02 February 2010

science after Stein

"Immoral," "Toxic," "Batshit Crazy," "Sleazy," and my personal favorite quote; "...loathsome piece of propaganda that has ever skulked its way into the theater." What documentary film are they talking about? It's a film that states that evolution is not what it's all cracked up to be and how and how you might lose your job if you say it out loud, but from these and other overkill quotes from film critics, you'd think it was a film denying the Holocaust or the killing of the poor. The film is called "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed." hosted by Ben Stein.

Ben Stein is annoying as fuck with his monotone way of speaking and looks like him, but the film isn't about Ben Stein or his shattering academy award worthy performance in "Ferris Bueller's Day Off" (critics are having a field day playing up "Bueller" as if it somehow takes away from the points this documentary brings up. If Andrew McCarthy from the teen flick "Weekend at Bernie's" narrated a docu about Einstein, so what).

The beginning part of the film has interviews with several people (evolutionary biologist, astrophysicist, neurosurgeon professor, rising journalist, etc) who claimed they suffered the consequences of questioning the theory of evolution, with lose of job, smear campaigns, and blacklisting. of course the universities and institutions involved are going to deny that's the case because that would open them up to lawsuits every which way from Heaven, so they give excuses to the firings with saying everything but; "they kept on eating the bag lunches not their own in the teacher's lounge." These "expelled" that the film presents payed a painful price for not cow towing to the dogma of evolution and speaking their truth, and still do. When the film came out soon a website popped up questioning the claims of those spotlighted in the documentary (this page). Here's rabid evolutionist involved in character assassination again (see this page that counters what expelledexposed.com says about these individuals). Apart from those who came out in support of ID publicly, other scientist interviewed in silhouette on the documentary fearing they would lose their jobs if they came out publicly.

One thing the critics of the film don't touch is the mathematical improbability of evolution according to Molecular Biologist Doug Axe (he's not the first to bring up the mathematical improbability of evolution or even the best one, but he's the one discussing it on this film). According to him, life as we know it now coming from chance is 1 in a trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion trillion. Evolutionist counter the mathematical argument with saying the only thing they can; "It's not IMPOSSIBLE." Well, yeah, NOTHING is impossible, but it's IMPROBABLE and that's what evolutionist don't get, do they even hear how seriously fucked up that sounds when they are the ones always bitching of wanting to stick to hard facts? It takes much more of a leap of faith with believing in a mathematical improbability this all came about by chance than to believe we were created by a creator we can't explain with our finite mind. I wish the film would have brought up the golden ratio of Phi that is found in everything from nature, to human DNA, to our solar system. Some believe it to be the signature of God, a mathematical stamp God put on everything that is the equivalent to our "Made in Taiwan" you see all over the place.

I do have one issue with the film, it's how evolution was the driving force to eugenics in Nazi Germany. There's no denying Hitler used Darwin to a twisted end, but Hitler used every excuse under the sun to annihilate every non-Aryan, Darwin was just another excuse, but it's interesting that the term "Eugenics" was coined by Darwin's cousin.

The evolutionist interviewed in the film, come off as sweaty, smarmy, fidgety, and cold, calling religion "evil" and those that believe in God "idiots." That's why some are now saying they were "hoodwinked " into appearing on the film, (the questions asked them were gone over before the interviews and were pre-approved by the participants by e-mail days before), they just don't like the fact they looking like the nasties they are and I notice none are suing the producers of the movie.

Stein in the film makes a case that ID believers, and even those who even give it the possibility of it being true, are stymied by those that think they know better.


  1. Great post. I think that Ben Stein is a bit grating as well. He's pompous and self-involved, but he's smart as hell so I guess he can get away with it.

    I haven't seen Expelled, but I've read a lot of articles arguing about it and the science behind it.

    What always strikes me is the fact that people still seem to believe that faith and science must be at odds- that religion hates science and science disproves the need for religion. I mean, how dated is that sort of mindset? I personally believe that religion and science can be quite happily married. If God is the author of all things, then he is the author of the natural order as well.

    And as my husband will point out rather tongue in cheek- "maybe God guided evolution just to fuck with us."

  2. When SHOWTIME aired the documentary they recieved hundreds of subscription cancellations, why this extreme feeling from critic and public? I wondered if the reason people get all twisted about the possability of a creator is because if their is a creator, that means you have a creator to answer to, and that scares the shit out of people.

  3. Hmmmm. I believe that science and spirituality can coexist, BUT spirituality as opposed to organised religion. I believe there are forces at work that we can't control, but i hesitate to label them "God". That's just me. Whatever makes ya happy.
    I hasn't seen you over at my bloggykins for awhile...I'm hoping i haven't said anything that's offended you Ab? I'm not into God stuff, but i still think you're cool :)

  4. All of your posts have been drawings of your blog followers, I don't know these people and I don't care about anyone who doesn't kick it with me on my blog. Give me more Asylum Dolly and less "Jorg."

    Organised religion is just alot of people coming together who believe in the same thing, it's only when they start acting like dicks and throwing their weight around as a group is when people say "Oh shit! Here comes Organized Religion!" Organised religion just wants to eat the small bones you don't use anyways, you won't even miss them.

  5. There may yet be a paradigm shift with ID. Most biologists (and other scientists) I know are willing to admit limits to what they know about the evolutionary process, but halt at some of the more assertive claims to certainty offered by many ID advocates. I find it a much more interesting debate in the nuanced details than in the broad strokes. And let's face it, Stein really focuses primarily on the broad strokes.

    (I find it interesting that our culture would produce this film and Bill Mahr's "Religulous" at more or less the same time. Opposite sides of similar issues, but both use similar tactics in the "reporting" and come off making what could be interesting topics more about being polemical and snide.)

    A good scientist doesn't rule out ID as a possibility, but reasonably demands proof before accepting it as a leading explanation. Long before ID came on the scene, Stephen Jay Gould offered rigorously supported interpretations of the evolutionary process that did not rely on random chance and severed species mutation from "natural selection" alone. But he did so without recourse to ID. By which, I simply mean that a better approach to the issue wouldn't dismiss ID arguments out of hand but also shouldn't accept strawman depictions of current scientific understandings of evolution (evolutionary biology has moved beyond Darwin, people!).

    I am a little less optimistic about the harmlessness of organized religions, too many of which seem invested in asserting truths and making judgments (almost always against non-believers) based on them. I have no problem with people who share similar beliefs enjoying fellowship. But when that fellowship starts leading to policies and social sanctions requiring that others accept those articles of faith as fact, I have problems.

    From my perspective, if your faith system requires that your people be the "winners," then you haven't evolved spiritually very much (intelligently or otherwise).

  6. I don't see biologist giving in an inch to ID, if anything, I see them digging their heels in the sand. Stein lets the anti-ID folks speak for themselves, and they do a pretty good job of cutting their own throat with how they look like they are about to bust at the seams with keeping in the hate they have for ID (One leading scientist in the film who claims the mechanism to start life one Earth piggy-backed on mystical crystals falling from space looked like he was about to throttle Stein for not swallowing this theory).

    You're right, A good scientist doesn't rule out ID as a possibility, but that's exactly what they're doing. Gould is a black sheep with evolutionist, but he's the first to say ID is bunk. He's no friend to ID believers.

    I hear you with what you're saying about organized religion. man has a bad habit of giving others a beat down if they don't believe as they do, it's the nature of man. I do believe though that there are absolutes in religion, some things are wrong, some things are right.


I eat your comments with jam and butter.