Escape to the Movies: Paul

[Wened]

dito

 

[Frostryu]

For the record, anyone ever look at the statiscal chances of evolution working? Heres a hint what i mean: I would have a better chance winning the lottery by picking up a dropped ticket in a different state then of evolution being true. Deal with it and move on with talking about the movie.

 

[Wened]

All the controversy around intelligent design aside, I want to see this movie, I love Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz was one of the funniest movies I've ever seen. Also just to poke at the controversy I'll say that no casual "Screw yous" are necessary, their community has spawned enough stupid to keep me entertained forver....including using THIS as a unofficial mascot:

Spoiler

Lol, image fail. Just so everyone knows, He's talking about [a href="http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/crocoduck"]Crocoduck[/a].

Crocoduck! A final proof that creationists do not understand evolution

 

[Wened]

You can detect dark matter via its gravity. Wow. That's what you've got? I mean, I know that's the official scientific explanation behind it, but still. Nevermind that it's 100% transparent. Nevermind that it isn't composed of baryons, so we can't observe it absorbing radiation. Nevermind that, between dark matter and dark energy, 95% of the contents of the universe is only inferred to exist, any only based on how light behaves around it. Nevermind that, if it didn't exist, we'd have to restructure how we explain large parts of the universe. Nevermind that the idea of it was created using the train of thought: "well, our numbers don't match each other, but they can't be wrong, so let's start inventing explanations that make our models work". Nevermind that they make the assertion of the existence of this otherwise undetectable matter because elsewise, Einstein's theory of gravity would be wrong.

Nevermind that it basically amounts to the scientific community basically saying "we can't directly PROVE that this stuff exists, be we know it must exist, because we KNOW and can SEE that it affects other things", because that would wind up sounding a lot like *gasp* faith!

LOL. I like how you admit that there is evidence for dark matter (measurable gravity and observable effects on light) yet turn around and try to claim that believing it exits is faith which is, by definition, believing something in spite of a lack of evidence. Nice try.

Now here's the twist ending, funny-man: I'm a mechanical engineering major. That's right, a science guy. I actually do believe dark matter and dark energy exist. I'm also not a militant-fucking-atheist like you and your hero Dawkins. Grow up, and realize that not only does science not have the answer for everything...

Science doesn't claim this and no intellectually honest "science guy" would make that claim.

...but it often functions by making blind assertions and leaps of logic and frequently tries to prove conclusions after already making them.

Perhaps as a "science guy" you could give us some examples of widely accepted scientific theories that where acquired in this manner?

Also, you used an "appeal to ridicule" fallacy there with your GammaBeta Quadrant Flabnoix paragraph. Get better material.

Actually, no, he didn't. He was giving a valid example of how you can't prove a negative. He used a ridiculous example because it had to be something that everyone would "know" to be untrue and yet couldn't technically be dis-proven. I personally prefer to use Unicorns because they are actually in the Bible, but alien impregnation works too.

Also, yes, I obviously have no idea how dark matter works. Assumptions are great, right?

His assumption was not completely unreasonable because you where implying that there was absolutely no evidence for dark matter, hence it requiring "faith". There is in fact evidence therefor you appeared ignorant when in fact you where just being dishonest.

Where does everyone get the idea that Hitler was anything besides a militant atheist? Because he was. He believed that Christianity was an invention of "the Jew", that it would ultimately lead to the failure of humanity, and that evolution was the natural order of things.

More intellectual dishonesty.

Adolf Hitler
"I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator. By fighting off the Jews. I am doing the Lord's work."

"I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so."

"Secular schools can never be tolerated because such schools have no religious instruction, and a general moral instruction without a religious foundation is built on air; consequently, all character training and religion must be derived from faith. . . we need believing people."

"Embued with the desire to secure for the German people the great religious, moral, and cultural values rooted in the two Christian Confessions, we have abolished the political organizations but strengthened the religious institutions."

"We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out."

Note: Nazi belt buckles also had "God with us" in Germain etched on them.

http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Adolf_Hitler#Hitler_was_an_atheist

To be fair, there is a valid historical debate to be had about Hitler's faith. It seems he was rather keen on saying whatever would please the crowds at the time. That being said he certainly was not a "militant atheist" and his motivations where not based on atheist philosophy.

