I noticed Expelled was playing at my local Movie Theater.
I can't let this slip past without commenting. If you followed the Dover trial a few years ago, you know that Intelligent Design was exposed as rank Creationism, and worse, those trying to argue Intelligent Design was somehow science knew full well their claim wasn't true, but they were willing to lie to get their way ("their way" being the teaching of ID in science class as if actual science).
Well, the Discovery Institute's shaded truths are back, this time in the guise of a movie that is apparently seeing wide release.
A great place to learn more about this movie is a website created and maintained by the National Center for Science Education: ExpelledExposed.Com.
ExpelledExposed clearly reveals "why this movie is not a documentary at all, but anti-science propaganda aimed at creating the appearance of controversy where there is none."
I recommend clicking through a few links at ExpelledExposed, then go catch the movie with friends.
11 comments:
I actually liked the movie. It is a Michale Moore style "documentary" meaning it has facts mixed with opinion, and a lot of caricatures that feed stereotypes. It should not be taken as truth, just as Moore or Gore's work should not been seen as truth, but as opinion that is trying to bring to light important issues of our time.
I did like how it pointed out that simply questioning darwinism is not allowed and can get you fired - even if you are not a proponent of ID and no matter your profession. (journalism and scientists both)
As a Christian I also think that ID can often be thinly veiled creationism- and I hate it when it is, but am more of the opinion that reasonable ID simply wants to believe that there is structured order to the universe, something darwinism doesn't allow as a theory.
Stein's Nazism stuff was just emotional claptrap and a wild goose chase.
I ultimately liked that he was pointing out how questions are not being allowed. Good science requires questions, even if you are wrong, because sometimes the wrong hypothesis can lead to a startling discovery as has been the case in chemistry and biology for some time.
John,
Thanks for your response! I still disagree with you though, respectfully, of course ;-).
My response to you: Who is not allowing these questions? The movie masterfully tries to make the viewer believe 'the scientific instutions' are ignoring something, but that's my point. The movie's message is deceptive.
Because, if a biologist were to discover some kind of serial number or 'maker's mark' in the deep cellular matrix of all living things, or a physicist were to discover an even deeper mark in all matter or in a fundamental constant like Pi, ID would instantly gain scientific footing. Everyone would be amazed and excited to look even deeper, and follow the trail to its ultimate conclusion. Indeed, many famous scientists of the past, like Newton and Faraday, were inspired to do their research looking for just such incontrovertible evidence. But so far, none have been found. But every experiment science does is a kind of question.
On the other hand, simply asking the same question over and over again, or stating the same hypothesis over and over again ("life's too complicated to have evolved"), without coming up with an experiment that can test that hypothesis, is not science. It becomes a kind of faith.
And faith, for all the great things it can accomplish in a community of fellowship, is not something I want to see promulgated in publicly funded science classes as a valid alternative to the method of evidence-based deductions (which is all "science" really is).
As to "Darwinism", that theory was a great basis for evolution, but it was, after all, promulgated before anyone even knew what DNA was. No one is teaching Darwinism in biology science classes anymore, except as a tip of the hat.
I agree, at this point ID is belief in many senses, but so is Evolution. I agree, we have some indicators that point toward th world having evolved, but there is not yet an incontrovertible proof. I would never disagree that microevolution happens, that has been proven, I'm just not sure that micro necessarily leads to macro, nor do I see proof of it yet.
That's not to say it isn't possible. I'm one of the day-age Christians that believes God may have used evolution to create the earth. Not because I believe evolution is proven, but because I think neither evolution nor ID has been proven and since both are still theories, both should be seen as ideas, not truth.
At any rate, in my world, this stamping out of ID is much talked about, and those scientists who appeared on Expelled were much in the news. It is happening, but only to a small extent becasue only a few have been brave enough to say that want to begin their scientific research with ID rather than evolution. As scientists, they should be free to do so.
I don't think ID is ready to be taught in schools yet. It needs more time and research. And as a fomrer teacher, I can tell you that Darwinism is the basis of almost all biology classes in public school education.
It is not a tip of the hat, but rather thoroughly integrated. In some cases, that isn't a bad thing, as its not like we haven't learned things from the theory of evolution, its just that the theory itself is not truth but is taught as such. Its called a theory true, but that is not how it acutally is conveyed to students.
John,
It sounds like we both agree ID shouldn't be taught as science at this stage ;-)
It sounds like we could enjoy other interesting conversations, to see where we are coming at things together and where we have experienced different personal experiences or where/if we use terminology differently, but let's save that for later! :-).
Take care man,
brc
Best to you as well. Looking forward to your next book release with anticipation!
John, if you're looking for a good (if lengthy) explanation the evidence supporting macroevolution, try here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/
I just want to point out that ID is not a theory in the scientific sense. Evolution is not a theory in the sense that a layman would use it. A scientific theory, such as evolution or gravity, is, according to the National Academy of Sciences,
"Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature that is supported by many facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena."
ID does not meet this qualification, at all, in any way. The 'ID movement' (such as it is, if a group of lying creationists can be considered such) has presented no, absolutely no evidence of any type, only wild speculation which has often already been proven false. It is perfectly acceptable to believe that God or a god created the procees of evolution, it is not okay to ignore the evidence and then to attempt to promulgate religious belief posing as bad science. This movie, Expelled, had been thoroughly debunked, killed, exhumed, autopsied, and reburied. It is a collection of lies and slander masquerading as a documentary, and is currently involved in several court imbroglios. I say these things because it bothers me, as a scientist, to have people with no training, understanding, or any real interest in actual science try to demean my work or the work of my colleagues.
Also, while I usually agree with Bruce wholeheartedly, I canoot on good conscience condone anyone seeing this movie. Not because I think it will succeed in its goal of convincing people of the martyrdom of ID proponents and the relative merits of their research. No, I believe the movie is quite incapable of that. I simply don't think anyone should pay money to the people behind this movie. See it for free, have a good laugh, but I implore people not to send any money to these liars masquerading as documentarians.
Happy 40th (the new 30) Birthday!!
Also, Happy Birthday, Sir.
All the best to you!
Thanks for the Birthday wishes :-)
Post a Comment