As you probably know, a recommendation in contemporary socialization calls for an absence of political and religious chatter, as it is usually leads to severe disagreements. While there are issues that can be independently placed within either political or religious categories, some issues – like evolution and abortion – are fluid, as they meander within both the political and the religious modes of society. These are, undoubtedly, the most dangerous issues to address, as few topics incite such inflammatory ranting on both ends of the political spectrum.
Enter Ben Stein – the presidential speechwriter, actor, commentator, game show host, and economist turned documentarian.
If you haven’t yet heard about Expelled — Stein’s new flick — I’m not surprised. In a media that is saturated with a blind acceptance of Darwinian theory (not to mention liberal inclinations), an absence of coverage is par for the course.
In his new film, Stein takes on free speech and Darwinian theory, as he addresses the overall field of science — the discipline in which these two social constructs greatly clash. While the leftist critiques seem to focus too heavily on Stein’s efforts to allegedly disprove or prove theories of creationism and evolution, media critic Brent Bozell correctly characterizes the main points of the film:
“Ben Stein’s extraordinary presentation documents how the worlds of science and academia not only crush debate on the origins of life, but also crush the careers of professors who dare to question the Darwinian hypothesis of evolution and natural selection.”
What many will likely miss are the fine details that get at just how limited the scientific community has made itself in terms of alternative ideologies. While the film shows us firsthand just how much Richard Dawkins and other Darwinists hate theology – and religion in general – it also shows us the powerful limitations that have been placed on scientists. After all, isn’t science all about free-thinking and exploration? I suppose free-thinking entails anything outside of the realm of believing in the possibility that our entirely complex world was created by an intelligent being.
In his own words, Stein characterizes his film as:
“… a controversial, soon-to-be-released documentary that chronicles my confrontation with the widespread suppression and entrenched discrimination that is spreading in our institutions, laboratories and most importantly, in our classrooms, and that is doing irreparable harm to some of the world’s top scientists, educators, and thinkers.”
Now, that’s a film you simply cannot miss.
Post written by Billy Hallowell. Visit his web site.
People from around the United States have noticed Billy Hallowell’s hard work and dedication. He has been published/featured in political and cultural books, textbooks as well as articles and websites focusing on the youth of America and its role in the future of the world. In 2003, he attended the World Bank’s conference on youth development in Paris, France. Over the years, he has become known as a major force among young people and has received prestigious journalism and community awards for his work. Since he was 15-years-old, Billy has been working through the communications industry to connect and reach out to his peers.
Technorati Tags: billy hallowell, Ben Stein, Expelled
OK cons, go to your Creation Museum theme parks and walk with the dinosaurs. But in the real world, evolution is a fact, not a theory. Take Monsanto, major contributor to midwest Repubs: Do you think their environment-destroying Roundup-ready Corn was not developed by molecular geneticists?
Darwin himself had said that if there was even one creature that didn't fit into his theory, it would make his theory shaky at best, and point to the existence of a higher power. Well, there are such creatures ---and oh yea, that's why they call it theory.....
"To suppose that the eye . . . could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species
To take evolution as fact is scientifically wrong....it's a theory for a reason. There are a few theories and all should be looked at. It's the people who don't want to admit there may be a creator that balk.
-Piltdown Man was a hoax . . . tests proved that its skull belonged to a 600-year-old woman, and its jaw to a 500-year-old orangutan from the East Indies.
-Why are there still monkeys?
"Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless." (Professor Louis Bounoure, Director of Research, National Center of Scientific Research).
"Evolution is unproved and unprovable." (Sir Arthur Keith--he wrote the foreword to the 100th edition of, Origin of the Species).
"Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever." (Dr. T. N. Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission, USA).
Oh and wait - what about Scientology views - they say it all began because of an alien.....
AhhhhhhBilly!
Actually i heard about this movie a while back on AlterNet(your fav left wing rag)......and isn't Ben Stein a former speech writer for Richard Nixon?
petunia.......
"In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena."-Wikipedia
.......and there are still monkeys because a niche exists in nature for them.
Ok you've made your excuse for the monkey's but what about transitional fossils. Darwin himself stated in the Origin of Species that the amount of transitional fossils must be enormous and the lack of discoveries of them may be the greatest argument against his theory. His word....not mine. Number of transitional fossils found to date: 0
Mitch.....finding fossils of terrestrial beings can be problematic, since most of them are destroyed before they become fossilized.
