members, click to sign in..

5,540 active users!!Bandwidth
SUNDAY
JAN 25, 2015
Home
NewsSITE
Events & Blogs
New Audio & Video
Broadcasters
Local Church Finder
Webcast LIVE NOW!
Sermons by Bible
Sermons by Topic
Sermons by Speaker
Sermons by Date
Staff Picks
CommentsALL -5 min
Top Sermons
VideosPDFs
Daily Log
PhotosNew Stuff!
Stores
Online Bible
Hymnal
Daily Reading
Our Services
Submit Sermon
Members Only

 
RELIGION, CURRENT EVENTS, TECHNOLOGY Subscribe to the breaking newsWhat is RSS?
FRONT PAGE  |  1/25/2015
Choice News SATURDAY, APR 5, 2008  |  9 comments
Intelligent Design foes no match for Stein in 'Expelled'
NASHVILLE, Tenn. (BP)--Actor, commentator and comedian Ben Stein promises he hasn't lost his mind. Well, he says with his famous dry monotone humor, at least not in this instance.

On the contrary, Stein -– whose documentary film "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" opens in two weeks, April 18 -- believes he's involved in one of the leading cultural and political battles of his life: the fight for academic freedom against an establishment that teaches Darwinian evolution as fact. Intelligent Design (ID) -– the belief that certain aspects of the world are so complex that they must have been created by an intelligent being, instead of by a random process –- deserves a place at the academic table, he says. ...


CLICK HERE to Read Entire Article
www.baptistpress.com

Was Darwin Right? Part 2
  START  
  Recommended sermons | more..
•  Genesis: Reclaiming Culture • Ken Ham | 5/22/2003
•  Was Darwin Right? Part 2Dr. Terry Mortenson | 1/16/2009
•  Six Creation Days: Rejected • Ken Ham | 11/27/2009
•  Answers Academy: Big BangJason Lisle | 6/1/2005

   01/20/15  |  Two more planets in our Solar System, say astronomers • 1 comments
   01/02/15  |  AIG has New Year's Eve Times Square message • 31 comments
   12/16/14  |  Ken Ham Argues Kentucky's Retraction of $18M Is 'Illegal' • 1 comments
   11/25/14  |  Ken Ham Affirms Creationists Do Not Deny Climate Change • 2 comments
   11/23/14  |  Pat Robertson attacks creationists again • 20 comments
MORE RELATED ( CREATION ) NEWS | MORE..
   01/23/15  |  Saudi state TV reports King Abdullah, longtime US ally, has died... • 9 comments
   01/14/15  |  NI: Gay couple launch legal bid to redefine marriage • 6 comments
   01/14/15  |  Half of all children in the US will likely live with an... • 17 comments
   01/13/15  |  Graham: America's ‘Culture of Death’ Stems From a 'Sinful,... • 134 comments
   01/13/15  |  Dallas Abortion Clinic Becomes First Abortion Clinic to Close in... • 1 comments
OTHER CHOICE NEWS | MORE..
   01/01/15  |  Happy New Year from SermonAudio! • 10 comments
   12/01/14  |  From Tyndale to Today: A New Study Bible • 34 comments
   06/02/14  |  A Letter to SermonAudio From a Missionary to Haiti • 10 comments
   02/07/14  |  Bringing the Gospel of John to Every Home in Austin, TX • 37 comments
   01/07/14  |  SermonAudio Partners with RFC for the 2014 Family Conference at... • 1 comments
OTHER CHOICE NEWS | MORE..
   01/25/15  |  The 10 Most and Least ‘Bible-Minded’ Cities in America: Did... • 5 comments
   01/25/15  |  Only Christian Church in Indian Village Burned Down by Hindu...
   01/25/15  |  Pope urges families to talk, not text • 1 comments
   01/25/15  |  Al Gore: Spend $90 Trillion To Ban Cars From Every Major City In... • 2 comments
   01/24/15  |  Obama's Nominee fo AG Reveals Passion for Racial Justice • 4 comments
OTHER RECENT NEWS | MORE..

COMMENTS | show all | add new  
    Sorting Order:  
· Page 1 ·  Found: 9 user comment(s)
News Item4/14/08 4:26 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
"The existence of stars, fossils, etc are facts that need no interpretation"

I say they do need it. A series of propositions & conclusions must be accepted before even things like stars or fossils can be believed to be facts. That we do not engage in conscious interpretation about these only means we have taken intellectual shortcuts, not that there is no interpretation *required*.

