We have seen an alarming growth of anti-intellectual zealotry. Between climate deniers and opponents of Evolutionary Theory, there is a rising trend among mostly conservatives to reject logic, reason, and empiricism. In this post, James makes the reasonable argument.

Intelligent Design Creationism is not Science

by James

I’m just back from the BBC studio in Brighton having done 9 regional interviews/debates on the issue of teaching intelligent design creationism as science in schools.

It is quite simple – intelligent design creationism is not science – is not accepted as science by the scientific community and, as such, cannot be taught as science in schools.

The interviews also had Dr Alastair Noble (former science teacher, science inspector for schools and lay preacher at the Cartsbridge Evangelical Church Glasgow). He is the director of the Centre for Intelligent Design based in Scotland. He is a firm – in some ways aggressive – supporter of intelligent design. In debates you know that things are going wrong for one side when it descends to name-calling – which is what Dr Noble did, certainly in the final interview this morning.

As the interviews carried on from regional station to regional station you could hear in his voice the frustration and it ended with name calling. It seems that I am an ‘intellectual fascist’ who does not understand the ‘science’ and who fails to explain the ‘information’ contained in DNA and who does not know the history of the intelligent design movement.

All these charges are false. Dr Noble consistently and aggressively misrepresented the call for the ban signed by myself and the other 29 leading scientists and educators – he’s claiming that we wish to ban all mention of creationism or ID – he ridiculed the position saying that we would have to get the police in to stop mentions of these ideas in classes. Despite patiently explaining to him that the call is that neither creationism nor Intelligent design should be presented AS SCIENCE he continued with his ridiculous claims of intellectual fascism etc.

His claim that I did not understand or define intelligent design correctly was also similarly ludicrous – the definition I quoted came from the discovery institute website – so if it is wrong then it is the DI who have it wrong. I explained, patiently on several occasions the roots of the ID movement in the USA – the ruling that it was religious by the courts and the intent of the Wedge strategy and Philip Johnson’s calls to keep the religion out of the debate so that ID can be accepted and only then discuss the religion. Dr Noble vehemently denied that Johnson’s goal was to get religion into schools. But this is simply not true. For example, in describing how they would get creationism and God into the science classroom Johnson wrote:

“Our strategy has been to change the subject a bit so that we can get the issue of intelligent design, which really means the reality of God, before the academic world and into the schools.” (American Family Radio, Jan 10, 2003 broadcast, in which Johnson “discusses his book The Right Questions, encouraging Christians to actively debate issues of eternal value”)

Johnson has also said: “This isn’t really, and never has been, a debate about science. It’s about religion and philosophy.” (Witnesses for the prosecution Darwin on Trial author brings together anti-Darwin coalition to bring down evolution by Joel Belz in Los Angeles 1996, World Magazine November 30, 1996, Volume 11, Number 28, p. 18.)

Dr Noble stated that he knows Philip Johnson and that my claims that this started as a religious movement and that the strategy is clear – get ID accepted then move on to the acceptance of the Christian God and the designer – is untrue.

Readers can judge for themselves who has the strongest argument here. Dr Noble and his denial or Philip Johnson and his recorded and reported admissions.

I suggested on air that he should read the wedge strategy and the book Creationism’s Trojan Horse. I explained that the call does not want a ban on talking about philosophical or religious viewpoints in RE lessons, or philosophy lessons etc. BUT and here is the nub of the argument they should be presented as faith and belief positions and NOT as science.

In one of the interviews – he stated quite openly that he didn’t want intelligent design taught in science – so I don’t quite understand what his position really is. Nobody is stopping the discovery institute from doing what they do. If they can convince the academic community of scientists that their ideas are borne from science then fine, debate it and once it attains the status of science it can be brought into science teaching. But ID does NOT have a mandate to jump the queue, get injected into mainstream science teaching with no body of evidence and peer review behind it and certainly not while the community of scientists disagree with it.

