1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Creationist “Think Tank” To Launch A Weird New Anti-Evolution Video Series

Discussion in 'Evolution Vs. Creationism' started by Skwim, May 23, 2019.

  1. Skwim

    Skwim Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    25,283
    Ratings:
    +9,662
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    .

    "The Discovery Institute* is best known for its promotion of Intelligent Design — a.k.a. Creationism that tries really hard not to say the word “God” — and for being a constant punchline among scientists. But they’ve been chugging alone quite profitably even after their attempts to overthrow evolution were rounded [sic] ridiculed — in 2016, they took in nearly $6 million in revenue.

    Now they’re ready to launch a new project: A video series called “Science Uprising” that’s all about countering the “materialistic worldview” that scientists hold.


    "The objective scientific evidence does not prove our universe is blind and purposeless. It does not show we are simply meat machines. It does not prove that evolutionary mechanisms can completely account for the diversity of life on earth. This is what THEY want you to think.

    We want you to think for yourself and make an informed decision."
    If the videos are supposed to present all the evidence in support of their position, this should be eight-second-long series… including the introduction and credits. The corresponding website is also devoid of information. Which is to say it has all the information anyone will ever need to see.

    That preview suggests a whole lot of money being thrown to argue a substance-free thesis. But if your idea of an effective science-based video series involves showing prominent science communicators with creepy music and lighting in the background and random images of computer hackers… then, well, you’re probably the target audience.

    The “uprising” begins June 3. Your mind will change by June 4 never."
    source

    *One part of the Discovery Institute's strategy is the slogan "teach the controversy". It deliberately tries to make opponents look like they are against teaching "all" of science to students. This, of course, only works with people who don't understand the issue.

    Dr. Barbara Forrest, of the NCSE, has described creationists' wedge strategy as a "Trojan horse," likening it to a computer virus. She says "A Trojan horse is a proposal to 'teach the controversy' about evolution that appears to have some useful or benign purpose (e.g., to promote critical thinking), but really masks the plan to teach intelligent design creationism." And "In this case, the Trojan horse and the public school system become the Discovery Institute's entry vehicle for teaching a religious belief in the public school science class."

    She continues to add, "Remember the ID creationists' main goal: to disguise their creationism so that users of the system (parents and children) and federal judges do not realize what the ID movement is up to."

    The Wedge Document is a publication of the Discovery Institute which outlines their goal to bring the "controversy" over "evolution" versus "intelligent design" into the public arena, in a way politically contrived to get less informed members of the public to side with the idea of "teach both sides" (one side being "science", the other religion). It is the smoking gun that demonstrates that "intelligent design" is "creationism" in a thin disguise. The full text of the document can be found at Text of The Wedge Strategy.

    Goals of the Discovery Institute as stated in ts wedge document:


    To replace materialistic explanations with the theistic understanding that nature and human beings are created by God. To see intelligent design theory as an accepted alternative in the sciences and scientific research being done from the perspective of design theory.
    source

    Thoughts?

    Mine: The creationist target audience will always remain the less educated, gullible, man-on-the-street follower, who will more likely than not dismiss the video as more of a mess than message. Thankfully, it's attempt to be state-of-the-art hip will be its own undoing. :D


    .
     
    #1 Skwim, May 23, 2019
    Last edited: May 23, 2019
    • Useful Useful x 1
  2. Hockeycowboy

    Hockeycowboy Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    4,557
    Ratings:
    +2,621
    Religion:
    Christian
    Come on....

    This is apparently the trailer.

    The "substance" will be in the main videos.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  3. Skwim

    Skwim Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    25,283
    Ratings:
    +9,662
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    Nice to see you put "substance" in quotation marks. :thumbsup:

    .
     
    #3 Skwim, May 23, 2019
    Last edited: May 23, 2019
    • Like Like x 1
  4. Hockeycowboy

    Hockeycowboy Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2015
    Messages:
    4,557
    Ratings:
    +2,621
    Religion:
    Christian
    To clarify, I was just quoting you.

    Don't imagine something there that wasn't intended.... you sly devil! Lol.

    Have a good night.
     
  5. Father Heathen

    Father Heathen Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Feb 29, 2008
    Messages:
    29,393
    Ratings:
    +13,694
    What's with the goofy knock-off Guy Fawkes masks?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  6. ChristineM

    ChristineM "Be strong" I whispered to my coffee.
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2017
    Messages:
    12,454
    Ratings:
    +8,454
    Religion:
    None

    I am guessing they will use groundbreaking peer reviewed sources. Or perhaps not.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  7. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    6,924
    Ratings:
    +1,821
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    Love how people are so open to opposing viewpoints.

    My take: flat-earth modern scientists will never be open if it violates their positions. :D
     
  8. It Aint Necessarily So

    It Aint Necessarily So Well-Known Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Messages:
    5,164
    Ratings:
    +5,225
    Religion:
    None
    This ought to be pretty easy for anybody to deconstruct, but it's enough to capture some. There is no need to prove that the universe runs blindly. Nobody except detractors of science is calling people meat machines, and nobody is claiming that science has shown that we are simply meat machines. Nobody need prove that evolutionary mechanisms can completely account for the diversity of life on earth.

    And I doubt that any scientist cares what creationists (or anybody else for that matter) think apart from their peers. I happen to agree with the scientists, but they don't care. Unlike the Discovery Institute, there is nothing that they want me to think or believe.

    And one doesn't need to be too savvy to realize that it is the religionists who care what others think, and very much don't want their target audience thinking for itself.

    Those not able to see such things because they have never valued critical thinking and therefore cannot think for themselves are at greater risk of being deceived and exploited by those feigning interest in their well-being.

    Yeah. The Discovery Institute is dishonest claiming that there is a controversy in science, and that scientists are doing what they do, namely indoctrinate (attempt to control public opinion through repetition) rather than teach, and that those who fail to learn to think critically and to apply reason to evidence to decide what is true about the world pay a price. Other people will do their thinking for them, they will passively and uncritically absorb and believe it, and they will live and think as others want them to whether that is in their best interests or not.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  9. Skwim

    Skwim Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    Messages:
    25,283
    Ratings:
    +9,662
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    I believe their working motto is "Dishonesty First And Above All Else."

    .
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Wandering Monk

    Wandering Monk Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2019
    Messages:
    372
    Ratings:
    +242
    Religion:
    agnostic
    Exactly the opposite is true:

     
    • Winner Winner x 3
  11. KenS

    KenS Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2013
    Messages:
    6,924
    Ratings:
    +1,821
    Religion:
    Judeo/Christian
    Yes... it can go both ways. :)
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  12. Hubert Farnsworth

    Hubert Farnsworth Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2016
    Messages:
    2,360
    Ratings:
    +1,614
    Religion:
    Agnostic
    I have researched both points of view, and found the evidence for evolution, driven primarily by natural selection, and secondarily sexual selection, to be far more compelling. Question for you: Would you consider studying the evidence for evolution, and how complex organs can develop via natural selection, or is your mind already made up? I am betting that no amount of evidence would change your mind. But if you really are open-minded, I suggest reading The Blind Watchmaker by Richard Dawkins. This is a very well-written book in which Dawkins spends the first half explaining just how incredibly complex and sophisticated living things are, and then in the second half, explains the logical means by which they can be "created" via natural selection a.k.a. the "blind watchmaker." Why don't you read it, then explain what you think is wrong with its reasoning, and then get back to me.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  13. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    1,125
    Ratings:
    +892
    Agreed. The God-ification of Society has always been the DI's primary (if unstated) goal. They failed spectacularly on their goal for scientific evidence and publication, so they skipped that and have gone straight to trying to sway the gullible by using religio-political rhetoric.
    Sadly, the dumbing-down of the USA is a winning strategy for the religious right, and even more sadly, they are succeeding in many parts of the country.

    And all to prop up their un-skeptical, un-yielding desire for a collection of ancient middle eastern tall tales to be true.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  14. tas8831

    tas8831 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2018
    Messages:
    1,125
    Ratings:
    +892
    Yes... 'substance'...

    Let me guess - Hitler was an evolutionist! Scientists are Nazis! Jesus, er... ah... the Intelligent Designer loves you! .... How does evolution explain THIS??? Huh?? No explanation right now??? OBVIOUSLY it was Je-, er, I mean, ID!

    That is the only 'substance' I have ever seen from the DI.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. A Vestigial Mote

    A Vestigial Mote Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2015
    Messages:
    3,602
    Ratings:
    +2,261
    Religion:
    ?
    You stated, sarcastically, that you "love" how people are open to opposing viewpoints. Problem being, the very source of this video series is "Discovery Institute", who operates the following site (which I found in searching for reviews on this "Science Uprising" - wondering what criticism or praise it has gotten):

    Evolultion News & Science Today

    That website is so obviously biased against actual scientific statements and findings that it is hilarious. Top trending articles:
    • Egnor: Why Neuroscience Points to a Soul
    • Genetic Surprises Support Intelligent Design Claims
    • Behe Up Against the Sociology of Science
    • Marcos Eberlin on Debating Evolutionists
    Wow... dislike science or evolution much? Browsing the site just a little shows that these goofballs are completely CLOSED to any scientific findings unless they are ambiguous enough to leave room to insert God.

    So, you're basically calling for people to be open-minded to the viewpoints of people who are blatantly closed-minded to viewpoints opposing their own, and in fact, build almost their entire argument and body of evidence for their position around "debunking" those opposing viewpoints. Which is hilarious, because science never set out to debunk anything theology had to say. That some of their findings seem to have done so is not the fault of science, but the fault of poor reasoning and evidence provided to the people and in the time that those theological concepts were dreamt up.
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...