Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
Charles Darwin film 'too controversial for religious America' - Telegraph
According to this article, only 39% of Americans believe in Evolution.
According to this article, only 39% of Americans believe in Evolution.
Are Americans really this stupid?
- Thread starter Mr. dB
- Start date
bakemeacookie
New member
That's not it, the real problem is -t he movie being overshadowed by protests and controversy and loser christians outside movie theaters (those wacky baptist church i'mn sure will be out there protesting!) and thus theater owners will NOT carry a movie that will give them a headache and won't be #1 at the box office anyways. And blockbuster doesn't want it for the same reasons. Controversial movies are never good sells. Ever seen a moive about islam or prophet mohammed ever released? abortin? illegal immigraiton?
c
c
Yeah, the Passion Of The Christ didn't do so well.
People and there stupid fucking polls. 39% sounds low. You cannot get a accuratte poll questioning just a small group of people. You need to poll everyone. No matter what 1000 people you question they do not represent the millions
I'd live to see the movie. Only ignorant people think this world just started the oher day and we were just put here
I'd live to see the movie. Only ignorant people think this world just started the oher day and we were just put here
bakemeacookie
New member
wasn't controversial to christians. meaning there was no people protesting outside theaters telling everyone they're gonna get aids and die.
plus mel gibvson can make a lot more money than whatever this film can. no theaters gonna dump toy story 3 from a screen just to play this movie. no one knows who paul bettany is.
c
right...i forgot that jews don't protest...they just buy and own stuff...christians protest...
digimon7068
New member
well. . .our country was founded by a bunch of people with a very deep faith in a creator. . .jus' sayin'. . .
jackangel
New member
if RG is any indication...americans are pretty stupid.
And where do you suppose they came from?
digimon7068
New member
a boat?
bakemeacookie
New member
the key si to make money from these stupid people (tv, mortgages, scam wars). if you're rich, you're not stupid by definition. So I assume you're not rich. lol
c
thanks i have done my job properly thenYou're posts makes my head hurt.
redsamurai
Banned
the last hour of that movie is pure bliss. Once the shooting starts, I'm just stroking myself in the back of the theater. People got ruined in that movie in way's I've never seen before outside a video game.
Movieguide.org, an influential site which reviews films from a Christian perspective, described Darwin as the father of eugenics and denounced him as "a racist, a bigot and an 1800s naturalist whose legacy is mass murder". His "half-baked theory" directly influenced Adolf Hitler and led to "atrocities, crimes against humanity, cloning and genetic engineering", the site stated.
Apparently some people forgot about the Crusades not to mention how antiSemitic they also were pre-John Paul the 2nd. Can you say "integrity?"
Can't have any kind of intelligent free speech interfering with our wonderful agenda now can we!
U
UA_Iron
Guest
You are wrong. And this country was not founded on Christianity.
bakemeacookie
New member
The only person who makes moives that make people think and question everything - is Michael Moore. And we all know how widely distributed his movies are
Try finding fahrenheit 911 at walmart!
c
digimon7068
New member
you are wrong. . .first off, i never said this country was "founded on christianity". . .fuck. . .i never even mentioned "christianity". . .i merely stated a fact. . .that this country was founded by people that had a deep faith and belief in a creator. . .it's written all over every important document that our country is founded on and governed by. . .and, i never said what my beliefs are. . .so you can put down your broad brush bro. . .
"Microevolution" is a term used only by creationists, as far as I can tell.
redsamurai
Banned
I hope that was an attempt at irony cause "AT LEAST" 50% of the country not only beleives in creationism, they beleive in the "young earth". God I just had a discussion last thursday with young kid at school who beleived in the young earth "vigourously". Not only that, he was explaining to me how the story of the ark was "verbatim" and that at the time of those events all forms of life on this planet were of higher genetic value therefore you could restart populations with just one pair of each animal. Oh yeah, the dinosaurs were on the ark too.........god hold me witness that's what he told me.
javaguru
Banned
:sigh: I expect better from you. Evolution doesn't address the "origin of life" and "micro evolution"/"macro evolution" are the same damned thing with some arbitrary difference in time scales made up by theists to claim Jesus,Allah, Zeus or the Great JUJU on The Mountain did it.
PICK3
New member
inkspot
New member
what do you mean by ruined? Wasn't that little kid lizard cute! District 9 was different.
Fixed.
mrplunkey
New member
The harsh reality is:
1) Evolution is true.
2) Evolution still can't explain how we got here.
I don't believe some gray-bearded deity whisked us into existence. But I also don't believe a couple hundred thousand amino acids lined-up perfectly on the backside of a perfectly imperfect crystal and got stuck by just the right cosmic ray either.
When it comes to the origins of life, I'm perfectly fine accepting the fact that we just don't know right now. Trying to overgeneralize a fundamentally good theory such as evolutionary adaptation to explain the origins of life seems just as silly as the ridiculous religiously-based theories.
Sometimes it's A-OK to not have the answer.
digimon7068
New member
at the risk of being accused of religious zealotry, i say amen my brother. . .
redsamurai
Banned
well you're a woman so I'm not surprised you've suppressed the gruesome (ie awesome) death's at the hands of those alien weapons. C'mon, remember the tornado gun? The one that blew the back of that shack out along with all those nigerians........that thing gave me a halfie, no lie. Can you just imagine having that thing in traffic? You could just lean out the window and clear yourself a quick route to work.............simply awesome!
Ezekiel
New member
Evolution is still taught as a "theory" in School. Ironically, "most" Christians believe in Theistic Evlotion anyways.
You're right it doesn't explain many things.
As a Christian I too am bothered by stupid arse protests like this. Let people make their own descisions.
While it is true that America was founded in part by "Christians fleeing religous persicution in Europe, it is also true that America was founded by a much larger portion or Rosicrutionists and Masons!
Since Christians in america have no real power, it might be better to focus our attention on those who have some serious power to do whatever it is they choose under the guise of "Christianity".
I don't think that word means what you think it means.
Hint: gravity is a "theory" too. But we don't need Velcro shoes.
digimon7068
New member
relativity is a "theory" too. . .but we still needed to blow up a bunch of people to make sure the theory held water. . .
The word "theory," in the scientific world, does not have the same definition as it does in the philisophical world. It does not mean something is speculated but not fact. The whole "evolution is still taught as a theory" is a useless little strawman argument based on an ironic misunderstanding of scientific terminology.
Ezekiel
New member
No tlooking to dabate anyone on this subject as i am not that concerned w/ it.
However, there are plent of unanswered questions in the evolution theory as it stands today.
Evolution still does not address "origin".
I have had this conversation way to many times in my life to coninue doing so here. I am not, and do not wish to convince any of you of anything different then what you aready believe. Please show me the same respect.
Pretty sure I know exactly what the word means!
As i stateed before: I don't think Christians or anyone for that matter should tell others what to think or what to watch.
Perhaps some of you can apply the same respect to others who think differntly then you.
As someone w/ a Bsc. and a M. in History The "scientific terminology" isn't over my head.
Blessings,
Please point to where I did this? Don't be so ready for an attack that you look for it where there is none.
Ezekiel
New member
I was indeed generalizing.
My Bad!although your statement to which I quote certainly does imply that I lack the scientific understanding of what indeed "theory" means.
Perhaps your intent isn't what I interpreted it to be.
Blessings,
Charles Darwin renounced his own theories on his death bed. LOL
Ezekiel
New member
There's actually no proof to support that claim. When Darwin died on April 19th, 1882 There was no one outside of his own family that had access to him during his last illness. There was a Lady Hope (Elizabeth Reid Cotton) who was an Evangelist and did indeed visit him in sept or Oct of 1881. However, there is no actual proof that he recanted his theories. A fact his own family supports. That he indeed never recanted his theories. He was however an Anglican.
Blessings,
Ezekiel
New member
If we had answers to all the questions, we could close down the science departments of every major university. Close down every archaeological dig. Shut down the Hubbell Space Telescope. Jeez, you expect a lot.
Ezekiel
New member
Ffactor
New member
The only person who makes moives that make people think and question everything - is Michael Moore. And we all know how widely distributed his movies are
Try finding fahrenheit 911 at walmart!
c
Very interesting comment! It's true, you'll never find a Michael Moore movie in Walmart. On the other hand Michael Moore does look like a big ape. I think I just solved evolution.
mrplunkey
New member
What is this a picture of?
The 2015 Government Motors concept car?
chris302001
Banned
chris302001
Banned
I like the idea of never knowing how all this got started.
U
UA_Iron
Guest
you are wrong.
A good majority were not religious or had weak religious beliefs. They believed that religion was necessary for the common folk such that things did not get out of control. They knew most were stupid.
digimon7068
New member
they left where they were and came here to escape persecution for their beliefs, the majority of which were rooted in religion. . .they saw fit to separate church and state because that wasn't the way it was in the place(s) that they came from and they realized that was a very baaaaadddd thing because the "church", when left to it's own devices can be just as much (if not more) corrupt and power mad than any other organization. . .and they use the word God about 10,000 times throughout the governing documents that they wrote. . .i'm getting my information from history books, the declaration of independence, the constitution, et al. . .i'm not sure where you're getting yours from. . .but, i'm sure you're right. . .
Ezekiel
New member
America was indeed founded by not only Christians but also the Masons and Rosicrucians. The Masons holding the greatest power. This is still true today.
The actual word "God" is only mentioned I believe one time in the Declaration of Independance. However, I believe the word "Creator" is used 3 times.
And while I amy be mistaken neither God or Jesus are mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. Nor are they mentioned in the Bill of Rights.
However, the God is used the Pledge of Allegiance.
Blessing,
God was added to the Pledge of Allegiance in the early 1950s.
For that matter, the Pledge was not always an official US oath, or whatever it is. It was originally composed for a needlepoint design for moms to make to hang on the wall in the kids' room.
Charles knows what he said. Even if his family didnt admit it. But who cares its garbage anyways..
javaguru
Banned
Actually, the point of most of my posts on religion/science are that it's OK to not have an answer but religion always has an answer. Even the most hallowed theories in science have been shown to break down under certain circumstances...Gravity on the cosmic scale is a prime example. When have you heard a theist admit any wavering on their God Hypothesis?
mrplunkey
New member
Religion's answer to the origins of life seems just as silly to me as a die-hard evolutionists thoughts on the matter. I know plenty of religions people who freely admit that they see the story of creationism as an allegory and they have no idea what actually happened.
Here's what makes no sense to me whatsoever: A pro-evolution person attacking religion. Let's suppose for a moment that evolution is 100% dead-on correct. Then that person would obviously understand the power of adaptations over long periods of time and would also understand the devastating impact of overloading the adaptive process. Our brains clearly evolved within a religious paradigm. Now we can debate whether it was over 10,000 years, 50,000 years or even 200,000 years -- but we're still talking about relatively vast amounts of time.
Given that, why in the world would an evolutionist attack religion? Would you throw a million people into the ocean thinking at least one of them might sprout gills? Would you put a million of them in an oxygen-depleted atmosphere thinking at least one of them would learn to use nitrogen instead? How about a fire? Let's throw a million people into an incinerator and hope one of them adapts with fire-resistant skin. Any competent evolutionist will quickly recognize that the process doesn't work like that -- so why do we think it would work that way within our psyche?
I personally believe in evolution, but I'm highly skeptical of anyone who supports the theory yet seems to think we're going to go from a society built around a religious framework as little as 200-300 years ago to an areligious society in anything less than a thousand years. To me, it seems like an anti-religion evolutionist is simply a person who abhors religion and is looking for a convenient scientific theory with which to justify their belief system.
But hey, that's just my two cents
chris302001
Banned
goddamn you're old.
javaguru
Banned
Religion's answer to the origins of life seems just as silly to me as a die-hard evolutionists thoughts on the matter. I know plenty of religions people who freely admit that they see the story of creationism as an allegory and they have no idea what actually happened.
Here's what makes no sense to me whatsoever: A pro-evolution person attacking religion. Let's suppose for a moment that evolution is 100% dead-on correct. Then that person would obviously understand the power of adaptations over long periods of time and would also understand the devastating impact of overloading the adaptive process. Our brains clearly evolved within a religious paradigm. Now we can debate whether it was over 10,000 years, 50,000 years or even 200,000 years -- but we're still talking about relatively vast amounts of time.
Given that, why in the world would an evolutionist attack religion? Would you throw a million people into the ocean thinking at least one of them might sprout gills? Would you put a million of them in an oxygen-depleted atmosphere thinking at least one of them would learn to use nitrogen instead? How about a fire? Let's throw a million people into an incinerator and hope one of them adapts with fire-resistant skin. Any competent evolutionist will quickly recognize that the process doesn't work like that -- so why do we think it would work that way within our psyche?
I personally believe in evolution, but I'm highly skeptical of anyone who supports the theory yet seems to think we're going to go from a society built around a religious framework as little as 200-300 years ago to an areligious society in anything less than a thousand years. To me, it seems like an anti-religion evolutionist is simply a person who abhors religion and is looking for a convenient scientific theory with which to justify their belief system.
But hey, that's just my two cents
Stop with the strawman arguments. Biochemists have shown through experimentation that amino acids combine from a primordial ooze. Where is the evidence Jesus did it 10,000 years ago? They haven't been able to accelerate "evolution in a jar." Biology is less than two centuries old...religion is tens of thousands of years old...give them some time.Where is the religious evidence? You must believe Obama will pay for nationalized healthcare from government spearheaded savings programs?
mrplunkey
New member
Stop with the strawman arguments. Biochemists have shown through experimentation that amino acids combine from a primordial ooze. Where is the evidence Jesus did it 10,000 years ago? They haven't been able to accelerate "evolution in a jar." Biology is less than two centuries old...religion is tens of thousands of years old...give them some time.Where is the religious evidence? You must believe Obama will pay for nationalized healthcare from government spearheaded savings programs?
Biology can take all the time it wants. And if they ever do discover the true origins of life, I'll be excited to learn all about it.
Now back to the matter at hand. Given that evolution is true and given our brains spent tens to hundreds of thousands of years under a religious paradigm, why in the world would anyone denounce religion?
39% seems low. very low. God isn't real. Deal with it.
And if so many of the so called christian did "truly" believe in god, they'd be Greek Orthodox, the first true form of christianity.... If it wasn't for the fact that most of the worlds problems are caused by religion, I wouldn't give a hoot
Whiskey
And if so many of the so called christian did "truly" believe in god, they'd be Greek Orthodox, the first true form of christianity.... If it wasn't for the fact that most of the worlds problems are caused by religion, I wouldn't give a hoot
Whiskey
mrplunkey
New member
Java? You there?
mrplunkey
New member
That's it Java... I'm forced to summon you.
Weren't you saying the other day that we should give a $10B grant directly to Sarah Palin to exercise the demons from high school science teachers who try to teach evolution to their classes?
Care to explain that remark?
Javaguru in 3... 2... 1...
digimon7068
New member
God's all over the roll of hundreds in my pocket. . .i can afford to argue this shit all day long
God's all over the roll of hundreds in my pocket. . .i can afford to argue this shit all day long
U.S. Treasury - Fact Sheet on the History of"In God We Trust"
A law passed by the 84th Congress (P.L. 84-140) and approved by the President on July 30, 1956, the President approved a Joint Resolution of the 84th Congress, declaring IN GOD WE TRUST the national motto of the United States. IN GOD WE TRUST was first used on paper money in 1957, when it appeared on the one-dollar silver certificate. The first paper currency bearing the motto entered circulation on October 1, 1957. The Bureau of Engraving and Printing (BEP) was converting to the dry intaglio printing process. During this conversion, it gradually included IN GOD WE TRUST in the back design of all classes and denominations of currency.
Well, how did evolutionary theory ever begin then if religion has been engrained in our collective brain from the beginning, lol.
digimon7068
New member
God loves my money. . .
mrplunkey
New member
Is that why he wants 10%?
javaguru
Banned
God's all over the roll of hundreds in my pocket. . .i can afford to argue this shit all day long
That was added in the 1950's just like the modification to the pldege of allegiance. Thomas Jefferson would not have approved...