Dr Noble kept challenging me to explain the ‘information ’ in DNA and how it arose – it could ONLY have come from an intelligent mind, he kept repeating. I pointed out that Information scientists do not accept the ID definition of information. I cited Professor Jeffrey Shallit who has criticised Stephen Meyers’ definition of information as confused wrong. He says of Meyer’s book – “Signature in the Cell”; ”Two things struck me as I read it: first, its essential dishonesty, and second, Meyer’s significant misunderstandings of information theory”. He goes on to say that:

“Creationist information, as discussed by Meyer, is an incoherent mess.” and ”Intelligent design creationists love to call it “specified information” or “specified complexity” and imply that it is widely accepted by the scientific community, but this is not the case. There is no paper in the scientific literature that gives a rigorous and coherent definition of creationist information; nor is it used in scientific or mathematical investigations.

Meyer doesn’t define it rigorously either, but he rejects the well-established measures of Shannon and Kolmogorov, and wants to use a common-sense definition of information instead.” (Stephen Myers Bogus Information Theory)

I asked Dr Noble to define information – in one interview several times – and he did not.

In one interview I challenged Dr Noble over some accepted science – the age of the earth and common descent – knowing that he probably does not accept this science (though he is very, very careful not to expose his own views on creation and Biblical literalism). He said that there was a lot of evidence for these things – ‘but do you accept the premises’ I asked. I pressed him, more than once. He did eventually admit that he didn’t necessarily accept them – the closest he has come to admitting publically his own creationist beliefs (that said I have not heard all his public talks so he may have divulged his true beliefs elsewhere).

In many of the interviews I said that accepting ID as science would mean that other pseudosciences would also be entitled to acceptance in science such as crop circles and astrology – both claim to use scientific methods, both claim mathematical foundations. With crop circle science for examples they have their own research (very small) institutes – have PhD qualified scientific staff, carry out lab based experiments and publish in peer-reviewed science journals – in some ways they are ahead of the ID movement – they characterise their science as dealing with:

Number, complexity, and placement Changes to plants Electromagnetic and radioactive effects Physical side effects Highly intricate mathematical design Eyewitnesses and balls of light

Surely, I said in one interview, they would have more claim for crop circle science to be taught as science than ID?

I also mentioned astrology – this again, its supporters claim, uses scientific methods, makes observations, measurements has testable predictions – but we are not going to teach that as science in school either!

I kept coming back to the point that school science is not the place for these debates. Both Dr Noble and I referred to the latest ‘shocking’ science, that a particle could possibly travel faster than the speed of light – we will not, I said, go into schools tomorrow and teach that Einstein was wrong that our understanding about the speed of light barrier is wrong. We must wait for the scientific community to verify this new experimental data and down the line (possibly many years) we may have to revise our thinking or we may find that it was the result of experimental error – the classroom is not where such things should be decided. We will not present this to children and say ‘you decide’.

I stated, many times, that ID starts from the premise that design and a designer exists and they look for evidence to support this – in the one solo interview I had I pointed out that while scientists now may do a lot of theory confirming experiments and tests on our understanding of evolution – the idea which became a theory did not start that way.

Darwin and Wallace both wondered about how new species arise. They observed they gathered data they went into the field they amassed evidence and then, only then did they move towards an explanation – a theory. They conducted real science they did not begin with the idea that things have developed and diversified through a mechanism that they called natural selection. They did not go out to seek to find evidence to fit this idea.

Intelligent Design, as the Discovery Institute admits, seeks to find evidence to support their assumption that some things are so complex they can only have been designed. I put it to Dr Noble that how they characterise ‘design’ is based on looking at the features of things that we know to be designed – that is that are man-made – if they feel that the universe and many natural things are ‘designed’ what is their frame of reference – how do they know what the features of an unintelligently or non-designed universe or cell look like? If your notion of design is simply referenced to designs by humans then the logical conclusion is that the designer is human – so God is human, a human is God (or substitute ‘the intelligent designer’ if you wish). Again Dr Noble said this was not what they were arguing. Yet according to my reading of the Discovery Institute definition of ID that is exactly what they are arguing.