You know how I know that? Because there is no such thing as "atheist philosophy!" Atheism is a LACK of belief, not a belief. Atheism has no say on how people should live their lives. It simply means that there is no proof of god and therefor I don't believe it. End of story. Anything else comes from other philosophical foundations.

And yes, I can give sauce.

Then why didn't you?

Yes, yes. You are right! But how much can i save on my car insurance?

 

[Netrigan]

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!!!

No matter which way you go, there's still going to be ??? in there somewhere.

How did the universe start?

???

How did life come about?

???

And if you go in for creative design, how did God come about?

???

But I think the anti-ID aspect of the movie is over-stated. The movie picks on the most idiotic brand of Creationists who truly believe, despite all evidence to the contrary, that the Earth is 4000 years old. The sort of attitude that even Christians tend to roll their eyes at.

As for there not being a God, why is Paul any more of an authority than anyone else in the movie. He's just proof that life exists elsewhere, not that a supreme being does or does not exist.

Personally, I think that there's a supreme being that could create something as complex as the universe if a bit more unbelievable than the notion that the universe just happened. But I'll be the first to admit I wasn't there. Maybe we're just the heartburn dream of a dozing God.

 

[Wened]

No matter which way you go, there's still going to be ??? in there somewhere.

How did the universe start?

???

How did life come about?

???

And if you go in for creative design, how did God come about?

???

But I think the anti-ID aspect of the movie is over-stated. The movie picks on the most idiotic brand of Creationists who truly believe, despite all evidence to the contrary, that the Earth is 4000 years old. The sort of attitude that even Christians tend to roll their eyes at.

As for there not being a God, why is Paul any more of an authority than anyone else in the movie. He's just proof that life exists elsewhere, not that a supreme being does or does not exist.

Personally, I think that there's a supreme being that could create something as complex as the universe if a bit more unbelievable than the notion that the universe just happened. But I'll be the first to admit I wasn't there. Maybe we're just the heartburn dream of a dozing God.

So if we do not yet know the natural cause of something lets just say "God did it". Cool!

 

[Netrigan]

No matter which way you go, there's still going to be ??? in there somewhere.

How did the universe start?

???

How did life come about?

???

And if you go in for creative design, how did God come about?

???

But I think the anti-ID aspect of the movie is over-stated. The movie picks on the most idiotic brand of Creationists who truly believe, despite all evidence to the contrary, that the Earth is 4000 years old. The sort of attitude that even Christians tend to roll their eyes at.

As for there not being a God, why is Paul any more of an authority than anyone else in the movie. He's just proof that life exists elsewhere, not that a supreme being does or does not exist.

Personally, I think that there's a supreme being that could create something as complex as the universe if a bit more unbelievable than the notion that the universe just happened. But I'll be the first to admit I wasn't there. Maybe we're just the heartburn dream of a dozing God.

So if we do not yet know the natural cause of something lets just say "God did it". Cool!

In science, there's what they call first principles. These are the underlying assumptions to everything. In a way, they're articles of faith as much as anything else.

I think therefore I am.

Well, how do you know you're thinking?

Shut up, that's why.

I'm of the Atheist camp, but I don't think that a religious person is necessarily any less of a scientist than a non-religious person. As someone once put it, man asked "why do we exist?" and science answered the question "how do we exist?", which kind of missed the point. You could plot out the entire history of the universe from the Big Bang until now, and someone will still ask, "what does it all mean?"

And that's pretty much the providence of religion.

 

[Stormz]

Watched this movie yesterday. I don't see many movies anymore because I think most of them suck, but I think this really was one of the funniest movies I ever saw.

 

[Frostryu]

Thanks for being logical and non- descending Nertrigan and Wennen. It means alot. Though generally, i must say this isnt my kind of movie. Guess im stuck waiting for green lantern.

 

[gorfias]

OH MY GOD!

A Seth Rogen movie I might actually enjoy!?

What sorcery is this?

