Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New Film Investigates Crushing of Dissent from Darwinian Orthodoxy
LifeSiteNews.com ^ | August 30, 2007 | Hilary White

Posted on 08/31/2007 3:21:59 AM PDT by monomaniac

New Film Investigates Crushing of Dissent from Darwinian Orthodoxy

By Hilary White

August 30, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - "If you have questioned Darwinism, that's it, your career is over."

"I was viewed as an intellectual terrorist."

"I have been told to shut up."

The quotes come from interviews with research scientists featured in a new film, "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed," starring the New York writer and intellectual Ben Stein. The film, set for release in February 2008, documents the crushing of any investigation or questioning of materialist Darwinism that is the orthodox position of most of the scientific establishment.

In the trailer for "Expelled", Stein is seen addressing an audience saying, "There are people out there who want to keep science in a little box, where it can't possibly touch God…Scientists are not allowed to even think thoughts that involve an intelligent creator."

A PRNewswire release says that Stein, a lawyer, economist, former presidential speechwriter, author and social commentator, was "stunned" when he investigated the debate surrounding Intelligent Design theory and Darwinism. Stein uncovers what he says is an elitist scientific establishment that actively suppresses any research that may lead to questioning of the accepted Darwinian theory.

The film features interviews with scientists and thinkers including biologists, astronomers, chemists and philosophers who have had their ideas suppressed for questioning adherence to the materialist theory.

"Big Science in this area of biology has lost its way," says Stein. "Scientists are supposed to be allowed to follow the evidence wherever it may lead, no matter what the implications are. Freedom of inquiry has been greatly compromised, and this is not only anti-American, it's anti-science. Its anti-the whole concept of learning."

Stein writes that the Darwinian orthodoxy in science is as dangerous politically as it is antithetical to free scientific inquiry.

"America is not America without freedom," he writes. "Human beings are supposed to live in a state of freedom. Freedom is not conferred by the state: as our founders said, and as Martin Luther King repeated, freedom is God-given."

"A huge part of this freedom is freedom of inquiry."

Expelled was produced by Premise Media and marketed by Motive Entertainment, the company that has spearheaded The Passion of the Christ, Polar Express and The Chronicles of Narnia.

View the trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxGyMn_-J3c

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Over 400 Eminent Scientists Sign "A Scientific Dissent from Darwinism"
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2005/jul/05072204.html

Over 500 PhD Scientists Proclaim Their Doubts About Darwin's Theory
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/feb/06022204.html

Read Ben Stein's weblog:
http://www.expelledthemovie.com/blog/


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: antiscience; benstei; benstein; biology; darwin; evolution; expelled; film; freedom; freedomofinquiry
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last
To: webboy45
You either believe in ID or in magic. My daughter’s evolution professor was at least honest enough to say, “and then the magic happens.”

On the one hand you have "...and then the magic happens." On the other hand you have "...and then a miracle occurs." So if you claim evolution has no scientific basis then how can you say ID does?

21 posted on 08/31/2007 8:08:50 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur

LMFAO


22 posted on 08/31/2007 8:11:22 AM PDT by Shryke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: webboy45
The Evidence (Physics, Astronomy, Chemistry, Biology, etc....) supporting Evolution does not require supernatural intervention. That's what irks the ID crowd.

The knowledge there is no evidence of the ID god scares them.

23 posted on 08/31/2007 8:17:22 AM PDT by GreenOgre (mohammed is the false prophet of a false god.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

The evidence of evolution (macro evolution) is non-existant. What irks the ID crowd is that one theory has become dogma without supporting evidence.


24 posted on 08/31/2007 8:25:11 AM PDT by webboy45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: webboy45
A question:
What specific evidence do you have that supports ID?

25 posted on 08/31/2007 8:31:26 AM PDT by Boxen (If we can hit that bull's-eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards...Checkmate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Then who is the intelligent designer?

One heck of an engineer.

26 posted on 08/31/2007 8:36:31 AM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (NY Times: "fake but accurate")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: webboy45
What irks the ID crowd is that one theory has become dogma without supporting evidence.

So your complaint isn't that a theory without supporting evidence has become dogma. It's that your theory without supporing evidence isn't the one.

27 posted on 08/31/2007 8:36:31 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan
One heck of an engineer.

A rambling wreck from Georgia Tech, no doubt.

28 posted on 08/31/2007 8:37:46 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: webboy45
The evidence of evolution (macro evolution) is non-existant. What irks the ID crowd is that one theory has become dogma without supporting evidence.

The evidence is non-existant to creationists because they absolutely refuse to see it--for religious reasons. Evolutionary scientists have no problem seeing the huge amount of evidence that is out there, with more coming each year.

And to paraphrase your second statement: What irks scientists is that dogma wants to become science without supporting evidence.

29 posted on 08/31/2007 8:38:13 AM PDT by Coyoteman (Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur
Even evolution attempts to explain the origin of life down to the very beginning.

And when evolutionists discover that God originated life, then what?

Do they become "creationists"?

30 posted on 08/31/2007 8:44:17 AM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (NY Times: "fake but accurate")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan
And when evolutionists discover that God originated life, then what?

Great question. I'll give you the answer: they continue with their work researching how life evolves. What did you think would happen?

31 posted on 08/31/2007 8:52:41 AM PDT by Shryke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan

Just out of curiousity, but how do you think they’ll “discover” something like that?


32 posted on 08/31/2007 8:53:48 AM PDT by Boxen (If we can hit that bull's-eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards...Checkmate!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan
And when evolutionists discover that God originated life, then what?

If you insist in making religion into science then when science finds evidence which support evolution, what does that say about your religion?

33 posted on 08/31/2007 8:55:07 AM PDT by Non-Sequitur (Save Fredericksburg. Support CVBT.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Boxen
Proponents of ID avoid identifying the intelligent designer(god or otherwise) as a way of keeping it scientifically acceptable:

That's because "modern science" precludes the supernatural. It assumes a priori that there is nothing outside the natural. Hence it (modern science) presupposes the philosophy of materialism.

34 posted on 08/31/2007 8:55:35 AM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (NY Times: "fake but accurate")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Non-Sequitur; metmom
" I guess that elitist scientific establishment conspiracy isn't working very well?"

But their Groupies are nevertheless working very hard; that's why you're here, isn't it?

35 posted on 08/31/2007 8:59:06 AM PDT by editor-surveyor (Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: atlaw
It's such a bizarre and blatantly obvious bit of fraud that I am at a loss to explain its persistence.

If it's an obvious fraud then you must believe they are liars and hucksters. And don't really believe what they say they believe.

Otherwise you end up with the argument that these very learned and credentialed men are stupid fools.


36 posted on 08/31/2007 9:06:51 AM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (NY Times: "fake but accurate")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

Go Ben!


37 posted on 08/31/2007 9:07:48 AM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan
That's because "modern science" precludes the supernatural. It assumes a priori that there is nothing outside the natural. Hence it (modern science) presupposes the philosophy of materialism.

Bullshit. Science precludes making assertions about things that cannot be studied by empirical methods.

No phenomenon that can be studied is off limits.

Quantum phenomena are weirder than anything imagined by philosophy, but they are consistent and regular, and lend themselves to observation, experimentation and quantification.

38 posted on 08/31/2007 9:08:42 AM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Coyoteman
Evolutionary scientists have no problem seeing the huge amount of evidence that is out there, with more coming each year.

"Evidence" that only supports evolutionary theory if you accept the premise of Darwinism before examining the evidence. So that's exactly how it's done: "Wow, a new bone! We know before we even study it that it supports Darwinism, we just have to decide how!"

You can talk about the huge amount of evidence all you like, but if that evidence were examined in a cold, critical, unabashedly scientific light, it would no more support Darwinism than it would support the notion of the man in the moon. Evolutionary theory is a house of cards held up by circular reasoning.

MM (in TX)

39 posted on 08/31/2007 9:10:09 AM PDT by MississippiMan (Behold now behemoth...he moves his tail like a cedar. Job 40:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: monomaniac

How can this be? Isn’t science our God?

Science and Multiculturalism the religions that aren’t called religions...


40 posted on 08/31/2007 9:11:31 AM PDT by Altura Ct.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson