Escape to the Movies: Paul

[Togs]

awesome film laughed like an idiot for most of it.

But I gotta say I disagree with it being a "screw you ID" and more a "hedonism is the only way to be" sort of thing, but to each his own.

 

[BmoreAkuma]

It didn't look funny, and I'm so sick of Seth Rogen it actually hurts a little. I enjoy your reviews Bob, but I generally don't agree with them a lot...

I have to agree as soon as they said "from the creators of superbad", I already knew and was waiting to hear his name. I mean for christsakes, can't the Apatow choose someone else in these films? I think he appeared in either the lead role or as an supporting character in just about all of Apatow movies he directed/produced (yes I am stretching it but still).

 

[Togs]

are we still pissed off about the disproving about ALOT of the theories of evolution, and the big bang.

I think your a touch confused there mate- ID did no such thing, in fact it was completely discredited and when it came to trial ID was laughed out the building for being "little more then creationism in a cheap tuxedo".
And Id suggest that before you reply with the same old nonsense Ive heard before on this topic go and read up on the subject- and actual scientific journals and debates, not your pastors latest sermon.

 

[Wened]

You do not hose Your race and it can't be changed. Religion is optional.

-People being racist-

Moviebob: WHAT THE HELL YOU GUYS ARE EVIL

-People making fun of religious people-

Moviebob: HELL YEAH GUYS YOU'RE GREAT

gah

seriously what the hell

also I feel obliged to point out that that Jeff Dunham was

a) Making fun of terrorists specifically, not all arabic people

b) bringing a stereotype out and ridiculing it, a good thing against racism.

I'm not even religious, but you seem to have not thought this through.

well making fun of somebody because of something they can't change is worse than making funof somebody for something they can.

And he's not really against religous people, just the ID people, and to be fair it is a bad argument.

It's a bad argument, sure. From our perspective. But to them it's not. Asking them to change their view on something they hold this dear is like asking a person to give up their cultural heritage because it's "dumb".

There is no real way to validate this, Moviebob's just a hypocrite.

So. If someone was born and raised in natzi Germany then it;s okay to kill jews for him?
Or female genital castration in some muslim countries. We should be okay with that cause its part of they culture?

No mater how dear to him are someones convictions/culture/religion i will always oppose it if it harms others.

In case of ID proponents. They cripple advance of science in the name of theyr invisible friend. I can imagine myself 40 years from now, suffering because of cancer/alzheimer/whatever only because funding for medical research was stopped by some moron who believed that prayer can cure people and only sinners get cancer.

 

[Wened]

Why must we always be hating on the itellegent design? or are we still pissed off about the disproving about ALOT of the theories of evolution, and the big bang. Oh wait, since no one pays attention to us disproving those theories, i guess we never did. Sorry if i seem just a little annoyed at this, but us ID people get ALOT, excuse me, ALOT of shit about this. Dont mean to flame but still, it doth get annoting to my sences. Im just wondering why its okay to take pot shots at intellegent design, but say, homosexuality or abortion, and we are suddenly crossing a line? why does are belief in where we come from so much lower then what we think we are. Can someone answer that for me?
FYI, YES I UNDERSTAND MY TYPING SUCKS GREATLY.

You are just Trolling right?

 

[Wened]

At this point Bob, you dont just come across as arrogent, you come across as ignorant. Yea I said it. I say this because you said this "There's never not a good time to give a screw you to the intelligent design argument" Which is plain STUPID because one of the theories of intelligent design is...aliens. Yes, aliens. There is a theory that human was introduced to earth through aliens. Just wanted you to know that.

1. No one calls it ID. I think it is called "Panspermic theory" or something.
2. The ID bob talks about is the one that is currently championed by the religious folk in us. I do not think they consider it possible that this "Designer" might be alien.

 

[Frostryu]

Sigh, no im not trolling, just speaking my mind. YOu know, its kinda the point of these boards. And to comment from an ID point of view, why would we stop alzheimer or cancer research? We have faith, but we do believe in improving things like medicine to the point of curing those things. An old christian saying does go "God helps he who helps himself". As i said, we just have faith, not stupidity. As an ID believer myself, can i ask a question: From my point of view, God is Omnipotent (all-powerful) so couldnt he have made, for say, a bullet that was already flying if he wanted to? or stars at various ages right off the bat? Who says that he made everything the exact same way? From my point of view, aren't the heavens there to inspire us to go out, explore, and generally better ourselves? call me a dreamer, but can't i believe in a God that gives us something to shoot for, to prevail against?

 

[Wened]

I'm all for a Pegg/Frost team-up. Just might go see this one.

Can I correctly assume that the people getting screwed in the screw-you moments are people that believe ID to be 100% undeniable irrefutable fact? Because those people are nuts. ID is a theory, nothing more, and should be taught and treated as such. It could be wrong or it could be right, possibly fact and possibly fiction, like the existence of extraterrestrial life, the presence of a divine universal (un)consciousness and the humanity of Jack Thompson.

If ID would be science at all (and it is not) then it would be merely a hypothesis (that what you described). Theory needs to be proven first.

1. You make an observation of some phenomenon.
2. You form a hypothesis on how that stuff might work
3. You design an experiment to prove your hypothesis
4. If your hypothesis was right you can use it as a basis for a theory. If not go back to point one.
5. Based on what you already proven you might formulate more hypothesis and try if it works in real life. As you accumulate more knowledge (facts) your theory gets better (bigger, more accurate).


How ID works:

1. Old scriptures tell us that we were created so we need to bend facts to prove it.
2. ???
3. JESUS IS KING!!!

 

[Frostryu]

Funny, we ID people have done the research. Youre little ID thing is missing steps 2 through ten you know. Actually, you're big bang theory has had to stretch a few facts, but you call it waiting for info, to that makes it okay then. Oh, sorry, "inconclusive data". Sad thing is, neither side has enough data to prove, WHITOUT A DOUBT, that they are 100% right. Things keep coming up that change the way we look at things, so quit bitching that ID people are foinded on nothing and Science if completely founded. Its not the case, science will change. My own science teacher, aitheist to the core, even said that the bing bang, is " the best THEORY we have AT THE MOMENT." it will probably be proved wrong. WHo knows, maybe we will find aliens or extraterestials who can prove creation and ID. I honestly think that would be intersting. And know you guys are gonna quote me and drive home all your little points based on what i said and how wrong and biased i am.

Frigging wonderful.

But sigh, whatever.

 

[BlueInkAlchemist]

How ID works:

1. Old scriptures tell us that we were created so we need to bend facts to prove it.
2. ???
3. JESUS IS KING!!!

That's definitely more of a Creationist stance than an argument for ID, not to mention something of a gross generalization. I agree, however, that we often bend the facts to fit a theory rather than basing a theory on the facts.

 

[Wened]

I'm all for a Pegg/Frost team-up. Just might go see this one.

Can I correctly assume that the people getting screwed in the screw-you moments are people that believe ID to be 100% undeniable irrefutable fact? Because those people are nuts. ID is a theory, nothing more, and should be taught and treated as such. It could be wrong or it could be right, possibly fact and possibly fiction, like the existence of extraterrestrial life, the presence of a divine universal (un)consciousness and the humanity of Jack Thompson.

To be fair, though, evolution is just a theory too. Some people take evolution as a 100% undeniable irrefutable fact. I think that some people in this thread are getting Intelligent Design mixed up with Creationism, which is kinda what MB did in his review when he flashed the picture of the ad for the Creationism Museum while talking about Intelligent Design.

Theory - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

ID and Creationism were already proven to be the same thing during the Dover trial.
There is lots of free vids on the net about that trial.

 

[OneOfTheMichael's]

I saw this movie last night because i was in a mode for a movie were you didn't have to think much off it and have a good time and paul certainly fulfilled those expectations.
Great movie and i urge many people to see it.

 

[Immortal_Engines]

Finally, a reviewer who didn't hate this film!

 

[Frostryu]

Yes! Someon who only talked About the Movie! Give this guy/gal a medal!

 

[Wened]

If a mentally challenged Person drooled on your Shoe, would you kick him in the Head and call him a retard?

I doubt it.

However, that is what this movie does. It attacks Creationism, which is in my Book the result of a mental Disability.

Most of mentally disabled ppl spend their time watching cartoons and eating corndogs. ID ppl spend their time undercutting scientific research. If i let retards eat their corndogs i lose nothing. But if i let ID ppl do their thing then in some way it will make me responsible for their actions. Better science = better medicine and standard of life.

 

[Frostryu]

Oh shit not this again. Look, we dont undercut science, we only debate. Undercut means we directly interfere, deprive them of funding, and the like. MOSt ID people just debate and stand for their beliefs. Why you idiots think we atack medical science blows my mind at the sheer mental retardedness of it all.

 

[Frostryu]

Hey Bob? can we get a block so that this board only refers to the movie and not massive scientific/ religious debate? Please? Its giving some of us a headache when we want to discuss the pros and cons of the movie from another standpoint other then, well, yours. More points of view are nice. I just want the Theological/Scientific debaters/flamers to take this somewhere else. SO Bob, can We get a block or redirect or something please?

 

[Wened]

second

 

[Mechanix]

It wasn't amazingly hysterical, but Paul was above average and made me laugh more than usual. But, if someone was religious, I could see them not enjoying this movie at all because they'd be too upset at the religion jokes. I guess it is kind of warranted, but since I'm not religious I found it pretty funny.

The movie definitely should have handled the religious humor better, because it's going to be shot down and buried no matter how funny it is.

 

[Togs]

Funny, we ID people have done the research. Youre little ID thing is missing steps 2 through ten you know. Actually, you're big bang theory has had to stretch a few facts, but you call it waiting for info, to that makes it okay then. Oh, sorry, "inconclusive data". Sad thing is, neither side has enough data to prove, WHITOUT A DOUBT, that they are 100% right. Things keep coming up that change the way we look at things, so quit bitching that ID people are foinded on nothing and Science if completely founded. Its not the case, science will change. My own science teacher, aitheist to the core, even said that the bing bang, is " the best THEORY we have AT THE MOMENT." it will probably be proved wrong. WHo knows, maybe we will find aliens or extraterestials who can prove creation and ID. I honestly think that would be interesting. And know you guys are gonna quote me and drive home all your little points based on what i said and how wrong and biased i am.

Frigging wonderful.

But sigh, whatever.

I dont even know where to begin with this.
ID has been disproved- the concepts on which it was based where shown to be fundamentally wrong and to be prefectly honest indicative of poor understanding of science.
The 2 core concepts of irreducible complexity and statistical improbability are to be frank nonsense.