This is the Discovery Institute definition, taken from their website, I was using – for reference:

“Intelligent design refers to a scientific research program as well as a community of scientists, philosophers and other scholars who seek evidence of design in nature. The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. Through the study and analysis of a system’s components, a design theorist is able to determine whether various natural structures are the product of chance, natural law, intelligent design, or some combination thereof. Such research is conducted by observing the types of information produced when intelligent agents act. Scientists then seek to find objects which have those same types of informational properties which we commonly know come from intelligence. Intelligent design has applied these scientific methods to detect design in irreducibly complex biological structures, the complex and specified information content in DNA, the life-sustaining physical architecture of the universe, and the geologically rapid origin of biological diversity in the fossil record during the Cambrian explosion approximately 530 million years ago.” (Discovery Institute definition of Intelligent Design)

From this very definition there are contradictions which were rejected by Dr Noble, as he claimed that I was not defining Intelligent Design properly!

They start with their ‘theory’ that there is a designer for things that are so complex we cannot conceive of how they could have evolved – so their work is not theory building (evolution theory as mentioned above started with evidence and built up to theory) but theory confirming they state that they are ‘seeking evidence’ so the clear implication is that they do not, as yet, have such a body of evidence. In science, particularly biology, the ‘theory’ comes from the evidence not the other way around! The definition also confirms that their point of reference for deciding if something is ‘designed’ is by comparison to man-made objects that we know to be designed. The assumption here is that the ‘intelligent designer’ works to the same notions of design as humans – why? Why should they have to do that? Hence my comment that the logical end result is that the intelligent designer must therefore be human or that the intelligent designer is only capable of thinking and acting like a human.

I pointed out that ‘theory’ can have different meanings and that in the case of intelligent design ‘theory’ is being used in a speculative way – little to do with evidence, more a hunch or notion that the answer may be ‘designer’ and then you go and look for something to confirm what you already ‘know’. Theory in science – especially biology – means we have the data, the observations and the evidence and our explanations for the natural phenomenon take in what we know and have observed and serve to provide us with a means of making predictions. It is also accepted by the scientific community.

Many times Dr Noble kept banging on about randomness and blind chance – I pointed out that evolution is not about randomness and blind chance and that environmental conditions are the ‘directive force’ in evolution. He of course ignored this and kept on about randomness and blind chance – no doubt he will accuse me of ignoring his claims that ID did not come from religion and to all intents and purposes still is a religious position.

I was clear that this call does not want any mention of ID or creationism banned, that we are not going to call in the police (not even the thought police – as he hinted we might have to) to enforce it and that it was not the job of science teachers to remove religious views from the classroom or tell students that God does not exist. When ID or creationism comes up in science lessons the way to deal with it is, in my view, straightforward. Science is not about faith or belief – it is the acceptance of evidence. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming and just as we accept gravity and atoms, so too should we accept evolution. ID creationism and Biblical creationism are faith-based positions and, as such, require a belief in the supernatural – science is about the natural world.

If someone wishes to believe in a creative force that instigated ‘the big bang’ fine. If you wish to call that force ‘God’ fine, but all the evidence for the diversity and development of life on Earth does not require the intervention of a designer – it is a product of natural processes.

I have no doubt that Dr Noble will be proclaiming a great defeat of me in his debates today – that I failed to address any of his challenges and that I am ignorant, clearly, of intelligent design.

I could also claim a great victory – that Dr Noble clearly does not understand how school science teaches accepted verifiable and reliable science and that the ‘controversies’ we do talk about are based on the application of science (technology – such as GM foods, mobile ‘phone radiation etc.) and as such these are more social controversy than scientific controversy – though they have their origins in the science. I could also claim that he clearly does not know how ID is defined by his own peers at the Discovery Institute and that their ‘science’ is no more reliable than crop circle science or astrology. I can also claim that despite explaining very clearly what the call by the signatories is all about – he clearly bid not read or understand what our position really is.

I could but I won’t (well, OK, I admit that I just have). I’ll simply say that after two hours it was only one side that resorted to name calling (intellectual fascist) and that is the true sign that someone has lost an argument!

Original post on Jame’s Space

50 Responses to “Intelligent Design?”

  1. bield duramakoff says:

    Just saw your vitro meat video and watching Afew others on your playlist

    Very interesting videos and very informative on new technologies
    Thank you!

  2. leongira doost says:

    “it is impossible to be gay and happy. The mental illness prohibits it.” Yes, in your world it happen. But in reality, suprise suprise…. why “gay”.

