Comments for "Ben Stein edition of Why do people laugh at creationists?" Video at VideoSift.com

By dmaze

dmaze (http://www.videosift.com/member/dmaze) — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 20:42:36 -0700

Let the scientists talk in Sunday school!

By rembar

rembar (http://www.videosift.com/member/rembar) — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 08:15:01 -0700

One point being brought up - that university professors have much more important things to teach than why creationism/ID is not science....well, yes, and no. Teachers and professors have more important things to teach, but I believe by this point we can no longer justify NOT covering this issue, even if in brief, because MOST PEOPLE IN AMERICA DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT CREATIONISM IS NOT SCIENCE. Yes, there is a shitload of real material to cover during classes, but what use is all that if students listen during lecture and then toss all that information out as they walk out the door because they think the idea that some bearded guy in the sky created all life on Earth by pointing his finger is scientifically feasible? We've turned up our noses at teaching against stupidity, and because of that we're now facing an epidemic of idiocy. We need to start taking a few minutes out of the first class of any intro bio course to lay the fucking beatdown on creationism, and then start the actual lecture.

By dgandhi

dgandhi (http://www.videosift.com/member/dgandhi) — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 12:00:32 -0700

^rembar

To paraphrase, are you saying "Teach the lack of controversy."?

By wjolson

wjolson (http://www.videosift.com/member/wjolson) — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 15:35:03 -0700

MAN that little bit about the ant eater was STUPID!

By siftbot

siftbot (http://www.videosift.com/member/siftbot) — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:38:06 -0700

Tags for this video have been changed from 'thunderf00t, creationism, intelligent design, evolution, darwin' to 'thunderf00t, creationism, intelligent design, evolution, darwin, expelled' - edited by kronosposeidon

By kronosposeidon

kronosposeidon (http://kronosposeidon.videosift.com) — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:39:46 -0700

*cinema

By siftbot

siftbot (http://www.videosift.com/member/siftbot) — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:39:47 -0700

Adding video to channels (Cinema) - requested by kronosposeidon.

By gwiz665

gwiz665 (http://www.videosift.com/member/gwiz665) — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 10:23:52 -0700

Within the scientific community there is absolutely no controversy, obviously. But elsewhere, the controversy is being "created" by ignorant or malicious creationists, and therefore rembar is correct in that it is a wise choice to use some time to, well, blow ID out of the water.

By chilaxe

chilaxe (http://www.videosift.com/member/chilaxe) — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 12:11:27 -0700

I would love to see the narrator's You Fool! replaced with that of Gilbert Gottfried http://www.videosift.com/video/Hollywood-Squares-You-Fool

By Dr_Q

Dr_Q (http://www.videosift.com/member/Dr_Q) — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 12:52:37 -0700

It takes 5 minutes to explain than Creationism isn't a science but a propaganda tool for nutjobs and fundies. Then you can go back to teaching science.

Don't forget the "Science : it works, b!tches" poster.

By Crosswords

Crosswords (http://www.videosift.com/member/Crosswords) — Sun, 20 Apr 2008 15:53:24 -0700

Is there a creationist scientific claim that hasn't been blown out of the water? Or rather one that can actually be disproved. I know the common tactic is to say, oh gee the rate of radioactive decay used to be much faster hence why radiometric dating is wrong. Okay so it can't be disproven everything was in fast forward until 10 thousand years ago, but there's no basis for suspecting that's the case in the first place. I can submit that 400k years ago the sun was a giant heat and light radiating tomato, but its properties miraculously changed into that of one based off the nuclear fusion of hydrogen.

The biggest problem I have with teaching creationism in science class is that its a waste of time. Were it possible I wish there was enough time to explore every facet of creationism in a science class, to be able to pick it apart and have a lovely class room discussion about how it does or doesn't stand up to scientific scrutiny. But from my experience there isn't even enough time to glaze over scientific claims that have a mountain of supporting evidence. As a kid I'm not sure we ever actually got through our whole text book. Hell it seemed half the time was spent relearning what we supposedly didn't learn the previous year. Imagine how bad it would be if time were taken out to discuss every half baked scientific theory?

I suppose the creationists argue evolution (or Darwinism as they apparently like to call it) is a half baked theory. To that all I can say is the Majority of the scientific community seems to think its not, based on the evidence supporting it that has accrued since its inception.

By Thunderhorseman1

Thunderhorseman1 (http://www.videosift.com/member/Thunderhorseman1) — Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:53:00 -0700

What do you expect? The guy wrote speeches for Nixon, hes the ultimate bullshit artist.

There really needs to be an academic revolution in this country. There is no way we are going to keep up with China's explosive growth and economy in the future when we still have dumbshits trying to push creationism. These fucking waterheads NEED to be stifled, for the good and the growth of our country.