Posted on 04/18/2008 4:04:57 PM PDT by PurpleMountains
I just returned home from seeing the premiere of Ben Stein's new movie, "Expelled:No Intelligence Allowed". I was amazed that such an important movie that addresses serious questions would be so enjoyable and have such great entertainment value. The movie exposes Darwinism and the crushing of scientific inquiry going on in this country. Darwinism is the foundation science of modern liberalism, and just as liberalism is a failed philosophy and imposes political correctness to stifle debate, so is some of Darwinian theory wrong, and scientific study and debate about it is simiarly stifled. I urge everyone to see this movie and spread its messsage.
(Excerpt) Read more at forthegrandchildren.blogspot.com ...
I just returned from watching this as well. If you believe the press it is about creationism vs. Darwinism. It is not. It is about academic freedom or the lack thereof.
Before you spout, watch the movie. It is thought provoking, fun and intelligent. You may not agree with its premise, but it will make you think.
I really don't think that would be appropriate since there is no basis for ID that rests on anything like hard science. Since there is no answer to the "Who designed the designer" question and there never will be it is a scientific dead end. Darwinism may be an incomplete theory but it is the best we have. After all, a lot can happen in 10-15 billion years. Or even 2 to 3.
If the movie isn’t about creationism / religion why does the promo kit contain material from the discovery institute?
We going to see it tonight. I’m looking forward to it.
In 1987, The Supreme Court of the United States ruled that teaching creationism in public schools violated the separation of church and state in Edwards vs. Aquilard.
In a similar later case, Kitzmiller vs. The Dover Area School District involving the school’s acquisition of Of Pandas and People, it was proven in court that the publishers and the people who financed the purchase lied in depositions when they stated that Intelligent Design wasn’t just another term for Creationism. They did this by showing that dozens of passages in the pre-1987 Edwards vs. Aquilard copies of the book used “Creation”, while later versions substituted “Intelligent Design” in its place.
The entire Intelligent Design movement is a dishonest, legalistic Trojan horse specifically intended to teach creationism in public school even though it is against the law.
Knowing ID’ers are liars, lawbreakers, and hypocrites.
Complete transcripts of Kitzmiller vs. Dover can be found here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dover/kitzmiller_v_dover.html
Even the famous Tennessee "monkey law" of Scopes trial fame didn't outlaw the teaching of evolution. It only forbade public school teachers to teach that men came from animals.
Why all the fuss? If it's really only about science, then it ought to be like the Shapley-Curtis debate. Nobody got all bent out of shape about the "other side" getting a hearing in that case.
Anyway, I have yet to see the movie, so I can't speak to its actual thrust. Soon, though.
We may never know who designed the designer, but the focus on information theory may change your mind about the hard science aspects one day, and how can we ever know if every scientist who approaches the subject is crushed?
ID never offers positive proof . They just attack natural selection. The whole movement is a fraud.
It seems entertaining, which is the essence of why I go to see movies.
Getting into a debate about the imponderable is a silly waste of time.
Krebs Cycle ... explain using Darwin’s theories.
“Knowing ID’ers are liars, lawbreakers, and hypocrites;”
The movie is about identifying and overcoming this kind of Stalinism.
Why are you leaving out 150+ years worth of advances in evolutionary science?
Even Darwin explicitly stated that it was simply a theory; not a proof. Until something better came along. To say that "Evolution" as argued today has been proven scientifically, but ID has not, is to simply attempt to not derail the discussion. ID does not claim anything as proven either, nor seeks to ban the teaching of evlolution. It seeks simply to be given a voice.
On the other hand, the reverse is not true, due primarily to the Gay agenda.
“ID never offers positive proof . They just attack natural selection. The whole movement is a fraud.”
Isn’t that the truth.
You state that with seemingly religious certainty. Would anything constitute "proof" in your eyes?
Behe, the Krebs Cycle, and Models of Origins of Complex Biochemical Structures
Post of the Month: December 1999
http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/dec99.html
You fail at research.
The isn’t maths. Maths deals with proofs - not science.
I am happy to defend natural selection, but you are the one claiming a new "theory". Offer some empirical evidence for ID or shut up.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.