Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed - Page 7 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 04-21-2008, 04:36 PM   #91
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 01:59 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by nathan1977


The challenge is for scientists to admit they don't have all the answers
Credible scientists will always admit that they don't have all answers. I would even venture to say that all scientists admit to not having all the answers. That's why they are scientists and still studying, after all. And this is the holes melon was referring to earlier, either.

Nevertheless, the answers (i.e. evidence) we have so far show that Intelligent Design is wrong, plain and simple.

And quite frankly, the USA is the only country in the world that discusses Intelligent Design as being a credible theory to be taught in school. And this is not because they are so far ahead of the rest of the world.
__________________

__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 04-21-2008, 04:50 PM   #92
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Strong Badia
Posts: 3,429
Local Time: 12:59 AM
Please note that I'm not defending the notion of ID being taught in schools. (Particularly since I'm not a proponent of ID, since I find it intellectually dishonest in the first place. If you believe in a Creator, say so.) What I am saying is that in reaction to ID being taught in schools, some proponents of evolutionary theory seem to be fighting so hard in the other direction (mistaking the effect for the cause) that the conversation becomes unnecessarily defensive and polarizing.
__________________

__________________
nathan1977 is offline  
Old 04-22-2008, 01:16 AM   #93
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 01:59 AM
One fairly positive review (of which I found a few) and one quite negative one (of which I found several) for Expelled.
Quote:
Rex Roberts, Film Journal International

Ben Stein won’t endear himself to his Beverly Hills neighbors with his sardonic Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, a documentary in Moore mode that manages to be flippant and darkly provocative at once. Ostensibly an exposé of the Darwinian cabal that has hijacked the scientific academy, purportedly squelching debate about alternative theories on the origins of life, Expelled evolves from a well-wrought warning of eroding freedoms into a brooding meditation on the dangers of secular humanism. Stein has embraced a strain of conservative thought that attempts to expose affinities between progressivism and fascism (represented in the film by Darwin and Hitler), but his use of Dachau, the German concentration camp, as a cautionary tale of science gone awry, as well as his choice of the Berlin Wall as a metaphor for the modern scientific mind, will send liberals into anaphylactic shock.

The movie doesn’t exactly defend Intelligent Design, a hypothesis that holds that the origin and structure of life on Earth is best explained by intelligent cause (in other words, by God), but it does defend researchers who advocate the position. One scientist in particular, biologist Richard Sternberg, has become a cause célèbre following his resignation, he claims under duress, from the Smithsonian Institution, where as a research fellow and managing editor of the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, he published a peer-reviewed article on ID. Two other biologists, Guillermo Gonzalez and Caroline Crocker, claim they were forced from their universities because they wrote about ID or “briefly mentioned” the theory in the classroom.

Stein, a Yale-trained lawyer and Nixon speechwriter before he morphed into the engaging comic actor we know and love from Ferris Bueller’s Day Off and The Wonder Years, argues that the abuse of these three scientists (and anonymous others who appear on camera in silhouette) represents a disturbing attack on free speech that is both anti-scientific and anti-American. He thus undertakes a quest to discover if, indeed, the so-called elite scientific establishment systematically put the kibosh on ID in order to protect its liberal ideological prejudices and political agenda. To this end, he interviews Sternberg and company as well as Richard Dawkins, leading proponent of neo-Darwinism and author of the bestselling book The God Delusion, and other ID debunkers.

Like most documentaries aiming to entertain as well as enlighten, Expelled takes a jocular approach to its subject, enlivening the proceedings with snarky archival footage and newsreels, ironic clips from classic flicks (Inherit the Wind, Frankenstein, The Wizard of Oz), and retro animation illustrating natural selection with slot machines. It’s good fun. Stein plays coy, lobbing big fat softballs to his interlocutors: “Aren’t we all Darwinists now, except for a few cranks?” Eventually, however, he grows earnest, setting up a declension by which Darwinists (that is, secular progressives) establish random chance as nature’s modus operandi, thereby eliminating divine purpose in the universe, undermining morality and destroying free will. “It appears Darwinism does lead to atheism,” he concludes.

