[yt="Expelled Movie Trailer by Ben Stein"]3FqjTlbvlGg&hl=en[/yt]

Expelled - The New Ben Stein Movie

Posted by: Curt in Academic Intolerance


"I always look forward to anything that has Ben Stein attached to it. Movies, articles, books, what have you. And in keeping with that tradition this movie is going into my “must see” list:

From the few reviews I have read of the movie from those who saw the still raw version at CPAC it appears the main thrust of the movie is academia intolerance. Science should always be about the research of new ideas and free debate. But when the film makers have to hide the faces of scientists who dare discuss ID in a rational way you know that this freedom doesn’t exist.

As for Intelligent Design, I don’t discount it. I’m sure there are some in the ID community who want to push the creationist version of life but to me ID could very well explain evolution. Who is say that a higher being didn’t put that first cell on this planet to set off evolution? Maybe, or maybe not. But at least let the free flow of ideas get thrown about in academia."

Ed Morrissey, who saw the film with a few thoughts:

"the film does an excellent job of demonstrating atheism as a belief system. Atheism as represented by Richard Dawkings and others in this film gets exposed as exactly the kind of belief system they claim to despise. They can’t prove God exists — and they can’t prove God doesn’t exist. They make the common fallacy of arguing that absence of evidence amounts to evidence of absence

Amusingly, Stein asks people how the first cell came to be. None of the scientists could give him a straight answer. Dawkins himself admits he doesn’t know and that no one else does, either — but postulates that aliens could have brought life to this planet, and then postulates that another alien civilization could have brought life to that planet, and so on. He then concedes that one entity could have been the original source … but insists that entity could not possibly have been God. For this he gives absolutely no evidence at all, relegating it as a belief system somewhat akin to Scientology.

Overall, though, the film presents a powerful argument not for intelligent design as much as for the freedom of scientific inquiry. If scientists get punished for challenging orthodoxy, we will not expand our learning but ossify it in concrete.

The new film, ” EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed” does not presume to bury the theory of evolution… but it declines to praise it, either. As a world view…no thinking person (certainly no moral person) can view a scientific theory of life based on an undirected, purposeless and random process as anything but pessimism. Certain people, and many scientists are drawn to pessimism, and thus pessimistic scientific theories. But that does not make their theories, or them, for that matter, any more attractive or intelligent.

Ben Stein:

if they are Darwinists and they owe their jobs to being Darwinists, they are not going to challenge the orthodoxy because that would challenge the whole basis of their jobs and their lives. So they are not going to challenge the ideology that has given them lush positions in real life.

[LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link.

Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed

The pre-release controversy surrounding Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed didn't quite reach the fever pitch that preceded The Passion of the Christ, but it has nonetheless "bought" the filmmakers more free publicity than they ever could have afforded.
Recent weeks of hullabaloo have included:

• Film critics allegedly "crashing" [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link.
• Interview subjects claiming they [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. by filmmakers
• A prominent atheist being [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. to a screening
• Producers [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. for allegedly "suppressing free speech"
• The advent of a [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. devoted to "exposing" Expelled

Ben Stein interviews Richard Dawkins
There's yet another comparison to the pre-Passion hype: While critics accused director Mel Gibson and his film of anti-Semitism, the filmmakers behind Expelled—and movie host [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. , who is Jewish—argue that Darwin and evolutionist theory paved the way for Hitler and the Holocaust (but [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. begs to differ). Perhaps it's no coincidence that Motive Marketing, which is spearheading publicity for Expelled, was also in charge of PR for The Passion.


Now that the movie has hit theaters, does it live up to all the pre-game hype? Well, sort of.


On the one hand, it does accomplish what its title infers. "Expelled" refers to several college profs and scientists who were reportedly denied tenure or lost their jobs because they dared to mention Intelligent Design (ID) in the classroom, in research papers, or on the job. The film presents these cases in varying degrees of detail, but always implying that a clear injustice was done in each situation. (Christianity Today looked into at least one of the cases earlier this year—that of [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. , denied tenure at Iowa State University ostensibly due to his support of ID.)


The film's subtitle, "No Intelligence Allowed," refers to what Stein and the filmmakers decry as a lack of "academic freedom" or "open inquiry" in academia and the scientific community. The movie argues that gatekeepers in those circles aren't even allowing ID as a topic of discussion. Of course, filmmakers only depicted those situations which support their premise—the movie was made by a company called [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. —but ignore any cases of public school classrooms across America where ID theory is at least discussed, if not taught.

Stein considers a statue of Darwin


So, the film succeeds in making the point that Intelligent Design should at least be on the table for discussion. But if you're looking for ammunition to argue your Darwinist friends under the table, you may want to look elsewhere. While Expelled certainly leans heavily toward the ID side of the debate, it's not trying to present an airtight case, or to shut the door on evolutionary theory.


Still, Expelled was made by people—including Stein—who believe in ID, and indeed in God as Creator. There is little talk of "biblical creationism," and in general, folks in the ID camp either don't want to be perceived that way—or they simply don't buy a literal interpretation of the Genesis account. Still, ID proponents argue that the complexity of organisms—even within a single cell—points to some sort of designer, whether or not they call that designer "God."


Prominent atheist and evolutionary biologist [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. certainly wouldn't call the designer "God," if he were to even acknowledge a designer in the first place. Dawkins, author of The God Delusion, is one of many experts interviewed in the film from both sides of the debate. (And it must be said here that even the "sides" aren't clearly defined. There are some creationists who also believe in parts of evolutionary theory, and there are some evolutionists who believe in a creator—and plenty of people in between. There is very little black-and-white on either side; and even though the complexity or organisms might imply a designer, it certainly doesn't prove anything.)
Dawkins is interviewed twice in the movie—once by an unseen questioner early in the film, and again at the end by Stein. That concluding interview will get audiences buzzing; the folks at the screening I attended were certainly talking about it as the end credits rolled.

Visiting a concentration camp
Stein, in his inimitable way, tries to corner Dawkins into acknowledging the possible existence of God—or at least some sort of intelligent designer behind it all. At first, Dawkins doesn't budge, and is incredulous at Stein's line of questions. But Stein, deadpan yet persistent, latches on to Dawkins' comment that he's 99 percent certain there's no God—and runs with it. "Why not 97 percent?" Stein asks. "Why not 49 percent?"
Stein continues to press until a clearly irritated Dawkins says something quite astonishing. "Okay," he says in essence (I'm paraphrasing, because I don't have the precise quote), "maybe there is an intelligent designer. But if there is, I can guarantee that that intelligent designer is a life form that evolved elsewhere and came to earth and seeded life here."

Huh? So that's his concession to the ID camp? That if they're at all right, that we were designed by aliens who evolved somewhere else in the universe? Yowza.


The filmmakers clearly opted to put that segment at the end for dramatic purposes; they couldn't have scripted a better conclusion themselves—by making one of the world's most brilliant men say something so silly.

Dawkins discusses his ideas on evolution
But there are plenty of interesting interviews along the way, with scholars and scientists coming from all perspectives on the issue. And even though the filmmakers are ID believers, they didn't merely throw softball questions to the experts on their side.



They—mainly Stein, a decent interviewer—challenged many of the ID proponents' claims, pushing them to further explanation and clarification.


And filmmakers can't be accused of denying Darwin proponents equal opportunity—Dawkins, [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. , [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. , and [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. , among others, get plenty of screen time. While they certainly edited these interviews for their own purposes, it's clear the filmmaker didn't pull a cut-and-paste way-out-of-context fast one either—this is no Michael Moore hack job, slicing and splicing every which way so you have no clue what footage to trust, or not.


The film's biggest flaw is a too-long segment where Stein explores Darwinism's alleged connection to Hitler, Nazism, and the Holocaust, essentially implying that such horrific events are almost a necessary result of belief in evolution. In an interview with [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. , Stein said he was especially taken by the book From Darwin to Hitler, saying that "It's about how Darwin's theory . . . led to the murder of millions of innocent people." Well, maybe, or maybe not. That may be a theme to be more fully explored in another documentary, but for the purposes of this film, it seemed too tangential.
But another result of wartime Germany did not seem tangential—recurrent images of the Berlin Wall as a metaphor for the supposed "wall" in academia and scientific circles, the wall that represents the two "sides" of the debate. The filmmakers—and Stein—would say that the wall is very real, that it was constructed by the "thought police" of the scientific community (read: evolutionists) who have no intent of allowing ID proponents any access to the other side.


I.e., no intelligence allowed. It's not even up for discussion. And the film leaves us wondering, "Why not?"
>snip<



Another take on it.



ID is not worthy of being "On The Table"...it is religious and has NO scientific FACTS to support it.



