Freedom of Speech-The Last Frontier
Published on May 13, 2008 By KFC Kickin For Christ In Movies & TV & Books

I had to go to Lynchburg, VA to see "Expelled; No Intelligence Allowed" because I have been so busy here with company coming and going. 

I want to see it again.  My thoughts?  Fantastic!  Troubling! Jaw dropping!

It's quite interesting to hear the comments from some of the Scientists about how we need to eradicate Christianity all together.   This is nothing new.  How many, over the centuries, have said that Christianity would be obsolete in so many years?  Yet, we're still here.  Just like the Jews.  No matter how they try to kill us off we're still a thorn in the flesh to those in opposition to God. 

To see these Scientists or teachers removed from their jobs because they dared mention  Intelligent Design (ID) in a classroom setting or write up a paper with ID mentioned once at their conclusion is unbelievable.  These well known and powerful institutions are named, along with people, places and dates and can easily be verifiable.  In other instances  seeing Scientists hiding behind the camera speaking out in fear of losing their jobs is also unbelievable.  Good Grief!  This is the ol' US of A. 

So much for critical thinking.  Why do evolutionists feel threatened by different ideas on origins?  I mean it's not like they have all the answers by any stretch.  In fact, their answers on origins don't hold a candle to the Christians.  I remember one Scientist who commented that an Evolutionist doesn't really want to sit down and talk with a Christian on Origins.  It wouldn't be a wise move on their part. 

Someone remarked to me recently that there is nothing in the top Scientific Journals on the Christian Theory of Origins or ID and I said..."no kidding!  Why is that?"

They are NOT allowed to write on these topics.  Someone's head would roll for sure if one of these articles made it to a  top published journal.   Heck, as soon as the establishment finds out you're even a Christian your findings will not be accepted regardless if they have anything to do with origins, ID or not.  It doesn't matter.  If a Scientist is "found out" he will be blacklisted.  His career is over.   Actually one of the Scientists on "Expelled," a well known case, was an editor of a journal who lost his job under such circumstances. 

I believe the Evolutionists are hiding behind their fear of religion being taught in the classroom, but ID can be taught without bringing God into the classroom at all.  So this is nothing but hype and old fashion brainwashing.  

No Intelligence Allowed.   

 


Comments (Page 7)
7 PagesFirst 5 6 7 
on May 19, 2008
If ID has no place in the science classroom, then niether does Man Caused Global Climate Change.
on May 19, 2008

If ID has no place in the science classroom, then neither does Man Caused Global Climate Change.


I agree.

on May 19, 2008

Is there an intelligent being behind all that we see or not? Explore both equally scientifically and let the people decide. Otherwise this is only all about indoctrination.


Exactly.

I want to see that scientific exploration of the intelligent being who is behind it all.

Let me see some experiments!

on May 19, 2008
I want to see that scientific exploration of the intelligent being who is behind it all.


Then let's insist on exploration on what caused the Big Bang before we allow Evolution in the science classroom. ;~D
on May 19, 2008
To make Creationism a science,


Perhaps I'm missing something or am flat out wrong, but as far as I know no one is trying to make Creationism a science. We Creationists don't need to "prove" anything in Genesis 1 nor do we require proof to believe.

There are bona fide scientists who happen to be Creationists though...if I'm not mistaken, they begin their work by knowing and believing in the Genesis 1 accounts of Creation and the Flood and go from there.

Scientists in the fields of geology, cosmology, molecular biology, etc. have made great advances and discoveries which substantiate Genesis 1.

DNA, the geologic-column, the Grand Canyon itself, and radio-halos are a few discoveries that pose major problems for the true blue belivers of the untenable eons of time macro-Evolution Theory.





on May 19, 2008

Now I admit my biased worldview but as far as who is more objective I would not be able to say you are Ock.  You are even more biased than I am.  Only you're just unwilling to admit it thus far anyway.

 

Well, ok.  You're stating this as a hypothesis.  (I wouldn't dare think you'd just out and out slander me)  So prove it.  If you can't, then retract it.  I have a hypothesis.  I hypothesize that you won't retract this statement about me, and my experiment is this post to see if you will or you won't.  Man, I love science.

