Anti-IMAX creationist stupidity

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2005-03-24 08:13pm

From the ignorance of the fundamentalists, O Lord deliver us.

...wow, that's good enough to be part of my sign, if you get the connotation.

Pint0 Xtreme · Post by **Pint0 Xtreme** » 2005-03-25 08:09am

From a marketing perspective, it's not difficult to see their point of view. Most profit organizations are mostly focused on business rather than long-term societal changes.

Guardsman Bass · Post by **Guardsman Bass** » 2005-03-25 09:41am

It's fucking stupid; I mean, the audiences that see these films are probably more religious than not, and (let's face it) most of the time I've gone to see an IMAX movie with others, at least for them, it was for the bloody special effects (Example: I went to see an IMAX movie with a religious group of Mormons. They are all young-earthers, and the movie was geology-related, but they enjoyed it). Could this mean, that a significant part of the fundie population in the IMAX areas is thinking about what they saw?

That NOS Guy · Post by **That NOS Guy** » 2005-03-25 02:00pm

Maybe they should just stop using all the things that technology and science grants. Let them go back to having no electricity, and tilling the Earth with cattle.

"Just as God intended"

Firefox · Post by **Firefox** » 2005-03-25 02:08pm

That NOS Guy wrote:Maybe they should just stop using all the things that technology and science grants. Let them go back to having no electricity, and tilling the Earth with cattle.

"Just as God intended"

You mean with a plow? That's a piece of technology, as well. So's the development of agriculture, to be more general.

No, if they want to work their anti-science and naturalistic fallacy to the hilt, they should return to hunter-gatherer society.

That NOS Guy · Post by **That NOS Guy** » 2005-03-25 02:30pm

Firefox wrote: You mean with a plow? That's a piece of technology, as well. So's the development of agriculture, to be more general.

No, if they want to work their anti-science and naturalistic fallacy to the hilt, they should return to hunter-gatherer society.

Hey, I want to get some use of them. Sustinence farmers do nothing to help the economy.

wolveraptor · Post by **wolveraptor** » 2005-03-25 02:36pm

we ought to deny them cancer treatment, or gene therapy, or antibiotics, or anything that has been influenced by the evolution of viri and bacteria, and the science of genetics.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2005-03-25 03:48pm

I suppose those idiots are already useing the film withdrawl as "proof" <cough, cough> that the museums know Evolution is on shaky ground.

sketerpot · Post by **sketerpot** » 2005-03-25 09:06pm

Firefox wrote:
That NOS Guy wrote:Maybe they should just stop using all the things that technology and science grants. Let them go back to having no electricity, and tilling the Earth with cattle.

"Just as God intended"
You mean with a plow? That's a piece of technology, as well. So's the development of agriculture, to be more general.

No, if they want to work their anti-science and naturalistic fallacy to the hilt, they should return to hunter-gatherer society.

To be properly consistent, we shouldn't have them give up all science and technology. We should just have them give up the science and technology that is the direct fruit of science done by the scientific method. Using a plow doesn't require thinking scientifically, so it's allowed. Coming up with the theories of genetics that let us make good hybrid crops does. Just look at Lysenkoism for an example of what happens if people reject science in that area.

Ditto for lots of physics (and related things like chemistry), everything else in biology (and therefore medicine), and all the technology that comes indirectly from the scientific method these people disagree with so vehemently.

It's like they think of the scientific method as something that's only valid when it's producing technology in ways that doesn't contradict what they've already chosen to believe. Then suddenly its proven track record of being the best way to truth is ignored.

Darth Servo · Post by **Darth Servo** » 2005-03-26 02:27pm

sketerpot wrote:To be properly consistent, we shouldn't have them give up all science and technology. We should just have them give up the science and technology that is the direct fruit of science done by the scientific method. Using a plow doesn't require thinking scientifically, so it's allowed. Coming up with the theories of genetics that let us make good hybrid crops does. Just look at Lysenkoism for an example of what happens if people reject science in that area.

Nice little arbitrary line in the sand there. But you're wrong about plowing not requiring scientific thinking. Its direct observation that plowing a field makes farming better than just randomly scattering the seeds around. It requires observation to determine that water is required for the plant to grow. It requires observation to realize that the seeds are the sourse of the plant in the first place. And what is this "observation" I keep talking about? Why, its SCIENCE!