KJ

Well KJ (do you suffer from insomnia?), my bottom line is this:

Being a scholar of the scriptures as well as having a science degree (having studied both Modern Physics/Einstein's Theories et al and Astrophysics), as well as Probability and Statistics, let me just sum up my take on all this:

I see ID as being the 'creation of the earth (and Universe) over time by a timeless Intelligence.' What many call 'evolution' is the creation story over eons (the Biblical 6 days werent 24 hr days---the Sun wasnt around for the 1st couple of days, but periods of time). Two places in scripture say "that 1 day to God is as a thousand years,' could have said a million or a billion, but that was the upper limit of measurement in those days!! And it says that man was formed out of the dust of the ground, and indeed Adam means 'red as clay.' But how long did it take to 'form' him?? My personal belief was over at least 10's of thousands of years---but 'time' may not have existed until the fall of man--'the day that you eat of the forbidden fruit (another spiritual principle---pride against God, to be 'as God') you will surely die.' Man didnt physically die that very day, but did spiritually, i.e. separated from his creator---records show that Adam lived for 900+ years. I personally believe that the formation of 'man' was completed when that 'being' resembled the Son of God and then God breathed in His Spirit to make him 'created in His image'---BTW, Jesus Christ was called 'the 2nd Adam.'

Back to physics, which by the way are the Laws also put in motion by the Intelligent Creator, and lets mix it with a little philosophy. Looking at what I (and others in the scientific community) believe is a cyclic, almost 'beating' universe of: big bang, expansion to a limit, then collapse again back to the infinitely dense original mass leading to another big bang. Many scientist believe this take---we are currently in the expansion period of 'this cycle.' Those who are in the scientific community have a better grasp of 'infinity' than the every day, time & space limited person walking the earth. In calculus, we 'integrate' from 0 to infinity all the time. Light years (light travels at 186,000 miles/sec, so 1 light yr is 5,900,000,000,000 miles), and we can see with our telescopes galaxies that are out millions of light years. Just brought up these figures to show the limitation of man's thinking and concept of time & distance.

Now look at the probability of you & me, sitting on this rock in vast space, at this point in time, with perfect conditions to support life of all types for over the period of the last 10,000 years---(I believe that the earth has had several 'destructions & re-creations' to get to where we are today). No, I dont believe that man co-existed with the old dinosaurs, and that they are not part of 'this current creation cycle!' This is one of many 'stumbling blocks' that God has kept as 'His mysteries' that He mentions, in regards to His words saying that "man will not find God by his own wisdom.' And, "the things of the Spirit (a 4th dimensional precept and set of 'Laws') are not received by the natural man because they are spiritually appraised." So what are the probabilities of us intelligently communicating about all this, at this point in time on an Internet, designed by 'our' intelligence, but using His Laws of Physics?! The probability of this carbon-based life is extremely rare in our near-term locale; and even if taken over 100's of billions of star systems and galaxies, to be on the same time period with all that time and distance separation. I personally believe that we on this earth are just 1 of his many creations, but are so separated by those terms of time & distance, that only the 4th dimensional realm of the Spirit (scripture does indeed say that there is no time or distance in 'that realm') can bring us together. And, the limited scientific community, having only the partial laws of God (or Physics) cannot comprehend that timeless/distance-less spiritual realm---thus they are ignorant of all that is what we call 'God!' So the limited argument for secular evolution (as opposed to timeless creation) is narrow and mentally limited by mortal man, who in 'his' pride' says that we know and have no need of creative intelligence! BTW, scriptures also say that 'the biggest enemy between man and God is man's pride.' That is the 'ultimate rebellion and unpardonable' sin of man toward his creator...AKA, rejection of the Holy Spirit, or the Spirit of the Creator, and saying that "we have no need of Him"...

No, I sleep well...just left myself logged in without meaning to.

All that's fine, just show the science...the facts. Otherwise, we're talking about a religious belief, not fact.

KJ

Make sure that 'we' dont mix and confuse 'religion' with 'truth!!' We both agree that wars over religion are common and destructive to society. I have said B4 and will say it again---'religion' is of man, man's attempt to define God and his 'will' and impose those doctrines (scripture refers to them as 'doctrines of demons' in some cases) upon mankind, thereby enslaving them!! Man uses 'religion' to put God in 'their' box and worship Him as they so desire! Thats' why I wont take any denominational label, or religious affiliation, other than 'a searcher and follower of truth.' I'm not looking for a 'game to play,' but having searched the scriptures for the 'spiritual principles' behind them--not dead letters written by men over many years---but with the intent of 'finding truth,' and I have no problems finding 'harmony' with science. Science is just the discovery or uncovering of God's work!! But to try to use science to disprove the existence of God is the ultimate rebellion of man's pride. Does any man 'know it all' concerning this world & universe?! But many are willing in their rebellion and rejection of their 'limited' knowledge to as we say, go there.

Nice to 'see' you again----sooo, how about that 'date?!'

You are talking about "Belief" not facts....science is fact based....here is another view of the film and it's errors....

[LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link.

In the film Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, narrator Ben Stein poses as a "rebel" willing to stand up to the scientific establishment in defense of freedom and honest, open discussion of controversial ideas like intelligent design (ID). But Expelled has some problems of its own with honest, open presentations of the facts about evolution, ID—and with its own agenda. Here are a few examples—add your own with a comment, and we may add it to another draft of this story. For our complete coverage, see [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. .

1) Expelled quotes Charles Darwin selectively to connect his ideas to eugenics and the Holocaust.
When the film is building its case that Darwin and the theory of evolution bear some responsibility for the Holocaust, Ben Stein's narration quotes from [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. thusly:


With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination. We build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. Hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.


This is how the original passage in The Descent of Man reads (unquoted sections emphasized in italics):


With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilized men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination. We build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilized societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly anyone is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.


The producers of the film did not mention the very next sentences in the book (emphasis added in italics):


The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming present evil.


Darwin explicitly rejected the idea of eliminating the "weak" as dehumanizing and evil. Those words falsify Expelled's argument. The filmmakers had to be aware of the full Darwin passage, but they chose to quote only the sections that suited their purposes.

2) Ben Stein's speech to a crowded auditorium in the film was a setup.
"Viewers of Expelled might think that Ben Stein has been giving speeches on college campuses and at other public venues in support of ID and against "big science." But if he has, the producers did not include one. The speech shown at the beginning and end was staged solely for the sake of the movie. [LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link. by speaking to officials at Pepperdine University, where those scenes were filmed. Only a few of the audience members were students; most were extras brought in by the producers. Judge the ovation Ben Stein receives accordingly.
>snip<

There is much more at the link.

Thank You Jam. I'm not dating at present...maybe in the future if you're out my way we can meet for coffee and pie somewhere...



KJ

We may have to get Bill Clinton to define 'what fact is!' ha ha Facts can supposedly be verifiable, but the exact path of all the species cannot be, since too many 'missing links.' Doesnt mean that it didnt happen tht way, but cannot be verified 'as fact!' Bottom line is that if one is ignorant of the Laws of the Spiritual realm, then how can they verify that there is no God?! Playing with 'half a deck' is not playing a fair game! I'm an 'info junkie' (dont read fiction of any type!) and catch all the Discovery/Nova etc. programs, read the latest Scientific news, and so forth, and the 'theories' of astrophysics are changed almost daily, modified, still unsure, debated, etc. as man sees more and more into the universe. As they keep saying, "the more we discover, the more questions are generated!' Again, KJ, 'man will never discover God using his own wisdom..' If man wants to teach the science course of "Undisputable and Repeatedly Verifiable Information with No Speculation or Bias of Purpose 101" , or acronym "UARVIWNSOB 101" (ha ha), then it's fine with me...

BTW, think that it will take more than 'coffee and pie' to loosen you up...LOL

3) Scientists in the film thought they were being interviewed for a different movie.

4) The ID-sympathetic researcher whom the film paints as having lost his job at the Smithsonian Institution was never an employee there.

5) Science does not reject religious or "design-based" explanations because of dogmatic atheism.

6) Many evolutionary biologists are religious and many religious people accept evolution.

[LINK POSTED BY MEMBER] Only Members Can View This Political Forum Link.

Nonsense....even your notion of what is entailed by having a cup of coffee and a piece of pie is radical and illogical Jam...how loose does one have to be in YOUR book eh? No, I don't think I want to know.

Later.

KJ

Wow, another person who needs 'Anger Mgmt' course..ha ha BTW, instead of 'coffee & pie,' I will being the ole 'Corn Cob Extractor' tool and a bottle of red wine....that shud loosen you up...LOL LOL LOL

Jam.
you are getting to close to that line.
be sure you don't cross it.

__________________