-jerk instinct that gets me in trouble. It seems just belief wouldn't land me in such troubles. So, instead, I'm learning to shut up to save my skin and ensure I can make some kind of living. Yeah, I'm bitter, since I feel I was NOT rude about it. I just asked a freaking question and let people see my personal side. I stick by my sig. There is discrimination against people who just plain old are not believing everything that is actually not in any way scientific. I had a hard time facing up to it, but am now. I've learned the hard way again. I only have this place where I can be myself, as anonymously as possible. It's like therapy, it keeps me sane. In real life I will shut up, as the consequences were hard to face. I got fired in January, told everyone I quit, and it took 6 months to face the reality and admit to it. It is not skills and hard work that matters, it is conforming to the culture of the workplace in order to survive. Just like they tell you in church, don't consort with people that are not like you. Discrimate, segregate, and punish. That is the "moral majority" way of doing things. Reverend Boisson is on the moral highground, and you can read all about it. If you deem someone immoral, then declare war. Get rid of those nonbelievers before they pollute society. If it were about science, then it would not be about belief. It just simply be figuring out how things actually work to make someone or something different, and then not fearing it will pollute you because you would know why it wouldn't.
	__________________ Motion affecting a measuring device does not affect what is actually being measured, except to inaccurately measure it. the immaterial world doesn't matter, cause it ain't matter-Jeff Corey my karma ran over my dogma-vbloke The Lateral Truth: An Apostate's Bible Stories by Rebecca Bradley, read it! Last edited by Eos of the Eons; 29th June 2008 at 11:01 AM.

29th June 2008, 11:34 AM	#20
Hellbound Abiogenic Spongiform Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: In a handbasket Posts: 9,031	Originally Posted by geni There are quite a selection of moral structures that allow you to kill people. Empathy doesn't appear to help much either since people tend to kill people they know. I was paraphrasing for brevity WRT moral structures. As far as empathy, I'd say whether they know the person or not is irrelevent. Empathy is the ability to see things from another's perspective; I don't believe you'd kill someone if that were true (with the exception of some mental illnesses) Label that as opinion.

29th June 2008, 11:47 AM	#21
Eos of the Eons Mad Scientist Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Alberta Posts: 13,894	Oh, oops, the quote that used to be in my sig was: "Discrimination against nonbelievers is the last civil rights struggle in which blatant discrimination is viewed as acceptable behavior."-Herb Silverman
	__________________ Motion affecting a measuring device does not affect what is actually being measured, except to inaccurately measure it. the immaterial world doesn't matter, cause it ain't matter-Jeff Corey my karma ran over my dogma-vbloke The Lateral Truth: An Apostate's Bible Stories by Rebecca Bradley, read it!

29th June 2008, 07:52 PM	#22
MattusMaximus Intellectual Gladiator Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe Posts: 14,204	Eos, you have my sympathies. I am fortunate enough not to have to deal with such an oppressive environment. Keep on truckin'...
	__________________ Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher The Times They Are A-Changin'

29th June 2008, 08:07 PM	#23
FreshHat Why, You Little... Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Funky Forest Posts: 1,087	Originally Posted by Eos of the Eons I need my current job, and everyone there is already demonstrating their lack science knowledge. I don't need to stir the pot there any more than I already have ... Science friction?

29th June 2008, 08:28 PM	#24
gdnp useless idiot Join Date: May 2008 Location: New Jersey-You gotta problem wit dat? Posts: 4,999	I'm a bit confused. Where did this video come from?

30th June 2008, 01:17 AM	#25
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,799	Originally Posted by gdnp I'm a bit confused. Where did this video come from? As Mattus pointed out, the actual event was an interview with the Trinity Broadcasting Network. I don't know who made use of the real interview to make the OP video but I'm sure someone will tell us.
	__________________ (*Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.)

30th June 2008, 02:12 AM	#26
devnull Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Perth, Western Australia Posts: 4,537	Originally Posted by Eos of the Eons Oh, oops, the quote that used to be in my sig was: "Discrimination against nonbelievers is the last civil rights struggle in which blatant discrimination is viewed as acceptable behavior."-Herb Silverman Move to Australia. Non-belief is the norm here. We simply wouldn't put up with such utter nonsense as you've described.
	__________________ no, i don't think i need to read naturalistic literature more accurately, to be convinced its true. - Gibhor

30th June 2008, 10:40 AM	#27
Madalch The Jester Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: The wet coast. Posts: 8,745	Originally Posted by devnull Move to Australia. Non-belief is the norm here. We simply wouldn't put up with such utter nonsense as you've described. Or even move to Edmonton.
	__________________ As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of resolving approaches zero. -Vaarsuvius It's a rum state of affairs when you feel like punching a jar of mayonnaise in the face. -Charlie Brooker

30th June 2008, 11:06 AM	#28
Yuri Nalyssus Graduate Poster Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: The Ancient Isle of Avignuon Posts: 1,083	Originally Posted by Eos of the Eons I don't understand the question. There is no such thing as "belief in science". Quite right, thank you for responding in such detail to my clumsy question. Your situation is incredible and unjust, I can only agree with your previous sig. line, there is so much it is illegal to discriminate against but it's somehow still ok for this covert anti rational anti-science discrimination to go on. In the UK I don't believe the situation is as bad but even still sometimes it pays to employ an 'indirect approach' when issues involving pseudoscience come up. It doesn't do, in certain circles, to be known as someone who makes waves. I really don't understand why sceptics get a hard time, I'm sure there's something fundamental I'm missing. Maybe it's because we have to be critical, casting doubt on things that people really want to be true; I have heard people complain when their favourite branch of pseudoscience is criticised that they feel this is an insult to their intelligence. It's never intended to be of course, whether someone is right or wrong in their beliefs is nothing to do with their intelligence or what they are like as a person. You can be mistaken without being stupid, no reasonable person will hold it against you. I suppose what I can't understand is why people would want these things to be true even when they can't be. Surely something is either true or it isn't and if it isn't, well that's that and you move on. Why do people lock on to stuff without looking into it first? Good luck with your fresh start, maybe your new co-workers will be a bit more broad minded. Yuri
	__________________ "The test of democracy is freedom of criticism." -David Ben-Gurion Peasant: Now we see the violence inherent in the system. King: Shut up! Peasant: Come and see the violence inherent in the system, help, help! I’m being repressed! King: Bloody peasant! Peasant: Ooh, what a giveaway, did you hear that... that’s what I’m on about, d’you see him repressing me? You saw it didn’t you... - Monty Python and The Holy Grail

30th June 2008, 12:15 PM	#29
gdnp useless idiot Join Date: May 2008 Location: New Jersey-You gotta problem wit dat? Posts: 4,999	Originally Posted by skeptigirl As Mattus pointed out, the actual event was an interview with the Trinity Broadcasting Network. I don't know who made use of the real interview to make the OP video but I'm sure someone will tell us. Ah. If the original video had been linked rather than a parody based on one phrase, it would have made more sense. What are we debating here? I think Ben Stein is right on. Without science, religious zealots would still be killing people with rocks and sticks. Science has made them far more efficient.

1st July 2008, 06:07 AM	#30
technoextreme Illuminator Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 3,786	Originally Posted by Hellbound Of course, IMHO, it's the exact smae analogy with religion, specifically Protestant Christianity. I believe almost all the non-Catholic sects believe in the innocence of birth (i.e.-children automatically get to heaven, because they haven't had a chance to choose right or wrong yet...they are innocence via ignorance). Logically, then, the best thing to do would be to kill each child immediately on birth, thus ensuring they go to heaven. Also, you make the ultimate sacrifice of your eternal soul for others. Likewise, people should be killed right after they are saved/baptised (depending on sect), as again this is a time when your sins have been "cleansed" and you are, in theory, pure. I don't think you are right from a theological perspective. It should be easy to find out though because copious amounts of babies died right after they were born. The only thing I remember is that there are essentially mass graves full of them in the cemetaries of Boston. I vaguly remember the reason being that they weren't getting into heaven.
	Last edited by technoextreme; 1st July 2008 at 06:10 AM.

1st July 2008, 07:32 AM	#31
Hellbound Abiogenic Spongiform Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: In a handbasket Posts: 9,031	Originally Posted by technoextreme I don't think you are right from a theological perspective. It should be easy to find out though because copious amounts of babies died right after they were born. The only thing I remember is that there are essentially mass graves full of them in the cemetaries of Boston. I vaguly remember the reason being that they weren't getting into heaven. Odd, that seems to fit more with the Catholic idea that the children would go to Purgatory. However, if it was during the times of the witch trials, then that's differnet. It was thought that the child of a withc was demon-spawn, and had no soul. Thus, killing it wasn't killing a person. Without knowing hte specifics I couldn't say. Do you have a link with some more info, perhaps? To my knowledge, most modern Protestent sects believe babies get a free pass. Comes from the Biblical text. Jesus's followers are trying to shoo the children away, and Jesus says (paraphrase): Let them come to me, unless you're like them you won't see Heaven. Matthew 19:13-15, Mark 10:13-16, Luke 18:15-17 And other comments, such as "in evil be as infants" (1 Corinthians 14:20). In any case, exactly which sects believe it is more of a side issue (and reflection of my speaking without looking up references); I know several do from personal experience, thus my point stands
	Last edited by Hellbound; 1st July 2008 at 07:34 AM.

1st July 2008, 01:37 PM	#32
Chris Haynes Perfectly Poisonous Person Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Wacky Washington Way Out West Posts: 4,214	Originally Posted by gdnp Ah. If the original video had been linked rather than a parody based on one phrase, it would have made more sense. What are we debating here? I think Ben Stein is right on. Without science, religious zealots would still be killing people with rocks and sticks. Science has made them far more efficient. I looked, but it is no longer on the TBN website, so that would have been kind of useless. Yes, science has made it easier to kill people... but it also enables you to communicate with strangers from all over the world on this forum. So if you don't like what science has done, you must stop using it now! Get away from the keyboard, unplug all your appliances, do not buy food that was trucked in, or buy any food that was genetically modified in any way (that includes carrots, broccoli and almost every fruit and veg that were made by selective breeding over the past 1000 years). But, if you watch the videos here: http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=Thunderf00t , especially about one minute into this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ihYq2dGa29M (after Ben Stein says that science leads to killing at 1:09, you will see a list like the paragraph above)... you will see that the "bad science" that Stein is going on about is that Darwin led to eugenics... basically killing off people who are considered subhuman. He claims that this led Hitler to want to exterminate Jews, gays, the disabled, etc. etc. Even though killing people for being Jewish, or not the accepted genealogy had been going on centuries before Darwin was born.
	__________________ I used to be intelligent... but then I had kids "HCN, I hate you!" ( so sayeth Deetee at http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=1077344 )... What I get for linking to http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/

1st July 2008, 02:47 PM	#33
gdnp useless idiot Join Date: May 2008 Location: New Jersey-You gotta problem wit dat? Posts: 4,999	My point exactly. Science has allowed the development of incredibly powerful tools. We can use those tools to save lives or destroy them. To be fair, religion is similar. It can be used to promote harmony and tolerance or discord and hate. Someone should ask Ben Stein: who was responsible for the deaths during the Spanish Inquisition: the scientists and engineers who invented the tools of torture, or the religious inquisitors who used them?

1st July 2008, 02:48 PM	#34
godless dave Great Dalmuti Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: St. Paul, Minnesota Posts: 6,138	No, it's true. Martin Luther was heavily influenced by Darwin. You see, Darwin had Nicola Tesla build him a time machine and sent "On the Origin of Species" and "The Descent of Man" back in time so Luther could read them before he wrote about expelling Jews from Europe and burning down synagogues.
	__________________ "If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." - aggle-rithm

1st July 2008, 02:58 PM	#35
INRM Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 5,490	I think Ben Stein's statement is quite extreme in nature and inaccurate... True, some applications of science and technology CAN lead to people killing each other (Bioweapons, Nuclear Weapons, Guns, Missiles, Grenades, etc), but not all applications of science and technology lead to people killing each other, in fact a great many actually save lives (vaccines, X-Rays, MRI's, PET-scans, Surgical Technology being the most notable examples) and make life easier. INRM
INRM Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 5,490

1st July 2008, 03:04 PM	#36
TobiasTheViking Resident Viking Autist Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: With your mother Posts: 6,923	because i didn't want to derail i've made a separate thread... but it may be of interest http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=117375 <- A solution to the ben steins of the world
	__________________ He pricked me with his prick that prick - NobbyNobbs Endearingly Obnoxious - Rebecca Watson

1st July 2008, 09:53 PM	#37
MattusMaximus Intellectual Gladiator Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: In the midst of a vast, beautiful & uncaring universe Posts: 14,204	And please check out this post I just put on Tobie's thread. It is my response to someone who (unfortunately) seems to be swallowing Ben Stein's b.s. http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...2&postcount=44
	__________________ Visit my blog: The Skeptical Teacher The Times They Are A-Changin'

1st July 2008, 10:21 PM	#38
plumjam Banned Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Valencia, Spain Posts: 7,837	Originally Posted by MattusMaximus And please check out this post I just put on Tobie's thread. It is my response to someone who (unfortunately) seems to be swallowing Ben Stein's b.s. http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...2&postcount=44 Just in case anyone wasn't going to click on the link, it's me who is swallowing the b.s. It's worth clicking on, though... if only to observe the onset of Mattus getting his panties slightly in a twist.

2nd July 2008, 11:13 AM	#39
godless dave Great Dalmuti Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: St. Paul, Minnesota Posts: 6,138	Plumjam, do you have anything to support Stein's statement that science leads to killing people?
	__________________ "If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." - aggle-rithm

2nd July 2008, 11:33 AM	#40
jj grumpy old skeptic Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Deep in the rain Posts: 18,719	Originally Posted by plumjam Just in case anyone wasn't going to click on the link, it's me who is swallowing the b.s. It's worth clicking on, though... if only to observe the onset of Mattus getting his panties slightly in a twist. Speaking as a scientist with a long career in research, I find the very concept deeply inoffensive, and personally insulting. Can you justify this allegation?
	__________________ The Power to Quit