Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

[bettertomorrowamy]

Saying Eugenics is a misuse of Evolutionary Theory is like saying that PhrenologyPhrenology (from Greek: ?, phr?n, "mind"; and ??, logos, "knowledge") is a defunct field of study, once considered a science, by which the personality traits of a person were determined by "reading" bumps and fissures in the skull. Developed by German physician Franz Joseph Gall around 1800, the discipline was very popular in the 19th century. In 1843, François Magendie referred to phrenology as "a pseudo-science of the present day."[1] Phrenological thinking was, however, influential in 19th-century psychiatry and modern neuroscience.[2]
Phrenology is based on the concept that the brain is the organ of the mind, and that certain brain areas have localized, specific functions (see in particular, Brodmann's areas) or modules (see modularity of mind).[3] Phrenologists believed that the mind has a set of different mental faculties, with each particular faculty represented in a different area of the brain. These areas were said to be proportional to a person's propensities, and the importance of the given mental faculty. It was believed that the cranial bone conformed in order to accommodate the different sizes of these particular areas of the brain in different individuals, so that a person's capacity for a given personality trait could be determined simply by measuring the area of the skull that overlies the corresponding area of the brain.
Phrenology is currently dismissed as quackery by the scientific community.
Phrenology, which focuses on personality and character, should be distinguished from craniometry, which is the study of skull size, weight and shape, and physiognomy, the study of facial features. However, these disciplines have claimed the ability to predict personality traits or intelligence (in fields such as anthropology/ethnology), and were sometimes posed to scientifically justify racism. is a misuse of the study of Human Anatomy.  It's a true statement, but you can give any number of examples of technological and educational advancements that have led to evil perversions.

[torgosPizza]

Saying it's a "misuse" is letting them off to easily, IMO. It's more than that. It's the complete opposite of what Evolution is.

Again, see the point of phenotypic selection. The people doing the selection may look back at what they were doing and say "that was the intentional direction by humans of evolution." But - it isn't. Killing non-Jews and non-blondes to breed more blondes and non-Jews is not changing the genetic makeup of a species, it's changing your exterior (or in the case of being Jewish, nonexistent in the biological sense) traits. If anything, it's a misuse of science and biology due to an intense lack of understanding.

Science done by people who don't know science is not science. Think of any of those "know-it-all" types who say, "Oh, I watched an episode of Bob Ross, and now I'm an expert painter." Well, no, you're not. You now have a slight recognition of what it means to paint, but that doesn't mean what you produce will be valid. Of course painting doesn't have the rigorous peer review that science does, so that's probably a crappy example.

[Tripe]

Of course painting doesn't have the rigorous peer review that science does, so that's probably a crappy example.

But what if it did, oh the excitement that would ensue.

[torgosPizza]

How many more Picassos we would have!

[Tripe]

I was thinking Magrittes myself but yes indeed

[AmandaGal]

Saying it's a "misuse" is letting them off to easily, IMO. It's more than that. It's the complete opposite of what Evolution is.

Again, see the point of phenotypic selection. The people doing the selection may look back at what they were doing and say "that was the intentional direction by humans of evolution." But - it isn't. Killing non-Jews and non-blondes to breed more blondes and non-Jews is not changing the genetic makeup of a species, it's changing your exterior (or in the case of being Jewish, nonexistent in the biological sense) traits. If anything, it's a misuse of science and biology due to an intense lack of understanding.

I wouldn't call it "evolution."  Evolution is a process.  You can't misuse a process.  That's why I said it was a bad way to say it.  I call it misuse of the theory of theory of natural selection. 

Phenotype and genotype are normally connected.   I get your point, but it doesn't make it any less a study in natural selecion. 

Nature often choses based on outward things that we can observe too.  If it was always intestinal tracks of lizards, the theory of evolution would be a more recent one.  Plus, the intestinal tracks of lizards IS phenotype.  If we dissect them, we can see it.  Granted, Hitler didn't choose based on internal organs, and I'm not saying he was great at the theory of natural selection (and god forbid, I'm not saying he was right...), but I think a perverse and limited understanding of how things worked in Darwin's theory was probably in place. 

There were probably things going on in phenotype that we didn't know with Hitler too.  For example, different ethnicities are more or less prone to certain genetic diseases that we can't see, but if we slaughtered everyone but them we'd be selecting for or against those diseases.  That wouldn't be something we could see. I honestly doubt Hitler could tell that Jewish males don' t produce as much  renin as his crew.  However, it would be something that killing all the Jews would also remove from the gene pool.

My point is not that Hitler was Darwin's star pupil, but I think the mockery of people comparing eugenics to natural selection is unwarranted.  Yes, it is a perverse way to view natural selection much like the Crusades were a perverse way to spread Christianity.  I just see that the theory is clearly at the roots of eugenics, however twisted it is at the root.  That doesn't make the theory less valid.  That doesn't make it "wrong" or perverse itself.

On the other hand, I guess I can see your point. I've heard the Bible quoted many times to back up racial hatred.  I wouldn't say that was the point of the Bible.  I wouldn't call that person a Christian, but I wouldn't call Hitler an evolutionary biologist or a Darwinist either.  However, like I would call Hitler perverting Natural Selection, I would call that perverting Christianity.  It's using bits and pieces from the "theory of Christianity" for their own means.  Clearly, they are holding on to the parts of Christianity that make sense to their goals, like Hitler does with Natural Selection even he didn't call it that, but not acknowledging the rest.  Do I blame Christianity? Of course not.  I don't blame Natural Selection or Darwin either.  I just acknowledge that a perverse knowledge of Christianity is at works there.

Bad example, because the racists are probably only using the Bible to get more people on their side, but maybe not because Hitler used the master race thing too.  Eh, I give up

[BathTub]

My point was this.

Ben Stein's study to prepare for his movie about how the Discovery Institutes Intelligent Design creation meme wasn't being taken seriously by Scientists was...

to read a book from one of the fellows at the Discovery Institute.

Now remember kids, 'Darwinism' is a failure because it doesn't explain Thermodynamics or the motion of the planets.

And Science leads to killing people.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

its nice not to have to argue my point.  lol thanks amanda for doing a better job than i ever could.

People are idiots and will confuse science and evolution with atheism if it's yelled loudly enough.

Did you assume I was that idiot?  Quite frankly i would bet money that adolf was using a twisted version of natural selection (remember this is in his thinking so putting rational reasons on it might be silly anyways) and throughly beleived in the "christian god" at the same time.  the thought hardly causes me any problems.  although spelling....

[torgosPizza]

No I didn't think you were the idiot. Unless you bought everything Ben Stein is selling, to which I would say, I'm sorry you fell for it.

Ben Stein's study to prepare for his movie about how the Discovery Institutes Intelligent Design creation meme wasn't being taken seriously by Scientists was.to read a book from one of the fellows at the Discovery Institute.

And Science leads to killing people.

Well, if it says it in a movie, it HAS to be true!

That's really my problem here, is that a lot of people who went and saw this movie probably did not leave it questioning their authenticity, just as a lot of the 9/11 Conspiracy Fans will watch Loose Change and be like "Yeah! It was an inside jorb!!!!" It saddens me to think that people can be so easily convinced of something that is obviously fraudulent.

I'm not sure how we got on the whole subject of phenotypes, I know I brought it up but my head's a little fuzzy now   In any case, my point still stands. Learning "science" from the Discovery Institute, people who wouldn't know what science was if it bitchslapped them, is akin to getting weight loss advice from the World's Fattest Man. They don't know what they're talking about, and if they did, they wouldn't be involved in the Discovery Institute.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

just out of amusement here torgo, did you watch the movie.  are you making assumptions about the movies presentation and assumptions?

[Tyrant]

Well, if it says it in a movie, it HAS to be true!

That's really my problem here, is that a lot of people who went and saw this movie probably did not leave it questioning their authenticity, just as a lot of the 9/11 Conspiracy Fans will watch Loose Change and be like "Yeah! It was an inside jorb!!!!" It saddens me to think that people can be so easily convinced of something that is obviously fraudulent.

  You just pointed out the real underlying problem here, torgo. The people who make movies like that and the ones who believe them have completely lost the ability to employ critical thinking skills, assuming they ever had any to begin with. I think the true art of debate has also been lost because of movies like this. You don't present only the facts and theories that you're pretty confident you'll be able to shoot down to make a blanket statement. You take ALL facets of the side you're opposing, learn about them as much as possible, and attempt to whittle them away in a meticulous and logical fashion. In movies like Expelled and the material Michael Moore has put out, it seems everyone is more concerned about just being right than actually finding real reasons why they could be right.

[torgosPizza]

just out of amusement here torgo, did you watch the movie.  are you making assumptions about the movies presentation and assumptions?

I refuse to see it only based on what I know from people who have seen it, and what Ben Stein himself has said publicly (and is available in written form). I'm not giving any money to that manipulative clown.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

isnt that a similar reason that stein wont read origin of the species?

EDIT: PS torgo PLEASE change your avatar, with that staring back at me it basically feels like your yelling at me.  I miss the old torgo pizza one.  so much nicer looking

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

sorry but i still remember you as HAL man.  heh 

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

ill think ill remain in my tugley woods forever.