Roger Ebert, Defender of Evolution

Roger Ebert, Defender of Evolution

There are 479 comments on the The Panda's Thumb story from Apr 4, 2013, titled Roger Ebert, Defender of Evolution. In it, The Panda's Thumb reports that:

As we reflect upon the amazing body of work left behind by this giant of the movie scene, readers of the Thumb should know that Roger Ebert was a passionate defender of science, and of evolution in particular.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Panda's Thumb.

The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#163 Apr 17, 2013
Shubee wrote:
According to Scripture, the judgments of hypocrites are the judgments of self. The truth is that you are willfully ignorant and don't have a clue about what you're actually opposing.
And as it happens you *are* an ignorant hypocrite.(shrug)
Shubee wrote:
I have never claimed to be an expert in biology. Frankly, I can barely remember anything about the one course I took in biology.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#164 Apr 17, 2013
The Dude wrote:
And as it happens you *are* an ignorant hypocrite.
Not at all. I let the independent scientists present their case:

http://everythingimportant.org/AZT/
http://everythingimportant.org/

So where are the rebuttals from the paid shills?

“Maccullochella macquariensis”

Since: May 08

Melbourne, Australia

#165 Apr 17, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>Not at all. I let the independent scientists present their case:
http://everythingimportant.org/AZT/
http://everythingimportant.org/
So where are the rebuttals from the paid shills?
Still spamming the forum with your idiotic web site, I see Eugene. No one here believes a word you say for the simple reason that everything you say here is complete Taurus excreta.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#166 Apr 17, 2013
Bluenose wrote:
No one here believes a word you say
No one here knows what the dissident scientists are saying. That's just typical of willful ignorance and mass delusion.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#167 Apr 18, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> No one here knows what the dissident scientists are saying. That's just typical of willful ignorance and mass delusion.
We know what they're saying. We think they are, like yourself, full of crap.

“Maccullochella macquariensis”

Since: May 08

Melbourne, Australia

#168 Apr 18, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> No one here knows what the dissident scientists are saying. That's just typical of willful ignorance and mass delusion.
Implode. Irony meter does it.

“I am the great an powerful Ny!”

Since: Dec 06

Lebanon, PA

#169 Apr 18, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> It's interesting that you say that. According to Scripture, the judgments of hypocrites are the judgments of self.
Ok, so your own book is claiming you're a hypocrite. We already knew this.
The truth is that you are willfully ignorant and don't have a clue about what you're actually opposing. The video documentaries at http://everythingimportant.org/AZT/ and http://everythingimportant.org/ are an excellent rebuttal to the belief that the witchcraft/ sorceries/ propaganda industry of pharmakia can be trusted.
Sorry, I don't believe in witchcraft/sorceries or anything having to do with superstition/supernatural. Stuff like that is for children's FICTIONAL stories.
So, I say again, the debate is all about the trustworthiness of paid shills versus the objectivity of independent scientists. Obviously, those who have prostituted themselves are unwilling to debate in the open because they all clearly prefer the cover of darkness.
Glad to see you're finally admitting to being a paid shill. The first step to recovery is admitting you have a problem.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#170 Apr 18, 2013
llDayo wrote:
Sorry, I don't believe in witchcraft/sorceries
But of course you do. The church of HIV=AIDS=Death teaches that we can trust the claims of valid scientific research by the pharmaceutical industry and that big pharma wouldn't lie about AZT and other toxic drugs just to make ridiculous amounts of money.

“I am the great an powerful Ny!”

Since: Dec 06

Lebanon, PA

#171 Apr 18, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> But of course you do. The church of HIV=AIDS=Death teaches that we can trust the claims of valid scientific research by the pharmaceutical industry and that big pharma wouldn't lie about AZT and other toxic drugs just to make ridiculous amounts of money.
The discovery that HIV led to AIDS was discovered 30 years ago by two separate teams who published their results in a scientific journal for peer review. This was well before any drugs were created to combat it. YOU ARE WRONG. A simple Google search would have shown you this information but you prefer to spout ignorant conspiracy theories. Tens of millions of people have died as a result of HIV breaking down the immune system thereby causing AIDS and you want everyone to believe this is absolutely not true so your little hero can make a few bucks selling stories? You are a sick, sad POS.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#172 Apr 18, 2013
llDayo wrote:
The discovery that HIV led to AIDS was discovered 30 years ago by two separate teams who published their results in a scientific journal for peer review. This was well before any drugs were created to combat it. YOU ARE WRONG. A simple Google search would have shown you this information but you prefer to spout ignorant conspiracy theories.
Your view of the world is very amusing to me, especially how top-ranking scientists can achieve prestigious awards for revolutionary scientific discoveries but simultaneously are profoundly ignorant and even too stupid to know how to search the internet with google. So if accomplished scientists that make revolutionary discoveries are as profoundly stupid as you say they are, then what does that say about mediocre mass of inferior ass-kissers that never distinguished themselves yet believe what they read about the HIV=AIDS=Death hypothesis?

More importantly, thanks for proving that you don't understand the position of the dissident scientists. Even the original claim was motivated by money. The money was in the patent to allegedly test for HIV. Furthermore, AZT, the treatment for HIV, existed before HIV was allegedly discovered. Originally, AZT was a failed anti-cancer drug that was considered too toxic for use as chemotherapy.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#173 Apr 18, 2013
Correction: What does that say about the mediocre mass of superior ass-kissers that never distinguished themselves (except for ass-kissing) yet believe what they read about the HIV=AIDS=Death hypothesis?

“Maccullochella macquariensis”

Since: May 08

Melbourne, Australia

#174 Apr 19, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text> Your view of the world is very amusing to me, especially how top-ranking scientists can achieve prestigious awards for revolutionary scientific discoveries but simultaneously are profoundly ignorant and even too stupid to know how to search the internet with google. So if accomplished scientists that make revolutionary discoveries are as profoundly stupid as you say they are, then what does that say about mediocre mass of inferior ass-kissers that never distinguished themselves yet believe what they read about the HIV=AIDS=Death hypothesis?
More importantly, thanks for proving that you don't understand the position of the dissident scientists. Even the original claim was motivated by money. The money was in the patent to allegedly test for HIV. Furthermore, AZT, the treatment for HIV, existed before HIV was allegedly discovered. Originally, AZT was a failed anti-cancer drug that was considered too toxic for use as chemotherapy.
The stupid is taking over your life, Eugene, you need to go out and take some remedial anti-dumb-arse classes real soon, before it consumes you.

Oh, too late...
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#175 Apr 19, 2013
Bluenose wrote:
The stupid is taking over your life, Eugene,
The issue is dissent versus ass-kissing. And there's no question that Roger Ebert, Defender of Crap Movies, was an ass-kisser. Clearly, we all have a choice to make in life. We can either prostitute ourselves like Roger Ebert has done or we can be crucified by the world.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#176 Apr 19, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>The issue is dissent versus ass-kissing. And there's no question that Roger Ebert, Defender of Crap Movies, was an ass-kisser. Clearly, we all have a choice to make in life. We can either prostitute ourselves like Roger Ebert has done or we can be crucified by the world.
Shoob the Boob, you have shown yourself to be a complete idiot in almost everything you have ever attempted. I am sure you would be a complete loser as a movie critic too.

I don't go to movies. I don't watch movie reviews. When I did go to movies I would sometimes check reviews, but I don't think I ever checked Ebert's reviews. I don't know if we would have agreed.

It is not a movie reviewers job to find the best movies and give them praise. His job is to review the movies that are playing right now. Usually people have already decided to go to the movies before they read any reviews. The reviews are there to help them decide which movie to go to.

So yes, some weekends, when all of the movies suck, he might have given better than deserved reviews to a movie, now that we can look at it from the present when we can compare it to all of the thousands of movies out there. The important thing is how did the movie compare to the other films available at that time?

This distinction will probably still be too hard for you to figure out and you will rely on your personal prejudice to attack Ebert.

That is why we call you Shoob the Boob. You lack the ability to learn.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#177 Apr 19, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
The important thing is how did the movie compare to the other films available at that time?
Roger Ebert is on record saying that he loves really good movies and really bad movies. Think about it. That's a perfect excuse for living one's life as a paid shill for the movie industry.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#178 Apr 19, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>Roger Ebert is on record saying that he loves really good movies and really bad movies. Think about it. That's a perfect excuse for living one's life as a paid shill for the movie industry.
Coming from someone with absolutely no sense of humor, I'm sure Ebert's sarcasm is completely lost on you. As is most other things.

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#179 Apr 19, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>The issue is dissent versus ass-kissing. And there's no question that Roger Ebert, Defender of Crap Movies, was an ass-kisser. Clearly, we all have a choice to make in life. We can either prostitute ourselves like Roger Ebert has done or we can be crucified by the world.
Sez the clown who is constantly kissing Hilbert's ass.

“Maccullochella macquariensis”

Since: May 08

Melbourne, Australia

#180 Apr 19, 2013
Shubee wrote:
<quoted text>The issue is dissent versus ass-kissing. And there's no question that Roger Ebert, Defender of Crap Movies, was an ass-kisser. Clearly, we all have a choice to make in life. We can either prostitute ourselves like Roger Ebert has done or we can be crucified by the world.
Yep. Definitely too late...
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#181 Apr 19, 2013
MikeF wrote:
Sez the clown who is constantly kissing Hilbert's ass.
David Hilbert has inspired many mathematicians with his beautiful vision and I also get a great thrill from the science and courage of similar modern-day visionaries, such as Noam Chomsky, Peter Duesberg, Kary Mullis, Paul Craig Roberts and John Pilger.
Level 6

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#182 Apr 19, 2013
MikeF wrote:
I'm sure Ebert's sarcasm is completely lost on you.
Sure, what else is a prostitute supposed to say?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in e... (Mar '09) 22 min Genesis Enigma 164,962
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Frindly 83,960
No Evidence for Creation, a Global Flood, Tower... 1 hr Zog Has-fallen 55
News Why Atheist Richard Dawkins Supports Religious ... (Jun '17) 4 hr Frindly 3,303
Creationism is a Fantasy 7 hr Zog Has-fallen 7
Time 21 hr Beagle 3
Ten Reason Why Evolution Is a Lie (Jul '09) Wed MIDutch 1,996
More from around the web