November 26, 2007

Expelled - No Intelligence Allowed Movie

Ben Stein promotes the up coming movie Expelled - No Intelligence Allowed due for release in February which tries to paint Darwinism as a fascist belief which persecutes anyone who dares criticise it. Stein would be right, If calling someone stupid then proving them wrong equated fascism.

The movie looks like it is going to be nothing but half truths, propaganda, Instances of Godwin's law, Strawman arguments and carefully edited sound bytes from respected scientists like Richard Dawkins who, In the above video, says "As a scientist, I'm pretty hostile to a rival doctrine…", which was likely followed by clarification of which parts of the rival doctrine he is opposed to. But we aren't going to hear that bit as it is heavily edited to make him sound unreasonable and ignorant, Which is a very cheap tactic to use and yet so typical of creationists.

Stein constantly misrepresents evolution by claiming evolutionists think "we are mud animated by lightning" and constantly references "scientists" who believe in biblical creation Intelligent Design, while at the same time offering no actual evidence for this belief other than the fact that at present science can't explain everything. We are bombarded with statements equivalent to "well if you don't know how it was done god must have done it"

The films intention is obvious and it's target audience are conveniently some of the dumbest creatures evolution has produced, So convincing them of this drivel isn't going to be too hard.

Believe "god done it" if you must, But stop claiming it is a science.

26 comments:

  1. Intelligent design should have gotten someone who doesnt sound retardred to make thier case.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I've been hearing about this. Sounds awful...is it direct to Christian DVD? I can't imagine it having an audience. I'm hoping some good Samaritan pirates it to the web so I can see it. I'd never pay those people a dime, and yes, I'd love to take Ben Stein's money, thanks very much.

    HJ

    ReplyDelete
  3. So Benny thinks he has some evidence for design, does he? Whaddaya wanna bet? OOOH! look a pretty rainbow! Must be design! A watch in a field! Design! A tornado can't build a car! Design!

    I'll wait for it to come out on one of the movie channels so I can watch it for free.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I believe it's going to be in the cinemas bing.

    The sad thing is they claim to be champions of "free speech in the classroom" as if the ability to think of something should automatically give you the right to teach it to children.

    Education isn't about "free speech", it's about truth.

    ReplyDelete
  5. At least give the movie a chance. I mean, if you don't even think it will make a good argument you are acting just like fundies who attack creationism with no evidence.

    "As a scientist, I'm pretty hostile to a rival doctrine…", which was likely followed by clarification of which parts of the rival doctrine he is opposed to.

    We may never know that. We will have to wait for the movie.

    It's also what you do when you quote small bits and pieces of what people say matt.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Ben + Dover = Bend over
    I have a feeling science will get bent over in this film.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Typical fallacious arguments from false authority, to false equivalency of opinion, from irrelevant analogy, and to emotion, victimization, ostracism, persecution, and fear. No justification of the actual merits of IDiocy claims (impossible, of course). My hero is the janitor who knew enough to wipe Stein's words from the blackboard.

    AIR, Stein performed poorly on "Celebrity Jeopardy!"

    I shall have to rely on reviews by those willing to waste money on this propagandistic IDiocy.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I think this really connects with that whole guise of "repression" that Christians like to exhibit when people show them exactly how ridiculous their beliefs are. The religious are always describing how every day their beliefs are being oppressed, and that their rights as Christians are being taken away, or something ridiculous like that.

    It's sad because it's the exact opposite. "Christians", or those who think they are, actually make up a large majority of religious belief in the US. And their own moral beliefs are even being put into law. What this movie does is exactly what I mentioned before, except it tries to make such a claim seem valid by putting it in the scientific playing-field and in education.

    No matter how often the reasons as to why Intelligent Design "theory" can't exist, the religious will always claim that their ideas are being repressed. Those ideas will never be valid in the scientific world, and while yes it is very important to remain open-minded, I think we should think about what Dawkins said: "Be open-minded, but not so open-minded that your brains fall out."

    UGH. It's UNREAL that Intelligent Design theory is still rearing it's ugly head. It has no evidence, is a negative argument, and isn't science. Why can't they make that PBS special a movie?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Nobody should listen to Ben Stein. the guy is an emotional wreck who has to carry notes from his shrink telling him how good he is. It's understandable that someone so emotionally unstable and inadequate would need to believe in a universal loving god who takes care of him.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Give me an example of when i quoted someone out of context D.

    RD was obviously going to continue and obviously had something further to say, You can tell by his speech pattern that he hadn't finished talking.

    You can bury your head in the sand and deny reality, But don't insult our intelligence by demanding we do the same.

    The movie has an agenda and it's not going to limit it's self to the truth in order to push this agenda.

    Pharyngula has a good write up on the movie.

    ReplyDelete
  11. RD was obviously going to continue and obviously had something further to say, You can tell by his speech pattern that he hadn't finished talking

    I agree that he was going to say "something" but weather it was to clarify or not, we may never know.

    I never said you misquoted. I said you take little "sound bytes" as well and use those.

    The movie has an agenda and it's not going to limit it's self to the truth in order to push this agenda.

    Sounds a lot like what Christians were saying about the DaVinci Code. Interesting how you get so pissed when the tables are turned.

    But don't insult our intelligence by demanding we do the same.

    Don't insult my intelligence because I believe in God.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I agree that he was going to say "something" but weather it was to clarify or not, we may never know.

    RD - And others - Have already expressed unhappiness about being deceived by the films creators when they were interviewed. it seems deception is going to be the films main weapon against truth, evidence and science.

    I never said you misquoted. I said you take little "sound bytes" as well and use those.

    of course. it's normal to quote only the relevant points. that is not the same as deceptively editing what someone is saying to make it look like they are saying something entirely different. Which was the comparison you were making.

    Sounds a lot like what Christians were saying about the DaVinci Code. Interesting how you get so pissed when the tables are turned.

    The Da Vinci code was a work of fiction you clown. At no point did the makers of Da vinci code attempt to pass it off as historically accurate or based on reality. Again, You use a flawed comparison.

    Don't insult my intelligence because I believe in God.

    You don't need me to insult your intelligence... You do a good enough job of that on your own.

    ReplyDelete
  13. anony mouse#1,
    Intelligent design should have gotten someone who doesnt sound retardred to make thier case.

    HAHAHAHAHA!

    d,
    Don't insult my intelligence because I believe in God.

    What intelligence?

    ReplyDelete
  14. The film should have been called "Creationism - No intelligence required"

    ReplyDelete
  15. They did, but they weren't as deceived as you make them out to be.
    "These criticisms however are defended as being hypocritical in nature - "I've never seen a bigger bunch of hypocrites in my life," said Mathis, who set up the interviews for EXPELLED. "I went over all of the questions with these folks before the interviews and I e-mailed the questions to many of them days in advance. The lady (and gentleman) doth protest too much, methinks.""

    that is not the same as deceptively editing what someone is saying to make it look like they are saying something entirely different.

    How do you know that, though? He had the questions in advance, so he obviously meant to say that. Besides its only a preview, they obviously can't put the entire quote in there.

    At no point did the makers of Da vinci code attempt to pass it off as historically accurate or based on reality.

    First of all, maker. Second of all, the you are very wrong."Brown's earlier statements about the accuracy of the historical information in his book, however, were far more strident. In 2003, while promoting his novel, he was asked in interviews what parts of the history in his novel actually happened. He replied "Absolutely all of it." In a 2003 interview with CNN's Martin Savidge he was again asked how much of the historical background was true. He replied, "99 percent is true ... the background is all true". Asked by Elizabeth Vargas in an ABC News special if the book would have been different if he had written it as non-fiction he replied, "I don't think it would have.""
    from wikipedia. Interesting. Didn't believe any of it? The creator of this fictional book said he believes it.

    You don't need me to insult your intelligence... You do a good enough job of that on your own.

    How so?

    What intelligence?

    Ha ha. Very funny. However, I do not have to resort to petty name-calling to make me seem like I am right.

    ReplyDelete
  16. What good is emailing the questions when they are lying about their motives and are going to edit what you say to suit their agenda?

    On Dan Browns official site he says "The Da Vinci Code is a novel and therefore a work of fiction."

    But even if it did write it as fact (which he didn't), That isn't the same as lying to people in order to get them to say things that you can later edit to misrepresent them.

    What was it jesus said about lying? practice what you preach, Hypocrite (he had something to say about hypocrites too, Go look it up).

    ReplyDelete
  17. "Creationism - No intelligence required"

    I may have to use that :D

    ReplyDelete
  18. What good is emailing the questions when they are lying about their motives and are going to edit what you say to suit their agenda?

    You don't know they will edit it, this was just a preview.

    On Dan Browns official site he says "The Da Vinci Code is a novel and therefore a work of fiction."

    Then why did he say he believed what he wrote was true?? He also goes on to say that the "secret rituals" are true as well. Opus Dei is not a crazy organization that goes around killing people.

    What was it jesus said about lying? practice what you preach, Hypocrite (he had something to say about hypocrites too, Go look it up).

    Ok, I admit, I attack others when I am attacked first. Ya caught me. I apologize if I have ever offended anyone. It just pissed me off when people attack me erroneously. I'm sure we can all understand that.

    ReplyDelete
  19. d,
    Why should anyone give a shit what your fictional character said?

    ReplyDelete
  20. Why should anyone give a shit what your fictional character said?

    1. You are making an assumption that he is fictional.
    2. Why should anyone give a shit about what you say? He may or may not be fictional, but at least he left a good message.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Its good too see the mudslinging on this blog hasn't stopped.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Maybe you should have as your subheading Matt mudslinging + Strawmen > intelligent debate

    ReplyDelete
  23. I am a Christian and you athiest are way out of your freaking minds. Your comments on this movie are retardedly out of proportion and the movie isn't even out. All your claims are based on speculation are based off a trailer. This is going to be an awesome movie telling the truth and you fools are going to cry about it!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  24. "This is going to be an awesome movie telling the truth"

    ROTFLOL

    ReplyDelete
  25. I don't get the atheist people...Their logic about the existance of God is flawed...IF you truly were an atheist than why would you care if people believed in a God?? You should just dismissed it as a garbage....waste of your time...why would you bother trying to take your stance on being an atheist when it does not affect you whether people believe in a God.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anonymous, I don't think you could have picked a more ironic post to make that absurd statement in.

    These people are trying to get biblical creation taught as science in schools. IT EFFECTS US!

    If they kept their delusions to themselves i wouldn;t have a problem, But they don;t keep it to themselves do they. They try to force it upon children under the guise of "science education".

    ReplyDelete