• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Tackling Ben Stein's "Expelled"

The skepTick said:
You should check on the three professors who claim to be a victim of the academic establishment and were fired for teaching intelligent design/the problems with evolution.

For example, Dr. Caroline Crocker was not fired from George Mason University...they just did not renew her contract as she was only a term assistant professor. And her behavior goes back before the one incident she mentions. Check out ratemyprofessor.com, and you can see some students complaining about her proselytizing way back in 2003.
Click to expand...


Another professor the IDiots have been crowing about is Gonzales, an astronomy professor who apparently didn't get tenure at his university and is crying "religious discrimination!" I'm not sure he appears in Stein's movie, but the IDiots will make noise about his situation nonetheless.

Basically, this guy had done some research in astrophysics as a new professor, but then he got into the whole ID-creationism thing. After that, his research and number of published papers dropped off drastically. And any college professor at a major university will tell you that, as a non-tenured faculty member, if you don't publish papers and do research you're basically hanging yourself. That's where the whole phrase "publish or perish" comes from.

For more detail on the whole Gonzales issue, check out these links:

Pandas Thumb Blog - Iowa Citizens for Science Press Release on Gonzalez Case: http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/12/iowa-citizens-f-1.html

A Handy Graphic/Timeline of Gonzalez's Publication Drop: http://scienceblogs.com/neurotopia/2007/12/a_handy_graphictimeline_of_gon.php

I hope that info is helpful!
 
Last edited:
Imrational said:
CareyP74, thanks, but I know tons of arguments against ID and creationism... and what I need are arguments specifically rebutting some of Stein's points in the movie.
Click to expand...

What are the points being made in the movie? Listing the ones you know of here will save everyone from having to waste time finding them.
 
MattusMaximus said:
For more detail on the whole Gonzales issue, check out these links:

Pandas Thumb Blog - Iowa Citizens for Science Press Release on Gonzalez Case: http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2007/12/iowa-citizens-f-1.html

A Handy Graphic/Timeline of Gonzalez's Publication Drop: http://scienceblogs.com/neurotopia/2007/12/a_handy_graphictimeline_of_gon.php

I hope that info is helpful!
Click to expand...

And this one.

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q...safe=off&as_ylo=2002&as_yhi=2004&start=0&sa=N


(I included the term "planet" in the search criteria because there were other authors named G. Gonzalez. I thought it likely that all of his papers would include the term "planet".)



At the time it was announced that Gonzalez would not be granted tenure, I remember reading that the quality of his recent publications had been lacking. However, the quantity was not in doubt. I am in no way qualified to say whether Gonzalez "should" have received tenure or "should not" have received tenure. However, one of the links posted said he published no papers as the principle author during the period 2002-2004. That is a simple assertion whose truth is much easier to verify. He did.
 
Where to begin... Ben Stein appeared on today's The 700 Club and I serendipitously caught his segment (maybe God wanted me to). It followed a short prepared piece on the C/ID debate which had some interview with a Texas SBOE member named Dunbar I need to work against.

Anyway, Pat Robertson started with a tangent into our financial situation where Stein criticized the avarice and greed of Wall Street and noted that while Bill Clinton stained the blue dress Oval Office, he at least left us with a budget surplus, which Dubyah should have used to pay down the Debt, and how Supply Side economics was a phantasm and how the rich would have to pay their share of taxes to get us out of this current mess (and they could afford it)... so I'm like "there's the pragmatic, fiscally responsible Ben Stein I know and once loved"... then they started talking about Expelled.

Ben started by noting that "Darwinism" = "Social Darwinism" which means the "strong" must erradicate the weak and without that mentality Nazism couldn't have existed and he, as a Jew knew what it meant to be on the downside of Social Darwinism so he had an epiphany.

He then went on to ask, why doesn't "Darwinism" explain where life comes from, or why the planets orbit the way they do or how light originated and I started yelling at my TV louder than I had during the "evolution=Hitler" comments.

He shilled the "free speech/academic freedom//dissent" angle a few more times and in the ultimate irony, two non scientists, he and Robertson, tried to define what the actual scientifice process was.

It was astounding to watch such a clear thinker when it comes to the economy and macroeconomics switch to woo mode when Robertson brought him back to discussing the topic of his movie.

CBN/The 700 Club might or might not post the footage of the interview, but since it's early some of you might be able to catch re-airings of it during the day today and here's the 700 Club link in case it actually shows up on there.
http://www.cbn.com/700club/
 
Check the link in my sig for an example of how I believe movies like this ought to be dealt with.


Though I'd probably get kicked out of the theater for shouting out riffs in the middle of the screening. :D
 
Dude, if you really want to pop the “Expelled” bubble and it will be all over the right wing news media channels, Michele Medved will act like it’s the second coming.
Anyway, do a little research into how much money Ben Stein has invested into companies that use ID science to (find oil, bio research, make new drugs) of course, the answer will be $0. Show me the money Ben.
 
Last edited:
I don't see any facts here to refute. Maybe they're just being coy, and trying to get people into the theaters before they tip their hand, but from the trailer and the CNN interview, it looks like they're not making ID arguments at all. All I hear here is "teach the controversy" fluff, and "we're victims of religious persecution!" rather than any scientific argument. I suspect the film will be more of the same -- some vague "argument from incredulity" as the only justification for ID, coupled with the dangerous eugenics/genocide implications of something called "social Darwinism," and a generous helping of "poor persecuted us!"

The argument from incredulity will probably be the hardest to deal with, as that's where many people begin and end. It's not just that there are still unanswered questions in the theory of evolution, it's that most people are not willing to educate themselves about the answers which have been suggested.

Equating social Darwinism with evolution (or "neo-Darwinism," which seems to be the fundies' favorite buzzword at the moment) is like inventing something called "social physics" and whining that without it, there would have been no Hiroshima. Genocide as a method of cultural conquest probably predates the bible, but certainly the bible is chock full of examples of the technique. I'm inclined to label it "social Yahweh-ism" and toss it back in their faces, beginning with the account of the flood, and following it up with a couple of verses which advocate killing all the men, women, children, goats, cattle, chickens... I'm sure more level heads can find more diplomatic ways to handle it, but this idea is the one that angers me the most. Science doesn't stop teaching truth just because aspects of that truth may be abused by people with unpleasant agendas.

Finally, while I accept that "teaching the controversy" is really no more valid in the evolution/creationism area than it is in the chemistry/alchemy or astronomy/astrology area, I personally would be willing to go that route. There is an argument to be made that this just gives unmerited credibility to an untenable set of assertions, but there is also an argument that refusing to engage suggests that evolutionary theorists have something to hide, or are trying to suppress truth. I think addressing it head on is a better tactic, but that's just me. There's no need to run away from this fight.
 
JoeEllison said:
Here's the video of Stein on Robertson:
Click to expand...

Thank you sir.

Bokonon, I hate to reply to your lenghty, well thought out post with a question, but I have to ask, are you familiar witht he premise/content of "Expelled"? It delves not a whit into the scientific arena, but tries to make the case that there is an atheist/evolutionist... and apparently Nazist Orthodoxy amongst academia not only won't allow "teaching the controversy" - a subject worthy of tengent unto itself, but won't allow any dissenting view from "Darwinism" (the straw man Creationist/ID version, not the scientific theory derived from The Origin of the Species). The movie doesn't base it's claims on scientific grounds, but on academic free speech grounds, which makes it all the more dangerous.

One of the great ironies of Ben Stein's involvement with "Expelled" and his claims about "Darwinism" suppressing the unfettered exchange of ideas on campus is that his compliants about the supposed quashing of ID could be claimed by folks who deny the Holocaust... a Godwinesque argument he is quick to use in his baseless and strawmannish objection to evolution.

Ugh! I have paragraphs more to rant about the inanity and near insanity of the C/ID "argument" about equal time - already struck down by the Supreme Court in Edwards case and given a smack down in the Dover case - but, why, why why, would C/IDers attach themselves to someone like Stein who carries such political baggage with him?

For full disclosure, I still like Ben Stein and agree with his comments on the economy under the Bush administration, but this "Expelled" thing is going to take me a while to get him back in my good graces... reruns of "Win Ben Steins Money" or not. :(
 
A good friend of mine made a 7 1/2 page critique on the trailer. That's a full page per minute! I was going to attach it as a word document... but they only allow 13KB (or something close to that) for the upload of word documents. Instead I zipped it (they allow up to 250kb zip uploads).

If you're interested, give it a view!

It could come in handy for imrational's short pointing out "Expelled's" flaws.
 

Attachments

Imrational said:
Added! Thanks.

PZ Myers, who is a scientist who will be appearing in Expelled, has agreed to be interviewed by me!!!!

Professor Myers was filmed by Expelled under false pretenses. Apparently, they did quite the hatchet job on his footage.

With this, and some basic points, I think I can make a decent rebuttal film!
Click to expand...

After this it should make for a fun interview :)
 
Good grief. I just watched that trailer.

Did they really complain about someone being "punished" for trying to get a creationist paper published, and then use Galileo as someone who had no problems publishing his work?

Did they not think people might be aware of y'know, the trial, the house arrest, the banning of his work etc. etc? I know subtle forms of revisionism make good propaganda, but I can't believe this film is anything but preaching to the converted.

Still, good to see Godwin's law being replicated once more :) That one is certainly standing the test of time, even if ID isn't!
 
I don't know how effective a serious discussion of the issues would be for the target audience. I would concentrate more on the tactics used by the movies producers, especially the gratuitous Nazi references. If you can turn Nazi comparisons into somewhat of a running joke before they even see the film, they'll have trouble taking them seriously in the film itself.
 
UnrepentantSinner said:
Bokonon, I hate to reply to your lenghty, well thought out post with a question, but I have to ask, are you familiar witht he premise/content of "Expelled"? It delves not a whit into the scientific arena, but tries to make the case that there is an atheist/evolutionist... and apparently Nazist Orthodoxy amongst academia not only won't allow "teaching the controversy" - a subject worthy of tengent unto itself, but won't allow any dissenting view from "Darwinism" (the straw man Creationist/ID version, not the scientific theory derived from The Origin of the Species). The movie doesn't base it's claims on scientific grounds, but on academic free speech grounds, which makes it all the more dangerous.
Click to expand...
I guess I'm not that familiar with the premise, but your summary seems to match what I've seen so far. I'm not sure that making the "academic free speech" argument is inherently dangerous. I don't know how much time is devoted to teaching evolution in K-12 classes now. My understanding is that many teachers avoid the subject altogether because they're afraid of protests. My experience with creationist/ID ideas here and elsewhere leads me to believe that there is no single counter-theory which ID proponents could agree on anyway. Their strategy seems to be mostly to attempt to poke holes in the theory of evolution, assuming that their pet alternative (YEC, OEC, panspermia, whatever) would win by default if only they could topple the TOE.

I think it's more important to teach scientific ways of thinking and evaluating evidence than it is to teach facts, especially in K-12, and especially when it comes to evolution. If students feel passionately, they're more likely to put the effort into research and thoughtful consideration. Personally, I wouldn't have a problem with letting every high school biology classroom devote a couple of weeks to a debate on the subject. Let the kids know what kind of objections the Kent Hovind crowd raises, and why they're bogus. Let them dissect some VenomFangX videos from YouTube, and see what the facts really are. Sure, the creationists see it as a toe in the door of academia, but I see it as the toe on which science can use a judo move to flip it on out the window.

There is lots of crackpot science that is excluded from the classroom. The big difference is that most of that crackpot science just has one or two crackpots as advocates, instead of the Christian Coalition. If I was a science teacher, the creationists would be BEGGING to let their children be excused from my "Teach the Controversy" sessions.

One last point. Sometimes, "crackpot science" actually has ideas worth considering, even today. The David Botstein's microarray method for evaluating genes was universally dismissed when it was first proposed. Peer review alone would have quashed the idea, but Botstein persevered. I don't expect anything like that to come out of ID "science," and I don't think it's necessary for the research scientists themselves to continue to revisit the subject, but I'm not too opposed to letting students have a taste of it.
 
Rational: Can I have my rebuttal movie shown after yours?
Fundy: Sure, as long as it meets my standards.

You’ll find that the only rebuttals his standards will allow are ones so weak that they lend credibility to his movie.
 
Last edited:
Evolutionary biologist PZ Myers is 'Expelled'!

Here's another big development that speaks to the inherent hypocrisy behind these IDiots who are promoting "Expelled"... PZ Myers was 'expelled' from a screening last night in Minnesota and wrote a blog entry about it:

The Panda's Thumb - Expelled!

"There is a rich, deep kind of irony that must be shared. I'm blogging this from the Apple store in the Mall of America, because I'm too amused to want to wait until I get back to my hotel room.

I went to attend a screening of the creationist propaganda movie, Expelled, a few minutes ago. Well, I tried … but I was Expelled! It was kind of weird — I was standing in line, hadn't even gotten to the point where I had to sign in and show ID, and a policeman pulled me out of line and told me I could not go in. I asked why, of course, and he said that a producer of the film had specifically instructed him that I was not to be allowed to attend. The officer also told me that if I tried to go in, I would be arrested. I assured him that I wasn't going to cause any trouble.

I went back to my family and talked with them for a while, and then the officer came back with a theater manager, and I was told that not only wasn't I allowed in, but I had to leave the premises immediately. Like right that instant."

That's only the first couple of paragraphs. Read his entire entry, because the very end of it will make you piss yourself with laughter. The irony is so thick you can cut it with a knife! :D

EDIT: Nuts, I just saw there was another thread on this very point. I got scooped :(
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom