I saw the documentary last week and I have to say that this is a very accurate review. Stein does very little debunking Evolution and even less to prop up intelligent design. By the end it seems that Stein's main reason for making the movie is to show how Evolution, brought to it's logical and extreme conclusion, leads to nazism, or abortion. Which comes accross as a another "Jew dwelling on the holocaust" flick. (I hate to put it that way, but that is how it seemed to me)
With that said, the author of the article does fail to recognize causality. In my opinion, evolution theory didn't lead to genocide. Genocide is something that has been going on before Darwin, but did evolution make the idea of genocide more palatable? I think Stein makes a good argument that it did.
Same with eugenics and planned parenthood. Margaret Sanger wasn't the first person to argue that some people are more fit to breed than others, but she is the first to use modern science, namely genetics, to support her argument.
And finally, atheism. Obviously atheism is also nothing new, but now atheists have a tool to prove the beginning of life, which is what creationism and evolution is all about. And yes I do think that people who believe in God will have their faith tested by Darwins theory.
To sum up, does Stein make a good argument for ID? Not in the slightest. But I do think that he makes a great argument for how one scientific thought can prevail over all other schools of thought and anyone who disagrees will been seen as a flat earther or a bible thumper. I think we are seeing that happen to some extent today with global warming theories. Of course, I don't know how it will lead to Nazism. :)
4 comments:
I saw the documentary last week and I have to say that this is a very accurate review. Stein does very little debunking Evolution and even less to prop up intelligent design. By the end it seems that Stein's main reason for making the movie is to show how Evolution, brought to it's logical and extreme conclusion, leads to nazism, or abortion. Which comes accross as a another "Jew dwelling on the holocaust" flick. (I hate to put it that way, but that is how it seemed to me)
With that said, the author of the article does fail to recognize causality. In my opinion, evolution theory didn't lead to genocide. Genocide is something that has been going on before Darwin, but did evolution make the idea of genocide more palatable? I think Stein makes a good argument that it did.
Same with eugenics and planned parenthood. Margaret Sanger wasn't the first person to argue that some people are more fit to breed than others, but she is the first to use modern science, namely genetics, to support her argument.
And finally, atheism. Obviously atheism is also nothing new, but now atheists have a tool to prove the beginning of life, which is what creationism and evolution is all about. And yes I do think that people who believe in God will have their faith tested by Darwins theory.
To sum up, does Stein make a good argument for ID? Not in the slightest. But I do think that he makes a great argument for how one scientific thought can prevail over all other schools of thought and anyone who disagrees will been seen as a flat earther or a bible thumper. I think we are seeing that happen to some extent today with global warming theories. Of course, I don't know how it will lead to Nazism. :)
Maybe you're just not looking hard enough.
I think I looked and it seems that he dismisses Stein's argument. Which is fine. It is just a documentary. I am bored with those anyway.
I was joking, tard.
Is it okay to call people tard anymore?
Post a Comment