<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Flunked, Not Expelled: Ben Stein Contradicts Mark Mathis</title>
	<atom:link href="http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/</link>
	<description>Wesley R. Elsberry&#039;s personal weblog, talking about falconry, science, antievolution, computation, and the broken body he lives in.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 03:12:10 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Austringer</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/comment-page-1/#comment-204456</link>
		<dc:creator>Austringer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:11:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/#comment-204456</guid>
		<description>There is the issue that in science theories are generally more useful than laws, and there is no promotion path that would lead from theory to law. Theories adduce mechanisms that explain observations; laws simply codify relationships in those observations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is the issue that in science theories are generally more useful than laws, and there is no promotion path that would lead from theory to law. Theories adduce mechanisms that explain observations; laws simply codify relationships in those observations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/comment-page-1/#comment-204435</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 16:18:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/#comment-204435</guid>
		<description>More gems from the comments-

&quot;I concur with Frank’s assessment of Ben’s Argument for Unwanted Consequences. Ben Stein is an idiot. The nazis used IBM “Hollerith” machines to help document and organize files pertaining to the Final Solution. Does that mean Ben never uses a computer?

“oh,” I hear, “but what computers they used has no connection to the ideology! Darwinism is directly related to the ideology of the Nazi’s belief in a superior race!” 

Go back to school.

paz&quot;

Like I said before, motivation is not an argument.  Seems like you could use a refresher course or two.  Few things make me laugh more than seeing someone call someone an &quot;idiot&quot; and then saying, &quot;go back to school&quot; while in the midst of a complete lack of understanding of what the person is saying.  Remember that this was an interview asking him why he took the job, not why he feels evolution is wrong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>More gems from the comments-</p>
<p>&#8220;I concur with Frank’s assessment of Ben’s Argument for Unwanted Consequences. Ben Stein is an idiot. The nazis used IBM “Hollerith” machines to help document and organize files pertaining to the Final Solution. Does that mean Ben never uses a computer?</p>
<p>“oh,” I hear, “but what computers they used has no connection to the ideology! Darwinism is directly related to the ideology of the Nazi’s belief in a superior race!” </p>
<p>Go back to school.</p>
<p>paz&#8221;</p>
<p>Like I said before, motivation is not an argument.  Seems like you could use a refresher course or two.  Few things make me laugh more than seeing someone call someone an &#8220;idiot&#8221; and then saying, &#8220;go back to school&#8221; while in the midst of a complete lack of understanding of what the person is saying.  Remember that this was an interview asking him why he took the job, not why he feels evolution is wrong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/comment-page-1/#comment-204434</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 16:08:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/#comment-204434</guid>
		<description>I find these comments to be quite amusing.  You guys are calling Stein an idiot because you confuse his motivation with his argument.  His motivation for being inclined to do a project that deliberately exposes the holes (and there are holes in it, otherwise it would be known as a law)in evolution theory (which hasn&#039;t been done, at least on this scale for the public) is NOT HIS ARGUMENT AGAINST IT.  His argument is contained in the film.  Again, the Holocaust &quot;argument&quot; was never an argument at all, it was an explanation of his motivation, or inclination.

How truly ironic that you guys are using a fallacious premise to expose a fallacious argument.  Yes, if one were to attempt to build a case against the veracity of evolution based simply upon Nazi&#039;s using it as a tool of oppression, they wouldn&#039;t have a leg to stand on.  That&#039;s as fallacious an argument as saying that God doesn&#039;t exist because so many people throughout history have done bad things in an effort to please their god(s).  This post makes me laugh the most, &quot;Holocaust-connection argument is (among other things) a fallacious Argument from Unwanted Consequence against “Darwinism”&quot;