  3. ganal ther says:

    its okay 🙂 Well my fiance is in the military so when he’s here I expect him to be a little mushy but I understand he wont change so I’ll accept it 🙂 I think I’m the mushy one since I’m always very loving and affectionate so I guess it makes up for both of us 🙂 I think I over exaggerated that he never shows he loves me and that I’m constantly mad >.< I mean he does stuff but its not the typical stuff that guys do but I appreciate it now. I have to see things through his POV more.

  4. katsuberda says:

    Had a political conversation with mr mendoza and dj…then turned into religion. Very nice convo. I feel like an adult.

  5. gillvrayme cerb says:

    SCIENCE SHOWS THAT THE UNIVERSE, because of entropy, could not have sustained itself eternally. Einstein confirmed that space, matter, and time had a beginning! That beginning had to be supernatural because natural laws have no ability to bring the universe into existence from nothing. The supernatural cannot be proved by science but science points to a supernatural intelligence for the origin and order of the universe ~ HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM

  6. If you had two perfect mirrors you could capture photons between them, bouncing to and fro all the time. Like the basic clocks you hear about in high school physics dealing with special relativity. Lasers use this principle, for example. But for practical real world purposes you need to the form of energy for storage.

  7. its obvious you will just argue till your blue in the face,but my point is why are you determined to be like that you dont want a reasonable,sensible debate!

  8. (Cont.) Also, my friend home-schooled is BEHIND. She struggles with math because to a point where her mom explain to where she fully understands it. Yes she has the books to learn, but not enough. She is currently a Sophomore but she has to take algebra again because she struggled with it so much.

  9. dupangalli says:

    Talking to college students about smoking hemp & drinking on campus or glee in WH after 911 won’t get evangelical votes.

  10. Many of Barack Obama’s most enthusiastic in 2008, who were worried about abuses of federal power in foreign and domestic policy, are going to migrate to the Ron Paul camp. Obama didn’t deliver (quite the opposite — he accelerated the abuses initiated by Bush and Cheney). Perhaps Paul will. He appears to be much tougher than Obama and better able to stand up to pressure from fanatical special interests. He can’t be pushed around.

  11. I dont think humans are “the most powerful” in the universe? How could I? I dont even know if there is other life out there, and I dont even know what you mean with “power”. There are good scientific reasons for not telling stories as facts in school. There are many many many (many many) ways of disproving the creation story. And, believers are those who wants to be slaves, not the other way around. You have no idea what you are talking about it seems.

  12. baldo tamerchami says:

    whether god exists or not has nothing to do with the content of the vid. keep it on point please. 🙂

  13. It’s just, if I was a fundamentalist, why waste time inventing Creationism when you could totally take claim for Evolution.

  14. quez beilli says:

    Civil Disobedience (Kindle Edition)
    By Henry David Thoreau

    Buy new: $0.00
    Customer Rating:

    First tagged “education” by
    Customer tags: kindle freebie(44), individual freedom(13), government(11), philosophy(11), individualism(10), classic(10), constitution(8), kindle popular classics(3), reference(3), thoreau(2), education, american political theory

  15. sri lohrney says:

    Ye gods. Trapped in a room with people who are playing evangelical music. T’aint my cup of religious music, at all!

  16. cleodos grine says:

    If by beautiful and peaceful you mean the Quran and hadith allowing the rape of captured slave, killing of apostates, the beating of muslim women, looking down at homosexuals, etc… Then I would say you are right on. I mean, what kind of serious religion allows men to have sex with their slaves ( who their right hand possess) and say that is not adultery or fornication. You tell me.

  17. The reason this question is not answered is because we cant answer. Some questions are still out of our reach. This does not automatically mean that “god” created it. We are sometimes to arragant for our own good and need to come up with an answer were there is not one YET. It is very dangerous to make assumptions about these and other unanswerable questions especially when you give them devine answers. Lets wait and see what we come up with in the future and not GUESS.

  18. brockmanji says:

    Intelligent Design gets everything backwards, it’s like saying that our feet are miraculous because they fit so perfectly into our socks.