I grant that the definition including "objective & verifiable" is common, but to accept this would be to beg the question, since I challenge the idea that they could ever be objective & verifiable. Even observation is problematic.

Example - fossil: "A remnant or trace of an organism of a past geologic age ... embedded & preserved in the earth's crust" [www.freedictionary.com].
Objection: How do we know it is a remnant of an organism? The absence of a plausible alternative doesn't mean it is *necessarily* so; we simply reject others as unlikely. Therefore, their organic origin (which cannot be empirically verified) is an opinion, not a fact. Only omniscience could resolve this. So while I accept this definition as a working hypothesis, I don't accept it as a fact.

My initial statement is not self-refuting if I qualify "scientific facts" (what Stein is debating) as being "empirical."

9

News Item4/14/08 12:05 AM
Sean | Montana  Find all comments by Sean
My first statement that you reference was poorly worded and an ineffective argument.
You said that you have done no investigation before stating that there are no scientific facts. What do you know of these "formally fallacious methods?"
The existence of stars, fossils, etc are facts that need no interpretation. How these things came to be is subject to interpretation.
You formed your definition of scientific facts (hypotheses about nature ostensibly confirmed by experimental methods)to fit your argument. I prefer the more impartial:
"In the most basic sense, a scientific fact is an objective and verifiable observation; in contrast with a hypothesis or theory, which is intended to explain or interpret facts"
Would you care to comment on Webster's definition of logic? "(1): a science that deals with the principles and criteria of validity of inference and demonstration: the science of the formal principles of reasoning"
Is it logical to say that there are no scientific facts bearing in mind the definition of logic? How and (more importantly) why did you arrive at this conclusion?
I have to go back to work tomorrow and may not get back with you for some time, but look forward to your response. Thanks for the discussion.
8

News Item4/13/08 12:37 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
"Saying that there are no scientific facts is a scientific statement"

False; it is a logical statement, for I performed no empirical investigation to discover this, but pointed out that such "facts" are established by formally fallacious methods. It is always false to assert the consequent or do open induction. Just because some unproven assertion *may* be true does not mean it is a fact.

"It is true that the interpretation of scientific facts can often be incorrect."

Can you give an example of a scientific "fact" that has not been established by interpretation? If interpretations are fallible, what right does one have to say its conclusions are facts?

7

News Item4/13/08 11:30 AM
Sean | Montana  Find all comments by Sean
Neil

Having the ability to use your vocabulary effectively is great evidence for intelligence.

All pleasantries aside, we are clouding the issue with extraneous information. My contention is that you cannot logically make the statement that you did.

Saying that there are no scientific facts is a scientific statement and carries with it the presupposition that you KNOW someting of science. Because the statement is absolute, it implies that you know everything.

As the arguement goes: Even if you only knew half of everything scientific, wouldn't it be possible that there are facts in the other half? You can't be entirely serious about your arguement. I'll ask my question with a little more clarification.

Is it a scientific fact that there are no scientific facts?

It is true that the interpretation of scientific facts can often be incorrect.

6

News Item4/13/08 8:54 AM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
Sean,

Having a broad vocabulary logically implies nothing about my intelligence

"Is it a fact that there are no scientific facts?" - Yes, as I'll explain below. Science as commonly understood is knowledge about nature, not all knowledge (which is an archaic definition).

First, to define terms:
"Fact:" a thing that is indisputably the case (Oxford Am. Dictionary)

Now, are "scientific facts" (hypotheses about nature ostensibly confirmed by experimental methods) indisputable? Logically they cannot be, for in making a broad claim about nature (as with laws of physics), one commits the fallacies of affirming the consequent & hasty generalization. This has been acknowledged by atheist philosophers.

Even measurement has no factual value, for is variable error explained by measurement error or unexplained causes, & how would we know the difference? And no experimental data ever matches the ideal equation without being arbitrarily fudged by statistical methods such as linear regression.

5

News Item4/13/08 12:32 AM
Mic | Japan  Contact via emailFind all comments by Mic
Ben Stein is a comedian and actor. Yet even he realizes there is a Creator. He may not have his "theology straight", but at least he is using his limited resources to stand up for a creation viewpoint. It seems that groups like AIG will welcome this, yet also clarify the Biblical points where Stein's production may fall short of good Bible reading.
4

News Item4/12/08 11:17 PM
Sean | Montana  Find all comments by Sean
Neil wrote:
Critics of Darwinism need to drop the useless pejorative "elitist." That term of abuse probably got popularized by Jacobins, Marxists, or Progressives, but serves no useful purpose in this debate. Illogical reasoning, not the existence of academic elites, is the problem.
The term is also popular among critics of Calvinism.
And even Stein needs to understand that there are no scientific facts. True science is an oxymoron.
You speak of illogical reasoning. Exactly what would you need to know to say: "There are no scientific facts." Logically, you would have to know literally everything.

Science deals with knowledge and can be defined as knowledge.

It surprises me that someone with the intelect to use words like "pejorative" would make such an obtuse comment, so I'll ask the obvious question.

Is it a fact that there are no scientific facts? Think about it...

3

News Item4/10/08 5:04 PM
Neil | Tucson  Find all comments by Neil
Critics of Darwinism need to drop the useless pejorative "elitist." That term of abuse probably got popularized by Jacobins, Marxists, or Progressives, but serves no useful purpose in this debate. Illogical reasoning, not the existence of academic elites, is the problem.

The term is also popular among critics of Calvinism.

And even Stein needs to understand that there are no scientific facts. True science is an oxymoron.

2

News Item4/10/08 3:02 PM
Jim Lincoln | Nebraska  Find all comments by Jim Lincoln
1
There are a total of 9 user comments displayed | add new comment |Subscribe to these comments
Last PostTotal
Obama Reaffirms ‘Deep Commitment’ to Abortion
broadstairs: "' the u.s. supreme court issued its ruling in roe v. wade, a decision..."
-4 min 10 
The 10 Most and Least ‘Bible-Minded’ Cities in America: Did...
wayfairer pilgrim from lubbock,tx: "what got me was how few texas cities are listed..."
-37 min 
Rev. Franklin Graham’s Non-PC Move on Live TV
quinary: " quadrangle logical, but hardly biblical. have you ever eaten a whole..."
-59 min 164 


Ballymena, Co. Antrim, N. Ireland
Ballymena Congregational Church

Play! | More

Christopher Sidwell
Demonic Faith

Luke 8; James 2
Sunday Service
Bible Presbyterian of Apollo
Play! | MP3 | RSS


Douglas Salyer
The Sower and the Seed

Pastor - Sunday Morning Sermon
Princess Chapel Church
Transcript!Play! | MP3

E. A. Johnston
Salvation Without Holiness...

Evangelism Awakening
Special Meeting
Play! | MP3

Mark S. Case
Becoming a Glorious Church

Riverside Church
Sunday Service
Video!Play! | MP4

Ken Wimer
Hard of Hearing

Spiritual Deafness Described
Shreveport Grace Church
Play! | MP3

Sponsor:
Paul Washer: "Most Useful Bible Study"

See what Paul Washer calls the most useful Bible study tool in hist­ory. Click here!
www.puritandownloads.com/pa..

Sermon:
The Life of CH Spurgeon
Jonathan Hunt

SPONSOR | 4,300+

SPONSOR




                   
A proud soul is content with nothing. ... Thomas Brooks

City: Las Vegas, NV
Gospel of John
Cities | Local | Personal
MOBILE
iPhone + iPad New!
Church App New!
Android New!
Church App New!
Kindle + Nook New!
BlackBerry
Windows Mobile, Nokia
Chromecast TV
ROKU TV
Pebble Smartwatch
Kindle Reader


HELP
Knowledgebase
Broadcasters
Listeners
Q&A
Uploading Sermons
Uploading Videos
Webcasting
Tips & Tricks
YouTube Screencasts

FOLLOW
Weekly Newsletter
Staff Picks Feed
Site Notices
RSS | Twitter | Facebook
SERVICES | ALL
Local Church Finder | Info
MP3 Play & Download
Mobile Apps
Podcasting
Video Support
Live Webcasting
Transcription Service
Business Cards
SOLO | MINI Sites
Domain Redirect
Favorites
QR Codes
24x7 Radio Stream
INTEGRATION
Sermon Browser
HTML Codes
WordPress
Twitter
Facebook
Logos | e-Sword
SOAP API

BATCH
Transfer Agent
Protected Podcasts
Upload via Email
Auto-Upload Sermons
Auto-Blog Import
Picasa | FTP | Dropbox
ABOUT US
SermonAudio.com is the largest library of audio sermons from conservative churches and ministries worldwide. All broadcasters must adhere to the Articles of Faith.

Our Services | Testimonials
Broadcast With Us!
Support Us
Advertising | Local Ads
CONTACT
info@sermonaudio.com
Copyright © 2015 SermonAudio.com.