What argument was made?  I hope you&#039;re not making the case that the Nazi&#039;s didn&#039;t use, &quot;Darwinism because it played such a large part in the Nazis’ Final Solution to their so-called “Jewish problem” and was so clearly instrumental in their rationalizing of the Holocaust&quot; because they most certainly did, whether or not their understanding was spot on is immaterial because Stein is not building a case against it based upon that &quot;argument&quot; (as you seem to confuse it with).  In the very same paragraph he says, &quot;So I was primed to want to do a project&quot; which even further reinforces the point that he was merely explaining why he took it, as opposed to building a so-called, &quot;argument.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I find these comments to be quite amusing.  You guys are calling Stein an idiot because you confuse his motivation with his argument.  His motivation for being inclined to do a project that deliberately exposes the holes (and there are holes in it, otherwise it would be known as a law)in evolution theory (which hasn&#8217;t been done, at least on this scale for the public) is NOT HIS ARGUMENT AGAINST IT.  His argument is contained in the film.  Again, the Holocaust &#8220;argument&#8221; was never an argument at all, it was an explanation of his motivation, or inclination.</p>
<p>How truly ironic that you guys are using a fallacious premise to expose a fallacious argument.  Yes, if one were to attempt to build a case against the veracity of evolution based simply upon Nazi&#8217;s using it as a tool of oppression, they wouldn&#8217;t have a leg to stand on.  That&#8217;s as fallacious an argument as saying that God doesn&#8217;t exist because so many people throughout history have done bad things in an effort to please their god(s).  This post makes me laugh the most, &#8220;Holocaust-connection argument is (among other things) a fallacious Argument from Unwanted Consequence against “Darwinism”&#8221;</p>
<p>What argument was made?  I hope you&#8217;re not making the case that the Nazi&#8217;s didn&#8217;t use, &#8220;Darwinism because it played such a large part in the Nazis’ Final Solution to their so-called “Jewish problem” and was so clearly instrumental in their rationalizing of the Holocaust&#8221; because they most certainly did, whether or not their understanding was spot on is immaterial because Stein is not building a case against it based upon that &#8220;argument&#8221; (as you seem to confuse it with).  In the very same paragraph he says, &#8220;So I was primed to want to do a project&#8221; which even further reinforces the point that he was merely explaining why he took it, as opposed to building a so-called, &#8220;argument.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Thomas Jones</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/comment-page-1/#comment-197473</link>
		<dc:creator>Thomas Jones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 May 2008 00:53:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/#comment-197473</guid>
		<description>Ben Stein?   After the Watergate scandal I certainly would not take an X Richard Nixon speech writer seriously.  How can one be certain he doesn&#039;t have some kind of political agenda like he did when he was speech writer for the Nixon administration by throwing out a &quot;red herring&quot; issue like this?  Due to his prior dealings I would certainly be a lot more skeptical of him than mere blind faith or devotion without exploring all the aspects of science, including evolution theory...(which they propose we should just toss out.)  If the biblical account given in the book of Genesis is a completely accurate account of both creation and history, it would not only have to explain why dinosaurs becameextinct but, also why geographically isolated species such as the polar bear did not die in the flood.  For that to happen, the Polar Bears would have to be strong enough to swim across the Atlantic Ocean 3000 miles from the North Pole to the Mesopotamian Basin to reach Noah&#039;s ark.  To assume they could swim such distances much less stay afloat during a 40 day flood goes against all logical sensibility, especially when we know polar bears die from drowning deaths because the arctic ice upon which they habitat is currently melting due to global warming.  Polar Bears would have died during the &quot;Great Flood&quot; just as surely as the dinosaurs would have yet, there are no fossils records which support a massive polar die off which scientists could then use to carbon date.  If the Polar Bears really were indeed direct descendants of the bears which came from Noah&#039;s Ark, their change in fur color makes one point glaringly obvious, it changed because of evolution.  However, these observations make me skeptical that a literal account of &quot;Great Flood&quot; really happened.  If the account of Noah&#039;s ark given in the bible is inconsistent with scientific observation, common sense, or reality, what&#039;s to say the account of creation given in the same book of the Old Testament is also inaccurate, inconsistent, or contradictory?  ID theorists treat their assumptions as if they were completely infallible yet, if we are to have a balanced unbiased discussion of all creation theories involved (including evolution theory), why are ID theorists unwilling to discuss weaknesses in their hypothesis?  No Intelligence Allowed lives up to it&#039;s moniker.  ID theorists are allowed to discuss Intelligent Design Theory yet, they refuse to concede any 
weaknesses in their theory.  When I visited the official &quot;Expelled&quot; website to elaborate my scientific skepticism based on this discussion, my blog was conveniently moderated and quickly deleted.  Talk about &quot;No Intelligence Allowed&quot; an honest, unbiased discussion of competing 
theories were not allowed at their website.  What will Ben Stein think of next?  The effort to quell any educated discussion on behalf of the &quot;Expelled&quot; promoters seems more like one sided, right wing, fundamentalist propaganda promoted by close minded individuals who are unwilling to openly discuss all the associated issues.  Now Avian Transport Theory?  How much more fanatical, magical thinking like this can people base their assumptions on without shred of evidence to 
back it up?  Fundamentalist theories that claim &quot;The Stork&quot; is responsible for conception under the name of &quot;Avian Transport Theory?&quot; Come on, this getting ridiculous already.

P.S.  Even some conservative Christians think you have gone off the deep end Mr. Stein so, you can&#039;t make the absurd claim that only liberals believe in evolution theory or that everyone who believes in evolution is a liberal.  That assumption is just inconsistent with social reality.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ben Stein?   After the Watergate scandal I certainly would not take an X Richard Nixon speech writer seriously.  How can one be certain he doesn&#8217;t have some kind of political agenda like he did when he was speech writer for the Nixon administration by throwing out a &#8220;red herring&#8221; issue like this?  Due to his prior dealings I would certainly be a lot more skeptical of him than mere blind faith or devotion without exploring all the aspects of science, including evolution theory&#8230;(which they propose we should just toss out.)  If the biblical account given in the book of Genesis is a completely accurate account of both creation and history, it would not only have to explain why dinosaurs becameextinct but, also why geographically isolated species such as the polar bear did not die in the flood.  For that to happen, the Polar Bears would have to be strong enough to swim across the Atlantic Ocean 3000 miles from the North Pole to the Mesopotamian Basin to reach Noah&#8217;s ark.  To assume they could swim such distances much less stay afloat during a 40 day flood goes against all logical sensibility, especially when we know polar bears die from drowning deaths because the arctic ice upon which they habitat is currently melting due to global warming.  Polar Bears would have died during the &#8220;Great Flood&#8221; just as surely as the dinosaurs would have yet, there are no fossils records which support a massive polar die off which scientists could then use to carbon date.  If the Polar Bears really were indeed direct descendants of the bears which came from Noah&#8217;s Ark, their change in fur color makes one point glaringly obvious, it changed because of evolution.  However, these observations make me skeptical that a literal account of &#8220;Great Flood&#8221; really happened.  If the account of Noah&#8217;s ark given in the bible is inconsistent with scientific observation, common sense, or reality, what&#8217;s to say the account of creation given in the same book of the Old Testament is also inaccurate, inconsistent, or contradictory?  ID theorists treat their assumptions as if they were completely infallible yet, if we are to have a balanced unbiased discussion of all creation theories involved (including evolution theory), why are ID theorists unwilling to discuss weaknesses in their hypothesis?  No Intelligence Allowed lives up to it&#8217;s moniker.  ID theorists are allowed to discuss Intelligent Design Theory yet, they refuse to concede any<br />
weaknesses in their theory.  When I visited the official &#8220;Expelled&#8221; website to elaborate my scientific skepticism based on this discussion, my blog was conveniently moderated and quickly deleted.  Talk about &#8220;No Intelligence Allowed&#8221; an honest, unbiased discussion of competing<br />
theories were not allowed at their website.  What will Ben Stein think of next?  The effort to quell any educated discussion on behalf of the &#8220;Expelled&#8221; promoters seems more like one sided, right wing, fundamentalist propaganda promoted by close minded individuals who are unwilling to openly discuss all the associated issues.  Now Avian Transport Theory?  How much more fanatical, magical thinking like this can people base their assumptions on without shred of evidence to<br />
back it up?  Fundamentalist theories that claim &#8220;The Stork&#8221; is responsible for conception under the name of &#8220;Avian Transport Theory?&#8221; Come on, this getting ridiculous already.</p>
<p>P.S.  Even some conservative Christians think you have gone off the deep end Mr. Stein so, you can&#8217;t make the absurd claim that only liberals believe in evolution theory or that everyone who believes in evolution is a liberal.  That assumption is just inconsistent with social reality.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Austringer</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/comment-page-1/#comment-192832</link>
		<dc:creator>Austringer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:28:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/#comment-192832</guid>
		<description>Also, when I Google for relevant terms, I find *lots* of discussion of the movie&#039;s content on those grounds.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Also, when I Google for relevant terms, I find *lots* of discussion of the movie&#8217;s content on those grounds.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Austringer</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/comment-page-1/#comment-192828</link>
		<dc:creator>Austringer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:25:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/#comment-192828</guid>
		<description>What is confusing about the difference between &quot;natural selection&quot; and &quot;artificial selection&quot;? 

And why would anyone wish to cast themselves in the role of a totalitarian homicidal maniac? I think that falls under &quot;too much information&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What is confusing about the difference between &#8220;natural selection&#8221; and &#8220;artificial selection&#8221;? </p>
<p>And why would anyone wish to cast themselves in the role of a totalitarian homicidal maniac? I think that falls under &#8220;too much information&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jon Klement</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/comment-page-1/#comment-192820</link>
		<dc:creator>Jon Klement</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:10:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/#comment-192820</guid>
		<description>The one thing that is starkly lacking in criticism of the movie, alleged legal improprieties aside, is  dialogue concerning the movie&#039;s content.

The producers did this. The producers said that. Ben Stein is dumb.

Enough already.

To respond to one comment above about the Nazis &quot;misapplying&quot; evolution and about modern theories of evolution being any different from the 1940&#039;s versions, I would say the Nazis got it right.

If we are just bags of reacting chemicals, then there is no absolute morality. All morality would be subjectively invented by humans. If killing you (and getting away with it) furthers my personal idea of what the world should be like (in this facetious hypothetical example, a place without you in it) then nothing is wrong if I just make you disappear one day.

I&#039;ve judge you as stupid and unfit for the gene pool. I have the power to pull off your murder and get away with it. You can&#039;t stop me.

You don&#039;t fit into MY version of the world, just as the &quot;useless eaters&quot; didn&#039;t fit into the Nazi version.

You will be dead. I will continue to reproduce and teach my children that there is no morality either.

I win.

Ta da! Natural selection at work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The one thing that is starkly lacking in criticism of the movie, alleged legal improprieties aside, is  dialogue concerning the movie&#8217;s content.</p>
<p>The producers did this. The producers said that. Ben Stein is dumb.</p>
<p>Enough already.</p>
<p>To respond to one comment above about the Nazis &#8220;misapplying&#8221; evolution and about modern theories of evolution being any different from the 1940&#8242;s versions, I would say the Nazis got it right.</p>
<p>If we are just bags of reacting chemicals, then there is no absolute morality. All morality would be subjectively invented by humans. If killing you (and getting away with it) furthers my personal idea of what the world should be like (in this facetious hypothetical example, a place without you in it) then nothing is wrong if I just make you disappear one day.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve judge you as stupid and unfit for the gene pool. I have the power to pull off your murder and get away with it. You can&#8217;t stop me.</p>
<p>You don&#8217;t fit into MY version of the world, just as the &#8220;useless eaters&#8221; didn&#8217;t fit into the Nazi version.</p>
<p>You will be dead. I will continue to reproduce and teach my children that there is no morality either.</p>
<p>I win.</p>
<p>Ta da! Natural selection at work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/comment-page-1/#comment-188503</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 17:42:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/#comment-188503</guid>
		<description>its sad when you spell ad wrong!!!!!!!!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>its sad when you spell ad wrong!!!!!!!!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/comment-page-1/#comment-188501</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Apr 2008 17:41:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/#comment-188501</guid>
		<description>Just saw an add for Expelled last night. It said April 18th as the opening.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just saw an add for Expelled last night. It said April 18th as the opening.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BW022</title>
		<link>http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/comment-page-1/#comment-188153</link>
		<dc:creator>BW022</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 23:14:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://austringer.net/wp/index.php/2008/04/12/flunked-not-expelled-ben-stein-contradicts-mark-mathis/#comment-188153</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the new take.

It was pretty clear that Expelled copied from XVIVO, but evidence that they only started fairly recently would be a rather damming slam-dunk if they somehow did within a few months what it took Harvard/XVIVO years to do. 

We know they are liars. However, for the most part, lying isn&#039;t illegal. The XVIVO copyright is another matter. It could easily delay or kill the film, if they comply and it could be even worse if they go to court. Dembski and Steins statements are just so bad, you can just feel the panic about potential discovery. Certainly, each of these folks would be dragged into court for possible testimony.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the new take.</p>
<p>It was pretty clear that Expelled copied from XVIVO, but evidence that they only started fairly recently would be a rather damming slam-dunk if they somehow did within a few months what it took Harvard/XVIVO years to do. </p>
<p>We know they are liars. However, for the most part, lying isn&#8217;t illegal. The XVIVO copyright is another matter. It could easily delay or kill the film, if they comply and it could be even worse if they go to court. Dembski and Steins statements are just so bad, you can just feel the panic about potential discovery. Certainly, each of these folks would be dragged into court for possible testimony.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