 

Explore both equally scienficially and let the people decide

 

I agree.  And when ID does anything scientific, I'll be standing by to read about it.

 

true for the most part,  but it does depend on the subject matter.  If the subject of origin comes up either by lecture or simple conversation  I'm sure they are not going to point to the bible as their source now are they?

 

No more than they're going to point to the flying spaghetti monster because the very idea is preposterous.

 

 

on May 19, 2008
Explore both equally scienficially and let the people decide


I agree. And when ID does anything scientific, I'll be standing by to read about it.


I disagree...Where, when and by whom has one iota of Darwin's theory of "molecules to mankind" been scientifically proven?



on May 19, 2008
Evolutionary biologists aren't attempting to explain origins.


Of course they are...that's what macro-evolution or Darwinism is mainly about..it explains man's origin...the theory teaches man's origin that man evolved from a lower ape-like form.

on May 19, 2008
Evolutionary biologists aren't attempting to explain origins.


Of course they are...that's what macro-evolution or Darwinism is mainly about..it explains man's origin...the theory teaches man's origin that man evolved from a lower ape-like form.


C'mon...let's be clear...Darwinism Evolution (molecules into mankind) has made it where it is not becasue of its scientific value (for it has none or becasue it's an established fact) but because it does away with God and moral responsibility and fills the need of those who wish to escape His authority.

ET essentially nurtures the atheist/secular humanist philosophy which teaches that man is sufficient in himself and doesn't need God. Macro Evolution Theory is a corollary to the first lie that Satan told Adam and Eve.

on May 19, 2008
ockhamsrazor posts:
And when ID does anything scientific, I'll be standing by to read about it.


Proponents of ID point to scientific research in 3 areas:

That living cells are like complex machinery in which each part serves a perfectly timed specific purpose. If the whole system is not complete and functioning flawlessly it cannot perform at all....To ID proponents this is clear evidence of a Designer.

As to the origin of the universe, ID proponents say that life can only be possible when literally thousands upon thousands of variants such as gravitational and electromagnetic forces are meticulously set and balanced...To ID proponents, this is the perfect working of a Designer's plan.

The latest discoveries of DNA is seen as the most convincing evidence of a Designer. The DNA code that directs the information imbedded in the DNA molecule is separate from the matter that makes up the molecule itself. ID proponents answer the question where did the information come? only from an Intelligent Designer.



on May 19, 2008

I disagree...Where, when and by whom has one iota of Darwin's theory of "molecules to mankind" been scientifically proven?

I agree with your disagree Lula.  But they don't seem to be getting it.  It's ok to teach molecule to man with no clear evidence on the kick start, but it's NOT ok to teach intelligent design with no evidence.  At least we have an explanation....and they do not. 

Good stuff Lula.   It's nice to see I'm not alone here.

 

 

on May 19, 2008
It's ok to teach molecule to man with no clear evidence on the kick start, but it's NOT ok to teach intelligent design with no evidence.


And why is that? It goes to my #99 post, dontcha think?

C'mon...let's be clear...Darwinism Evolution (molecules into mankind) has made it where it is not becasue of its scientific value (for it has none or becasue it's an established fact) but because it does away with God and moral responsibility and fills the need of those who wish to escape His authority.

ET essentially nurtures the atheist/secular humanist philosophy which teaches that man is sufficient in himself and doesn't need God. Macro Evolution Theory is a corollary to the first lie that Satan told Adam and Eve.


on May 19, 2008

on May 20, 2008


Ah, Henry Rollins tells it like it is.
on May 20, 2008

It's ok to teach molecule to man with no clear evidence on the kick start, but it's NOT ok to teach intelligent design with no evidence. At least we have an explanation....and they do not.


What explanation do you have? You simply state that someone did it, somehow. That's not an explanation.

The theory of evolution does not say how it started. Scientists are still working on it. And exactly that is being taught at schools.

Now, did we get anywhere with that ID experiment?
7 PagesFirst 5 6 7