...Expelled isn’t likely to convince anyone unpredisposed to the notion that life has grand design and godly purpose, but these kinds of documentaries (as the producers of this one readily admit) make money by preaching to the choir. The problem with the genre is that many people who watch the film don’t have a scorecard to follow the inside baseball that ultimately makes them interesting. Do fans of Ben Stein the game-show host know that he was a longtime columnist for the notorious right-wing organ The American Spectator? Since Stein travels to Seattle to visit the offices of the Discovery Institute, a conservative think tank sympathetic to Intelligence Design, should he identify interviewees who have connections to the foundation? He doesn’t, just as he fails to tell us that religion reporter Larry Witham, who talks about media coverage of Intelligent Design, was a longtime employee of the conservative newspaper The Washington Times. The fact is, few filmmakers disclose such connections, partly because they haven’t time to do so in a feature-length movie, but mostly because they would undermine their own agendas. Ben Stein is about as fair and balanced as any of the new breed of documentarians, so the standard warning applies: Viewers beware.
Quote:
Jeannette Catsoulis, New York Times

One of the sleaziest documentaries to arrive in a very long time, Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed is a conspiracy-theory rant masquerading as investigative inquiry. Positing the theory of intelligent design as a valid scientific hypothesis, the film frames the refusal of “big science” to agree as nothing less than an assault on free speech. Interviewees, including the scientist Richard Sternberg, claim that questioning Darwinism led to their expulsion from the scientific fold (the film relies extensively on the post hoc, ergo propter hoc fallacy—after this, therefore because of this), while our genial audience surrogate, the actor and multihyphenate Ben Stein, nods sympathetically. (Mr. Stein is also a freelance columnist who writes "Everybody’s Business" for The New York Times.)

Prominent evolutionary biologists, like the author and Oxford professor Richard Dawkins—accurately identified on screen as an “atheist”—are provided solely to construct, in cleverly edited slices, an inevitable connection between Darwinism and godlessness. Blithely ignoring the vital distinction between social and scientific Darwinism, the film links evolution theory to fascism (as well as abortion, euthanasia and eugenics), shamelessly invoking the Holocaust with black-and-white film of Nazi gas chambers and mass graves. Every few minutes familiar—and ideologically unrelated—images interrupt the talking heads: a fist-shaking Nikita S. Khrushchev; Charlton Heston being subdued by a water hose in Planet of the Apes. This is not argument, it’s circus, a distraction from the film’s contempt for precision and intellectual rigor. This goes further than a willful misunderstanding of the scientific method. The film suggests, for example, that Dr. Sternberg lost his job at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History because of intellectual discrimination but neglects to inform us that he was actually not an employee but rather an unpaid research associate who had completed his three-year term.

Mixing physical apples and metaphysical oranges at every turn, Expelled is an unprincipled propaganda piece that insults believers and nonbelievers alike. In its fudging, eliding and refusal to define terms, the movie proves that the only expulsion here is of reason itself.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 04-27-2008, 06:33 PM   #94
Rock n' Roll Doggie
 
the iron horse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: in a glass of CheerWine
Posts: 3,251
Local Time: 07:59 PM
Intelligent Critique
Expelled adroitly addresses the dogmaticism of Darwinian theory in the scientific world.

By Dave Berg


I like rebels, especially ones who go against type. Take Ben Stein in his latest film, Expelled, which comes out this Friday. Dressed in a sport coat, tie, and tennis shoes, he’s not who you expect — the deadpan, monotone-voiced but ever-likable teacher he portrays in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off and The Wonder Years.

Stein retains his characteristic deadpan affect, but this time he’s playing himself — a deceptively erudite and well-educated interviewer, who is passionately skeptical of evolutionary biology and its leading proponents.

The film’s endeavor is to respond to one simple question: “Were we designed, or are we simply the end result of an ancient mud puddle struck by lightning?”

Big science doesn’t like that question because they can’t answer it. Underneath their antagonism toward explanations that suggest an intelligent cause, lies a fundamental egoism. Science wants to deny any evidence of a supreme being precisely because it wants to be a supreme being. Moreover, representatives of big science in the film are unsettlingly snippy, suggesting that they feel threatened by rival opinions, rather than assured of their own.

To make this point, the film introduces teachers and scientists who are shunned, denied tenure, and fired for questioning dogmatic Darwinism. The film’s producers spent two years traveling the world, talking with more than 150 educators and scientists who say they have been persecuted for questioning Darwin’s theory of natural selection.

Dr. Richard Sternberg, a biologist, publishes a peer-reviewed paper, which posits evidence for intelligent design (ID) in the universe. For his efforts, Sternberg’s bosses at the Smithsonian Institution trashed him so badly that it led to a congressional investigation.

Iowa State University denied tenure to Guillermo Gonzalez, an accomplished astrobiologist. University officials admitted that Gonzalez’s work on ID is a factor.

For Richard Dawkins, by contrast, job security is not a problem. To this superstar Oxford University evolutionary biologist, and devout atheist, intelligent design is nothing more than an “ideological cousin of creationism.”

The highlight of the film features Ben Stein interviewing Dawkins, who concedes that an intelligent being may have created life on earth. But that being cannot be “God.” Instead, he suggests it may be an alien, itself a product of “Darwinian evolution.” Oh, the scientific imagination — there’s nothing like it on God’s green earth.

Dawkins has since complained that the interview was set up under false pretenses, and that he didn’t even know who Stein was. It is rather astonishing that it did not occur to the world’s smartest atheist to look up Ben Stein on the Internet, where he might have readily discovered numerous examples of his writings that are critical of Darwinism.

Dawkins dismisses the Emmy-winning actor as having “no talent for comedy.” He believes during the interview Stein is an “honestly stupid man, sincerely seeking enlightenment from a scientist.” A lawyer, a law professor, an economist, and a speechwriter for both Nixon and Ford, Stein hardly seems to fit the description “honestly stupid.”

In the end, the film isn’t really about intelligent design as much as about a relentless attack on an authentically free inquiry. As Ben Stein points out, “Freedom of inquiry has been greatly compromised, and this is not only anti-American, it’s anti-science. It’s anti-the whole concept of learning.”

— Dave Berg is a senior segment producer at The Tonight Show with Jay Leno.

http://article.nationalreview.com/pr...FmMWIxMmE5M2I=
__________________
the iron horse is offline  
Old 04-27-2008, 06:45 PM   #95
ONE
love, blood, life
 
EdgeIsTooSexy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,828
Local Time: 07:59 PM


saw it last night thanks to a friend. i wasnt really into it and it turns out he didnt like it either
__________________
EdgeIsTooSexy is offline  
Old 04-27-2008, 06:47 PM   #96
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep
My 80 year old neighbor asked me to take her to see this movie,
will probably go next Wed or Thurs evening.
Well

I did take my neighbor to see this Thursday 3:00 matinee. We were the only people in the audience. It opens up with a string arrangement of "All along the watch tower" most of the music was 60s and 70s, I did enjoy the music.

Ben Stein is somewhat entertaining to me.

The first 2/3s was not as far-fetched as I had expected it to be.

The last 1/3, suggesting that Darwinism drove the Nazis was a bit of a stretch. Jews have been persecuted in Europe for thousands of years with the Church's support.

The movie left me with the impression that creationism has no relationship to ID.

Also, Ben Stein does manage to pull off a "gotcha" kind of a moment with Richard Dawkins. Much like Moore did with Heston in Columbine.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 04-27-2008, 07:08 PM   #97
Forum Moderator
 
yolland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 7,471
Local Time: 01:59 AM
^ I've noticed that many of the critics have compared Stein's style to Moore's in their reviews.

That was kind of you to take your neighbor, I hope she enjoyed it.
__________________
yolland [at] interference.com


μελετώ αποτυγχάνειν. -- Διογένης της Σινώπης
yolland is offline  
Old 04-27-2008, 07:15 PM   #98
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 04:59 PM
She did.

She is a Ben Stein fan.

We shared a bag of pop corn.

I think Moore makes a better documentary.
I will admit that after leaving the theater Stein had me a bit sympathetic with the ID people.
__________________
deep is offline  
Old 04-27-2008, 09:07 PM   #99
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 05:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by deep




The last 1/3, suggesting that Darwinism drove the Nazis was a bit of a stretch. Jews have been persecuted in Europe for thousands of years with the Church's support.

The movie left me with the impression that creationism has no relationship to ID.

Also, Ben Stein does manage to pull off a "gotcha" kind of a moment with Richard Dawkins. Much like Moore did with Heston in Columbine.
Deep,

That could speak to the Godless place you live in-that you we're the only 2 souls in the movie house.

I saw this last night with my girls and the ultra athetist was pinned and pleaded uncle for a bit. Comparing Heston a man with Alhemizers to Dawkins interview shows favortism to Moore and Darwinism.

I did notice the ID people being more calm and peaceful in their interviews while the athiests bristled and blinked a lot-that spoke volumes to my childen and I who happen to be 4.0 students and attend avanced classes for their age- theyre very intuitive.

I *really* felt for Ben when the tour guide of the Nazi death camps was glib and ambivilent about the inhumanity of the Nazis.

Going light on the Darwinism connection to Nazis is a cop out.
The Jews may have been persecuted and driven like the Mormons in the USA, (much worse than Mormons) but Hilter took glee in riding the planet of the Jews and those he felt were inferior, a view proffered also by Darwin.

I give the movie 7/10 Stars.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 04-27-2008, 11:46 PM   #100
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:59 AM
Quote:
Hilter took glee in riding the planet of the Jews and those he felt were inferior, a view proffered also by Darwin.
Care to give a citation for this?
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 04-28-2008, 12:01 AM   #101
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 07:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by diamond
Hitler took glee in riding the planet of the Jews and those he felt were inferior, a view proffered also by Darwin.
I think you're confusing evolution with eugenics. Part of the confusion arises from the fact that eugenics was created by Darwin's half-cousin, Sir Francis Galton. Darwin, himself, had nothing to do with it.

Secondly, considering the sheer amount of history I've read regarding anti-Semitism, a very large chunk of it had to do with religion and religion only. In fact, the minute you'd get an imperial ruler that was inclined to be nice to Jews, you'd then get a papacy that would scream tirades against Jews and demand their conversion to Christianity or death.

To blame anti-Semitism on Darwinism is so intellectually dishonest that it's not even funny.
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 04-28-2008, 12:36 AM   #102
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Tempe, Az USA
Posts: 12,856
Local Time: 05:59 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon



To blame anti-Semitism on Darwinism is so intellectually dishonest that it's not even funny.
I'm not "blaming" anti Sentimanism on Darwinsim only pointed out that many Nazis subscribed to it. Some Americans did subscribe to Eugenics in the last century for a time period.

it's also no secret that the Catholics and Nazis shared despise for the Jews, although Catholics do not subscribe to Darwinism Eugenics nor mass mudering of the Jewish ppl, those 3 traits fall at the feet of Nazis.

<>
__________________
diamond is offline  
Old 04-28-2008, 12:46 AM   #103
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:59 AM
Many Nazis subscribed to what? Anti-semitism (or Sentimainism) or Darwinism.

How does the latter poorly reflect on those who subscribe to natural selection, one might as well say that if you believe in special relativity then you are morally responsible for Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It's disconnected logic, Nazism does not discredit natural selection as it has nothing to do with it; on the basis of the evidence evolution holds up wholly independent of politics or how much support it enjoys.

Everybody on the planet could believe in special creation and it wouldn't make evolution wrong; before Darwin evolution was just as much a part of reality as it has been since.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 04-28-2008, 12:54 AM   #104
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 10:59 AM
As far as the ad hominem attacks over the response of scientists and secularists to ID being some sort of shrill overreaction I feel it is very important to understand that it is about more than just an idea; it is about telling the truth, preserving the principles of the liberal democracy, ensuring the integrity of the scientific method and freedom.

It is not illiberal to prevent children being taught ID in public schools instead of or with evolution as ID is not on equal footing intellectually and would be teaching them religion by stealth. Freedom from religion does exist in state funded institutions; opposing ID in public schools is a pro-freedom (in the guise of freedom of religion) position.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 04-28-2008, 12:55 AM   #105
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 06:59 PM
Saw the movie and enjoyed it.

Unfortunately the movie only touched on eugenics which came about when proponents of scientific evolution started to push their scientific theories into social and political arenas. Except "Social Darwinism" isn't science, it's a metaphysical ideology requiring all the faith of any religion.

Doesn't eugenics (breeding a better man, eliminating the weak) kinda make sense if your worldview professes that man is NOT inherently sacred; every life special with a Divine purpose, each human possessing an eternal soul. That the universe is a cosmic accident, death is final, and all morality is manmade with no external source of authority existing above the laws of man.

Why not? After all, why attack just the idea of man being created in God's image as "dangerous,""outdated" or worse unless you have, at least in the back of your mind, thoughts of tinkering with the design?
__________________

__________________
INDY500 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:59 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com