I love Seth Rogen but did not love this movie. It is pitching to a sweet spot of us nerds, but it was, in the end, only meh. On the other hand, Bob gives a sideways dig at "Fanboys" which I freakin loved. Same method (pitch to sweet spot of nerds) but just worked far better than this trying experience.

BTW: You didn't love:
40 Year Old Virgin
Knocked Up
and, Oh My, Observe and Report? Brilliant, brilliant movie.

 

[FROGGEman2]

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.

Oh my God I agree with you. Mostly.

I'm just pointing out Moviebob's hypocrisy.

Also, really, as if they're crippling science. That's just dumb.

 

[BrotherRool]

I was fine with the screw you to ID but I'd just like to point out that Paul was hugely incorrect in one regard

The Bible has nothing to say about aliens. It does not will not and can't even be misinterpreted to say that they can't exist. If a christian tells you that there are definitely no aliens, tell him to read the bible and the existence of Paul does nothing to disprove God's existence. Why should an alien know anyway?

Also my brother, in trying to defend Paul said "Why don't you believe him when he says God doesn't exist? I'd believe someone if he could resurrect people"

. Kinda the point really.

 

[Pyode]

Yes, yes. You are right! But how much can i save on my car insurance?

You can save up to 15% if you sign up right now!

 

[Taranaich]

Schwarzenegger was the perfect Conan, with the exception of his eyes

And his hair, his accent, his hairless chest, his scar-free skin, his ability to move with anything remotely resembling panther-like agility...

Okay skinny wasn't the right word your right on that but I can recal REH comparing him to having the speed and agility of a panther. Also Conan in his thirties and forties were indeed portrayed as being very muscular ala Schwarzenegger but when he was in his teens and early twenties I can remember Conan being described as more of an athletic pantheresque type of person with supernatural agility.

Yes, he had the speed and agility of the panther, but this was viewed as being in remarked contrast to his size. Even in the early thief stories, there are references to his "massive chest," "broad shoulders" and whatnot.

The only thing Schwarzenegger has over Momoa is in his physique. Momoa has the black hair, hairy chest, scars, and will have the blue eyes. Ultimately, I'd be more concerned about his ability to fight than his muscle mass: judging from his work on Stargate Atlantis, I think he'll be a lot more Conan-esque than Arnold ever was.

 

[Steven True]

3. It is possible to explain or convince in a relative world

Then you agree that some ideas hold more truth than others?
That not all explanations are equal?

 

[Steven True]

The degree that somebody loves their beliefs has absolutely nothing to do with whether they are true or not. None.

And yet there is just as little proof denying the existence of God as there is proving the existence of one.

There is little proof denying the existence of unicorns, or imps, or fairies. Shall we belief in them UNTIL they are shown not to exist?
The burden of proof is on those that claim that something exists.
Until that burden is met there is no reason to believe that it does.

 

[Killing_Time]

A movie that bashes the notion of there being a God/Intelligent Designer sounds awesome! I'll definitely go see it cause I'm the average internet forum user who is a devout atheist and enjoys projecting my views on public threads about how stupid people who believe in God are. Man, if only everyone could stop believing in God and accept that there is no designer or purpose in life and just focus on being happy and making money!

 

[Steven True]

My own science teacher, aitheist to the core, even said that the bing bang, is " the best THEORY we have AT THE MOMENT."

That can be said of ALL science.
The heliocentric theory of the solar system is the best THEORY we have AT THE MOMENT.
The germ theory of disease is the best THEORY we have AT THE MOMENT.
Atomic theory of matter is the best THEORY we have AT THE MOMENT.
Electromagnetic theory (the theory used to build your computer) is the best THEORY we have AT THE MOMENT.

Theory =/= hypothesis.
In science, theory is an explanation for a set of phenomenon with overwhelming evidence to support it.
Theory is the highest degree of certainty there is in science.
To say something is the best theory we have at the moment is to say, "Based on current evidence a very high degree of certainty can be given to the explanations of natural processes given by this theory."

it will probably be proved wrong.

Although it is possible (anything is possible) it is not at all likely.
They evidence for Big Bang theory is overwhelming and has withstood multiple attempts at falsification.

 

[DTWolfwood]

Battle LA was worth the matinee

So Y are they remaking Conan?