  19. Facehammer on 63 Percent of Voters Back Obama Control Policy ..including clear majorities of Roman Catholic, Protestant evangelical and independent voters –

  20. Actually,John McGeoch left Magazine for Siouxsie & the Banshees…then was sacked and joined the Armoury know what he did after that….RIP John McGeogh

  21. you idiots see that the ptb powers that be, want you slice you into dem or repub. You fall for anything. You give the rest of us normal thinkers who need a paid of preacher of a fox or msnbc or cnn to tell you what to think. The cfr runs the country, if you vote for a cfr person for any race you are not necessarily stupid, but its a great People. The dem/rep structure is a joke. cfr runs the country taking the orders of the rothschilds who control the media,gov/militaryfed

  22. entitled to oppose both, but it is not intelectually honest to lump in “young creationism with intelligent design as you did in your post. For the most intelligent design proponents do not take issue with the standard theories about the age of the and the universe. It is also not correct to label intelligent design as Christian (or Judeo-Christian). While it is true that many Christians have latched onto intelligent design as of the evolution debate, there is no sense in which the intelligent design idea necessarily identifies the designer with the God of the Bible.]]>

  23. tibeanold guiller says:

    hacikenks, bilim insanları da ne kadar ilgileniyor emin değilim. eyvallah, bağlantı kuran, temas eden var. ama çoğu da bir umutla ilgi duymaya başlıyor ve bir fikir edindikten sonra da hayal kırıklığına uğrayıp bırakıyor gördüğüm kadarıyla. ya da bana öyleleri denk geldi çoğunlukla diyeyim.

  24. A High View of Scripture? The Authority of the Bible and the Formation of the New Testament Canon (Evangelical R… –

  25. kingdavidy2k:

    Still a bit messy, just waiting for a few more pedals coming in. But got my essential drives set. + 2x 1 Channel TB Loopers. One for pre gain fxs, the other for post gain but pre delay fxs. Then I can think less of gear and more on making music. In theory anyway… – http://effectpedal.es/post

  26. cindon says:

    One of the most common logical fallacies is called “Affirming the Consequent.” Such fallacies take the form: If A, then B. B. Therefore, A. The first two (if A, then B, and B) can be true. The fallacy comes in concluding that A is true. Joe Klein offers up a textbook example today: Newt Gingrich is clearly running for President. How do I know? He gets dumb and angry when running for office. When not running for office, he’ll take the occasional independent stand–in opposition to the teaching of creationism in science class (it’s ok to teach it as a “philosophy” in a non-science setting, he has said) and he’s had some very creative ideas about urban But he really can be a complete jerk when electorate politics is dominating his frontal Let’s break down Klein’s argument: If Gingrich is running for office, then he will act dumb and angry. Gingrich is acting dumb and angry. Therefore, Gingrich is running for office. Klein proceeds to elaborate that Gingrich will…

  27. jacquerza suko says:

    I’m down with the G O D but its foolish not to believe in evolution. To me intelligent design (or growth) works for me.

  28. mignone says:

    So I’m getting out a bioethics book, a stephen king book, a ronald regan book, and an evolutionary theory book.

  29. bjorniko says:

    I propose that Chet from Weird Science would be in the top 5. Smacking his bro and girlfriend with a shotgun. Cold blooded.

  30. guintopell gring says:

    I KNOW I AM SAFE BECAUSE YOU ARE HERE YOUR PRESENTS IS NEEDED AND I THANKU.RAPGAME CULTHERO.SCIENCE FICTION NO MORE NOWTRUE

  31. The rise of the “nones” (people with no religion) just rose higher to 19%. Almost 1 in 5 Americans have no religion:

  32. Yes it’s time of the year when we come together and serve our God an our community! Armenian Evangelical Chu

  33. I bet the CEO of Chickfila a white southern evangelical ain’t 2 fond of blk ppl either! But u can’t mk money selling fried chicken W/O us!

  34. lini kashidakia says:

    Reconciling science + religion isn’t attempted by theologians, but by scientists unable to shake the piety absorbed w/their mothers’ milk.

