The.Voyage.That.Shook.The.World.2009.DVDRip.XviD-aAF96
ReeGed: Aright I had to call this lunacy to your attention because it would be unfair to have you download it otherwise. This film was commissioned by Creation Ministries International. Basically the kind of lunatics who take the bible as literal truth, word for word (and also deniers of the fact of Evolution). What they’ve done in this film is present a distorted view of Darwin and his history to what i can only assume is to fit their views (read the wiki for more information). This is such a pathetic attempt at trying to undermine what by now is the fact of evolution (supported by mountains of scientific evidence). I actually saw something similar done by Kirk Cameron and his crew of loonies (the same guys who found out that the banana is proof of god, rofl) HERE, we’re they’re handing out their own edited versions of Darwins “Origin of Species”.
Quality: DVDRip, nice and crisp 
Synopsis: In celebration of the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin’s birth, this insightful documentary retraces the scientist’s infamous, five-year research trip on the HMS Beagle. Featuring dramatic recreations and commentary from leading scholars, The Voyage That Shook the World examines the observations and experiments that led to Darwin’s groundbreaking theory of evolution.
 |
 |
 |
Ratings: IMDB: 5.9/10.0 (34 votes) | RT: N/A
Genre: Documentary | Biography
Directed by: Steve Murray
Starring: Antoni Biernacki, Mike Casten, Sam Downes, Drew Kelly, Liam Norris
Language: English
First Cinematic Release: 21 May 2009 (Australia)
Release Name: The.Voyage.That.Shook.The.World.2009.DVDRip.XviD-aAF
Video: XviD @ 1404 Kbps - 624×352px (WxH) - AR: 16/9 - FPS: 25.000 fps
Audio: MP3 @ 448 Kbps (Constant) - 6 channels
Size: 52 Files @ 721.4MB
Runtime: Release - 53 mins
Filename: aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world
Links: NFO, Wikipedia, Allmovie, YouTube Trailer
Download: Torrent Search | Download Search | Usenet Search | NinjaVideo | Subtitles
October 23rd, 2009 at 9:38 pm
Nice work Fr0zen.
I’m hoping more films about Darwin and the fact of Evolution will be released this year.
Update: Ok check out the intro I updated.
October 23rd, 2009 at 9:43 pm
I created all living creatures at the same time, including the various stages of man that scientists have discovered via fossils (which I put in the earth just as my little joke!). 10,000 years ago when I created Earth, then flooded it cos I was having a bad day and tried to kill everything, Noah put two of each animal on his Ark, including T-rexs, stegosauruses, brontosauruses and so on. One might ask "how did they all fit on there and what did they eat for all that time afloat?", but I move in mysterious ways and must be off now………. I have prayers to ignore……….
October 23rd, 2009 at 9:44 pm
More:
http://h33t.com/userdetails.php?id=128558
http://thepiratebay.org/user/extremezone/
http://extratorrent.com/profile/extremezone/torrents/
Download:
http://letitbit.net/download/0279.088421098cd5f933d5c51a6669/fwint.com_aaf_voyage.that.shook.the.world.avi.html
or
http://www.storage.to/get/TSBhtulS/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.avi
or
http://rapidshare.com/files/296932385/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part1.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/296932123/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part2.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/296933317/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part3.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/296932911/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part4.rar
or
http://www.storage.to/get/mIAlaneW/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part1.rar
http://www.storage.to/get/cB6DBVRG/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part2.rar
http://www.storage.to/get/hPNuKTS5/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part3.rar
http://www.storage.to/get/yWxHcIOj/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part4.rar
or
http://netload.in/dateiR9i6WsMdpv/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part1.rar.htm
http://netload.in/datei5IEuK87qHm/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part2.rar.htm
http://netload.in/dateir6NlqHlyiM/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part3.rar.htm
http://netload.in/datei76BSQbQw2B/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part4.rar.htm
or
http://hotfile.com/dl/15593475/1dfd2b4/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part1.rar.html
http://hotfile.com/dl/15593185/f8cef50/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part2.rar.html
http://hotfile.com/dl/15593184/8529e36/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part3.rar.html
http://hotfile.com/dl/15593182/5b8bc59/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part4.rar.html
no password,enjoy
October 23rd, 2009 at 9:50 pm
The.Voyage.That.Shook.The.World.2009.DVDRip.XviD-aAF400 MB || No Password
http://hotfile.com/dl/15598095/180caba/The.Voyage.That.Shook.The.World.2009.DVDRip.XviD-aAF.part1.rar.html
http://hotfile.com/dl/15599302/4da15d9/The.Voyage.That.Shook.The.World.2009.DVDRip.XviD-aAF.part2.rar.html
Apparently a fake link - panda
October 23rd, 2009 at 10:28 pm
Evolution is a hoax though.
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:03 pm
The best bit about that banana thing, (among it’s many many flaws) is that the bananas we eat today and of which they talk about are product of man. Bananas actually support the theory of evolution.
The original wild bananas are practically inedible, but humans have cultivated this seedless (and sterile) variety all this time - without us the banana would die off. Also of note: the current variety banana we eat comes from a well documented genetic mutation (evolution anyone) which created a sweet, more edible fruit.
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:14 pm
I find it funny that Reeged had to inject his bias into the description of the movie. Evolution fact? I don’t think so. It can’t even tell us how life began in the first place just what it did once it started. I am not saying to believe the bible or any other religious belief but it pays to keep an open mind. I for one believe in science but don’t take Evolution as fact but as what it is theory.
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:19 pm
The.Voyage.That.Shook.The.World.2009.DVDRip.XviD-aAF
200 MB || No Password
http://rapidshare.com/files/297019135/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part1.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/297017774/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part2.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/297019136/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part3.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/297013183/fwint.com-aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part4.rar
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:27 pm
Think I’ll give this a miss, If I want to hear total bull**** I’ll listen to Gordon Brown
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:41 pm
Evolution is a fact and a theory. Evolution will never tell us how life began in the first place, merely how it has evolved. There’s not a shred of evidence to point towards the existence of ANY god, so the chances of the Christian version of a god being the creator out of all of the other gods that humans have invented over the millennia isn’t even worth considering. You might as well be as open minded about that as you are of a technicolour dragon called Maureen shitting the universe into existence. It’s about as plausible an explanation as the Christian one.
Christianity is nothing more than a security blanket for those that cannot accept their own mortality. I would never claim to know how the universe came to be, yet a Christian is certain that they know how it happened, so if you want an example of arrogant closed mindedness, you don’t have to look much further than in the direction of your nearest brainwashed Christian to find it.
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:42 pm
@ 6 (pandaking): I know I just love the irony of it all.
@ 7 (LOL): If you want to call me biased to evidence then yes that I am. Also, last I checked Darwinian Evolution doesn’t attempt to explain how life started.
Even so we have some very plausible ideas of how life on earth as we know it started.
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:54 pm
Id like someone to point me in the direction of the evidence that supports that we evolved from monkeys, and im not talking the old line that says hey we look similar their brains are this close they have five fingers, im talking actual evidence.
October 23rd, 2009 at 11:59 pm
Seeing the description, this must be worth some good lawlz!!!
October 24th, 2009 at 12:21 am
The only loon I see here is the original poster, "Frozen." If you think something is absurd, then you should probably just ignore it, eh?
October 24th, 2009 at 12:24 am
Great job, will watch this for sure.
October 24th, 2009 at 12:34 am
@ 12 (Mark): What would you class as “actual evidence”?
@ 14 (Mac): We post stuff your enjoyment not ours, as you will see from the comments some people want to watch this. If you don’t like a release, skip over it - no need to bash someone spending their free time doing something for you.
October 24th, 2009 at 12:48 am
OP is a moron
October 24th, 2009 at 12:52 am
Who wants to bet that the people calling the OP a moron and asking for evidence about evolution are all Yanks? I’d say "go and read a book about evolution", but I doubt such a thing exists in the US as they’ve probably all been burned.
October 24th, 2009 at 1:01 am
It seems that the OP hasn’t fully evolved yet and is in a very primitive state.
And to claim that evolution is fact is just as hilarious as Christianity.
October 24th, 2009 at 1:02 am
Actually, I’m Canadian. America is probably the leader, along with the UK, in pro-evolutionary propaganda, so your comment is ignorant.
Go read Darwin’s actual books. I find them highly entertaining. His disdain of the Irish far surpasses his zeal for science or his dislike of Catholicism. One could call THE DESCENT OF MAN less biological science and more anthropological and moral advocacy on how to eradicate Irish immigrants in Britain.
I am amused by the ignoramuses who spout off about Darwin when they haven’t even read his actual books. This is about Darwin, not MODERN evolutionary theory, which is VERY far removed from Darwin’s original ideas.
October 24th, 2009 at 1:08 am
@ post 20: I think this is incorrect. If anything, America is still in a backwards-thinking pro-religion state of mind, just like the various Middle Eastern countries it is always forcefully invading.
October 24th, 2009 at 1:15 am
@ 20 (Mac): Yes modern evolutionary theory is different in the sense that we now have a mountain of evidence to support Darwins original idea. But evidence usually doesn’t matter much to deniers of Evolution. Faith seems to be more important.
October 24th, 2009 at 1:16 am
"It can’t even tell us how life began in the first place just what it did once it started."
The origin of life has nothing to do with the theory of evolution. It’s like asking why you don’t get grass with a hamburger.
October 24th, 2009 at 1:20 am
What I find amusing is the fact that when an opposing point of view is presented in this respect, people get defensive and attack it. If you are so secure in your belief, then there shouldn’t be a need to ridicule others beliefs because they differ from yours. Some could say what you believe is a "religion" in itself. The point being, respect your neighbors beliefs even though they might contradict yours.
Charles Darwin wrote a book called, "The Origin Of The Species", with the keyword here being Origin yet never defined an "origin". Just started the process after the advent of life.
Yes there are hypotheses on how life began, some being more fantastical than the other: lightning strikes a primordial ooze some how sparking life, crystals, and aliens just to name a few.
Look, we all have strong opinions on the subject. The point of my post is to point out how we can all have different views on something and talk intelligently about it even though we might not agree and think the other is wrong.
October 24th, 2009 at 1:26 am
Bananas were intelligently designed to be edible by man.
And this proves evolution happens all by itself? That’s brilliant!
Anymore prof out there I don’t know about? Because God knows (and apparently Europe) we yanks don’t study both sides of an argument to find out the truth.
October 24th, 2009 at 1:32 am
well thanks for the post but i could have done without reeged’s stupid editorial comments, who the fuck cares, if i want to see the stupid movie, i’ll see it, i don’t really give a shit about your personal opinion on evolution. with the next release of juno are you gonna shout out your opinions on abortion? or how journey to the center of the earth is ridiculous because science shows dinosaurs are extinct? nobody gives a flying fuck, keep it to yourself.
October 24th, 2009 at 1:49 am
@ 26 (wah wah wah): Actually, I give a flying fuck, and so do many others. Otherwise, we might’ve thought this film was based on facts, and not known it was "commissioned by Creation Ministries International … the kind of lunatics who take the bible as literal truth." Thanks reeged.
October 24th, 2009 at 1:56 am
@27
Are you so weak minded that you need to have someone tell you that something isn’t fact? In other words, you would like to be spoon-fed ideas from others instead of coming to a conclusion yourself, wow.
October 24th, 2009 at 2:01 am
Folks, the terrible IMDB rating is indication enough that this film is awful. Frozen could simply have labeled this as "propaganda" instead of going off on his tirade, which makes him sound just as fanatical and loony as the people whom he is ridiculing.
#24 is spot on. What happened to "tolerance"? If you disagree with someone, then intelligently state your stance if you are so inclined –condescendingly belittling others just exposes how INSECURE you are.
October 24th, 2009 at 2:04 am
It seems this post has brought out all the religious nuts who troll zerosec
October 24th, 2009 at 2:04 am
YA! Thank reeged we might have downloaded this and actually heard what the opponents of evolution had to say. That was a close one.
October 24th, 2009 at 2:09 am
Absolute fundamentalist, creationist rubbish.
October 24th, 2009 at 2:28 am
I agree with all those persons who insist Darwinism is not a fact. The theory of evolution is a theory after all. Whom I disagree with is all those other people who insist creationism deserves an equal standing within the scientific community. The specious arguments set forth by creationists to support their claims just make my head ache. After all if your best argument is a microscopic organism that evolutionists have demonstrated just might have evolved after all, well, isn’t that just too desperate? Archeologists and anthropologists are finding fossils every day that support evolution and nobody and nothing has ever found anything that suggests creation could have taken place. If they had we sure would have heard about it by now!
October 24th, 2009 at 2:41 am
If you don’t believe the theory of evolution by now then you are a fool, plain and simple. I’m not surprised to see the word theory used in completely the wrong way in this thread, even by those who are pro-evolution - a theory in science has to have a proposal, evidence, empirical data, repeatable experimention and explanation in that order. It’s not a set of wild guesses based on speculation or complete unprovable rubbbish like intelligent design. Dunno why I’m bothering to explain, fools are not gonna change their mind are they?
Go read some Richard Dawkins fools. Or better yet, don’t breed and then you won’t evolve any further to curse the rest of us with more Creationists!
October 24th, 2009 at 2:49 am
@24 - you’re wrong, the key words are both "origin" and "species". Darwins aim with this book was not to explain how life got started but to illustrate the idea of evolution and explain how the species of animals living on the earth at his time evolved from older and different species in the past, and ultimately to explain what we ourselves evolved from - something he only actually briefly mentions in the book itself as a result of fear of persecution from the religious authorities of the time.
Again, people (mostly Creationists) misrepresent Darwin here by arguing that he cannot explain where life came from in the first place - something like saying because a plumber cannot tell you the process that gets water into a house he cannot fit a sink! He wasn’t trying to explain where the first lifeforms came from or how, only how all other life forms evolved from it.
October 24th, 2009 at 2:52 am
@ 24 (LOL): I appreciate the reasoned post but a few things:
1. Calling belief of evolution a ‘religion in itself’ is ridiculous. Religion implies blind faith, absence of need for proof. The theory of evolution is based on scientific principles, which require evidence. If some jackass believes in evolution just because he hates religion (ie not because of evidence), then he’s not religious, just a jackass.
2. I believe ‘The Origin of Species’ refers to the origin of individual species. That is, they evolved from other species.
I agree with everything else you say, except want to point out that the theory of evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life…. unless it was aliens.
October 24th, 2009 at 3:16 am
This kind of releases always get a debate going. God is dead. Peace
October 24th, 2009 at 4:20 am
You won’t convince these people by making rational points. They base their beliefs in faith, which is not a rational thing to begin with.
You can point out x amount of evidence, you can point out x amount of religious absurdities… and it will not make one bit of difference. Just call them what they are (ignorant) and move on, most of the garbage they spout is not even worth justifying with a response.
October 24th, 2009 at 4:55 am
Yeah… it’s just harder to do when they try to turn things back around on you and distort shit to mislead. Many who spout the classic bullshit responses just don’t know any better because someone told them the same shit. I’m not sure what the solution is, but just ignoring the problem won’t make it go away. As long as they other side is actively engaging people, ignoring just lets the problem spread.
October 24th, 2009 at 5:01 am
Hmm so here we go again. Creationist spouting off about missing links and "it’s only a theory" and so on. So last time I looked the evidence for evolution consisted of:
- DNA
- Anatomy
- Embryology
- Fossils
- Basic physics
- Speciation
- Direct observation (yes, direct observation).
Each of these cascade to literally millions of items of experimentally proved evidence.
When we compare this with the bible and religious arguments their evidence is:
- Wishful thinking
Who’s case is the strongest?
October 24th, 2009 at 5:01 am
http://www.400monkeys.com/God//
October 24th, 2009 at 5:02 am
best god related FAQs website lol
October 24th, 2009 at 5:07 am
For Mark @12, if you want evidence that you are descended from a monkey go look at your parents. Seriously.
October 24th, 2009 at 5:14 am
the two hotfiles Slavik posted at post 4 are fake, what u get is this:
Microsoft.Windows.XP.Professional.SP3.Integrated.September.2009.Corporate.Unattended-UP2DATE
Thanks for wasting my time jerk
October 24th, 2009 at 6:05 am
lots of post but have not seen anyone post any actual evidence that supports evolution. they just say fossils support it. really which ones?
they say dna supports it. really how?
October 24th, 2009 at 6:44 am
"they say dna supports it. really how?"
lol.
Fossils show how various animals and plants have evolved over millennia.
DNA shows us the genetic lineage, its mutations, what we call evolution.
"All things bright and beautiful, All creatures great and small, All things wise and wonderful: The Lord God made them all" Doesn’t really cut the mustard when it comes to scientific Fact. Does it?
October 24th, 2009 at 7:44 am
One proof I would really love to see, is how we humans evolved or inherited the propensity for "faith" itself. That is, the belief in a "story" (whether fictional or based on experience) to fill in our gaps in understanding.
We all have faith that the sun will come up tomorrow - based largely on our experience that it always has. We all live our lives and make our decisions based on "assumptions" around what we have experienced or learned.
For example, we were taught in school about the elements, the Periodic Table. How do we know it’s all true? Well, it’s in all the books, and most other people accept it, and we know it’s used to make everything we see around us. The point is, we haven’t *experienced* all that ourselves, or made those discoveries ourselves - rather, we have *faith* that it’s true, largely based on our experience of *it all fitting together*. That is, everything we learn in science seems to support everything else we’ve learned from it, so it all makes logical sense. It’s all consistent.
If humans didn’t have the ability to assume, believe and have faith based on what we’re told, we’d go nuts having to prove every little thing to everyone all the time.
So the curious thing about religion *is not faith* as such. We all have that. The odd thing is that a group of people adopt a system of faith which is *not consistent* with most other self-supporting, experience-based and "provable" beliefs (I’m carefully not using the word "fact").
That’s what science is, after all. A series of interwoven, self-supporting, beliefs, all consistent with experience and observation of the real world.
And what is religious faith? It’s also based on experience - people always talk about "experiencing God". I do believe they have some kind of experience which is obviously quite real to them. I haven’t had it, so I don’t know it, but I’m not going to mock it. One day we might know what that experience means.
So see what I mean? "Faith" isn’t the issue - we all have that and use it every day, it’s an essential survival tool. Even scientists have faith - they believe passionately that the universe "makes sense". That faith drives them to look for connections and reasons for things. If they didn’t have that faith in a "logical universe", we wouldn’t have science at all.
What religions have done, is create a story, or doctrine, around the "experience" of their spiritual Faith. Personally, I don’t question a religious person’s *own experience* of their Faith. But I do (and we should) question the doctrine.
I would never question the Faith of a Muslim or Christian or whomever - in fact I have great respect for the *experience* of Faith, even if I don’t have it myself. But I do question the Mullahs and the Priests, who are part of the establishment and may have political motives well beyond the religious experience, sometimes completely detached from it altogether.
Science is wonderful and full of mysteries. The religious experience is wonderful and full of mysteries. They both seek a "larger truth". They both tap into our human need for answers and to believe we have a special place in the universe.
Most religious people accept science, and most scientists won’t say "god doesn’t exist" (Dawkins is a sad exception). There is basically no argument between science and religion, except what the vocal few in each camp create.
Both science and religion will ALWAYS be with us, as they always have. By now, we can’t deny that both are very fundamental expressions of human nature. Can’t we just friggin accept that and respect each other’s experiences?
October 24th, 2009 at 8:11 am
"Dawkins is the sad exception"
Erm, no he isn’t. Take Stephen Hawking for example. Possibly the greatest thinker of the late 20th century.
Science and religion are often at odds. You only have to look back to the trial of Galileo to recognise this fact. Though the exception to this fact comes in the form of a Catholic priest called Mendel. The father of modern genetics.
October 24th, 2009 at 8:15 am
This is what you see when extreme fundamentalism happens.
October 24th, 2009 at 9:01 am
I just wanted to say that Evolution is most certainly not a fact. It is still a theory. Before people begin to rant and rave you really should do research yourself and build your own opinion. Also, frozen, it’s one thing to state your opinion, but the words you chose to use were uncalled for and all you did was make yourself look extremely childish.
October 24th, 2009 at 9:23 am
The Voyage That Shook The World 2009 DVDRip XviD-aAF
download
http://rapidshare.com/files/297170831/aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part1.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/297170828/aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part2.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/297170907/aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part3.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/297170602/aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part4.rar
or
http://hotfile.com/dl/15642637/f0d31f7/aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part1.rar.html
http://hotfile.com/dl/15642667/95ee95a/aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part2.rar.html
http://hotfile.com/dl/15642647/03ee6eb/aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part3.rar.html
http://hotfile.com/dl/15642508/6bb76b3/aaf-voyage.that.shook.the.world.part4.rar.html
10% data recovery! Single Extraction! Links interchangeable
no pass
October 24th, 2009 at 9:27 am
This is one of the most enjoyable forums I have ever read on zerosec.An actual debate about something substantive. Aside from the few that feel they need to insult others who do not see there point of view this was quite enjoyable. I on the other hand learned a long time ago that this subject will be debated until the idiots in charge blow us all up. I bid you all good day and I am off to work.
October 24th, 2009 at 9:44 am
"I just wanted to say that Evolution is most certainly not a fact. It is still a theory."
Evolution is a fact. The theory concerns which or what element(s) trigger that evolution. Is it environment, is it social, is it genetic, is it that ‘only the fittest survive’?
You really need to educate yourself, on the facts.
October 24th, 2009 at 9:52 am
To those people wanting evidence about how DNA and Fossils and so on prove evolution lease read the following books:
Why Evolution is True by Jerry Coyne
Your Inner Fish by Neil Shubin
The Greatest Show on Earth by Richard Dawkins
The Ancestor’s Tale by Richard Dawkins
There you will find all the info you need, if you can be bothered.
Incidentally I have read the bible cover to cover. I am interested to know if the people supporting creationism also support stoning your children to death for being naughty (see Matthew 5.14) or offering your daughter up for rape (see Sodom and Gomorrah) or the treating woman as sex slaves (see Exodus)? If you are honest in your belief of the bible you must also support these deplorable acts.
I am also interested to know why in Genesis the bible contradicts itself within a couple of pages (check the order of what God created and when)?
October 24th, 2009 at 9:53 am
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/articles/understanding_evolution.htm
October 24th, 2009 at 10:05 am
https://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/
Richard Lenski’s ‘Long-term Experimental Evolution Project’
October 24th, 2009 at 11:38 am
You special little snowflakes whining that ‘it’s just a theory’ really need to go look up what ‘theory’ means in a scientific context. Evolution is a process we’ve observed, quantified and can replicate in a lab. That’s about as ‘fact’ as you can get.
Science - it works whether you believe in it or not. Suck it up, you hysterical bitches.
October 24th, 2009 at 1:31 pm
Damn, atheists are SO COOL!
Oh and FYI. It’s the THEORY of evolution. NOT the FACT of Evolution. Also like that you said ‘Lunacy’ which pretty much sums up your bias.
October 24th, 2009 at 1:59 pm
Lateralus - look up the definition of a theory in science. To be a theory it has to be backed by facts and repeatable experimentation. Shit, I don’t know how many people I’ve had to educate to what a theory in science is over the years but if I had a stone for each time I’d be building a huge mansion by now!
Panda - you said "We all have faith that the sun will come up tomorrow - based largely on our experience that it always has". You’re wrong. No one has faith the sun will come up (except perhaps people who have never been educated at all and have never built a telescope. We KNOW the sun will come up tomorrow because we have the evidence to prove it and the steps to prove it can be repeated by anyone following the same intructions. That’s science, not faith, don’t confuse the two.
The faith of the religious subscriber and the belief of the scientific observer are poles apart from each other - faith is based on what you believe to be true where no proof is required, whereas science is based on what you can prove as a result of experimentation. I hate when people confuse the two - it’s like saying being an aethiest is a religion of itself when it’s nothing of the sort, it’s a complete absence of the factors that make a religion, relying on proof, evidence, experimentation, peer group review, exactly like science and exactly the opposite of "faith".
October 24th, 2009 at 2:18 pm
Just in case you creationist numties haven’t grasped what a theory is yet, I shall reiterate the point made in WMC’s post:
A theory, in the scientific sense of the word, is an analytic structure designed to explain a set of empirical observations.
A scientific theory does two things:
1. it identifies this set of distinct observations as a class of phenomena, and
2. makes assertions about the underlying reality that brings about or affects this class.
Theories are intended to be an accurate, predictive description of the natural world.
Scientific theories are not guesswork, they are FACTS. Please distinguish this from the general layman’s usage of the word ‘theory’ in such statements as, "I have a theory as to why too much religion turns people into morons", that is just a guess.
The origin of the universe, chemical evolution and biological evolution are completely separate disciplines. Measurements of expansion, temperature and correlation function easily prove the universe is billions of years old, transitional fossils do exist and man is not ‘descended from monkeys’ but shares a common ancestor with other primates.
Anyone who adheres to the myth of creation, in the face of the wealth of information to the contrary, should try typing the words anthropogenesis, abiogenesis or big bang theory into a search engine and read through the results.
October 24th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
To all those who want evidence of evolution just look at the dna strand and how it has evolved. We share so many other characteristics with other creatures, including some genes that are no longer required for us as humans.
So if creation is correct and evolution is fiction, GOD would have to be the laziest software engineer ever. So much redundant code still sitting in modules no being utilized. Redundant code just opens the door to viruses and hacking, not something you would do if you wanted something perfect in your own image.
Oh and the big question if GOD created us then who created GOD. If no one created GOD then he just appeared. So to have something come from nothing then it evolved from nothing into something. hmmmmmm
Yes possibly we were created by GOD, Aliens or Colonies of bacteria working together to make mobile cities called creatures. But what ever you believe you must always come back to the nothing into something theory called evolution.
So the first spark of existence is always based evolution. You do not need evidence it is just simple maths……
Oh and in closing……. Stop as a human species spending so much effort arguing about where we came from and start to think about where we are going.
October 24th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
The FACT of evolution - What fact?
I thing itis called the "Theory" of evolution
I personally would rather believe there is a God
October 24th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
To all those who have contributed in this forum topic, I thank you….
It has been a very enjoyable read on a late Saturday night with a glass of wine.
October 24th, 2009 at 3:07 pm
@ 63 (The One): I have to agree with you. By making my comments in the post I was hoping to spark a debate like this and I’m glad it turned out successful.
I think one of the most important points which several people have made is the idea that religion is blind faith in a deity even in the face of overwhelming evidence. Science is the exact opposite. Real scientists revel at the prospect of being proven wrong, because science seeks the truth.
If the God from the old testament undisputably showed himself to the world tomorrow I’d be the first to get on my knees and pray, because god knows (no pun intended) you don’t want to end up in the hell portrayed in the bible.
October 24th, 2009 at 4:11 pm
I’m not going to watch the movie, but it sounds like they just touch on how Darwin was going to be an Anglican parson before he was diverted by his love of nature.
That really did happen, and it kind of shows how he wasn’t out to bring religion to its knees. He made some observations, made a brilliant book, and that’s that.
If anything his views were probably along the lines that evolution and creation-ism were complimentary. Which is what I think too.
October 24th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Arguing about religion or politics on the interwebs is about as useful as tits on a tree.
October 24th, 2009 at 5:45 pm
hm, I think tits on a tree would get a few men to enjoy nature more (especially forests)…. personally, I wouldn’t mind tits on trees =)
October 24th, 2009 at 6:38 pm
america thinks it is heaven,americans(not all)think they are angels avenging all the bad in the world,usually caused by americans, right under the noses of the godsquad "moms apple pie eating" middle classes, whom also believe in god ie "the president".! away tae yer beds ya nasty greedy horrible people,you guys need a couple o hundred years sleep! that should get rid of yez! evolution has been proven your church has been proven as corrupt sick and false, you guys are a disease, avoid this shit. be human not a fuckin blind asshole. sad,tragic,pish. c’mon the humans!!!
October 24th, 2009 at 7:12 pm
Theory doesn’t imply fact. I don’t know why people think it does even in the scientific sense. Theories can be unproven or even rethought. There have been several theories that have been shot down or rethought. One example could be Newtons Law of Gravity. We are finding now that it isn’t entirely accurate but was accurate enough to do certain calculations. Scientist test a hypothesis or hypotheses and then if that hypothesis or hypotheses is/are supported enough by data, it becomes a theory. A theory is our best guess to why our hypothesis or hypotheses worked.
October 24th, 2009 at 7:44 pm
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n16PpvdpMXo
October 24th, 2009 at 8:31 pm
quite an enjoyable read, all ur comments n stuff =] if someone would up it on mu or something one-clickish, i would give the piece of shit a try, maybe worth a LOL or two^^
October 24th, 2009 at 8:45 pm
Check their site out, it’s really interesting. Worth keeping an open mind.
http://creation.com/
October 24th, 2009 at 9:52 pm
Meh I’ll still download it regardless of who commissioned it.
October 24th, 2009 at 9:56 pm
Creationism is BS and though I’m a supporter of the theory of evolution um it’s not a fact….. there are only well supported theories no facts in the world of science. Anyways yeah *downloading*
October 24th, 2009 at 9:57 pm
@ LOL exactly
October 24th, 2009 at 10:35 pm
How did this story go from comments of the movie to deep discusions on the origin of man?
Anyways.. while we are in it - think about this:
can you prove math, the past isn’t an illution or that you’re not the only mind and everyone else is imagination?
Why does everything exist, insted of nothing? but here we are - so where did matter in the very, very first place come from?
can something come from nothing?
evolution tells us that we origin from primates or monkeys, but why is the human DNA more related to pigs than monkeys?
BTW Stargate Universe ROOOCCKKS !!!!
October 25th, 2009 at 12:30 am
@Anders
Check out string theory and m-theory for an explanation (or at least most workable theory so far) but you have to be able to deal with 11 dimensions and other exotic ideas to grasp it.
Also, I wish people would stop saying human DNA is more related to pigs than chimps, it’s complete nonsense and a little research would prove it so. And before you say that pigs are used for transplants to humans whereas chimps are not, the reason is simple - pigs are slaughtered anyway, having been raised for food and so raise far less objection than would the breeding and raising of primates for use as donor organs - even though they would be far better candidates for xenotransplantation due to their higher genetic match. Humans who are given pig organs face a harder battle to stop their bodies rejecting the pig organs than anyone who was given a primate organ would be since the larger the genetic difference between species the more likely a rejection is to occur.
Oh, and you’re right about one thing - SU does rock, or at least it will once it gets properly started!
October 25th, 2009 at 2:19 am
\"The FACT of evolution - What fact?
I thing it is called the \"Theory\" of evolution
I personally would rather believe there is a God\"
In the USA it is still called the \’Theory of Evolution\’.
Whereas in the rest of the enlightened world it is accepted scientific fact and simply called Evolution. There are theories as to what drives and triggers \’the\’ evolutionary process.
I prefer to believe there is a Tooth fairy and a \’Father Christmas\’.
October 25th, 2009 at 4:17 am
@78
So what would happen if something changed the way we thought of Evolution? If it was fact, then it would be a falsehood, right? Theories are not fact but a best guess to why something happens or how something happens. There is a reason why they are called theories and not facts. Theories can be molded, updated, removed, discarded, reevaluated, and scrutinized. Facts are things that are static. 2+2=4 is a fact. We are human beings, fact. Facts never change.
October 25th, 2009 at 6:34 am
Holy shit!
Lots of ignorant American Fucks read Zerosec!
Man das ist gud to know. I will start keeping my jokes PG-13.
October 25th, 2009 at 8:06 am
@48 Sorry I meant Dawkins is *a* sad exception, and he is. Most scientists don’t have a problem with religious people, and many people of faith are scientists themselves. The Catholic Church has no problem with evolution; they even have a Vatican Observatory.
So no, they’re not often at odds in general life. They’re often at odds in the media and news and a small minority of minds attached to loud voices. Generally, science and religion get along fine, because *most* people are generally tolerant and just want to get on and make a living.
@59 You missed the point, I should have said we "assume" the sun will come up every day. The point being we all use that part of the brain which makes assumptions about the world without it having to be proven every single time.
Another example; everyone had faith that Newton’s laws governed everything in the universe, until Einstein came along and showed that gravity can bend light. Until then, everyone had 100% faith in a Newtonian universe.
The main difference between scientific and religious "faiths" is that scientists are open to being DISproven and addressing contradictions, whereas religious people generally are not.
However, try convincing a science-minded person that there are things science will *never* explain. Most of them will vehemently disagree and never accept that idea. That’s their "faith" - that the universe is discoverable and explicable.
Faith is not something to get rid of - it’s part of how our brains work, and will always be there. We generally have faith that life is good, that people are good, that "it all makes sense". Unless you’re depressed of course.
October 25th, 2009 at 3:32 pm
I think #65 Miyamoto puts it best:
"If anything his (Darwin) views were probably along the lines that evolution and creation-ism were complimentary. Which is what I think too."
And which is what I think too.
Darwin even talks of a Creator too; so all the anti-religious, science-only people are really quite pathetic. I mean we all know the people who literally believe in Noahs Arc and that God has a choosen people and all the evil things that OT’s GOD demands of his sheeple, as #54 pointed out, are totally ridiculous and not really worth a discussion. BUT, as #81 puts it very true: "try convincing a science-minded person that there are things science will *never* explain. Most of them will vehemently disagree and never accept that idea. That’s their "faith" - that the universe is discoverable and explicable."
For example, reincarnation! There are children who remember their last lives and even still remember where their "old" family lives etc.! Any of you Science-only people mind explaining that to us?
Truth is stranger than fiction. Get over it.
October 25th, 2009 at 3:36 pm
[quote]The main difference between scientific and religious "faiths" is that scientists are open to being DISproven and addressing contradictions, whereas religious people generally are not.[/quote]
No,no, no and again NO! The difference between science and religion is that science has to be backed by facts, data, repeatable experimentation and is open to peer scrutiny and review. Religion, on the other hand, is blind belief in something there is no evidence for, no facts, no data, no repeatable experimentation. Totally opposite ends of the spectrum! As for your assertion that "Most scientists don’t have a problem with religious people" - show me the evidence. Most of the scientific types I have ever spoken to do not belief in a God or Creationism, since it would go against every principle of scientific research.
It’s not a faith that the universe is discoverable and explicable, it’s fact. We simply have not got the tools or the knowledge to ask the right questions to answer everything yet and there may be ideas that the human mind can never fully grasp such as m-theory but that doesn’t mean they are not explainable. Take any 100 year segment of human history, look at the things that could not be explained at the time - then move 100 years forward and lo and behold those questions have been answered. By science. Not faith.
And finally, changing the sentence to "I should have said we "assume" the sun will come up every day" would still make it incorrect - I do not assume the sun will come up every day - science has given me the tools to know the sun will come up every day because we know about orbits, gravitational effects, what the sun is made of, how it interacts with other bodies, etc etc etc. I therefore do not have to assume anything with regard to Sun rising every day. That’s the point of science, to explain and furnish us with the tools to know things, or to point us in the right direction to ask the right questions so answers can be refined as new technology and answers in other scientific areas come along to help us - such as the refinement of Newtons laws (most of which still stand) by Einstein - who himself had better knowledge and tools to work with than Newton (scientific advances at work).
October 25th, 2009 at 3:38 pm
[quote]Darwin even talks of a Creator too[/quote]
Darwin talked of a Creator because to not do so would have incurred the wrath of the Church and the Establishment and being jailed or hung was not really something Darwin really wanted. It was this fear that led to him not publishing his book for 10 years, and that forced him only to mention the origins of man in one sentence in the whole book. Not because he was a believer!
October 25th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
@#84
That’s what you think but that’s not necessarily the truth.
We’ll never know for sure. So don’t take that as a fact.
Others had the balls to stand up for their true beliefs f.e. Galileo,
and as some pointed out here already, evolution simply explains the evolving of life but not the origin. So maybe a creator was simply the only reasonable cause and he indeed had the balls to point that out.
Regarding the aliens as the origin of life, then the question still is: well what’s the origin of those aliens then?
Evolution and intelligent design are complementary.
And by the way, there’s another prominent fight going on which is IMHO also not a question of "either…or" but "both", and that is Climate Change: non-man-made effects and man-made effects are both affecting the world. Why can we not simply get over it and finally see it as it is. The sun very much has an effect on our current situation as does the man-made pollution. Taxing us now will never ever stop the pollution and is simply the first global tax of maybe many more to come.
Fight Depleted Uranium instead, which is destroying the planet and everything living on it, right here and right now! No matter what the origin of life is - THIS IS KILLING IT!
PLEASE!! PLEASE, FOR THE SAKE OF EVERY LIVING BEING - EVERYONE must see this, know about it and spread it as far as possible:
The Doctor, the Depleted Uranium, and the Dying Children
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5146778547681767408&ei=AWrkSqGqO5DJ-AbemdDJDA&q=depleted+uranium#
The same documentary is also available in german, maybe other languages as well.
Thank you.
October 25th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
@85 - No, that’s the facts. Originally Darwin believed in a Creator (hardly surprising given his upbringing) but both his work and personal tragedies made him become less of a believer. In the end, Darwin referred to himself as an agnostic, not a believer. That was probably as far as he could bring himself to go against beliefs ingrained into him from being a child!
October 25th, 2009 at 5:12 pm
@ me again, yes I know what you’re saying, but you’re still missing my point. If you miss someone’s point, the idea is to try and look at what they’re saying in another way, not repeat the same line. I stand by what I said. It’s meant in a way different to how you’re looking at it.
Think about "proof" in subjective terms. Yes, we take repeatable results as proof. A person of faith has their own "proof" too. Their own "repeatable experience". They stand by their experience of their faith.
I would wager than most people in science, when considering the issue, wouldn’t disregard the experiences of millions of people. The only problem is we can’t (as yet) repeat the "experience of god" under controlled conditions. But that doesn’t mean it’s not real.
We all think "love" is real. We say we love our families, partners, friends and pet gerbils. We talk about love in objective terms, like it’s a common experience. But is it? There is no PROOF that one person’s experience of love is the same as another’s. But we do take it on FAITH that love is love, all over the world.
Do you see what I’m getting at?
October 25th, 2009 at 5:32 pm
let’s assume that’s the truth, @me again.
agnostic means "we know that we don’t know", that seems to be the intelligent way to go. But most people on both sides of the spectrum act like they know for sure and that is questionable.
I certainly don’t believe that everything that exists is a product of pure coincidence. Everything non-man-made is designed so perfectly, there has to be some sort of a blue-print. Life evolvs over time but it has a purpose too, which wouldn’t be the case if it were simply the product of billions of trillions of coincidences.
October 26th, 2009 at 4:46 am
There was a Big Band, from some sort of primordial atom, that made everything in existence. Then when the Universe cooled after a time, elements started to attract to each other. Stars created the heavier elements up to iron. Super Novas created the ones beyond that. Then rocks started to collide and planets forming. Then the Earth formed. The Earth was positioned in the right spot away from the sun. The other planets were also positioned in exact spots too since their gravitational pull would affect the Earths orbit if they were not where they are now. Also, the sun was exactly the correct size and type for our planets location. Then somehow life began on Earth. When I hear a science program on TV gloss over this portion, I always laugh, "Then from a primordial ooze, life began." Then from this ooze, life sprang into the billions of different lifeforms.
I akin this to winning the lottery a billion times in row for all the right things to come together to form life from lifelessness. It is one fantastical feat after another. Yet, when you listen to people that believe in this they are dumbfounded why people believe in a God. Shhh, we are superior to those those God believers. They are delusional. Yea that is it.
Respect others if you in turn want respect.
October 26th, 2009 at 12:17 pm
@82 says "For example, reincarnation! There are children who remember their last lives and even still remember where their "old" family lives etc.! Any of you Science-only people mind explaining that to us?"
Here is my thoughts on this issue…..
There is a code base in every cell called DNA. This DNA is proven to exist and yes is still being explored and discovered like the new worlds found when the ships did not fall off the edge of the earth. This DNA is the blueprint for life, like an architechs drawing of a building, shows how the body will be assembled. This DNA in my opinion must also hold memories. Animals born with what is called instinct proves that the brain when it is formed can also be formed with ready assembled neuron paths which function as a kind of memory.
So it may just be possible that life experiences are recorded in DNA and in the forming of the brain these neurons are connected to form memories of our ancestrial memories, which some may say are past lives.
This does seem a bit far fetched when you think about it. But if a tiny strand of DNA can have the complete blueprints for a living creature, why does the brain have to be formed as a clean slate, maybe it can be formed with the ready connected neurons as the DNA maps out that function as memories. Remember the brain is the size it is because it is a functional machine. The plans for this machine do not have to be the same size as the machine, just like the drawings for a 100 storey building.
Maybe this can also explain why some transplant patients have memories of their donar?????
@89 says "I akin this to winning the lottery a billion times in row for all the right things to come together to form life from lifelessness."
This is very true and science excepts this as so. But also keep in mind that in the fastness of this universe with billions of galaxies containing trillions of stars which some have planatery systems. Then the odds you speak of seem more likely that one place in the universe developed life.
These are just my thoughts and not to be taken as gospil (so to speak)
October 26th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Hi @LOL,
you’re totally right. Most of the science people are so absolutely certain on their views, but are sometimes just as ridiculous as some religuous believes. I wished more of them would see that.
@#90:
okay, I heard that concept before but it somehow doesn’t make sense.
If one child dies somewhere how do his/her genes get into the sperm of his/her new father?
On the other hand, with the concept of immortal multi-dimensional beings which incarnate into this world, everything starts to make sense.
October 26th, 2009 at 11:47 pm
@91
I agree with you 100%, the memories from a dead child can not get into the genes of the father. Be the memories that the father has of the child can and may be passed on, including their life and death.
People search for immortality and it has been staring us in the face the whole time. Have children and pass on your genetic memory and you will live on in genes of your children.
That may be why in some cultures when a person hated someone so much they not only killed that person but also wiped out their entire family line.
October 27th, 2009 at 5:49 am
its call a theory because it is not a fact. if it were a fact then it would be called a law. i have never heard of the law of evolution.
when you die and stand in the day of judgment, maybe then you can explain to Jesus how evolution is a fact.
remember forever is a long time.
October 28th, 2009 at 1:41 pm
I give up with this debate - debating with people who have "faith" or religion is like punching yourself in the testicles - painless, pointless and ultimately fruitless. It’s impossible to prove the non-existence of something that doesn’t exist when those who do believe are willing to ignore evidence, science and common sense. Donald Rumsfeld tried much the same thing in the 1970s claiming that the Russians had super weapons that the Americans could not detect because they were so super - a very circular argument (not to mention a big pile of lies) and one that could not be disproven - except with evidence, which he chose to wilfully ignore or co-opt to his story. Not unlike religious believers (think the Intelligent Design brigade with their pseudo science and wilful obfuscation of scientific fact).
So, believers, believe what you will. When we’re all dead it won’t matter anyway.
When the people you are dealing with come up with rubbish about pigs being closer to humans than apes and monkeys, deliberately fail to understand what a theory in science is, and spread willfully spread misinformation then it’s a losing battle. Hopefully all your children will have grown out of your ridiculous anti-logic beliefs otherwise we will continue to be a race of cave dwellers running back into the dark because the truth outside is too bright! "The light, the light, it burns my eyes".
And you know what, even if I and all the others who think like me, are wrong and Jesus and God (or Allah or Buddah or whatever ridiculous entity you want to name) appeared in front of me together I wouldn’t be getting down on my knees. I’d have a whole bunch of hard questions for them, starting with "why"? And if they were mad at me I’d simply say "you made me this way so get off your moral high horse". The fact is none of the above will ever happen because science has already explained what happens when you die - your body degrades and the heavy elements in us go back to the cosmos to help the next wave of evolution of life.
I can’t wait for life to be discovered on other planets, maybe that will stop all the religious bull, although probably not as religions are adaptable (look at the Catholic Church for a good example) and will change to saying God created them too - even if the aliens wouldn’t agree.
If Jesus appeared in front of me right now I’d take some advice from LL Cool J and knock him out.
November 1st, 2009 at 6:32 am
@ Lateralus
You don’t even know the meaning of the word "theory". Before you rant and rave you should read a fucking dictionary.
November 11th, 2009 at 11:41 am
Your god is dead and no one cares.