"and Darwin described the lack of transitional fossils as "the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory", but explained it by the extreme imperfection of the geological record.["-Wikipedia
Use the entire quote, if you will please
But that doesn't explain really why there are some monkeys and some did evolve, there is no "natural" selection for who evolves and who doesn't. If there is an evolution one species would die out to make room for another.
There was a conference of some scientist debating these issues a few years ago. I wish I would have kept my notes....one thing was about a giraffes neck - I think this explains it : I didn't read it yet but wanted a reference to what it was:
http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/tj/j16_1/j16_1_120-127.pdf
I don't know if this one is good either - but stumbled on it:
http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/
(sorry, at work and don't have a lot of time to look)
petunia.......life evolves to take advantage of changing conditions. Conditions that favored upright standing apes appeared and these apes evolved. Enough of the forest remained for the tree climbing apes to remain in that habitat and flourish.
Ah, Jerry Bergman is a behavioral psychologist......? Quote a scientist with credentials please. He teaches at a community college.
will reply properly when I'm not after a 12hr shift at work but for now...... just stating the monkey thing shows you haven't looked at any of the replys by Darwinists (hate using that but hey u get what I mean) to creationists crazy ideas that "disprove" the theory of evolution. Some are not so crazy I have to admit but the monkey one takes the biscuit! LOL thank you for your time
That is just in the forefront. I went to the seminar that featured leading scientists in my section of the country. They had a lot of things to say about why Darwinism has failed....and more and more scientists are agreeing.....I have to find my notes. There are many things that discredit Darwin's theory - but they teach it as fact....not one of other theories....that's what bothers me. If you all want to think your descendants were monkeys - more power to ya!
again petunia.....
"...................A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena."-Wikipedia
Creationism isn't even a theory because there is NO "logical self-consistent model" which explains it. In other words, creationism and rationalism are mutually exclusive.
i have no problem with the bible, but not in science class thank-you.
"If you all want to think your descendants were monkeys - more power to ya!"
And we are NOT descendants of monkeys........, however, apes and humans had a common ancestor.
Don't get too picky with me DW - the time may say I posted at 6:48 pm but it was after midnight....how do I change that?
Monkeys, apes, whatever....they all throw their feces and pick lice out of each other's hair.
Why not teach all the beliefs of the beginning of life? In school I was taught about them all (well, a lot anyway)...they have more credibility than Darwin's theory....it's been discredited in too many ways. It's not a "self-consistent model" anymore - there are too many holes to teach it as theory....there is no vast body of empirical data supporting the theory...if we are being technical about the definition. Darwinism should not be taught as a theory in the strictest sense of the word. Maybe as a layman's "theory" or idea of how....but not as science.
Great quote:
"The basic difficulty in explaining how life could have begun is that all living organisms are extremely complex and Darwinian selection cannot perform the designing even in theory until living organisms already exist and are capable of reproducing their kind."
Phillip E. Johnson "Darwin on Trial"-----I encourage you all to read it. This has encouraged me to read it again (in my spare time - haha)
I wanted noted that many Christians believe in microevolution or variation.
They believe there are changes in a species over time such as skin color in humans determined by location and the sun, the stronger of all the animals surviving and producing stronger animals etc. But species beginning in a primordial soup and eventually becoming elephants, apes, humans etc....phooey. That takes more faith... believing something as complex as the human eye, just kept adjusting itself until it was perfect.
oops...want it noted....for those watching spelling, grammar, etc.
petunia,
find me a scientist who doubts natural selection is the process that drives change on a biological level. Phillip E. Johnson is a lawyer, not a scientist.
MikeS......you should have failed science.....and logic.
"As we all know, once upon a time, scientific consensus told the world that the Earth was flat and the center of the Universe."
No, it was ignorance that told us the earth was flat......
"Around 330 BC, Aristotle provided observational evidence for the spherical Earth"-Wikipedia
My take is that conservatives must be lazy, because you could have easily found this out for yourself. Yes, with conservatives history is repeating itself in ways that would make Joseph Goebbels proud.
David
For the record Wikipedia is not a reliable source. If I was trying to quote Darwin correctly I would have used ".....". It was just the idea of his statement.
If people and dinosaurs have evolved over millions of years there should have been millions of more species that have existed than there are living today. Yet, we find thousands of dinosaur fossils that seemed to have made it alright but there are NO transitional fossils. You cannot explain that away with the fossils were destroyed. If there were that many different species we would have found something by now.
re:mitch
Why is it you say there are no transitional fossils? http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html
A reference and now the opinion.......... there are transitional fossils and I've now pointed you in their general direction! and all it took was a google search. you're welcome
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/compare.html
secondly........ it seems some fossils have gone through a period of transition of a different kind. Deciding on the classification of fossils as human or ape appears to pose a problem for creationists.
mitch
"If people and dinosaurs have evolved over millions of years there should have been millions of more species that have existed than there are living today."
Ok, from my freshman geology class i learned of the Permian extinction........this is but one of the die offs of life in earth's history as shown by the geological record. The more famous mass extinction is at the close of the Cretaceous period. Enroll in a few historical geology class, maybe you'll learn something.
David Walters,
I am in college and have been for 2 years and have taken a very elementary geology class. I also have learned that 90% of the college population is EXTREMELY Liberal. Also, trying to argue evolution against a creationist using evolutionist beliefs (Permian extinction) is white noise and contradictive to your point. I don't like to be bitter with people and I'm sorry if I come off that way.
But hey, Ben Stein is smarter than both of us and he doesn't support evolution.
I just cannot believe with all the evidence of evolution having holes in it that we teach it as fact in the schools --- people need to read things OTHER than that written by Darwinists. A LARGE group of scientists DO NOT agree with evolution.... I'm so glad Ben Stien came out with this movie ---LIBERALS>>>>>go see it! You don't have to agree to be informed.
mitch....no offense was taken. (But i can win Ben Stein's money......)
Creationism is a pseudo-science like astrology. I have no problem with it(creationism) as long as it isn't in a science class.
Mr. Stein is a political hack making a buck off of other people's ignorance. I'll go see the movie when it's free.......i'm sure it has some entertainment value(like his show). Actually Ben can be quite funny; -he can sell eye drops. But as an expert in the earth sciences&biology-I don't think so... And you are right about "white noise" .......i'm not going to change any minds that are already made up. There may be open minds reading however.
And Michael Moore, the "documentary" film maker, is an expert on firearms, government, war, healthcare and whatever other crap he tends to spew.
thank God for people like Ben Stein . we need more of them.
http://blogginontheright.blogspot.com/
On DNA day, I'm celebrating the passage of Leahy's The Justice For All Act, which passed the House 393 to 14. It prevents discrimination by government agencies and health care companies based on DNA makeup.
I haven't commented on this thread since my original post, but have been cringing at many of the comments. Two points:
1) When scientists debate Darwinism, it is over the fine points, not its validity. I worked in Genentech's founder's lab at UCLA, and have taken many upper division genetics courses. Most scientists believe that straight-line Darwinism is not accurate, but that there are mechanisms such as repetitive-sequence DNA that accelerate the survival or demise of mutations based on environmental pressure.
2) The comment that God created the universe, then put evolution in place afterwards as a mechanism for his flock to use is ludicrous. That is a little too easy, don't you think? Christianity has a long history of violent suppression of scientific advancement (Galileo, etc.) then later when the knowledge is irrefutable, giving 'God' credit for it.
Can WE Support Mccain? A man who endorses the idea that the CATHOLIC CHURCH IS A WHORE!!!!! Mr Mccain over 25% OF AMERICA IS CATHOLIC AND YOUR VIEWS ON OUR RELIGION IS PARHETIC AND SHOWS YOU FOR THE RACIST & BIGOT YOU ARE!!!!
DONT VOTE MCCAIN
Brian dude, I think you hit the wrong comments section
dissolvethecorporation, there is no way to argue against the existence of God, as that premise is untestable. Saying that God creating evolution is "too easy" is just like the anti-evolutionists saying that people are "too complex" to be the product solely of natural evolutionary forces. It's and opinion, not an argument.
The main problem with the ID conjecture is not that it presumes the existence of God, but that it denies the proven fact that modern man evolved over thousands of years from lower lifeforms. Any belief system that takes into account verified facts such as the evolution of man has to be considered plausible. The big debate between creationism and evolution is not over whether God created man, or even over competing theories of the origins of modern man - it's about accepting or denying the widespread scientific evidence available.
If this debate were about the origins of the pyramids of Egypt, the equivalent creationist argument would not be about whether the pyramids were created by people or by aliens, but whether the pyramids existed at all.