  35. eleep gillo says:

    ABC15.com (KNXV-TV)

    Yuhnke Commentary: $200 Amazon Kindle Fire HD Android tablet review
    ABC15.com (KNXV-TV)
    PHOENIX – Tablets, tablets, tablets! Expect to hear about these slabs of technology A LOT this holiday season. Prices are finally coming down and competition is heating up. Amazon wants to be your pick with the newest addition to the Kindle tablet …
    and more »

  36. bland big says:

    pretty sure that would be the case. did you know the devil burys dinosaur bones in the just to make people doubt creationism?

  37. The Dennis family’s problems began one day when their son Zachary, then 13, showed them some marks on his arm. The red burns were in the shape of a cross, and Zachary told his parents that a science teacher named John Freshwater was responsible for them. Freshwater had made the mark with an electronic device called a Tesla coil. It soon came to light that Zachary wasn’t the only student who had been burned. While investigating the matter, school officials soon uncovered a host of problems in Freshwater’s classroom. It turned out that Freshwater, who in 2003 had publicly attacked the school district for mandating that evolution be taught, had been pushing “intelligent design” – a variant of creationism – in class and distributing materials designed to cast doubt on the validity of evolution. The investigation revealed that Freshwater had put religious posters in his classroom, asked students questions about their religious beliefs and the depth of their commitment and even offered…

  38. Maracas – that’s what I meant! Duh. Just a very evangelical English minister my mum’s parish has. Very into “a joyful noise”

  39. sacsi cost says:

    Download here Lucky Mosley
    Frank Hamer
    George Edgley
    Bill Thurman
    Floyd Hamilton
    John Jenkins
    Harold Hoffman
    Jo Enterentree
    Burl Ives

    . The legend of the bloody duo is presented from a different perspective in this offbeat outing that features actual footage of the criminal pair, fascinating. Produced by Larry Buchanan, Joreta C. Something Weird Video – OTHER SIDE OF BONNIE & CLYDE, THE – Download If s the “Actual Death Film” showing the grisly aftermath of Bonnie and Clyde’s roadside. The Other Side of Bonnie and Clyde Synopsis – Plot Summary. The Other Side of Bonnie and Clyde – Wikipedia The Other Side of Bonnie and Clyde è un film documentario statunitense del 1968 diretto da Larry Buchanan . Bonnie and Clyde (film) – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia When Bonnie and Clyde stop on the side of the road to help Mr. tree while .30-06 slugs struck the other side,. Bonnie and Clyde’s “Other Side”: The Good-Bad Outlaws of Larry. Il soggetto riprende la storia vera di Bonnie e Clyde. Bonnie and Clyde – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Their reputation was cemented in American pop folklore by Penn’s 1967 film Bonnie and Clyde. The Other Side of Bonnie and Clyde (1968) – IMDb Director: Larry Buchanan. — The Other Side of Bonnie & Clyde is cult director LARRY. The Trial of Lee Harvey Oswald/The Other Side of Bonnie and Clyde Before Oliver Stone set the film world ablaze with conspiracy theory biopics,. His next true crime project was 1968’s THE OTHER SIDE OF BONNIE AND CLYDE,
    http://blog.yahoo.com/_2GPEI2

  40. steinbornb says:

    The Truth About Wicca and Witchcraft Finding Your True Power (Kindle Edition)
    By James Aten

    Buy new: $0.99
    Customer Rating:

    First tagged “jewelry” by Fanatic
    Customer tags: occult(44), wicca books(42), religion(40), wicca(39), esoteric(38), religion and spirituality(38), introduction(38), metaphysics(37), witchcraft(37), astral plane(27), spirituality(17), truth about wicca and witchcraft(7)

  41. alyne tunaida says:

    Downloads The new iron dog.(CROSS-COUNTRY: RACING NEWS * SCHEDULE * STATS)(Tesoro Iron Dog race in Alaska): An from: Snow Week

  42. schioliaki says:

    Download here Jack Evans
    Fred F. Sears
    Clayton Moore
    Smiley Burnette
    Western All Stars
    Tommy Duncan
    Charles Starrett
    Richard Emory
    Gail Davis
    Lee
    Death Valley – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Death Valley is a valley located in Eastern California.. South of Death Valley (1949) (1960) Star Wars (1977) Death Valley (1982) – IMDb Director: Dick Richards. Actors: Charles Starrett: Steve Downey aka The Durango Kid · Gail Davis: Molly Tavish · Fred F. Films – Stovepipe Wells Village, Death Valley Death Valley in Film. Watch Death Valley Days – Season 9, Episode 19 – South of Horror Flats:. Actors: Paul Le Mat: Mike · Catherine Hicks: Sally · Stephen McHattie: Hal · Wilford Brimley: Sheriff · Peter Billingsley: Billy. Amazon.com: death valley days dvd – Movies & TV Movies & TV › “death valley days dvd. South of Death Valley (1949) Death Valley National Park – the South An illustrated guide to Death Valley National Park, California – the South Memorial Stadium, Clemson – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia It is now a tradition for the Clemson Army ROTC to “protect” the Rock for the 24 hours prior to the Clemson-South Carolina game when held in Death Valley. The following list of movie or television film/video productions were either shot on location in or. Silicon Valley; South Bay (LA) South Bay (SF) South Bay (SD) South Coast; Southern California; Death Valley | Trailer and Cast – Yahoo! Movies A group of young friends head to the to attend a winter rave. South of Death Valley (1949) – IMDb Director: Ray Nazarro. Death Valley Days – Season 9, Episode 19: South of Horror Flats. Prairie Raiders (1947) Buckaroo From Powder Creek (1947) Last Days Of Boot Hill (1947) South Of Death Valley (1949) Pecos. Death Valley in Movies and Television – Death Valley National Park Death Valley in Movies and Television Nature & Science For Teachers For Kids News. Sears: Sam Ashton · Lee Scotty. Instead, it turns into the trip to hell when they meet up with a couple of bad locals
    http://friendfeed.com/oukuii

  43. Thomas – Love As Strong As Death (The Library of New Testament Studies) – Dennis Sylva – T T Clark International.

  44. helmannen pion says:

    I don’t wanna have science i wanna have gym and health again cause that would make my day go by so fast now it’s gonna go …

  45. @HomefryDaddy

    Not once have I used “religious dogma” when pointing out the fact that evolutionary theory cannot be by abiogenesis

  46. woodlunder says:

    Tunisian university students weigh in on how to balance secularism with freedom of religion. We’ll hear from them at 8:44a on witf.

  47. I have to admire CBC’s Neil Macdonald for his blunt take on Scientology, religion in general, and US democracy. …

  48. dey baeumitsu says:

    :a religion thats based on looking like,acting like and following the ways of one evil man.yet it claims be against hero worship.

  49. hungmann tani says:

    The under-fire Hammers manager believes the play-off final is bigger than the Champions League because it has the power to change lives Sam Allardyce has an evolutionary theory for his species.

  50. Download here
    Chaos | Movies.com – New Movies | Movie Trailers | Movie Times. CHAOS unleashed on DVD September 26, 2006! DOWNLOAD CHAOS CLIPS. CHAOS has now been released across the country and. Chaos Theory | Trailer and Cast – Yahoo! Movies Frank Allen, celebrated author of the bestseller The Five Minute Efficiency Trainer, has perfected the of living via a foolproof system of timetables and index cards. Chaos (2005) – IMDb Emily and her friend Angelica go to a rave in the woods, and when they arrive, they meet a stranger called Swan that promises some Exstasy for the girls. Chaos (2005) – IMDb In Seattle, detective Quentin Conners is unfairly suspended and his Jason York leaves the police force after a tragic shooting on Pearl Street Bridge, when. CHAOS on Myspace Films – New Films & Documentaries About me:..THE MOST BRUTAL MOVIE EVER MADE!.. Genres: Drama , Crime , Action Chaos Theory (film) – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Chaos Theory is a 2008 comedy-drama film starring Ryan Reynolds, Emily and Townsend. . The film was written by Daniel Taplitz and Kathy Gori and was. Chaos (2008) | Rope of Silicon Details on the movie Chaos from Lionsgate Home The film is described as a bank heist tale of a rookie and veteran cop, played by Phillippe and Statham. Download Chaos Full Movie | Chaos Movie Now « Movies download Download movies free. Read the Chaos movie synopsis, view the movie trailer, get cast and crew information, see movie photos, and more on Movies.com. They follow
    http://friendfeed.com/iofuduahttp://friendfeed.com/ypbzm

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *