tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1885549900454136918.post1435752477174177134..comments2023-08-11T08:06:28.810-07:00Comments on Slobber And Spittle (Archive): Expelled: No Idiocy AllowedCujo359http://www.blogger.com/profile/10385213658828021737noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1885549900454136918.post-37090304269439500592008-05-06T12:58:00.000-07:002008-05-06T12:58:00.000-07:00So do you actually confess that you don't want to ...So do you actually confess that you don't want to study the matter further? By your own mouth?<BR/><BR/>Instead, you just behaved as an authority-believer in the way you, Sir & Sirius merely refer to Mr. Dawkins. I don't believe you really ARE such a fellow but was just provoked to act so.<BR/><BR/>Because I don't respect such an attitude, even if I ignored you maligning and calling names.<BR/><BR/>As for the Darwin's Origin, I have read and studied it in both Finnish and the English language, in the original and later edition. (Even the concept and term "evolution" was not mentioned in the original edition but what I believe was 5th edition!)<BR/><BR/>As for me, I have made a source discovery of the correspondence letters of Finnish scholars to Ernst Haeckel and from these nestors to some scholars in Finland. One of the Finnish companions was one of the 7 founding fathers of the International Eugenics Society, Harry Federley. He was very hars by the time of Finnish civil war and exhorted annihilation of the war prisoners (belonging to the "Mongolian" Finnish stock, instead of the Swedish speaking upper class in Finland.) Federley claimed, in a Haeckelian ethos, that the brains of a Finn weighted more than 100 grams less than those of a Swede. The highest ladder in the linear concept of human evolution for Haeckel were the blue eyed Nordic stock living in Åland.<BR/><BR/>Just to interpret the 90-140 year old handwritten hieroglyfs was painstaking and also the German was oldfashioned to translate for me who had studied German only 2 years.<BR/><BR/>One of the cases I found TO Finland was the second surviving letter of the only Nobelist student of Morgan, who himself was the first Nobel laureate in genetics.<BR/><BR/>Others are actually doing research on the history of science. Mr. Dawkins is a professor of PUS in Oxford, but the popularization of history of science is very, very poor in the subject of evolutionism. It is a taboo and sacred cow. Do not touch! Just bow your knee. As an indication, the relevant letters to Charles Darwin prior to 1859 do not exist. It is extremely rare to tell about that to public. Just like the excess use of cocaine by Sigmund Freud was a taboo for the critical decades.<BR/><BR/>pauli.ojala@gmail.com<BR/>Biochemist, drop-out (M.Sci. Master of Sciing)<BR/>http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Expelled-ID.htm<BR/>PS. The web pages of the Expelled give answers to the issues you raised.Jaakonpoikahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05473422011143619917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1885549900454136918.post-76987639514723205462008-05-04T10:47:00.000-07:002008-05-04T10:47:00.000-07:00Because someone who starts an argument out with no...Because someone who starts an argument out with nonsense deserves no better. <I>Mein Kampf</I> wasn't based on Darwinian theory, nor inspired by it. One needs to look no further than the Old Testament to tell where Hitler's ideas about his people's inherent superiority could have come from. He mentions natural selection, but clearly had no concept of how it actually works.<BR/><BR/>Richard Dawkins has <A HREF="http://richarddawkins.net/article,2488,Open-Letter-to-a-victim-of-Ben-Steins-lying-propaganda,Richard-Dawkins" REL="nofollow">dealt sufficiently</A> with this argument already, so I see no reason to expound on it further:<BR/>[begin quote]<BR/>Darwinism gives NO support to racism of any kind. Quite the contrary. It is emphatically NOT about natural selection between races. It is about natural selection between individuals. It is true that the subtitle of The Origin of Species is "Or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life" but Darwin was using the word "race" in a very different sense from ours. It is totaly clear, if you read past the title to the book itself, that a "favoured race" meant something like 'that set of individuals who possess a certain favoured genetic mutation" (although Darwin would not have used that language because he did not have our modern concept of a genetic mutation).<BR/>[end quote]<BR/><BR/>Kampf, by the way, is typically translated into English as "fight". The meaning of that word is rather broad in English, as the meaning of <I>kampf</I> is in German, so the synonym "struggle" works better here. Once again, nothing to do with Darwin.<BR/><BR/>Why don't you educate yourself by picking up a copy of <I>Origin Of Species</I> or the <A HREF="http://www.expelledexposed.com/" REL="nofollow">Expelled Exposed</A> site, instead of lecturing people about stuff you clearly don't understand?Cujo359https://www.blogger.com/profile/10385213658828021737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1885549900454136918.post-87193515016111882482008-05-04T09:59:00.000-07:002008-05-04T09:59:00.000-07:00Why don't you read more and suppose less:http://ww...Why don't you read more and suppose less:<BR/>http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Gasman.htm<BR/>?<BR/><BR/>Pauli OjalaOjalanpoikahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01295332610492661778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1885549900454136918.post-36101524012533188552008-05-03T13:33:00.000-07:002008-05-03T13:33:00.000-07:00This is utter nonsense. Hitler never once mentione...This is utter nonsense. Hitler never once mentioned Darwin, nor evolution in its scientific meaning in <I>Mein Kampf</I>. He did, on the other hand, mention divine will as the force that winnows out the weak. His assumption of the superiority of the German people had more to do with his view of their culture than it did with anything resembling science.<BR/><BR/>That you can go on so long from such an obviously erroneous point is amazing.Cujo359https://www.blogger.com/profile/10385213658828021737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1885549900454136918.post-49112028226581276322008-05-01T02:09:00.000-07:002008-05-01T02:09:00.000-07:00Ben(jamin) Stein is under heavy artillery for 'exa...Ben(jamin) Stein is under heavy artillery for 'exaggerating' or 'going easy' on the influence of evolutionism behind Nazism and Stalinism (super evolution of Lysenkoism in the Soviet Russia). But the monstrous Haeckelian type of vulgar evolutionism drove not only the 'Politics-is-applied-biology' Nazi takeover in the continental Europe, but even the nationalistic collision at the World War I. It was Charles Darwin himself, who praised and raised the monstrous German Ernst Haeckel with his still recycled embryo drawing frauds etc. in the spotlight as the greatest authority in the field of human evolution, even in the preface to his Descent of man in 1871. If Thomas Henry Huxley with his concept of 'agnostism' was Darwins bulldog in England, Haeckel was his Rotweiler in Germany.<BR/><BR/>'Kampf' was a direct translation of 'struggle' from On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life (1859). Seinen Kampf. His application.<BR/><BR/>Catch 22: Haeckel's 140 years old fake embryo drawings have been mindlessly recycled for the 'public understanding of science' (PUS) in most biology text books until this millennium. Despite factum est that Haeckel's crackpot raging Recapitulation/Biogenetic Law and functioning gill slits of human embryos have been at the ethical tangent race hygiene/eugenics/genocide, infanticide, and Freudian psychoanalysis (subconscious atavisms). Dawkins is the Oxford professor for PUS - and should gather the courage of Stephen Jay Gould who could feel ashamed about it.<BR/><BR/>Some edited quotes from my conference posters and articles defended and published in the field of bioethics and history of biology (and underline/edit them a 'bit'):<BR/>http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Asian_Bioethics.pdf <BR/>http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Haeckelianlegacy_ABC5.pdf<BR/><BR/>The marriage laws were once erected not only in the Nazi Germany but also in the multicultural states of America upon the speculation that the mulatto was a relatively sterile and shortlived hybrid. The absence of blood transfusion between "white" and "colored races" was self evident (Hailer 1963, p. 52).<BR/><BR/>The first law on sterilization in US had been established in 1907 in Indiana, and 23 similar laws had been passed in 15 States and sterilization was practiced in 124 institutions in 1921 (Mattila 1996; Hietala 1985 p. 133; these were the times of IQ-tests under Gould's scrutiny in his Mismeasure of Man 1981). By 1931 thirty states had passed sterization laws in the US (Reilly 1991, p. 87). Typically, the operations hit blacks the most in the US, poor women in the Europe, and often the victims were never even told they had been sterilized.<BR/><BR/>Mendelism outweighed recapitulation (embryos climbing up their evolutionary tree through fish-, amphibian- and reptilian stages), but that merely smoothened the way for the brutal 1930’s biolegislation - that quickly penetrated practically all Western countries. The laws were copied from country to country. The A-B-O blood groups, haemophilia, eye colours etc. were found to be inherited in a Mendelian fashion by 1910. So also the complex traits and social (mis)behaviour such as alcoholism, schizophrenia, manic depression, criminality, rebelliousness, artistic sense, pauperism, racial differences, inherited scholarship (and its converse, feeble-mindedness) were all thought to be determined by one or two genes. Mendelism was "experimental" and quantitative, and its exaggeration outweighed the more cautious biometry operating on smaller variations, not discontinuous leaps. Its advocates boldly claimed that these problems could be done away within a few generations through selection, persisted (although most biologists must have known that defective genes could not be eliminated, even with the most intense forced sterilizations and marriage restrictions due to recessive genes and synergism. Nevertheless, these laws were held until 1970's and were typically changed only when the abortion legislation were released (1973).<BR/><BR/>So the American laws were pioneering endeavours. In Europe Denmark passed the first sterilization legislation in Europe (1929). Denmark was followed by Switzerland, Germany that had felt to the hands of Hitler and Gobineu, and other Nordic countries: Norway (1934), Sweden (1935), Finland (1935), and Iceland (1938 ) (Haller 1963, pp 21-57; 135-9; Proctor 1988, p. 97; Reilly 1991, p. 109). Seldom is it mentioned in the popular media, that the first outright race biological institution in the world was not established in Germany but in 1921 in Uppsala, Sweden (Hietala 1985, pp. 109). (I am not aware of the ethymology of the 'Up' of the ancient city from Plinius' Ultima Thule, however.) In 1907 the Society for Racial Hygiene in Germany had changed its name to the Internationale Gesellschaft für Rassenhygiene, and in 1910 Swedish Society for Eugenics (Sällskap för Rashygien) had become its first foreign affiliate (Proctor 1988, p. 17). Today, Swedish state church is definitely the most liberal in the face of the world.<BR/><BR/>Hitler's formulation of the differences between the human races was affected by the brilliant sky-blue eyed Ernst Haeckel (Gasman 1971, p. xxii), praised and raised by Darwin. At the top of the unilinear progression were usually the "Nordics", a tall race of blue-eyed blonds. Haeckel's position on the 'Judenfrage' was assimilation and Expelled-command from their university chairs, not yet an open elimination. But was it different only in degree, rather than kind?<BR/><BR/>In 1917 the immigration of "defective" groups was forbidden even in the United States by a law. In 1921 the European immigration was diminished to 3% based on the 1910 census. Eventually, in the strategical year of 1924 the finest hour of eugenics had come and the fatal law was passed by Congress. It diminished immigration to 2% of the foreign-born from each country based on the 1890 census in order to preserve the "nordic" balance in population, and was hold through World War II until 1965 (Hietala 1985, p. 132).<BR/><BR/>Richard Lewontin writes:“The leading American idealogue of the innate mental inferiority of the working class was, however, H.H. Goddard, a pioneer of the mental testing movement, the discoverer of the Kallikak family,<BR/>and the administrant of IQ-tests to immigrants that found 83 % of the Jews, 80% of the Hungarians, 79% of the Italians, and 87% of the the Russians to be feebleminded.” (1977, p. 13.) Regarding us Finns, Finnish emmigrants put the cross on the box reserved for the "yellow" group (Kemiläinen 1993, p. 1930), until 1965.<BR/><BR/>Germany was the most scientifically and culturally advanced nation of the world upon opening the riddles at the close of the nineteenth century. And she went Full Monty.<BR/><BR/>Today, developmental biologists are anticipating legislation of laws that would define the do’s and dont’s. In England, they are fertilizing human embryos for research purposes and pipetting chimera embryos of humans and monkeys, 'legally'. The legislation should not distract individual researchers from their personal awareness of responsibility. A permissive law merely defines the ethical minimum. The lesson is that a law is no substitute for morals and that dissidents should not be intimidated.<BR/><BR/>I am suspicious over the burial of the Kampf (Struggle). The idea of competition is innate in the modern society. It is the the opposite view in a 180 degree angle to the Judaeo-Christian ideal of agapee (contra epithumia, eros, filia & storge) (ahava in Hebrew), that I personally cheriss. The latter sees free giving, altruism, benevolence and self sacrificing love as the beginning, motivation, and sustainer of the reality.<BR/><BR/>pauli.ojala@gmail.com<BR/>Biochemist, drop-out (Master of Sciing)<BR/>http://www.helsinki.fi/~pjojala/Expelled-ID.htmJaakonpoikahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05473422011143619917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1885549900454136918.post-59337385299024528132008-04-25T22:18:00.000-07:002008-04-25T22:18:00.000-07:00You don't promote thought by lying through your te...You don't promote thought by lying through your teeth. His equating Nazism with Darwinism <EM>and</EM> atheism shows how mendacious this film is. I wouldn't believe Stein's assertions about some "behind the scenes worldview" if he brought back video. <BR/><BR/>Nonsense is nonsense, pure and simple. Thinking involves examining your assumptions. When you can't tell that your assumptions have no resemblance to the truth, you can't think worth a shit.<BR/><BR/>BTW, are you the same moron who posted this same comment over at <A HREF="http://amused-muse.blogspot.com/2008/04/expelled-imagine.html" REL="nofollow">Kristine's site</A>? Didn't they smack you around enough over there? Or did you figure you'd try this same schtick at some other places and see if it went any better?Cujo359https://www.blogger.com/profile/10385213658828021737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1885549900454136918.post-13906300555288995012008-04-22T15:09:00.000-07:002008-04-22T15:09:00.000-07:00just saw Expelled... Ben Stein's goal in making Ex...just saw Expelled... Ben Stein's goal in making Expelled (i gather) is to promote free thought, especially more thinking about motivations that drive American academia and a lot of other behind-the-scenes worldview that we tend to take for granted.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1885549900454136918.post-14824054229165073272008-04-21T10:59:00.000-07:002008-04-21T10:59:00.000-07:00I suppose the old approach was more honest, at lea...I suppose the old approach was more honest, at least in the sense that it wasn't concealing its motives, but in any other respect I think these guys lost their cred a century ago.<BR/><BR/>Science has moved on from the creationist viewpoint, for good reason. The whole notion that the creation hypothesis has never had a hearing is as absurd as the premise of this movie. If a religion can't deal with the implications of that fact, it either needs to adapt or die.<BR/><BR/>BTW, for anyone whose eyes may have glazed over before they reached the end of this article, Wesley is the guy who checked out the expelledthemovie.com domain registration. Thanks for that.Cujo359https://www.blogger.com/profile/10385213658828021737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1885549900454136918.post-40297691627164521662008-04-21T03:54:00.000-07:002008-04-21T03:54:00.000-07:00Actually, creationism of the antievolutionary sort...Actually, creationism of the antievolutionary sort started out honest: they simply wished to exclude evolutionary science and prefer their interpretation of scripture, and said so. <BR/><BR/>It was after the 1968 Supreme Court decision in Edwards v. Aguillard saying that one could not exclude science from a science classroom to privilege a particular religious doctrine thereby that antievolutionists in general started down the road of deception. After that, they have tried over and over in many different ways to have the same argumentative content taught to students, but calling it by different labels ("creation science", "intelligent design", "teach the controversy", "strengths and weaknesses", "academic freedom", and "critical analysis" among them) and sanitizing what is said of direct references to God and scripture, and also de-emphasizing (but not repudiating) certain arguments like positing a young age of the earth and a recent global flood. This essentially dishonest approach has tainted the entire movement, and more insidiously, the apparent moral stance of its advocates. That's why I call antievolution a morally corrosive movement.<BR/><BR/>Wesley R. ElsberryWesleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12530161743505339352noreply@blogger.com